Happy Days Are Here Again" Old FDR song.

Same old song. Another economic Depression like the 1930s, thanks to leftist policies which kill economic growth.

It is "Happy Days" only for the pampered fat public sector parasites.

President Obama saved us from another great depression. That is a fact.

Bob-1887910

Same old song. Another economic Depression like the 1930s, thanks to leftist policies which kill economic growth.

Positive private-sector job growth for 13 months in a row and 250,000 added last month isn't what most economists would call a "depression," as much as you connies would like to see America fail, if that's what it takes to make Obama fail.

Bob: did your dog do its business in your wheaties this morning ? "Happy Days Are Here Again" was first published in 1929. It was made popular as the unofficial song of the FDR campaign. Like President Obama, FDR inherited an economic downturn begun during his predecessors time in office. Unlike President Hoover, President Bush did act to stave off a complete financial system collapse.

Then, as now, there are many people who do work in the city, county, state and federal government. Then, as now, there are some who could be labled as parasites, i.e. the take from the host (taxpayers) and give nothing in return. I happen to think that the vast majority of people who work for our governments do contribute to society. Whether it is the policeman on the beat, the fireman, the teacher, the librarian, the water treatment worker, the social worker, the prosecutor, the nurses and doctors, and yes even the clerks in the assesors office all do contribute.

If you believe that your government workers do not contribute, I suggest you take the initiative and run for office on the premise that you will eliminate those wasteful positions.

Tom lives in California and thinks that "happy days" have returned... what better way to highlight a complete lack of knowledge(or caring) as Califonia has some of the worst budget problems in the union.

Bob -

Your right, Herbert Hoover put us into the great depression, Roosevelt got us out. Now Bush put us into this depression, President Obama will get us out. Watch and see. (Smile)

Pajama -

That's because we had a Republican Govener. It will get better now that we have a Democrat Governor.

your right the bottom line is the rich part of this country..the top 2% would like to be filthy rich not just rich.and soon if they take power again...it will be a rich and poor country and no middle class important people like fireman,policeman and just your eveyday hard worker will not be paid what they deserve,just enough to keep the rich billionaires and not millionaires!!

Wow.....a bunch of left wingnuts today. Hows that kool-aid taste? California has been run by democrats for the last 30 years. Doesnt matter if there are a few republicans holding seats, the FACT is that the dems have been making the decisions for CA for the last 3 decades. CA was doing great before they were running the show.

mabe this time we will get it right. and we can get this country running correctly. everyone blames budgets on unions but how many banks are union and look how much "us" tax Payers had to pay to bail them out thanks obama.

For the first time in my adult life, I will not be voting in the upcoming general election. Can't vote Republican - too many crazies. Can't vote Democrat - too many broken promises - and sidling up to crooks like BP. I'll sit this one out.

It looks like First Read has Obama ahead already. 232 to 191. I guess they couldn't wait to post the number of states with electorial votes that show Democrat vs Republican.

Neither democrat or republicans will decide the election in 2012. It will be all on the independent's shoulders. They will decide the election. For as much as the liberals want Obama to be re-elected, independents think differently. Most of your tea-party are independents so, up yours liberals! Keep showing the tea party your true colors and your hopes will be dashed in the ballot box.

I love the way the liberals on this board think they are the kings of verse and verbage.... tossing out their liberal blogs and links... as if what they say will garner any support from us independents. For as much as I dislike the republican party, I can't stand the democrats. If you think for one minute my opinion is not shared by millions of independents, you have another thought coming. Just think back to the midterms. I haven't lost my fervor and neither has a lot of other independents. We are just beginning to dump democrats and the lead up to the election will prove how wrong the liberals are.

I'm looking forward to the long faces on the liberals the day after the 2012 election as they wonder what happened. Independents rule this nation and the democrats have no hope of gaining much ground because we know who they are... and what they stand for.

If you believe that your government workers do not contribute, I suggest you take the initiative and run for office on the premise that you will eliminate those wasteful positions.

Problem with that is that he'd have to become one of those "government workers that do not contribute", just like the rest of the "Party of No". Politicians that do not contribute also do not try to eliminate their own positions.

everyone blames budgets on unions but how many banks are union and look how much "us" tax Payers had to pay to bail them out thanks obama.

The "Bank bailout" was signed into law by Bush Jr. before he left office. Yet another mess left by Bush for Obama to clean up.

California Tom

Your right, Herbert Hoover put us into the great depression, Roosevelt got us out. Now Bush put us into this depression, President Obama will get us out. Watch and see. (Smile)

Yes CA Tom, and Moonbeam 2.0 and the unions will remove us from the deficit position and back into prosperity, right. Like CA Tom, the Democratic Spending Party created the CA fiscal position, and so did the liberals in DC. Do you really belive Obama will have a position when 2012 rolls around? Gas is already $4+ a gallon in the CA where I live, inflation is creeping up at the grocery store, the U6 is still in double digits for unemployment, and on the whole, the economy is tanked.

When you see the econonmy, jobs, deficit as it is, you have to look at the numbers from when the Dems controlled the legislator to see WHO is accountable. Wait until the economy goes to the days of Carter, another progressive, then smile about who may be elected.

As Schumer, good ole Chuckie said, we have to talk about extremes......let's talk about the Obama extremes since day one.

Bob-1887910 "Positive private-sector job growth for 13 months in a row and 250,000 added last month"

Yes, and just think - It's only been three months since the Republicans took over the House of Representatives. I guess businesses are a lot less concerned about any new job-killing legislation from Obama and the Democrats now.

I've got news for you Roy. Business budgets are made months in advance. Mine was finalized in September, WELL before the election. At no point was the situation in Washington even discussed. Amazing that the party of business doesn't know this. It'd be a lot less amazing if they fully realize and are just lying about it.

You mean like all those RELIGOUS people in Afganistan that Killed Innocent people for what some dumb ass in Florida did? I would Argue that what the Idiot in Florida did . PALES in comparison to the Murder of Innocent people in Afganistan by RELIGIOUS Zealots

Lot like we couldn't see the reaction coming from miles away! He's got his 1'st Amendment rights! I've got mine and I'm going on record that HE"S AN A$$H@LE!!!!!!!

You try to sound like a moderate, but sound like another Soros bought boy....I didn't find out who all had funded jobama until after the last election, now I know we've been suckered by Soros, Rockefeller, Kluge (wonder who his successor was?) and lied to. I just wanted a different direction from Bush, not elitist socialism. The bought boy won't get my vote... ACORN and the rest of the machine can burn...

Auntie Fascist,

I think he is a AXXhole too. That still doesnt take away from the Fact that those Religious ZEALOTS over in Afganistan are the ones that MURDERED innocent people................ or perhaps you dont want to talk about the EXTREMIST MUSLIMS that actually killed people..

Auntie:

He's got his 1'st Amendment rights! I've got mine ....

The second part is something that right-wing religious zealots always seem to forget.

Anna Molly

So you think its a Great thing that MUSLIMS killed Innocent people? Are you a little bit outraged that they Murdered innocents?

OK, Steve, I'll concede the existence of radical Islam. They'll take any opportunity or excuse they can get. Did we need to have this anal orifice GIFT WRAP an excuse for them?

Auntie,

I wont argue with you about him being an Anal orrafice............ but what he did Pales in Comparison to what these Fanatics did. but i dont see you screaming as Loudly about what they did as you are about him burning a book..... seems your outrage would be more by people that Commit murder. People that Murder worry me alot more then people that burn books....

Ugly early today, it seems. Mention Al Qaeda and the Taliban and paranoia takes stage. Not every Muslim is an extremist. Not every Christian is an extremist. There are elements of extremism in both the Christian and the Islamic faiths. The Bible has some pretty radical beliefs expressed in it, too; but apparently that's acceptable.

Did I mention 9/11? Nope, thought not. Did I make excuses for the Afghanistan rioters who killed innocents? Nope. I mentioned the idea that some jerk bottom in Florida is an idiot and a hate monger and it is that so-called minister that gave the extremists an excuse, a talking point, gave them fuel to aid their efforts to paint the USA as anti-Islamic and undermine OUR efforts to defeat extremists and terrorists. And it's obvious by the comments here that idea escapes many.

You must understand, at least a little, what you may be dealing with. A gross generality, but with a very high probability of truth: the citizens of most arabic muslim countries tend to be undereducated, unstable and volatile, brainwashed from early childhood, perhaps infancy, by religious zealotry, easily manipulated by extremist mullahs and imams who have no qualms about selling them the snake oil promises of glorious martyrdom and the seduction of 72 virgins impatiently awaiting the martyr's arrival in the garden of allah.

One does not give a known pyromaniac 5 gallons of gasoline and a book of matches, what is exactly what that hairbrained idiot in Florida did. And , in so doing, he caused the death of a couple of Americans, who should not be there anyway, as well as the deaths of a number of innocent civilians.

Freedom of expression, as a guarantee of the first amendment, does carry with it certain responsibilities and each of us must be willing to bear those responsibilities before we open our mouths to utter a single syllable.

The media also must bear fault. Their irresponsible publicizing of this idiot's desperate grasping for his 15 minutes of fame for their "ratings", is absolutely despicable.

Jody. did i mention 9/11. NOPE Did you mention the RADICAL MUSLIMS IN YOUR POST. NOPE. the HATE FILLED MUSLIMS EXTREMIST TERRORIST THAT MURDERED INNOCENT PEOPLE.

Are you a MUSLIM JODY. is that why you take Exception to the Fact that i mentioned MUSLIMS. I mean After all it WAS MUSLIMS that MURDERED INNOCENT PEOPLE.

THE dumb ass Pastor in Florida all he did was Burn some paper. in the form of a Book.

You didnt Mention the MUSLIMS EXTREMIST at all. If you had . I would have Agreed with your post 100 percent. but i could only agree with 50 percent of it because you left out the MORE VIOLENT PART of it

Disgusted - Thank you for your post. Yes, the pastor certainly has First Amendment rights and can burn as many Qur'ans as he wants. But, as our soldiers have died, and are dying, protecting those right, we should use those rights responsibly.

Yes, I know that burning the Qur'an is his right, and he did not murder anyone, and the citizens in Afghanistan are the ones you committed this atrocity. However, as Secretary Gates, and other government officials, warned that the unstable, Islamic extremists could very well react in this manner, he was irresponsible to go through with the book burning.

I've received many complaints about similar posts that I have made, so I want to make it perfectly clear that the Islamic extremists are the ones responsible for this atrocity; they will use any excuse for violence. That being said, it was irresponsible for the pastor to burn the Qur'an after being warned about the possible consequences.

you guys mention muslim extremist??what about the extremists in our own backyard trying to overturn our middle class workers..we will have alot more to worry about than terror in our country if we put another right wing bimbo in office again

decerned in calif. - As a conservative Democrat, I have issues with unions. However, this overreach by these Republican governers is appalling. And, I do not begrudge the wealthy. In fact, I guess I am considered upper-middle class or wealthy. But, the middle class has been shrinking for some time, and I am worried for my children and grandchildren.

It’s way past time we stop deluding ourselves when it comes to income inequality in this country?

Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed that America’s top economists are running around with their hair on fire? (Or whatever passes for it with economists.) Nobel Prize winner Joe Stiglitz in Vanity Fair sounds the alarm about growing economic inequality in America. I wonder if anyone in a position to do something about it is listening?

America’s inequality distorts our society in every conceivable way. There is, for one thing, a well-documented lifestyle effect—people outside the top 1 percent increasingly live beyond their means. Trickle-down economics may be a chimera, but trickle-down behaviorism is very real. Inequality massively distorts our foreign policy. The top 1 percent rarely serve in the military—the reality is that the “all-volunteer” army does not pay enough to attract their sons and daughters, and patriotism goes only so far. Plus, the wealthiest class feels no pinch from higher taxes when the nation goes to war: borrowed money will pay for all that. Foreign policy, by definition, is about the balancing of national interests and national resources. With the top 1 percent in charge, and paying no price, the notion of balance and restraint goes out the window. There is no limit to the adventures we can undertake; corporations and contractors stand only to gain. The rules of economic globalization are likewise designed to benefit the rich: they encourage competition among countries for business, which drives down taxes on corporations, weakens health and environmental protections, and undermines what used to be viewed as the “core” labor rights, which include the right to collective bargaining. Imagine what the world might look like if the rules were designed instead to encourage competition among countries forworkers. Governments would compete in providing economic security, low taxes on ordinary wage earners, good education, and a clean environment—things workers care about. But the top 1 percent don’t need to care.

http://www.google.com/search?q=vanity+fair+joseph+stiglitz&hl=en&prmd=ivnsuo&source=univ&tbs=nws:1&tbo=u&sa=X&ei=isKZTa28GcKW0QHQ-s3wCw&ved=0CEYQqAI

This is not the America I grew up in...

While the Teapublicans fight to defund NPR & Planned Parenthood the modern day robber barons are stealing this country blind!

GMJ: So $4 trillion in cuts, block grant Medicaid and means test Medicare, but no cuts to Defense??

Obama and the Senate Democrats can come up with their own plan, and if they so choose, they can have defense cuts. So, just where is the Obama's and the Democrats plan? Think they'll ever produce one? I know, doubtful. Extremely doubtful.

And do recall, there are a lot of union jobs tied up in those defense appropriations. Think Obama will turn his back on the very unions that own him? He needs a billion dollars to have a chance of being re-elected, so it's doubtful Obama has any plans of giving up any union money.

JoAnna:

Think Obama will turn his back on the very unions that own him?

Yes, he's already done that. But he'd better be careful because, with the mood that unions are in right now, they may just return the favor.

Republicans campaigned on a platform of balancing the budget while cutting taxes if they won the House of Representatives.

All budgetary matters originate in the House.

It's the job of Republicans House leaders to come up with a responsible budget. The fact that they show no signs of doing so isn't the fault of Democrats. Apparently Conservatives are already assuming failure by their intense desire to pin their own failure on the opposition.

Think Obama will turn his back on the very unions that own him?

Yes.

Good Morning Anna Molly!

Help me out here, wasn't JoAnna one of the sycophants who only a few weeks ago was incessantly wailing about WHY the President wasn't marching with the union workers in WI?

I could of sworn it was her? Hmmm.....

Something is systematically amiss when it take "billions of dollars" to mount a campaign for any public office. It's time people just rejected the entire "pay to play" political system, it has became nothing more than an instrument of the wealthy for the wealthy with 98% of the country left voiceless.

John B, Des Moines, IA Comment collapsed by the community

GMJ, it just shows that the only thing they're actually serious about is dismantling the social safety net. Defense will have to take reasonable cuts as well if there is to be any hope of getting the budget within balance, and revenue has to be on the table as well. Ryan's budget is really about the Republican plan to flood the market with newly unemployed to drive down wages.

HIGHER UNEMPLOYMENT AND LOWER WAGES -- ON PURPOSE.... About a month ago, I described the Republican economic plan as "higher unemployment, lower wages, and slower growth." It's worth appreciating the fact that (a) I meant that literally; and (b) occasionally, GOP officials will acknowledge their intentions.

Tim Fernholz and Jim Tankersley reported this week on a little-noticed report distributed by House Speaker John Boehner's (R-Ohio) office last week, summarizing the findings of the Republican staff of the Joint Economic Committee.

[T]he paper predicts that cutting the number of public employees would send highly skilled workers job hunting in the private sector, which in turn would lead to lower labor costs and increased employment. But "lowering labor costs" is economist-speak for lowering wages -- does the GOP want to be in the position of advocating for lower wages for voters who work in the private sector?

The report also touts the value of cutting "transfer payments," or subsidies, to private firms, suggesting cuts to Amtrak and ethanol support. But many Republicans back both of those objectives, and the GOP has long been a staunch defender of corporate subsidies through both spending and the tax code, including direct payments to agricultural firms.

Remember, independent economists, including some who have no sympathies for Democrats, have said the Republican spending cuts, if approved, would lead to roughly 700,000 job losses. (Told about making unemployment worse, John Boehner replied, "So be it.")

But the GOP plan isn't just to increase layoffs, at least in the short term, it's also to intended to make sure Americans are earning less money.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2011_03/028650.php

Thanks for the repost, Feisty. Seems the right-wing authoritarian censors are quite busy today.

Conservatives are quite desperate to keep people from finding out what they're REALLY doing.

Conservatives are quite desperate to keep people from finding out what they're REALLY doing.

They sure are! God forbid the stuck on stupid crowd is exposed to what's really going on! lol

You kidding me, cut the defense budget while we're in two wars and aiding a country with warplanes in a no-fly zone! If you look at our budget, social security costs as much as our defense budget so instead of taking bullets out of the guns of our soldiers overseas, we should take cuts at home in social security and raise the taxes of the top 2% of the rich. The trickle-down-effect theory played out by Reagan and Bush has failed. If we're gonna get our government back on its feet we need the wealthiest of our nation to play their part.

i agree common sense!!,but taking from the retired and old won't cut it..they have used billions of dollars in building planes that sit in warehouses.what are they waiting for to use these jets,for another country to invade???the rich don't care about teachers and public schools and social security and security in police because their children all go to private schools and they have their own security for life.

Beverly in Chicago

Beverly in Chicago Comment collapsed by the community

Copy Truth And Nothin' But

It is a busy day. Today is the day President Obama announces his re-election bid. He is not giving a speech; he'll be working. It's so nice to have a President who cares and works hard. You can see the stress in his face and the gray in his hair.

Another wonderful cut and paste job Bev, you are beginning to out do yourself. Obama busy - FORE on the third fairway!

Keep being a good troll Bev, and you may also join Feisty, feeding at the feet of Obama.

Nothing wrong with sycophancy when the object is worthy. Your side's problem is that you are unable to come up with even a single worthy object, and yet you have plenty of sycophants of your own.

Steiner,

You are correct. Moderates were Taken by the Lies of Obama. They wont be Fooled again.

Oh, I don't know. Try Wisconsin, and maybe Ohio, Michigan, Tennessee, and a few other states battered by conservatives who lie, and plenty of them. If Wisconsin was a swing state before 2011 began, it sure isn't anymore. Count it BIG blue.

By the way, I'll take our puny George Soros (46th in the world) any day over the Koch brothers (combined number 4 in the world) for billionaires whose roles I would care to model. They've bought a few of their own sycophants, like the governors of several states and a big share of Congress, and they like to keep their agenda secret, for VERY good reason.

Anna,

Redistricting is gonna be a B@tch for the Democrats in the 2012 elections..............

And reality is gonna be a B@tch for Republicans;

A new Rasmussen poll shows Walker’s approval rating is quickly shrinking and that Republicans may also be turning off young marrieds who have kids in schools. Not a good sign for Walker, the Wisconsin GOP or the branding of the GOP nationally. The poll lends credence to the likelihood that Republicans could be in the beginning of a process where the party is turning off independent voters, mobilizing and unifying the Democratic party base and further alienating the smaller number of more moderate Republicans in Wisconsin and elsewhere:

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker won his job last November with 52% of the vote, but his popularity has slipped since then.

A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Wisconsin Voters finds that just 34% Strongly Approve of the job he is doing, while 48% Strongly Disapprove. Overall, including those who somewhat approve or disapprove, the new Republican governor earns positive reviews from 43% and negative reviews from 57% of voters statewide.

In addition to the usual partisan and demographic breakdowns, it’s interesting to note that Walker, now engaged in a budget battle with unionized state workers, receives a total approval rating of 46% from households with private sector union members.

However, among households with a public sector union member, only 19% offer their approval. Among all other households in the state, opinion is nearly evenly divided—49% favorable and 51% unfavorable.

In other words: he is turning some voters who might not be militantly against the GOP and willing to give the party’s ideas a chance against him …and his party.

http://themoderatevoice.com/103053/scott-walkers-approval-rating-now-43-winning-the-battle-and-losing-the-war/

Average Americans aready recognize the Conservative Republican war on the middle classs, and they're quickly becoming disenchanted.

Redistricting is gonna be a B@tch for the Democrats in the 2012 elections..............

Maybe, maybe not. We'll see how the recall elections go in Wisconsin before we make any predictions about re-districting. Republicans are back-pedaling almost everywhere. Right now, government has pretty much ground to a halt here; they can't even seem to get the votes right now to re-up on the bargaining bill.

Anna Molly

Republicans are not Back Pedaling anywhere. but it seems that Liberals believe that if they Scream loud Enough they will. Just because you say its so doesnt make it true. I didnt See Walker Back pedal on passing the Anti Union bill in Wisconsin. I didnt see Ohios Governor Back Pedal. I dont see the Republicans in Congress Back Pedaling. Seems like they are holding there ground to me

Now we must wait and see what happens with the TRO in Wisconsin. My guess is the judge will find that it was all done Legally when its finally heard..

They aren't back pedaling because they're stuck in a corner between angry citizens and their wealthy benefactors, with no escape that doesn't paint them as totally corrupt, incompetent, or as lying weasels;

But don’t expect to see a major shift:

“Republicans can’t turn back in Wisconsin,” says Mark Mix of the National Right to Work Foundation. “This will only embolden the unions and weaken efforts at reform all over the country.” It’s foolish to believe that backing down will satisfy the unions. If history is any guide, more than 90% of union money will be used to defeat Republicans no matter what happens.

The Washington Post’s Greg Sargent:

But there are two points worth making. The first is that the drumbeat of polls showing strong opposition to Walker’s rollback of bargaining rights may be starting to shift the landscape. The Journal report hints that Repubicans are growing nervous about opposition to Walker’s proposals among independents. The key here is that public opinion on this standoff has caught a lot of people off guard.

Also: If the reports above are true, that could bear out the notion, articulated to me earlier today by a spokesman for the Wisconsin Democratic Party, that Republicans are well aware that Walker’s impending layoffs could damage them more than Dems. Walker told the fake Koch on the prank call that he would be ratcheting up the layoff threat to pressure missing Dems into returning. But Dems are refusing to budge despite the fact that the layoff threat is now very real. And there are indications that the layoffs could exacerbate the current public opinion dynamic, rather than turn it around. That may well be spooking Republicans who continue to stand by Walker.

UPDATE, 4:41 p.m.: I should have added that the drive to recall GOP senators has also picked up in the last few days. So you have pressure on numerous fronts.

When you see a press narrative, live TV pictures and polls coming together to create one image it is very difficult for one force or infooutlet to turn it around. This could be a case where talk show hosts, Fox News, and partisan internet writers are unable to stem a growing perception that is seeping into public opinion..and quickly. So does the GOP try to shift, ram it through even faster, or cut its losses? Will Scott Walker turn out to be more like the 1990s over-reaching Newt Gingrich and not like his hero Ronald Reagan (who compromised and worked with the opposing party by the way)?

http://themoderatevoice.com/103053/scott-walkers-approval-rating-now-43-winning-the-battle-and-losing-the-war/

Seems like reality is already beyond the grasp of party-owned Dems, much like it was prior to the November elections.

"Obama's 'all-time low' approval rating"

"President Obama's approval rating has slumped to an "http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2011/03/30/2011-03-30_president_obamas_approval_ratings_hit_alltime_low_half_dont_think_he_deserves_se.html">all-time low," according to a new Quinnipiac poll. A mere 42 percent of American voters approve of the job Obama is doing, while 48 percent disapprove. It gets worse: Half of all voters say he does "not deserve to be re-elected in 2012," with only 41 percent saying that he does."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/theweek/20110330/cm_theweek/213690

I didnt See Walker Back pedal on passing the Anti Union bill in Wisconsin.

Actually, he is. If he had the votes, all he would have to do is pass it again with 24 hours' notice. And if he was so sure that he "published" the bill properly, then why did he back pedal by deciding to obey the judge's order not to implement it?

And if he was so sure that the state senators wouldn't be recalled, then what is he waiting for with the rest of his agenda?

No one man can resolve the disaster Obama was handed in four years. He is still cleaning up the mess and it will take much more then the time he's been in office so far. Bush (advisers) failed to see the Freddie Mac and Fannie collapse. It was Bush who decided to lead the US to war in a country with no mass weapons of destruction...and it was the United Nations which required us to use our technology to disrupt the Libyan no fly zone. Every time we get a president in there to "clean up" America panics and votes in another guy like Bush. I don't care about Clinton's personal issues, but he managed to clean up the deficit after an awful run with papa Bush. Yet knowing the reputation Bush jr. had for bankrupting a company and the state of TX, they still voted him in. You people are going to do it again.

Anna.

Because they already have a Law Passed. Why would they Bother WASTING MORE TAX PAYER MONEY on doing it over... thats just stupid (but liberals are good at wasting Money) The Democrats and Unions will lose this one. and Scott Walker will have Saved the Tax payer Money but not doing something over that they have already done.

Again just waiting on the Hearing to Confirm that Republicans did it right

By the way, I'll take our puny George Soros (46th in the world) any day over the Koch brothers (combined number 4 in the world) for billionaires whose roles I would care to model.

"But in the last decade, it's also worth noting the Kochs have given more than $600 million in pledged or donated money to arts, education, and medical research, including (but not limited to):

New York-Presbyterian Hospital Weill Cornell: $15 million

M.D. Anderson Cancer Center: $25 million

The Hospital for Special Surgery: $26 million

Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center: $30 million

Prostate Cancer Foundation: $41 million

Deerfield Academy: $68 million

Lincoln Center's NY State Theater: $100 million

Massachusetts Institute of Technology: $139 million"

www.politicsdaily.com/2010/09/02/koch-brothers-give-more-to-charity-than-to-right-wing-causes/

What has Soros done?

And yet organizations that DON'T have a direct link to Rupert Murdoch STILL show President Obama with a better approval rating than Clinton or Reagan at this point in their terms. http://www.gallup.com/poll/124922/Presidential-Approval-Center.aspx

Even a cross section of all the major polls shows the President almost exactly at the level of support he was seeing a year ago, even with Foxmussen working hard to swamp the results with a barrage of negatively-biased reports in a very short time span. Hover over the dots and you'll see Rassmussen with a new poll virtually every day. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/06/jobapproval-obama_n_726319.html

Just remember your buddy obama doesn't really care about you. Just your votes!

Are your buddies the Koch brothers looking out for us? I'll take someone who's trying to work on behalf of the middle class over the "let them eat cake" crowd any time.

Well johnny - If your buddy obama gets relected. Then you democrats certainly get what you desvere!

How's your "Hope and Change" and false promises and lies from your messiahs mouth been working out for you?

Time to change the guard in the white house next year!

If you can show me what proposals coming from the Republicans that would support your statement, what facts on the Republicans campaign platform that would convince progessives to lean to the right, and what reputable candidates the Republicans have for 2012, I'll vote Republican. Until then, keep thinking, I can wait.

Again with the "messiah" narrative. No one calls the President that except Conservatives. I wonder why?

Oh yeah, it's a dog-whistle term meant to stir up Religious Conservatives with mental pictures of false prophets and the Antichrist.

Surely Conservatives wouldn't be that dishonest, would they? Oh yeah, they'd be EXACTLY that dishonest. http://o.bamapost.com/

Alan, NJ

What has Soros done?

è Refugees International "generates lifesaving humanitarian assistance and protection for displaced people around the world and works to end the conditions that create displacement.

è Provided funds to help black students attend the University of Cape Town in apartheid South Africa

è Funded dissident movements behind the iron curtain.

è Funded efforts to promote non-violent democratization in the post-Soviet states

è donated $35 million to the state of New York to be ear-marked for under-privileged children

è gave to parents who had benefit cards at the rate of $200 per child aged 3 through 17, with no limit as to the number of children that qualified

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

On the other hand, the Koch brothers increased Wealth by $9 Billion Last Year As They Fund Laws to Make Working Class Poorer .

The Koch Industries business empire isinextricably linked to carbon pollution. Koch refineries specialize in high-carbon crude, Koch fertilizer plants emit large amounts of carbon dioxide, and its manufacturing plants are particularly harmful. Just as Koch fundedopposition to acid rain regulations using “libertarian” fronts in 1990, the current $50 million Koch-funded campaign to deny climate change is an effort to allow Koch Industries to pollute for free.

The Koch brothers don’t want to be held accountable for being behind the scenes. They don’t want to be exposed either.

1. a. Oil spills: fined $30 million in 2000 to resolve claims related to 300 oil spills across America
2. b. Anti-worker/union
3. c. Anti-healthcare
4. d. Anti-immigration
5. e. Foreclosures
6. f. keeping corporate money in elections
7. g. fightin net neutrality

Check it out: http://goo.gl/Lua4t

http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/2011/04/koch_brothers.html

So the difference there is Soros wants to help and the Kochs want to destroy poor people and the planet.

You know Bev, those links you post are no different than me using Glenn Beck or some other right wing loon. All I'm saying is Soros is as dirty as any other billionaire that made his money by almost destroying a country's economy. Do you actually know how many people lost their jobs because of the recession in the UK that he helped cause? BTW they were working people.

The only reason I posted the Koch Brothers philanthropy was to illustrate how it's not all black and white the way these people are portrayed.

George Soros Quotes

"It's not whether you're right or wrong that's important, but how much money you make when you're right and how much you lose when you're wrong."

"I rely a great deal on animal instincts."

"Playing by the rules, one does the best he can, irrespective of the social consequences. Whereas in making the rules, people ought to be concerned with the social consequences and not with their personal interests."

www.investopedia.com/university/greatest/georgesoros.asp

Yep...he's a real humanitarian.

wow, i have to give it to the right wing republicans they can manipulate the middle class union worker to vote against themselves..or are all these people we are hearing from the top 1% of the country??obama shows all signs of getting the country back on its feet..it takes more than 2 years to clean up the mess he was given

It’s way past time we stop deluding ourselves when it comes to income inequality in this country?

Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed that America’s top economists are running around with their hair on fire? (Or whatever passes for it with economists.) Nobel Prize winner Joe Stiglitz in Vanity Fair sounds the alarm about growing economic inequality in America. I wonder if anyone in a position to do something about it is listening?

America’s inequality distorts our society in every conceivable way. There is, for one thing, a well-documented lifestyle effect—people outside the top 1 percent increasingly live beyond their means. Trickle-down economics may be a chimera, but trickle-down behaviorism is very real. Inequality massively distorts our foreign policy. The top 1 percent rarely serve in the military—the reality is that the “all-volunteer” army does not pay enough to attract their sons and daughters, and patriotism goes only so far. Plus, the wealthiest class feels no pinch from higher taxes when the nation goes to war: borrowed money will pay for all that. Foreign policy, by definition, is about the balancing of national interests and national resources. With the top 1 percent in charge, and paying no price, the notion of balance and restraint goes out the window. There is no limit to the adventures we can undertake; corporations and contractors stand only to gain. The rules of economic globalization are likewise designed to benefit the rich: they encourage competition among countries for business, which drives down taxes on corporations, weakens health and environmental protections, and undermines what used to be viewed as the “core” labor rights, which include the right to collective bargaining. Imagine what the world might look like if the rules were designed instead to encourage competition among countries forworkers. Governments would compete in providing economic security, low taxes on ordinary wage earners, good education, and a clean environment—things workers care about. But the top 1 percent don’t need to care.

http://www.google.com/search?q=vanity+fair+joseph+stiglitz&hl=en&prmd=ivnsuo&source=univ&tbs=nws:1&tbo=u&sa=X&ei=isKZTa28GcKW0QHQ-s3wCw&ved=0CEYQqAI

This is not the America I grew up in...

While the Teapublicans fight to defund NPR & Planned Parenthood the modern day robber barons are stealing this country blind!

Why is there always so much spam from the same users on this "First Read" message board? Every day (or rather article) it is the same people who post the same "comments" which really aren't their own comments but rather a regurgitation of some blog post or opinion piece.

These people wonder why they are collapsed? Maybe because the links and articles you post don't pertain to the article that is being presented? There is nary an original thought, yet these same people post on EVERY article with the SAME garbage!

I haven't collapsed any of those comments but perhaps a level of moderation is needed if we truly want an exchange of ideas and not an exchange of other people's ideas, thoughts, opinions, etc.

I suggest someone look up the definition of spam and post it here. While my comment is not on topic either, I had no intention of contacting MSNBC or Newsvine or whoever just to be shuffled off with a simple, "Thank you for your concern, we are looking into the issue."

Opportunists. I care not whether your opinion leans right or left simply that it is your own so that we can come together and discuss instead of being shouted down or bogged down by repetitive nonsense.

WE GET IT! You don't like a collective group of citizens! Now discuss the issue at hand!

Good day.

That comparison of the charity of Koch Bros. vs. the charity of Soros was interesting.

The Koch charities are ones benefiting themselves, like the theaters they attend, the schools their kids go to, even the PBS shows they like to watch - or may benefit them in the future, like the medical research on cancers and diseases that old white guys are prone to.

The Soros charities benefit others, especially the poor and downtrodden, with little or no benefit to Soros himself.

Both Koch and Soros do good with their charities, no complaints there, but somehow Soros seems a lot more noble in his giving.

decerned - many economist mark an end of a recession as one that has two consecutive quarters of growth in the GDP. if we follow your assumption of 2 years to fix the mess then bush along with bipartisan support from a democratically controlled congress had already started the ball rolling to bring us out of the recession in 2007 or 2008 at the latest. when the 2009 stimulas ran out of money our GDP declined and has been bumping along at ~ 3% thru 2010.

Since obama has had no job creation plan in 2010 (to busy working on obamacare, wall st reform, government job preservation and business bashing), it would appear that only the FED has had any plans of action for stimulateing the economy via QE1 and QE2 during 2010.

american, the recession BEGAN in the 2nd half of 2007. As far as jobs growth is concerned here's a graphic that really illustrates just how deep a hole the failure of Republican deregulation and trickle down economics dug for us. http://www.pensitoreview.com/2010/04/03/job-growth-improves-under-obama-as-bush-recession-continues/

Gundy 75 - FR refuses to monitor postings like other monitors do on other newsvine blogs. Perhaps if Sally or tyler visited these FR postings, better posts would be forthcoming.

Cm 69 - from your analysis of charitable giving by the Kochs and soras you seem rather biased on the subject of giving. You imply that the Kochs only give to benefit themselves directly and not to organizations that benefit many.

Funny how the arts benefits everyone including those you so graciously insult as being downtrodden and poor. Naturally the kochs tell PBS what shows to fun and BTW give us back our $$$ if any is left over. Is that what you believe?

Rather telling on you narrowmindedness when you further negate Kochs contributions because...

may benefit them in the future, like the medical research on cancers and diseases that old white guys are prone to.

Why can't cancer and health research go across lines of income whether the patient is rich or poor? Think the kochs put conditions on the research that only the wealthy buds of koch will benefit?

Johnb - So you are using the famous bikini graph. how does that address my comments to decerned in caili on his two year delay? It doesn't.

How does reagans "trickle down" from the 80's aplly to a totally different type of economy in the first decade of the 21st century? it doesn't.

Other than the FEDS QE1 and QE2 what has obama done in 2010 to stimulate the economy?

Care to share how he brokered the deal with Boeing and GE to close contracts already in progress with India and China. How about new trade agreements with china and S korea. oooops, don't think that happened either. Obanas best effort came during the lame duck session in 4 qtr 2010 when he embraced republican standards of giving tax breaks, credits and incentives to business for private sector expansion, let alone giving everyone more discretionary income to spend.

As honeywell CEO David Cote said...

The U.S. economy will continue to improve during at least the next three, four, maybe five, years, Cote said. The best way for government to create jobs is to build an environment amenable to hiring

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-31/u-s-must-cut-entitlements-to-slash-deficit-honeywell-ceo-says.html

I'm sorry, american, just saying "no it isn't" only works here; http://www.montypython.net/scripts/argument.php

But that isn't exactly real life, is it? If you think my evidence is inapplicable in spite of demonstrating exactly what I've stated feel free to tell me why. I've presented my evidence, you've said "no it isn't."

What makes you think the Republican philosophy of "trickle down" has changed since the time of Reagan? The majority of Bush's tax cuts went to the top 2%. Only in December a filibuster by Republicans forced retention of a $70B/yr temporary tax cut aimed entirely at the top 2%. Every day someone on on FR whines "did a poor person ever give you a job?" The approach hasn't changed in the slightest though it's been a proven loser for DECADES.

Then you go on and quote a rich guy who says the poor have it entirely too good. The Conservative philosophy in a nutshell.

So AM, please post the Democrats plan to reduce the deficit, provide entitlement reform, modernize tax policy, and pay down the national debt. But please, don't hurt yourself trying, there is no such plan, and there never will be. It will just be more empty rhetoric like yours, being critical of others, but no plan of you own to point to. It's much easier for the likes of you to call others "clueless" like you do to Ryan than it is to come up with your own plan. That would be work, that would be politically risky, that would actually be doing your job, and that's not the Liberal way.

You see AM, Conservatives have made the error of believing their own propaganda...and because there's no real plan that has a hope of working there is nothing BUT the propaganda.

Some Conservatives seem to have an inkling of this. That's why they're trying to avoid responsibility for the job the ASKED the American voter to give them, and even deflect responsibility for much of what they're already done onto Democrats. It won't work, buyers remorse is everywhere you look.

Extremely disengenuous, Anna Molly.

You can talk all you like about how dreadful Ryan's plan is. But where is the Democrats' plan for finding "better ways to pay for them"?

President Obama issues an executive order creating a bipartisan debt commission, receives their report and Plan to address the debt crisis, then issues a FY 2012 budget proposal suggesting that $13 trillion in new gross debt will be added over the next 10 years to the $14 trillion already on the books, with debt service payments approaching $1 trillion annually.

We have the debt commission's Plan...we'll soon have Paul Ryan's plan.

Where's President Obama's plan?

Where's the Congressional Democrats' plan?

AnnaMolly:

Since you know so much, why don't you tell us your plan for fixing this economy since everyone else is so clueless.

Just running your mouth as usual, exactly what most PARALEGALS do.

The "likes of me"? And good morning to you, too.

It's not MY job, JoAnna, and I never said the democrats were doing theirs either. But since you asked, MY plan would be to go back to square one, figure out what our REAL priorities are, and then develop sensible ways, including taxation, to address and fund the REAL priorities. That's always been MY plan. And that used to be how it worked. But somehow we've forgotten that taxes are a means, not an end. And for the past 20 years or so, taxes are just about the only end, besides war and women's reproductive rights, that republicans can wrap their minds around.

And I might remind you that, while we keep going down this road, nothing of any substance has gotten any better. NOTHING.

Now, feel free to have a nice day disparaging the rest of your neighbors.

exactly what most PARALEGALS do.

Wrong, as usual. Talk about clueless. But about on par for disparaging emptiness.

Extremely disengenuous, Anna Molly.

Et tu, Brutus? I thought we had a deal.

Anna Molly: It's not MY job, JoAnna

Not your job? So what is your job, to be critical of any plan that reduces the role of government? Your party, the Democrats, have no plan Anna. All this bs your party has put out about the Republicans being the "Party of No" just went up in huge flames. The true party of "No" is the Democrats and Obama. They are the ones, just like yourself, that sit there and are critical of others, while at the same time, they produce NO plan of their own. Reid and his Democrats in the Senate can't even pass a bill that reduces spending by one single thin dime!

Not your job. That is just pathetic.

You're an attorney, Anna Molly.

Read our contract.

I believe I'm within my rights.

:-]

Republicans control the House. They control all the committees. They control all debate on the floor. They control the votes. It's their job to produce a budget. A budget that hasn't even been released and already Conservatives are trying to deflect voter anger away from themselves. Pretty telling about how they rate their own performance.

Bag Boy:

You're an attorney, Anna Molly.

Tell that to ITM, who evidently does not believe.

But ... I went back and reviewed the fine print, and sure enough, I believe you may be right about the contract. Mea culpa.

JoAnna:

So what is your job, to be critical of any plan that reduces the role of government? Your party, the Democrats, have no plan Anna.

Did I dispute that, JoAnna? It's my party, and I'll cry if I want to.

But what's YOUR job, other than to be critical of ANYTHING the other side says?

And how much does that pay, anyway? Because that's easy. At least I criticize my own side once in a while ... and more and more often nowadays. You should try it, too.

But you'd have to take off those blinders first.

AM: At least I criticize my own side once in a while ... and more and more often nowadays. You should try it, too.

Until your side has anything resembling an economic plan, you best sit down and be quiet my dear. You want to be critical, be critical of your own side for being delinquent and devoid of any plan. You're the one with blinders on, you can't see the trees for the forest.

No, I can see the trees, JoAnna, just fine. Always have. I have been complaining about Congress for the past 15 years or more. And I've done my share of complaining about the President, too. Beginning almost two years ago. You just haven't been listening. In fact, I don't even think you read my initial reply to you, where I admitted that democrats don't have a plan either.

Not liking Paul Ryan doesn't mean I'm defending democrats. Nor does the fact that democrats have no plan require me to be quiet if I disagree with the republican plan -- if you call Paul Ryan's ideas a plan.

As smart as you are, I'm sure you know that much, if you know anything at all.

Has "your" side had a good plan lately? Last time I checked the deficit has been escalating, regardless of who was at the helm. There's more than one person who can't see, look in the mirror.

ME? How many times do I have to say I'm not defending the democrats? I know they have no plan. And every day that goes by just makes it that much worse. Period.

i can hardly wait for more [ 14 ] trillion in debt,[3 ] wars ,gas @ 4.50 a gal. and rising, insurance going up because of obama-care ,the decisiveness on the gulf oil spill,afghanist an,the budget. oh ! be still my heart, we have to have [ 4 ] more year of jimmy carter 11 .he believes everthing the msm says ,oh yeah ? i forgot they are the ones who stuck us with that loser.

When someone serves up a pile of dung and calls it a plan for America's future, if the many people who rise up and call it a pile of dung do not have a plan of their own, that does not change the fact that the plan issued is a pile of dung.

Pointing out that their is not (yet) an alternative does not change what this plan is.

dirp101

Are you talking about the Plan from the President's deficit commission, or the Ryan plan?

Because both are better than the plan outlined in President Obama's FY 2012 budget proposal....which is REAL a pile of dung! $13 trillion in new debt and debt service payments approaching $1 trillion/yr? You must be joking, Mr. President.

I'm guessing that privately, President Obama might agree with me on that...if nothing else. lol

you can say all you want about president obama,everyone has their oppinion,but it really reeks of the fact that if we had a white president we would probably be on the same page on issues..i believe that this country wasn't ready to set aside their racial beliefs for a black president to be commander and chief at this point or any other time..that shows how ignorant our society is.

decerned in calif.-

LouisJ will conduct your orientation here at First Read.

LouisJ?

dirp101 If you don't dream big, whats the point of even submitting a budget for discussion. If the obstructionist democrats want to block the budget fine! It will be easy enough to remind the voters in 2012.

Obamas dream budget for FY 2012 wants to have $1.1 trillion debt reduction in discretionary cuts, freezes and tax increases over the next 10 years. The republicans want $4.4 trillion in debt reduction over ten years.

What's the problem, sounds like both have a plan. Now, can the democrat legislative members come up with a compromise between the two?

EXACTLY!! And good morning, Houston.

"With tax rates the lowest they have been in 60 years"

You lie! That is 100% false. Tax rates are very high..and the tax code is rigged by insiders, to favor corporations which toe the Obama line, like GE.

The amount of tax receipts is low, thanks to Obama's failed socialist policies which tanked the economy.

Sorry Rep. Wilson, your outburst is once again out of order.

Federal, state and local income taxes consumed 9.2% of all personal income in 2009, the lowest rate since 1950, the Bureau of Economic Analysis reports. That rate is far below the historic average of 12% for the last half-century. The overall tax burden hit bottom in December at 8.8.% of income before rising slightly in the first three months of 2010.

http://bonddad.blogspot.com/2011/02/tax-burden-lowest-in-50-years.html

Bob-1887910

You lie! That is 100% false. Tax rates are very high..and the tax code is rigged by insiders, to favor corporations which toe the Obama line, like GE.

You're nuts.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20002548-503544.html

Reid was referring to the impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, otherwise known as the stimulus -- essentially, the only Obama policy to really impact people's 2009 tax returns. In fact, tax refunds reached an all-time high this year in part because of the stimulus, the president said in his weekly address on Saturday. Meanwhile, taxes are at their lowest levels in 60 years, according to William Gale, co-director of the Tax Policy Center and director of the Retirement Security Project at the Brookings Institution.

This article was from last year, but nothing has changed for most people except that the Obama "Making Work Pay" tax credit was small for 2010.

When I started working in the tax field in the 70s, the maximum federal income tax rate was 70%. There was a 50% maximum on earned income (wages and business profits of individuals).

Hey, Bob - "clues for $200, Alex"!!!!!!!

You lie! That is 100% false. Tax rates are very high..and the tax code is rigged by insiders, to favor corporations which toe the Obama line, like GE.

Yet another outburst from the reality challenged. Tax rates haven't changed since the last Bush tax cut, thanks to Obama caving in to Republican demands that the Bush tax cuts be extended another year. Yes, GE paid very little in taxes, but that's due to tax loopholes put in by Republicans to benefit big corporations - like GE.

Houston - got a few questions about your graph...

If obamas tax cuts are scheduled to expire in or after 2012 why does the graph still project a growing deficit/debt?

Why does the Economic turndown still showing growth after 2014?

Why is tarp, arra and iraq/afganistan war still there?

I notice that with a return of employment numbers over the next 5 years (and its resultant increase of revenue? the deficit/debt is still growing,

Seems to me that just increasing taxes will not be enough. Spending cuts will be required as well to obtain a sustainable fiscal budget.

The last question pertains to the date of the graphs data. If the graph does not reflect 2011 updated numbers why are yo even posting it in support of your argument?

BTW - ever stop to consider what the general populace does when confronting the issue of facing more debt at the end of the month than cash? Doesn't one either cut discretionary spending first or look for a second job?

Or you could try looking at the reports filed by the campaign to see where the money came from instead of just insinuating.

Why don't you do that, and then come back and report?

Or you can do some math to determine it is NOT possible to acculumlate $750 million from half of registered voters, and they are the only who are involved enough to contribute. Maybe GE and the insurance companies had something to do with it. And the endorsement by the Trilateral Commission (David Rockefeller) must carried with it some favors for Big Oil.

Sorry JobSeeker, you need facts to play the game, all you've given is an unsupported opinion. That may fly on talk radio, but expect to be called on it here. If you think President Obama didn't get a huge volume of donations from small donors prove it.

John,

This is not the IRS where you are guilty until you can prove you are innocent. If you tell me I am wrong, then you have to present facts to prove me wrong. I don't think you have the numbers to support your claim. Back to my initial point. Doesn't it bother you that Obama is Dubya all over again, from war mongering, to deficit spending, to corporate bailouts, to Patriot Act, to Gitmo, to tax cuts for the rich?

No, this is debate, where if you're going to take a position you should be prepared to prove and defend that position. Instead you're just regurgitating talk radio blather.

Thanks for playing.

You go first. Give me a reliable source that provides the percentage of donations to the Obama campaign that are $20 or less and I'll shut up. And I'm not talking about Michael Kinsley said so in a oped in the NYT.

Let’s assume you are correct and that all of Obama’s donors were the little guys and gals. That means Obama is in worse shape than he can imagine because they are the ones who will vote in 2012. Do you think they are happy with the hope and change so far? I believe they are tired of seeing the same things from Obama for which they were pissed at Bush. He has been Carter and Bush rolled into one.

JobSeeker

What the hell are you talking about.The president only gave in to the teabaggers tax cuts to rich and corporations so people like me who lost my job in October so I could get umemployment.Worked for 27 years and never had to apply for it.The good old boys played the give me mine or poor middle class can go screw themselves.He maned up and did the right thing. Next election he will have the majority.The young kids like my daughter and son are pissed at this tea bag crap.Watch out in 2012,the tital wave is coming.

lets hope dave-d

Or you can do some math to determine it is NOT possible to acculumlate $750 million from half of registered voters, and they are the only who are involved enough to contribute

Well, lets see. The US population is about 380 million, if we assume the average contribution is $100, then to get $750 million would take about 2% of the total population contributing. Of course, some of those are non-voters, but even if we use a rather pessimistic estimate of 10% of the population is voters, it would still only be 20% of voters - far less than the number of voters that actually voted for him.

And that's just a rough "back of the envelope" estimate. Imagine what actual statistics would reveal!

jobseeker - JohnB is totally incapable of posting a rebuttal. He is merely a parrot of the left wing radical opinionators. Along with Bev if he can't find a cut and paste rebuttal he remains silent or expects you "prove" your point. Never mind the fact that for many, lifes experiences have come about by the cold truth gained by that experiance. For him only a liberal viewpoint is valid and no other viewpoint is allowed. Yo know, just like a parrot.

Anna - is it true that you legally practise law?

practise

HUH??? English puhleeze...

I've made my point. There are no facts to argue, so there's no point in my doing so.

fiesty - isn't "practise" a verb in the context I used?

Right Johnb, there is never a need for YOU to generate a rebuttal because you refuse to have independent thoughts. You must have been a joy to your debate instructor when you insisted on always presenting one side (the same side) in a debate? To bad you fail to realize that internet blogs are not the "norm" for any types of formal debate or rules

When you object to ones conclusions and you can't substantiate your position you have proven nothing for it is just an opinion just like the others poster. Is that your argument??

Friday I received an e-mail from (wait for it) John Boehner and you guys were skeptical. Here is part of what he said.

Anyone else notice the irony that Weeper Boehner FINALLY responded to dottielou on April Fools Day? lol

Thanks for the update! ;o)

Just what we need another 4 years of the, talk up a storm and do nothin. Forget the greatTea Party they had their day, from what i see they blu-it also.Now what we need most of all is people to wake to our main problem which is WASHINGTON itself. they tell us we have to tighten our belts, why is it always us. I haven't seen any of GOP or democrats cuttin their pay tohelp us, its always we the dummies have to survive their stupid laws@games. I find it very hard to support lires and crooks with a so-called title, emma wake up girl. for your information its people like you and I that are gittin dumped on.

Folks out there DON'T let Bush fool you again, YOUR VOTE DOES COUNT.

Bravo Burgundy! The Republicans are just hoping that their lies will affect Democrats and Independents so they won't show up to vote. They are snakes who will say and do anything to make sure President Obama fails.

Dreamer

LOL@Emma...a politician cares for no one but their own...OMG thanks for the laugh though

Happy Birthday, Nash.

Happy Birthday GF - you're 40 and FABULOUS! ;o)

*GIANT Birthday HUG* for you!

Since you brought your own *popcorn*, I'll bring the kool-aide! Cherry right?

Thanks Job1 . . . and Feisty . . . the koolaid is much appreciated . . . as long as it is "red" any flavor will do! :oP

Happy birhday Nash!

Happy Birthday, Nashville Fan!

Muchas gracias John B and Jody!

Happy 40th Birthday Nashville fan. I passed that milestone last summer.

Don't know about you, but it reminded me of that song, "Are you reeling in the years" :}

scoreboard? Obama is full of talk but even he can't remember what he promised. His Obama Doctrine is the latest example of Obama contradicting himself. at least he's more concerned with winning re-election than ruining our country the last few months.

Thanks for the birthday wishes Yellowdog!

And thank you "use your brains" for not seeing the irony in your name! :o)

Happy Birthday, Nash - I brought Chocolate Croissants, they're in the breakroom.

I remembered it was your birthday, as it is my wedding anniversary! I sent a message through the vine tubes at the Dew Drop.

I hope you have a GREAT day! The first 40 are EASY - it starts getting a little tougher after that,...

Take care,

Thanks so much Clara . . . you have no idea how much I need a chocolate croissant right now . . . and HAPPY ANNIVERSARY . . . now THOSE are much harder to reach than birthdays in my opinion . . . so congrats! :o)

Happy Birthday Nash, may you live a hundred years. Enjoy your special day and all good wishes for the coming year.

Thanks so much Gingerbread Mamma - it has been a great day . . . coughing and all! :o)

What a fool you are, Jeff...the Republican hatred, lies, and sarcasm lives on. If you get a paycheck, Jeff, have you been enjoying the tax CUTS President Obama has made sure that you get?

Obummer spent 2 years dragging us to our knees and creating the mess we're in, but you feel that the GOO should have addressed and fixed all our issues in the last 90 days? Wow, more liberal spin from clueless followers of Mr. Clueless. 4 more years of this incompetent campaign manager and we can kss this nation goodbye.

If Trump is serious about his plans to run we had all better vote for him if we want to save this country. This administration of lawyers and far left loonies has no idea how to do that, and their reckless spending and money printing is sending inflation at us like a runaway freight! Only an aggressive businessman like Trump can pull this broken mess back together, and in spite of minorites blindly voting for "their guy", the majority will actually use common sense and send this golf playing fool packing.

no one really...what an appropriate name! You want Trump for President?!?! What a fool.