This is all part of the Teapublicans 'master' plan!

See, if we let the underprivileged starve to death, then we won't have to worry about insuring or housing them.

Remember, these are the very same people who are waging war on Planned Parenthood!

House Republicans are aiming to make deep cuts to to
domestic nutrition programs and international food assistance, cutting $832
million -– or 12 percent –- from a federal program that provides food for
low-income mothers and children. The bill would also cut 12 percent from the Food and Drug Administration,
which is responsible for keeping Americans food and medicine safe.

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/05/24/thinkfast-may-24-2011/

By all means, make sure BIG oil continues to receive those subsidies…

When was:

"Give me your tired, your poor, your
huddled masses yearning to breathe free. - Engrved on Statue of
Liberty" -

-- Emma Lazarus

Replaced with:

I GOT mine – FU!

--Republicans - circa 2012

US Navy Disabled Veteran - Retired

I GOT mine – FU!

Great post to start the day Navy. Somehow, looking at the tread I doubt in the I GOT mine – FU gets it starting in NY

Any no load can win an election by saying "I'll give you stuff, and I'll tax the other guy to do it." That's exactly what Obama is preaching with his populist message. And the Lefty Liberals just eat it up. Medicare is broke, but Obama tries to whitewash that little detail not by coming up with any solutions of his own, but of being critical of a man, Rep. Paul Ryan, that has a plan to save that entitlement program. That's what losers like Obama do, they discredit people just for the pure reason of getting votes. So lets go with Obama's plan, the one where Medicare goes broke in a few years. Lets hope any one of you with family on Medicare enjoy that call when the nursing home tells you to pick up grandma by 5pm, because they are now out of business.

Quisquam vere puto quis sit sententia ullus magis? Magis quod magis is sanus amo puer quisnam fletus lupus vel pullus parum. Relaxo , meus amicus. Vita mos vado in quod nos mos totus superstes.

Great Opening Post Navy and Feisty.

It’s all pretty simple, The Progressives just need to keep nailing these Republicans on every front, because it’s a no brainer that the Republicans-Tea People are so bad for our country and their failed polices are really hurting our country, while crushing the poor and middle class.

Filled With Fear The Twin Faces Of Ryan And Walker

Paul Ryan's roadmap to recession is in peril. If Democrat Kathy Hochul wins — she is leading by 4 to 6 points in the latest polls — it not only would be a setback for House Republicans but would send a message to Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and his key lieutenants that their Medicare overhaul plan could become a serious political liability. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker urged his party members at their annual convention Saturday to take seriously the threat of losing control of the state Senate through recall elections.

"They know there's a very strong possibility their days of controlling every level of government are numbered," Democratic Assembly Leader Peter Barca told The Associated Press. "(The Republicans are) moving forward huge pieces of legislation that dramatically change the direction and traditions and values of this state. Generally, doing that takes much longer."
The Republican majority pushed through a controversial Voter ID bill and Gov. Scott Walker is expected to sign it into law Thursday.
The bill requires voters to show photo identification at the polls

http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/05/24/36786.htm

Well, that is scray. At least three Republican state senators will face recall elections in July, and voters are gathering signatures to try to recall another three Republicans and three Democrats.

The GOP/ T-bagger’s party is so afraid to admit the truth. Truth to them is to limit people’s ability to vote!

As far as Paul Ryan scary push Grandma over the cliff plan goes no one in Congress should be playing politics with your benefits.

It is essential we do not let Congress use Grover Norquist's Master plan to destroy American along with the political deals to pay the nation's bills that could mean harmful cuts to Medicare and Social Security.

Medicare and Social Security are vital to the health and economic security of today's seniors and future generations. They mean a safety net for many, and health and financial security for all, including our children and grandchildren

Maybe this is the reason Newt Gringring is afaid to answer his question about why he can’t pay his bill at Tiffany's.

Gingrich businesses owed unpaid state taxes

GOP presidential candidate's firms had liens, overdue tax bills totaling $6,000 in Mo., Ind., Ga. and Pa.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/05/14/politics/main20062942.shtml

Newti, should be intillgent to know the bible says: A faithful witness will not lie: but a false witness will utter lies.

As Heraclitus said: How can we know anything in a world that never is, but instead is always becoming something else?

President Obama and First lady are greeted by Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip, Buckingham Palace.

It should be fun in London today. Ya’ll know the Queen is into high tech toys ever since the Prez gave her that gift last time.

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2011/5/24/1306237109990/Barack-Obama-andd-Michell-006.jpg

Lecturing Americans To ‘Reread’ Constitution, Herman Cain Confuses It With Declaration of Independence

Cain really should have taken his own advice, however, before he decided to lecture the entire country about the Constitution. The phrase “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” does not appear anywhere in the Constitution’s text. Nor does the Constitution include a phrase about the right of the people to alter or abolish a government that is destructive of their ideals. Both of those phrases appear in the Declaration of Independence, which, in case Mr. Cain is not aware, is actually an entirely different document than the Constitution — written over ten years earlier.

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/05/23/cain-reread-constitution/

How’ bout a Hermain Cain/Mad Housewife Sarah Palin or visa versus ticket they are both clueless.

Would you prefer a Hermain Cain/Mad Housewife Sarah Palin or visa versus ticket?

They all clueless.

Job1:

Thank you. Just about every independent think tank and economists have exposed the Ryan Bill as a death song for Medicare and Medicaid. The rights continued attempt in supporting the lie that Ryan is somehow saving Medicare for the future is pure BS, unless they are referring to a future where only the wealthiest Americans will be able to pay the premiums for Medicare.

They have done nothing to solve the problems with escalating Health Care Costs. All they have done is shift the costs to the elderly, disabled, sick, low income, etc. Any moron can do that and call it a reduction in costs. The fact is, it does not reduce the costs, it merely shifts the burden to somebody else - smoke and mirrors my friends. This is not cost reduction. In fact most economists claim it will in the long run actually increase costs, put 50 Million or more out in the street with no Insurance and people are going to die. PERIOD!

And this is the plan they think will get them elected in 2012. The American people are saying NO WAY.

Navy, Feisty, outstanding illumination of the sweeping wave of rejection the rigid ideologues of the right have brought on themselves.

The current issue of The Nation examines this subject closely, too. Three in-depth reports, on Wisconsin, Texas, and Ohio dissect the anti-government executive and legislative actions that have taken place (and our newspapers in Florida have done the same with Rick Scott's terrible initiatives).

What is remarkable is how all of this activity has been orchestrated by the guru of the ultra-right, Grover Norquist. On a different 'Vine blog yesterday, poster David Walker corrected me when I referred to Norquist as a conservative - Walker said the man is a fascist ideologue who enshrines selfishness.

Be that as it may, what we are seeing is a comprehensive attack on our state and federal governments by fanatics. And now the backwash against their programs is making them frantic to destroy as much as they can before they lose their temporary grasp on power.

Their basic philosophy of eliminating government regulation, eliminating government services, slashing budgets and taxes, is all in pursuit of a fantasy - that the kind of laissez-faire economics they worship will result in more freedom, a more vigorous economy, and improvement in the lives of all. It's absolute hogwash.

Benjamin Franklin was one of the great innovators and builders among the Founding Fathers. His proposals for public schools, public libraries, a postal system, public highways and much more would today be assailed by Norquist's disciples as "socialism."

The idea of more "freedom" resulting from elimination of regulations in one sense is true - but in another is insane. Going back to an idealized vision of pastoral America of the early 1800's not only relies upon complete ignorance of history, but also of the consequences of an unrestricted polity. There are reasons the American nation adopted banking laws, established the Pure Food and Drug Act, empowered the Department of Agriculture to oversee aspects of food safety, instituted child labor laws, set up the Securities and Exchange Commission, and later instituted the Social Security Administration, Medicare, the Environmental Protection Agency, OSHA, and the Energy Department, among others.

Those reasons all came from the bad behavior of unregulated pirates stealing, poisoning, cheating, killing, abusing, abandoning, pimping, raping, hoarding, addicting, and oppressing Americans.

The laissez-faire kind of environment the right has been pursuing avidly since the Reagan Administration has been an utter and total failure. Not only have those policies wrecked the American economy, they wrought havoc as well around the globe.

It is vital that the American nation see and understand this reality clearly. Two years ago, the small crowds of the activist ultra-right chanted, "We want our country back."

Now the American public realizes that crowd lied about its intentions. And the vast majority of us say to them, "WE WANT OUR COUNTRY BACK!!!!"

Sorry

How' bout a Hermain Cain/Mad Housewife Sarah Palin or visa versus ticket they are both clueless.

Would you prefer a Hermain Cain/Mad Housewife Michele Bachmann or visa versus ticket?

They're all clueless.

Great way to start the day, Navy and Feisty.

Contrary to the GOP's talking point: With the Ryan voucher plan, the money for those nursing home medicare patients runs out in 3 months and that's when the phone call comes to pick up Grandma or Grandpa by 5 PM.

No one disputes that fixing medicare, medicaid and social security is necessary but it should be done separate from the budget debate. It does not have to be part of the 2012 budget. The debate about those three programs should be stand alone discussions and solutions; this should be a serious and lengthy debate not some budget quick fix.

President Obama and democrats have ideas on how to fix the programs but the "urgency" is not this year; for now, they're just sitting back watching republicans digging deep holes.

Don't be late picking up grandma Fascist.

Is that before or after Ryan dumps her off the cliff???

You are so full of hate why don't you just do us all a favor and move to another country that supports your and the New GOP/TP fascist ideology of religious intolerance, taking away our civil rights, deny equal education, deny women their reproductive rights, trying to take away the rights to vote of Million and Millions Americans, deny Gay Rights, etc, etc, etc.

You keep playing your little game of hate baiting. It failed in Europe and it is failing here as well. The people are starting to speak up and exposing people like you for what you really are and now you are mad simply because you have been EXPOSED. Your ideology is laying naked in the eyes of the public and it turns their stomachs.

Bottom Line:

Republicans do not want to save Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security. They wat to eliminate the programs.

Please Navy - in the future would you refrain from using the word naked & JS1 in the same sentance?

I just ate breakfast!

Thanks in Advance! lol

".......and Obama has created a lot more for the next guy/gal to clean up."

And won't it be fun, hollering "you can't mention the predecessor" over and over and over and over and over......??

Ryan's Impact sounds much like the splat from the South end of a North facing Bull! And the GOP/TPers are like the dogs wallowing and rolling around in the same product!

One of the best threads to start the morning that I can remember. I don't dare start congratulating you on your good work because nearly all of you are at your best today.

Conservatives laughed during the Wisconsin standoff when we began to speak of waking the sleeping giant. It's now clear that the Conservative strategy of lying about what they intended to do then ramping up their war on the middle class has started a groundswell of opposition to the GOPTP. Their slavish devotion to the wealthy elites is angering Americans everywhere, yet even in the face of that they only double down on their draconian agenda.

Mr. Ryan, I am 40yrs today. Getting close to medicare and you want to KILL medicare as I know it? Asking me to sacrifice so you can appease your rich cronies? this ain't flying. Pius @ 40.

JoAnnaSmith1

AF: Medicare covers 100 days of health and rehabilitation related care. It does NOT cover custodial care. I think you're dissembling here!

What covers it after that? Yeah, that's right Medicaid, which is in the same economic boat as Medicare.

Don't be late picking up grandma Fascist.

Uh, NO!! Medicaid is means tested!

@ Pius! Happy 40th Birthday & many many more! ;o)

How about a slice of Feisty's Famous *popcorn* cake?

"According to Medicare Trustee Thomas R. Saving, a professor of economics at Texas A&M University and senior fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis, the Medicare program is now projected to consume:

24 percent of all federal income taxes by 2019 and
51 percent of all federal income taxes by 2042.3
The true cost of the drug entitlement expansion is unknown, and the trustees could be understating the real cost. When the new Medicare law was enacted in 2003, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated the 10-year cost at $395 billion. Less than three months later, the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) revealed that it estimated the 10-year cost at $534 billion.4

More recently, Richard S. Foster, Medicare's chief actuary, said, "All our estimates showed that the cost of the drug benefit, through 2013, would be in the range of $500 billion to $600 billion."5 This is just for the next 10 years, before the baby-boom generation hits the program. All of the various government actuaries have concluded that taxpayers will likely pay far more than the initial official estimates for the first 10 years and trillions of dollars after that.

Ironically, the entire financial situation could be far worse. During the debate on the new drug entitlement, Democrats offered proposals that would have cost nearly $1 trillion in the first 10 years, 6 far in excess of anything proposed by the Administration or the congressional leadership. Many critics of the new drug program actually want a more expensive program."

So why are the democrats not running on their proposals?

Social Security - The People’s Budget does not propose any reductions in benefits. The People’s Budget raises the taxable maximum to include 90% of economy-wide earnings, and eliminates the maximum that employers pay on behalf of their high-income employees. The CBO estimates that increasing the share of total earnings subject to the payroll tax to 90% would require raising the maximum taxable amount to $170,000 in 2012, up from $106,800 in 2011.12 The increase in the taxable maximum on the employee side is gradually phased in over five years. The increase in employer contributions for high earners (those employees earning more than $106,800) would be phased in immediately.

Medicare / Medicaid - Major proposals include reducing the Medicaid provider tax threshold in 2015, tracking high prescribers and utilizers of prescription drugs in Medicaid, strengthening Medicaid third-party liability, and recovering erroneous Medicare Advantage payments. According to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), these proposals would collectively save $17.2 billion over the 2012-16 period and $62.2 billion over the 2012-21 period. In order to harmonize tax rates between capital and ordinary income, the Medicare
Hospital Insurance (HI) 0.9% surcharge on earned income and the 3.8% surcharge on investment income for high earners (included in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) of 2010) must also be repealed. The PPACA surcharges were estimated to generate $201.3 billion over the 2012-19 period.39 Extrapolating from this score, the repeal of the PPACA surcharges
would decrease revenue by $292.4 billion over the 2012-21 period. Adjusting the TPC score for eliminating the PPACA surcharges, this policy is projected to generate $736.7 billion over the 2012-21 period.

Taxes - The People’s Budget would adopt Representative Jan Schakowsky’s (D.-Il.) Fairness in Taxation Act (H.R 1124), which would create several new tax brackets for high-income earners: $1-10 million would be taxed at 45%; $10-20 million, 46%; $20-100 million, 47%; $100 million to $1 billion, 48%; $1 billion and over would pay 49%. The bill would also tax capital gains and dividend income as ordinary income for those taxpayers with income over $1 million. Citizens for Tax Justice (CTJ) estimate that the Fairness in Taxation Act would generate $748.2 billion over the 2011-20 period.35 Extrapolating from this score, Rep. Schakowsky’s Fairness in Taxation Act is projected to generate $401.5 billion in revenue over the 2012-16 period and $872.5 billion over the 2012-21 period. The People’s Budget would decrease the regressivity of itemized deductions while maintaining incentives built into the tax code by limiting the rate at which itemized deductions can reduce tax liability to a maximum of 28%. This policy would only affect itemizing tax filers currently in the top two income brackets. The president’s budget also proposed limiting the value of itemized deductions to 28%. This policy would generate $293.3 billion over 2012-21 period.

Corporate Taxes - The People’s Budget would impose a fee on large financial institutions. Specifically, the budget would impose a leverage tax (0.15% of covered liabilities) on large banks with more than $50 billion in assets (as proposed in the president’s budget request). According to the CBO, imposing
such a tax could generate $31.3 billion over the 2012-16 period and $70.9 billion over the full 2012-21 period, recouping more than three-fold the net taxpayer cost of the Troubled Asset Relief Program.

Derivatives and Speculation Tax - The People’s Budget would impose a small tax on transactions of exotic financial products. Assuming a 25% behavioral reduction in transactions resulting from a tax, Dean Baker and Robert Pollin estimate that various taxes on financial derivative products (financial instruments deriving their value from some other underlying asset, such as a stock, currency, or index) could generate upwards of $63.5 billion annually.

Eliminate Fossil Fuel Tax Preferences - The president’s budget requests have repeatedly proposed eliminating a handful of tax preferences carved out for fossil fuel producers over the years. Eliminating this tax code spending would help level the playing field between renewable energy sources and fossil fuels.
The People’s Budget would eliminate fossil fuel tax preferences as detailed by the president’s budget. Specifically, this policy would repeal exploration and development expensing, preferential tax treatment of royalties, and domestic manufacturing deductions, among other tax preferences, for oil, natural gas, and coal producers.48 Repeal would save $21 billion over the 2012-16 period and $41 billion over the 2012-21 period.

Now these are just the highlights but all the jokes we make about there not being enough rich people to tax is not a joke in the progressive world. They basically want the rich in this country paying between 70% and 90% in taxes.

If this is your platform take it to the people and run on it.

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL

sure nice. thanks.

I'm so enjoying the GOPTP spin on TV last night and today trying to claim that the third party in NY26 is splitting the republican vote. Odd, since that 3rd party candidate has lost support and the support has primarily gone to the democrat. It just can't possibly be about killing medicare.

Happy 40th b-day, Pius E....!!!

x

JoAnnaSmith1

Just don't TOUCH my medicare as I know it. ask ryan to follow these steps

1 Reverse bush tax cut back to clinton era.

2 close all corporate tax loopholes

3 end all wars.

4 slash defense allocation.

and am loving myself at 40.......LOL. Thanks, Jody, JoAnnaSmith1.

and the rest of you guys..

They are hidden between the pages of Boehner's jobs-creating legislation. Please check there.....

At 40 now, without serious reform there will be no entitlement programs by the time you retire. Each year that goes by those programs get more insolvent.

And now Reid tells the truth - the democrats in the Senate will not produce a budget at all.

It is very sad when the leaders refuse to lead. Are children are already doomed. The only question is how many of us are as well. Certainly someone only 40 will not receive the customary entitlements as things stand now.

Well, Spider, get your head out of your backside and scroll up to Alan, NJ's, post about the budget proposed by the Congressional Progressive Caucus. Several of us have raised that subject here before, too - and the President indeed sent budget plan guidelines to the Hill long ago.

Alan's post fixates on some of the tax policy matters in the CPC budget plan. he fails to record a number of areas where spending cuts are also proposed. Well, that's OK, it suits Alan's bias and I can understand that.

The CPC budget plan differs from the nuthouse proposal offered by Ryan in several key basics: it recognizes that revenues are as much a part of the need as are spending reductions; it preseves essential government services and programs; its spending cuts do not attack the fragile economic recovery underway now. Ryan's budget is entirely the opposite.

Of course, this has been a subject of discussion for a while. So you can drop your snarky and useless sniping and go back to sleep.

Happy birthday Pius Emeka Nebo!

I tried to give Ryan the benefit of the doubt initially. (What with the pundits saying how courageous he was and all.)

I think he is a bright man, and those blue eyes and black hair remind me of the men in my family. But the more I sat and listened to him, the more I realized Paul Ryan is like my Puritan ancestors in more ways than one: he is an ideologue, a bit of a fanatic, the type who would drown an elderly woman to test the hypothesis she was "possessed." If you ask me, that's what his plan to "reform" Medicare is, balancing his numbers by cutting into the lives of the elderly.

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL

This is all part of the Teapublicans 'master' plan!

See, if we let the underprivileged starve to death, then we won't have to worry about insuring or housing them.

I find a flaw in your theory - if you starve all the poor to death, who will work the minimum (minimum until the Repubs get their hands on that, too) wage jobs?

But then again, they could say, we have no one to work these jobs here so now we have to outsource some more...I guess i take it back...there is no flaw.

@Alan -- A very good and informative post that asks a very important question. It's too bad that a thoughtful debate is not generated because the pre-prepared remarks can't respond. There needs to be good debates on how to fix the problems rather than how not to fix them.

JAS1 - If you want to just swoop and poop with useless remarks, fine. If you're serious then you should study up on the budgeting process first.

The CPC budget must first pass the House before it is considered by the Senae. For your edification, spending legislation actually originates in the House, it's right there in the Constitution you pretend to revere.

The budget process begins with a Presidential message on spending proposals, and then Members of the house of Representatives take up the process.

Some Presidents, Roosevelt among them, actually sent their own budget bills to the House - others, including our President Obama - send policy proposals and budget objectives to the Hill, where the actual crafting of bills takes place.

JoAnnaSmith,

Those would be the Obama tax cuts, the ones he signed back in Dec/2010 due to expire on Jan 01/2013. But do you think on the off chance that Obama gets re-elected he'll raise the taxes on the middle-class?

A letter from all 42 Republican senators comes to mind. Didn't they vow to block any measure (Unemployment, 9/11 Fund) if they did not get the Bush tax cuts extended...?

John A

The CPC budget plan differs from the nuthouse proposal offered by Ryan in several key basics: it recognizes that revenues are as much a part of the need as are spending reduction.

Obama is spending 25% of GDP. Revenues have never exceeded 19% of GDP since WW II despite any tax rate.

Might want to tell your fellow "scholars" and "historians" at CPC to check out their history / check there math.

You got nothing but childish marginalizations and obfuscations.

The Ryan plan has cooties, big nasty political cooties.

Now that we've destroyed the Conservative lie that they're the only ones to have produced a budget it's important to point out the reality of who's responsible.

ALL budgetary matters originate in the House of Representatives.

Republican Conservatives said they'd fix the budget if we only gave them control of the House.

Republicans control the House.

Therefore it is the RESPONSIBILITY of Republicans to negotiate a REAL budget that can pass the Senate and be signed into law. By passing an ideological masterpiece that only true devotees of Ayn Rand can love, knowing it won't pass the Senate or be signed by President Obama they have failed to fulfill their responsibility. In terms of doing something useful the GOPTP has created something as worthless and symbolic as when they pretended to repeal Affordable Care.

When will Republicans take seriously their responsibility to the American People and the US Constitution?

Paul Ryan will be a force to be reckoned with for years to come. Jimmy Carter gave us Ronald Reagan. I had been wondering for a while what Rock Star the Obama presidency would bring us. His name is Paul Ryan.

JoAnnaSmith1,

Even the one in Libya?!?

when did we go to war with Libya? I must have slept right through this one.

here's your medicare:

get out and exercise America, you are over weight and eat too much

John B, Des Moines Iowa: ALL budgetary matters originate in the House of Representatives.

Don't recall you being this agitated when the House failed to pass a budget in 2010.

When will Republicans take seriously their responsibility to the American People and the US Constitution?

The Republicans take it very seriously, so seriously, they've taken it upon themselves to reform the entitlements, the same entitlements the Democrats have been too much of cowards to even discuss. The Republicans take it very seriously, so seriously, that they paid attention to what the Presidents own Debt Commission recommended, the same Debt Commission the President and the Democrats have ignored. The Republicans take it seriously, so seriously, that they have produced a budget that addresses the debt problem.

The Democrats have produced rhetoric, lies and innuendo, nothing of value. They have the House budget in their hands, it's time the Democrats, who control the Senate, to produce a budget they can pass in their chamber, let alone having to pass in the House. It's time Obama and the Democrats show everyone what they are made of, what they believe in. And when they do, America will be just so disappointed.

John A. - do a little more research. The budget process did start in the house. It is now up to the Senate to either accept, offer amendments to be resolved in committee or decline and give their version. Spider was incorrect when asking about the President's proposal since he did give one (opps, sorry - two) but the Senate has done nothing but complain.

Don't agree with everything from Ryan but at least he had the leadership to put something out there to be voted on. He even stated on MTP that he is willing to negotiate.

The House passed a budget in April of 2009. Republicans filibustered it in the Senate to make sure it had no chance of an up or down vote, something they claimed was unconstitutional when they ran the Senate. Keep lying JS1, we're used to it by now.

I had been wondering for a while what Rock Star the Obama presidency would bring us. His name is Paul Ryan.

You must be into PUNK rock. Paul Ryan is a punk. That's real brave, real courageous Paul, don't take on big oil, wall street, or the insurance companies, pick grandma's purse instead, and call yourself courageous, and innovative, hell any street punk can grab an old lady's purse and run. A punk in a nice suit, is still a punk.

According to one Republican, who supports the Ryan bill, when asked what will happen when the vouchers run out and they (the elderly) needs care, his exact quote was "they are S O L". Republicans says health care is a privilege, not a right.

It's okay to make sure the rich corporations and people are taken care of. Take care of big oil. The privileged are the only ones entitled to health care. The rest should just hurry up and die before they run out of Ryan's vouchers.

So seniors are having the most difficult time finding work in this economy, and now Ryan wants to make them pay MORE for health care? On top of that, the Republicans want to give the rich MORE tax cuts?

Are they they taking stupid pills? Extending the previous tax cuts DID NOT WORK. Unemployment is still at 9%. TAX CUTS DID NOT CREATE JOBS.

Why are they pushing for them again? The facts are slapping them in the face . . . TAX CUTS DO NOT WORK. Why are they still pushing for more?

Seriously, can any Republican tell me why you continue to push a policy that FAILED? Anyone . . . anyone at all. You had your chance. You got your extension. Your theory that tax cuts create jobs FAILED. Look at unemployment, it did not change. You were WRONG!

How can you continue to support a theory that has been PROVEN to fail? How can you logically say, "it did not work so let's keep doing it"? Come on, give me one reason . . . just ONE reason . . . to support a theory that did not work.

Oh, I forgot . . . when your policy FAILS, instead of being a man and admitting you are wrong, you change the subject. Tax cut extensions did not create jobs . . . so start complaining about the rapper from the GAP commercials (and Sesame Street cameos) making an appearance at the White House. *facepalm*

And people wonder why I stopped voting Republican.

ryan a rock star, yea right, then you should consider THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION his record label. after all, he sings and dances to their tunes. they write the lyrics for his songs, including his latest flop, the ryan die'n plan. this man may be a rock star, but his "monsters" are the corporate wealthy, not the average american

Well, I see a new left tactic emerge ... the comment of the length of War and Peace. Cripe Navy ... Feisty ... and Beverly can you refine your thoughts to something less than a diatribe?

With regards to the fear mongering on the left. Here are the facts:

1) Medicare as we know it will be insolvent in less than 11 years.

2) Ryan has enough stones to at least offer something that will provide Medicare into the future. The "Death Panels" that you hate to talk about are the path of last resort in Obama care. The bill proposes to simply pay less to the doctors. Tell me what happens, my lefty friends, when other people's money runs out and / or doctors no longer take Medicare patients?

3) The Senate has offered absolutely zero budget resolution as a basis of negotiation. You b1tch about negotiation but there's nothing there to reconcile?

Here's the very bottom line ... (yet again) ... Today, for every $2.20 in revenue we spend $3.78. For every $1.78 in excess of our revenue we borrow around 76 cents goes to interest ... today. That means only a little over $1.01 of what we borrow (or print) is available to do anything with ... today.

By 2020, if we do nothing and did not reduce what we spend at all, the GAO predicts that $1.61 of that $1.78 is interest and only 16 cents is available to do anything with.

An increase in taxation will not solve the problem and, in fact, will likely make it worse. Spending needs to change ... radically.

So, in my view, Ryan's the adult. He's at least telling you the truth. NOW, of you have a better way (or idea) about how to cut $6 Trillion over 10 years ... put it on the table and get on with it.

Rocco, you didn't read and understand my comment, apparently. I quite properly described the budget process - and in more detail in an answer to the basketball with ears, JAS!.

Astonished, if you have been reading the posts, you should realize the Democrats have offered quite a solid budget proposal that addresses every issue - more effectively than the Ryan plan. The CPC budget proposal is a serious plan that addresses both spending and revenues, cuts the deficits and reduces debt, and doesn't tear apart the country by doping so.

In contrast, the Ryan plan adds $6 trillion to the deficits over the next decade and takes 60 years to be in balance. it's a sham, a lie, a political policy document that is no honest national budget.

Paul Ryan will not be the Reagan answer to Carter. Ryan isn't Reagan and Obama isn't Carter.

Ryan is more like "balloon boy" getting fame with deceit. He can never advance in a national arena, probably not even in a state-wide arena. Looking at the Town Halls, he may not even get reelected as a Rep. Like Gingrich, who is now in a vicious circle of lies to cover lies, Ryan won't be asked to help campaign, which is the first necessary step in climbing the Party ladder.

As for Mitt Romney, he is weak. Any comment Romney has made outside his narrow experience as governor shows lack of sophistication, especially in foreign policy. He is not as deficient in gravitas as Palin, Bachmann, or Trump, but he is not presidential material either. Hunstman has a better chance if he can overcome his Mormonism with Evangelicals/Bible Belt.

Pawlenty is already getting hammered for his poor record as governor -- we're going to continue to see this with Republican governors from Schwarznegger on. Republicans can't govern--they lack intellectual honesty (among other things like a platform), and Ryan is the epitome of this.

I did not doubt that GOP would promote Ryan ever since the President/Republican roundtable Health Care Summit in 2010.

For on that day in order to make his argument, Rep. Ryan claimed brashly and insistently that the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office was not a valid or an authentic source. A senior Repub congressman jumped in and warned that there were no grounds to run down the mutually respected CBO and that doing so served no purpose. Nothing further was said.

Conservatives keep fixating on how Medicare will be insolvent in the near future as if progressives are unaware of this problem. The Dems are very well aware of the need to shore-up entitlements. They just want to shore-it-up in a responsible, balanced way.

It is easy to just abolish something, or shift the burden, or worse privatize profits and socialize debt (that's Grover Norquist's fascist plutocracy ideology in a nutshell). It takes a lot more intellectual honesty to get at the root of problems, like sky-rocking costs for health care, which is dragging on our economy and hurting everyone regardless of Medicare.

The same goes for deficits and balancing the budget. We must look at both sides of the equation (revenue and spending) and we must address this problem in phases. Simplistic sound bites do not solve complex problems.

TruePatriot -

The Dems are very well aware of the need to shore-up entitlements. They just want to shore-it-up in a responsible, balanced way.

The same goes for deficits and balancing the budget. We must look at both sides of the equation (revenue and spending) and we must address this problem in phases. Simplistic sound bites do not solve complex problems.

This is the most honest and factual summary of the problem I have seen.

We must fix these problems with an intelligent, responsible solution. There are long term social and economic ramifications that must be accounted for. We can not simply abolish something . . . we must be smarter than that.

I agree whole heartedly with Navy! These GOP/TEA nay-ers have stirred up a hornets nest with the Ryan pronouncements, and now many GOP/TEA players are opting out of playing and backing away en-masse! Ancient articulator got glittered and some big players saw the light at the end of the tunnel and realized it was a train roaring straight at them!

Cali,

There is only one plan from Teapublicans and that is to rid this country of any government involvement in social programs.

They will never offer or consider any plan that asks people to pay more. If we just increase the payroll tax by about 3% and increase or eliminate the ceiling for payroll deductions ($108k) the problem would be solved. In fact that increase may only be needed for 20 to 30 years until the “boomers” have passed.

But they will not even propose that idea to the voters and see how we feel about that approach. Perhaps there is a middle ground between tax increases and drastic change but the Teapublicans won’t allow that discussion.

To continue: Say-anything-do-anything right wing politics is rewarded, elevated and spun and used mightily to prey upon ordinary Americans, even when the lie is emblazoned in 3D. My point above was that Rep. Ryan was more than willing to throw the CBO under the bus to support his argument.

Why forward someone like Ryan for President? Before he says a word more, we know who he represents and who will fund him ~ we know he gives his staff Ayn Rand books to read.

We know he's pushing a budget bill which adds hugely to the deficit, cuts jobs, ends Medicare and will kick seniors and children to the curb, leaving no safety net and ALL to protect the wealthiest 2%.

These things we already know. They are known.

Dennis -

You are right. The really sad part is that the GOP/TP would rather lay off hundreds of thousands of government workers than pay 3% more in taxes. We are talking about hundreds of thousands of families suddenly struggling, without work . . . but at least they get to keep that 3%.

What they fail to realize is all those public jobs maintain demand. Removing them will reduce overall demand in the economy, thus hurting the private sector as well. Less demand means less sales and revenue in the private sector.

But who cares about maintaining or improving demand in a struggling economy when they can save 3%. Maybe they believe supply and demand is just another "liberal myth".

Remember - It was Dick Cheney who said "Deficits don't matter". Why are Republicans now turning on one of their own?

The bottom line is this: If the government would STOP borrowing willy nilly from the Social Security fund....there would be PLENTY of money for it to last for a very long time. They use this fund as their own personal "slush" fund....IOU's all over the place, but they NEVER pay them back. This is money that is paid into this fund from our paychecks....it's NOT for them to use for their "pork projects, etc.! When will we ever learn to STOP them from using both Medicare AND Social Security funds for their own personal gains!!! They are stealing money from each and every American who works and pays into these accounts! They all belong in jail!! Enough said!

Cali,

The really sad part is that the GOP/TP would rather lay off hundreds of thousands of government workers than pay 3% more in taxes

Here let me help make your day ... You are right! Damn Right! I would like to see more government workers laid off ... So they can be replace with private enterprise workers. Your problem is that you want to control private enterprise and deep down inside dispise what you can't control, unionize, or intimidate.

In this regard, less is more! Maybe we'd be able to actually generate some tax revenue for once rather than just consume it!

... and on the topic of "killing Medicare" (not you Cali but others)

Because you say it doesn't make it true. It's not true, isn't true, and never will be. If you have any hope (at any age) of using some sort of Medicare you need to get as much of it as you can out of the control of the Federal government! It isn't the Repubs that are trying to kill it, it's the Dems who are terrified to help fix it!

Can anyone explain why JaAnnaSmith's comments are being collapsed? You know exactly what she's going to say. She is the best advertisement for NOT choosing to be associated with the right-wing. You can put her on ignore. Stop with the collapsing. It does not speak well of the left.

DW, it's true that JS1 is a great advertisement for how disingenuous, deceptive, and dismissive of facts Conservative messaging can be.

Notice how she gives Republicans credit for passing a budget, but accepts no responsibility for the GOPTP passing a budget EVERYONE knew was DOA. Instead she insists that Democrats just knuckle under or accept the blame for not having a budget.

She also continues to whine about not having a budget for the current fiscal year, even though Republicans prevented a vote in the Senate 2 YEARS IN A ROW and 15 seconds in Google will prove it. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/04/14/breaking-house-passes-2011-budget-deal/

She expects Democrats to bend to the will of Republicans because they hold a majority in 1 house of Congress. In previous years she's scathing because Democrats didn't cave in to the MINORITY even though they held majorities in both houses.

The extent to which the ends justify the means and situational ethics rule the Conservative world is breathtaking.

Astonished -

I would like to see more government workers laid off ... So they can be replace with private enterprise workers. Your problem is that you want to control private enterprise and deep down inside dispise what you can't control, unionize, or intimidate.

And THIS is my main issue with the GOP/TP . . . where are these "private enterprise" jobs going to come from? You want to lay off public workers and put them in the private sector? . . . WHERE?

You see, this is where ideology does not meet reality. The REALITY is that there are NO private sector jobs available for them. Hell, there are not enough private sector jobs available for the millions on unemployment. So where are these jobs going to magically come from?

Is this another one of your "theories" . . . like extending the tax cuts. Ya, we all saw how many jobs that created. So now are you trying to push another theory about magical jobs popping out of thin air?

Stick to reality.

The reality is that thousands of jobs are gone FOREVER. Want proof? Remember the thousands of jobs in the video and music sector? All those record stores, video rental stores, production companies, etc? They are all being replaced with technology. Now anyone can produce their own music from home and sell it on iTunes. No production company, no music store, no plastic manufacturer for the CDs. All of those jobs are gone, FOREVER.

Want more? Remember newspapers? Maybe you still get one each morning . . . or maybe you have joined the rest of society and get your news online. Do you have any idea how many people were involved in the manufacturing, printing, and delivery process of a newspaper? You got the people who make the paper, the people who deliver giant spools to the printing press, the people working the press, the people stacking and arranging them, the people managing delivery routes, the people who actually deliver them . . . ALL being replaced with a small team who puts the news online. That is thousands upon thousands of jobs gone FOREVER.

Still not convinced? Let's look at the radio. More and more radio stations are moving to a computer controlled system. DJs have been laid off, talk radio is slowly dying, advertisers are pulling out because it is the least successful medium. In the past it took a team of people to get music and talk radio on the air. Now computers have reduced the number of people needed. Beyond that, services like Pandora and talk radio hosts pod-casting is splintering the market even more. Why do you think the conservative, talk radio demographic has one foot in the grave? Because they are the only people still using traditional radio. As they die off, so do your conservative radio prophets. Technology has replaced, and will continue to replace, workers in the radio field.

Still think there are jobs aplenty? Let's take a look at bookstores. How are they doing? The tablet pc market is booming, with Apple leading the way. Add tablets to the number of eReaders being sold, and it is no surprise that book stores have tumbleweeds rolling through them. More people purchased books online than in bookstores last year. That means the people making the paper for books, delivering books to stores, and working in the stores are all on the chopping block. ALL of those jobs will be gone FOREVER.

Perhaps you would like to discuss the housing construction industry. With a huge supply bubble of available homes, and low demand, what do you think happens to those jobs?

So tell me, Astonished . . . where are all these private enterprise jobs going to come from? What magical hole are you going to start pulling jobs out of?

If you can tell me where all these public sector workers will go for work, after you lay them off, then MAYBE I will support your idea.

BTW . . . I don't believe in unionizing or control, I believe in supply and demand. Laying off hundreds of thousands of people reduces demand, no matter how you twist your logic.

Cali ... Cali ... Cali ...

The REALITY is that there are NO private sector jobs available for them.

There you go again ... you right ... today. But the reason (and in my opinion one of the largest reasons) why private employers aren't hiring is the huge uncertainty in what the cost of each employee is. There's several sides of this uncertainty.

First there is the differentiation between the way Small businesses are treated by the feds and how the big business are treated. Small businesses are the big creators of jobs yet the solution to everything is regulation. Yes, in spite of how many cases of how you portray lack of regulation, adding regulation kills small business while big business just finds a way to avoid it. Small business (the big employers) don't have the resources to avoid it, litigate, or simply move.

Secondly, it's how capital is available to small business. Try asking for a loan if you have small cash flow. The time was I could walk into my bank and have a loan at the stroke of a pen. Now I have paper work and approvals.

Lastly, and I think this is the sinister part, small businesses tend to not be unionized. Yet every thing this administrations does panders to any industry that is unionized! Witness the Boeing case. Never before has the federal government attempted to tell a company where it could build a plant within the US (other than environmental issues ... but then that related to over-regulation).

You perceive of the big old government as an employer of last resort. I consider them just an employer of necessary services. No more and no less. I don't mind supporting the necessary part ... I do mind the "make a job" part. This didn't work in the 30's and it isn't working now.

... but come to think of it ... are you saying government worker are not smart enough to create businesses? I don't think so!

You think they aren't capabable of it. I wonder what enterprises they might foster. You say CAN'T and I say WHY NOT?

Astonished -

First, you need to review the census bureau information over the past 10 years. Small business is NOT the "big employers" . . . I know that Fox News and it's ilk tell you this, but look it up yourself. Strictly speaking from numbers, businesses with over 100 workers represent the largest number of employees. So the "big employers" are now big business corporations.

There is a reason for this . . . in the past small business was leading the way in employees. That is because a small business needed a brick and mortar building, with numerous employees. Now, most small businesses are going online because it is cost effective, can reach a larger customer base, and requires fewer employees. I know someone who makes gun holsters, selling primarily to Republicans. Guess how many people work at his small business? Himself . . . THAT'S IT. He does not need a store front, he does not need a sales clerk, stock manager, no one. The internet and technology allow him to run a small business ALONE. Small business is no loner the "big employer".

This is what happens when society advances. Technology replaces the need for workers. We saw this in the car industry years ago when they replaced line workers with robots, and we are seeing this now with small business.

Again, look at the census bureau data over the past 10 years . . . analyze the trend. The number don't lie.

I won't get into your EPA comment . . . I know you hate them. I happen to like clean air, water, and an ocean I can swim in.

To your last comment . . . your answer for "where they will get jobs" is that they will all create their own businesses? Ok . . . based on what evidence? What facts do you have to support your theory that they will ALL go out and create their own businesses? I want facts and proof that this will happen . . . substantial evidence that supports your theory. Would you like to discuss the psychology differences between those with entrepreneurial spirit, and those who are content working for someone else? What do you think a government worker is classified as?

See, this is my problem with your theories . . . they have ZERO facts to back them up. First, your idea that small business is the "big employer" is blatantly false. Second, your answer to the job dilemma is nothing more than an opinion with nothing to back it up. The honest truth is that you DO NOT know where they will get jobs, and you really don't care either. So you will brush them off with a simple, "they could just go start their own business" and alleviate any guilt you may have from putting someone out of work.

What you fail to realize is that a reduction in demand, through massive lay-offs in this economy, WILL affect you. Everything from your private sector job to the value of your home will be affected. Just look at the 2008 crash. As more people were laid off, demand dropped, resulting in fewer private sector profits, resulting in more lay-offs, and down we went. The government stepped in to stabilize it, by bailing out companies, stopping the downward spiral. You called it socialism (even though Chrysler just paid back their bailout). Now we are trying to prevent round 2. Government lay-offs will lead to a drop in demand, leading to less private sector profits, leading to more lay-offs, and down the drain we go.

Supply and demand creates jobs, not taxes . . . not regulation . . . not unions . . . SUPPLY AND DEMAND.

JohnB:

Those are not conservatives. They are ideologues who eat a steady diet of dogma food. A more accurate label is fascist or totalitarian.

As far as you observation with respect to situational ethics - you pegged that one dead-on. The ends justify the means with those people.

David Walker;

You're right, unfortunately those ideologues have taken over the Conservative Movement and to a large degree shoved aside reasonable Conservatives. I believe one day reasonable Conservatives will again run the Republican Party, but it's going to be a bumpy ride between now and then.

Even though I am far from a Conservative I can respect those reasonable Conservatives, people in the tradition of William F Buckley and Barry Goldwater who had ethics, consistency in principle, and understanding of the need to compromise. My brother is such a person, proudly Conservative. There are many things upon which we'll never agree, but we respect each others beliefs and see many points on which we could compromise.

Cali,

Alas you protest too much my lefty friend.

You are a sad, sad example of defeatism, fear along with your elitist views. Believe me, I run a small business. You are soooo far out of touch.

Government has its purpose but sadly its purpose is not to be all to all. Supply is not generated by government workers and demand is totally artifical when it is "targeted" at the winners and losers (ie Your cronies).

... but it's good that you lefties have a place in MSNBC-land to blather!

Sad ...

Cali

You should read this about small businesses.

Small firms:

• Represent 99.7 percent of all employer firms.

• Employ just over half of all private sector employees.

• Pay 44 percent of total U.S. private payroll.

• Have generated 64 percent of net new jobs over the past 15 years.

• Create more than half of the nonfarm private gross domestic product (GDP).

• Hire 40 percent of high tech workers (such as scientists, engineers, and computer programmers).

• Are 52 percent home-based and 2 percent franchises.

• Made up 97.3 percent of all identified exporters and produced 30.2 percent of the known export value in FY 2007.

• Produce 13 times more patents per employee than large patenting firms; these patents are twice as likely as large firm patents to be among the one percent most cited.

Sources (see the Office of Advocacy's Research and Statistics page):

• U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census and International Trade Admin.
• Advocacy-funded research by Kathryn Kobe, 2007
• CHI Research, 2003
• U.S. Dept. of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics

http://www.sba.gov/advocacy/7495/8420

BTW. All definitions that I can find say that a small business has 500 or less employees.

http://www.sba.gov/content/what-sbas-definition-small-business-concern

Thoughts from Cali

You are right. The really sad part is that the GOP/TP would rather lay off hundreds of thousands of government workers than pay 3% more in taxes

The laying off does not end there - these people will be paid unemployment for who knows how long. So what does it really fix other than forcing more families to lose their homes?

Navy- speaking of 'buyer's remorse', looks like 3 are up for recall votes in WI! Sometimes, it takes a while to undo serious damage (think Bush's legacy that we are not supposed to notice or comment on....), but eventually, we WILL get the job done!

CA Tom:

Thank you for the kind words. I think the GOP/TP overreached on just about everything. Currently they are not listening to America and are following their own agenda from 30 or 40 years ago. Todestroy the Middle Class and repeal just about every Social Program that benefits the average American. They have been against Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. They have been against Unemployment Ins., Food Stamps, equal Education, Women's rights, and the Gay Community. They are trying to use the current JOBS and Economic Conditions to foster these "Draconian" ideas and the people are finally starting toe wise up and call them out.

I just hope it is not too late.

DBO:

Very true. It will take time to undo some of this mess, again. Seems the GOP is very good at creating problems and then trying to disown them and/or blame somebody else. Time will tell my friend, time will tell.

Even the insistence that we ignore the damage of the GW Bush administration, pretending it didn't happen is part of the Conservative effort to manipulate the conversation. We should treat the Republican debacle of 2000-2008 as basically a non-event. Meanwhile EVERYTHING that's represented a step forward for society dating clear back to 1900 is on the table and open for discussion. We should treat the GWB years as if they don't matter but every day radio talkers whine about the evil Progressive Woodrow Wilson and how his impact still mars our society.

It's a clear and obvious attempt to dictate the terms of debate.

Navy - Thanks for the reply. I feel a growing ground swell amongst the Democrats and Independents of our Country. I think the Republicans/TB, in their arrogance have awakened "The Sleeping Giant". Paybacks are in order and I sense we will see a turn around by our Party that will sweep away the fools we mistakenly let get elected.

We must henceforth be dillegent and make sure we never let their kind control our lives again.

The GOP Derby:

Yesterday First Thoughts commented that this will be a summer of speculation, so let the guesswork begin. Many in the GOP/TP are not too thrilled about those horses left in the stable. So let’s eliminate the pretenders right away. Forget Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum and the ones who have already dropped out. As for Pawlenty, I suspect he will fall asleep in the starting gate.

That leaves four potential candidates: Mitt Romney, Jon Huntsman, Ron Paul, and I do believe Michele Bachmann will run. In this group there are two moderates, Romney and Huntsman; a libertarian, Ron Paul; and Tea Party favorite, Bachmann. It would be fair to say that there is a significant schism between the moderates and conservatives. The party has moved so far right that in the primaries, it will be hard for a Tea Partier to vote for Romney for a Romney supporter to back Bachmann.

So breaking it down even further, it is likely that moderates will have to decide between Romney and Huntsman, and conservatives will pick either Paul or Bachmann. It is way too early to presume the winner, but it’s easy to guess that millions of dollars will be spent. One has to wonder: if Romney or Huntsman wins, will the Tea Party stay home? And if Paul or Bachmann wins, will the moderates vote with the Democrats?

It’s too early to tell, but not too early to speculate.

OF the three senators in Wisconsin up for recall, it is highly unlikely that all three, or even two out of three will be recalled.

Prosser was just confirmed via recount. Wisconsin appears to be evenly split and the Prosser election was to be a referendum on Walker. If that was the case, Walker won.

You appear to be counting your chickens too early.

Wisconsin recall initiative:

There are still 3 Republicans and 3 Democrats with recall petitions that have not been certified and are in the process of challenges. It is possible all 9 will be on a July 12th (or later) special election ballot.

The odds of a democratic controlled Senate are highly likely.

Well, the collapse cowards took down a string of excellent posts along with navy's fine piece. The strident right wing here can't handle the truth, of else it would be telling the truth about the sham "budget" Ryan has put forward. Below is a re-post of my principal piece in that thread:

Navy, Feisty, outstanding illumination of the sweeping wave of rejection the rigid ideologues of the right have brought on themselves.

The current issue of The Nation examines this subject closely, too. Three in-depth reports, on Wisconsin, Texas, and Ohio dissect the anti-government executive and legislative actions that have taken place (and our newspapers in Florida have done the same with Rick Scott's terrible initiatives).

What is remarkable is how all of this activity has been orchestrated by the guru of the ultra-right, Grover Norquist. On a different 'Vine blog yesterday, poster David Walker corrected me when I referred to Norquist as a conservative - Walker said the man is a fascist ideologue who enshrines selfishness.

Be that as it may, what we are seeing is a comprehensive attack on our state and federal governments by fanatics. And now the backwash against their programs is making them frantic to destroy as much as they can before they lose their temporary grasp on power.

Their basic philosophy of eliminating government regulation, eliminating government services, slashing budgets and taxes, is all in pursuit of a fantasy - that the kind of laissez-faire economics they worship will result in more freedom, a more vigorous economy, and improvement in the lives of all. It's absolute hogwash.

Benjamin Franklin was one of the great innovators and builders among the Founding Fathers. His proposals for public schools, public libraries, a postal system, public highways and much more would today be assailed by Norquist's disciples as "socialism."

The idea of more "freedom" resulting from elimination of regulations in one sense is true - but in another is insane. Going back to an idealized vision of pastoral America of the early 1800's not only relies upon complete ignorance of history, but also of the consequences of an unrestricted polity. There are reasons the American nation adopted banking laws, established the Pure Food and Drug Act, empowered the Department of Agriculture to oversee aspects of food safety, instituted child labor laws, set up the Securities and Exchange Commission, and later instituted the Social Security Administration, Medicare, the Environmental Protection Agency, OSHA, and the Energy Department, among others.

Those reasons all came from the bad behavior of unregulated pirates stealing, poisoning, cheating, killing, abusing, abandoning, pimping, raping, hoarding, addicting, and oppressing Americans.

The laissez-faire kind of environment the right has been pursuing avidly since the Reagan Administration has been an utter and total failure. Not only have those policies wrecked the American economy, they wrought havoc as well around the globe.

It is vital that the American nation see and understand this reality clearly. Two years ago, the small crowds of the activist ultra-right chanted, "We want our country back."

Now the American public realizes that crowd lied about its intentions. And the vast majority of us say to them, "WE WANT OUR COUNTRY BACK!!!!"

The same jerks day in and day out with nothing to say except spit hatred toward our current President. They just sit on the sidelines throwing stones while President Obama keeps the ball rolling.

JoAnne---thanks for the reminder to think of the suffering of the folks in Joplin. I think we all have a little bit of "disaster overload"---it seems they occur so frequently that it is hard to take it all in.

JAS1---great job in taking up the Obama-hatred and negativity from No Joe.

Come on JoAnna, please stop the fake outrage. It seems like President Obama can do no right by you. No matter what he does it all wrong.

Obama is in London today. Probably going to lecture PM Cameron of England on going back to its 1911 borders with Wales.

It is truly sad that some here find it appropriate to use the devastationand death of hard working Americans to push their personal agenda of hated for our President.

Obama is in London today. Probably going to lecture PM Cameron of England on going back to its 1911 borders with Wales.

This is what you get when, the party of NO has nothing positive to talk about...

I mean, is it any surprise with the current crop of characters running?

You're running on empty there, honey! lol

@SF - I agree on 'disaster overload'!

Hey JS1 How long did it take Bush to visit New Orleans after Katrina? Could only do the flyover in AF1 - Where was his "Mission Accomplished" vest then?

He was quick with that "Great job Brownie" though wasn't he?

"Obama is in London today..."

And, Smith, as usual, is full of sh!t clear up to her eyebrows. Give it a rest already, Smith. We get it. you don't like OUR president. What the hell are you going to do between 2012 and 2016- more to Costa Rica with Limbaugh?

It real nice O'Bama took the time from his busy day of drinking with his Irish friends to send a "Thinking of You - Get Well Soon" greeting card to the people of Joplin. I'm sure they appreciate it.

It's not like the Europe trip wasn't planned out months in advance, right? No, I'm pretty sure it happened like this:

VP Joe Biden: "Mr. President, there's a problem in Missouri."

President Obama: "What's happened?"

VP Joe Biden: "A big tornado. It seems to have destroyed the town. There are probably going to be a lot of dead people."

President Obama: (on intercom) "Tell them to fire up the jet. I hear Ireland is lovely this time of year."

JoAnne, PA. Great post, what a nice way to remind us all of what really is important. Sometimes the sheer number and frequency of disasters both man made and natural numb us and we find an alternative to push it out of our minds--politics, ball games, whatever. I also wondered about that favorite poster, CA Tuscaloosa last month. People come and go on FR but some leave a lasting impression.

JS1, that petty comment reeks of the green-eyed monster and a whole lot of ignorance.

I had every expectation that folks here would try today to draw parallels between this week's tragedy in Joplin and the disaster of Hurricane Katrina. Might I point out that there's a difference between being on another continent meeting with heads of state and a couple of flight hours away at a party.

Well said, Dennis Columbus!

JoAnna--what a load of bull. I do NOT collapse posts. I rarely flag anyone's comments--I prefer to let comments stand for all to read and decide for themselves.

JoAnnaSmith1

Jody, do you get carpal tunnel syndrome while collapsing posts? Just ask'n.

Why do you write worthless crap and lie about other posters? Just ask'n.

Let's not forget than when the President did go to Alabama, conservatives were saying it was a waste of resources and a distraction to the people there on the ground doing recovery efforts. The Republicans simply will never be satisfied with anything President Obama does and will never credit him with a positive motive. So be it. Those of us who support him are satisfied with his response to this latest disaster---a prompt acknowledgment of it, a fast direction of FEMA to help out, including sending the head of FEMA and a promised visit at the earliest opportunity.

Jody, do you get carpal tunnel syndrome while collapsing posts? Just ask'n.

No, but I imagine she does get a warm, fuzzy feeling deep in the cockles of her heart.

I really don't understand why you guy's keep giving attention to JS1. She spouts the same hate everyday just to get attention. I'd like to see everyone just ignore her. Then you'd see her really go viral.

Jody Iowa: JoAnna--what a load of bull. I do NOT collapse posts.

Just seems like you're always around when Right side posts start getting collapsed. Just a coincidence I guess. And by the way, enjoy the cockles of your heart.

Nice seeing you again Mo. And Mo, with the Feds QE2 program winding down, do you think the value of the dollar will rebound of its lows?

MO-681343, most days I do ignore her but every now and then petty nonsense deserves a petty reply.

@Navy -- I agree with you about spewing hatred day in and day out. It is not productive and I for one will not be posting hate and name calling and making up cutesy names (a polite way to hate). How about you? Are you willing to live up to what you have disdain for? Set an example?

I don't have to agree with the president's policy and I can believe that the ball he is keeping rolling is going down hill. I can point out his back pedaling on issues, gaffs made and promises not kept. It is so immature to think that one political party wants to destroy the lives of seniors, the poor, etc. It's like you don't believe that party has friends and families, grandfathers and grandmothers, etc. and they want to throw them under the bus. Be realistic. Not all of one party is rich and another poor.

I would be impressed with you if you would take the rest of the day and evening to compose -- without attacking others and their beliefs -- a post that would give us your thoughts on how to fix the budget problems -- deficit, medicare, medicaid, social security, spending, taxes, etc. Does it really make any difference as to how we got here now? Or would it make more sense on concentrating on to move forward?

joanne, don't forget obama was drinking with family also, lmao

Double Standard Dept;

lots of "collapse cowardice" here today without any protests from the usual precincts...

Wow, we are all in RARE FORM today. Are you folks still upset about the non-rapture? Well, you get another chance on October 21 so keep sending that cash to the Radio Rev and he'll get you a seat on the heavenly express.

But in the meantime folks lighten up. Geeeez. What a bunch of hate-filled windbags we are today.

Ok, here's what I want you to do. Close your eyes, breath deeply, and think about puppies and kittens and happy babies all laughing and playing together on the lawn on a beautiful Spring day. Now take another deep breath and open your eyes.

Don't you feel better?

And don't forget, Barack H. O'Bama (Irish spelling) is still the President of these United States and George Bush II is still NOT the President of these United States. And when President O'Bama is re-elected Bush will STILL not be the President of these United States. Doesn't that make you feel all warm and fuzzy and secure inside? I know I feel better knowing that O'Bama is the President and Bush is not.

Have a nice day.

Obama/Biden 2012 Because they are not BUSH!

JoAnnaSmith1

It real nice O'Bama took the time from his busy day of drinking with his Irish friends to send a "Thinking of You - Get Well Soon" greeting card to the people of Joplin. I'm sure they appreciate it.

so i guess joanna he should have turned his plane around when the tornados hit joplin, but you left me wondering. if he is OUT of the country how much can he do from europe but lets remember Bush was in washington eating cake for John McCains Birthday. Unlike Bush in your view Obama can stop tornados so what happened in joplin could have been avoided only if he had been here.

as MLK always said Joanna Hate will do us all in, so Girlfriend stop hating or if your going to keep hating go to the confessional. also watch american experince on public TV they had a great doc on the freedom riders sunday, Joanna you will see what heate can do.

funny that obamas roots on his grandfathers side is irish, most Black in america have irish blood.

Joanna who are you crapping.

JoAnnaSmith1 -

You seem as if you head is going to pop off? The GOP are DONE. Accept the truth and move forward with your small life.

Obama WILL be re-elected in 2012 and haters like you will go crazy for it! "I actually feel sorry for you" - and this is the difference between a thoughtful and intelligent person and... well, a GOP extremist.

Frank: Again you are the voice of reason

Well said, Frank.

Thanks for your thoughts Frank, I live just 50 miles from Joplin and have a brother, cousins and uncle that live there they are all OK my uncle lost his house but they are all OK. And thinks to everyone else for their thoughts and prayers.

Hi Mo...I lived in Missouri for a while and loved my time there. I spent some time going through the southwest part of the state...beautiful, beautiful country and unbelievably friendly people. I'm glad to here that everyone in your family is safe.

You do realize, Frank, that you are making way too much sense because I agree completely. As a democrat, I can honestly say I hope republicans find their way back to center right--back to the party of Eisenhower, Nixon (minus the crook side), Ford.

Good luck with getting your party to go along with the "learning experience", Frank. Seems to me they will learn what they want to learn from the election and spin it in a way that suits their agenda. For example, seeing the 2010 elections as approval for the conservative agenda such as limiting women's reproductive rights rather than an expression of dissatisfaction about the economy.

I voted for his post. He does make a huge amount of sense. But as SF points out, the GOP/TP very rarely have the insight necessary to pull the "message from the bottle".

Look, it is like this:

You vote the way you want to vote and I vote the way I want to.

No one on this message board is going to change anyone's ideology.

This is 2011 and MOST people are in their respective corners.

A Democrat cannot tell any Conservative what he/she should be doing/believing. Democrats always seem to think they know what is best for Republicans.

Why is the news EVERYDAY about Republicans? There has been maybe 2 stories in 3 yrs about Democrats. Democrats are some crooked MF'ers too. They do shyt and it stinks just like everyone else's but the media just ignores it.

Y'know things are rough for the right when Conservatives start whining "hey, those guys are just as bad as we are!"

Doesn't sound like much to build a campaign or a party on, does it?

Hey ITM...I concur...we should vote the way we want and not let anyone else tell us how to. I just wish we'd do a better job of uniting behind the candidate that wins the primary. I also wish we'd take into account electability. A Tea Party candidate isn't going to win in the Northeast for example.

Have a good one my friend.

1. It was not stimulus money it was TARP money.

2. Obama continued the policy of Bush in the LOANS to GM and Chrysler. IT WAS NOT A BAILOUT (I know you didn't say that, but many on both sides call it that)

So good, once again, for President Obama following the lead of President Bush and keeping the Auto Industry viable while the Banks failed.

3. Chrysler is paying back the Government loans because they were able to secure Traditional financing from banks based on the FIAT involvement over the past two years. The LOANS from the government had ridiculous interest rates and restrictions. But that's what you get when you have to go to get money from the place that is your last resort. Kind of like a loan shark.

But hey, it worked, so I'm not complaining.

White Collar Auto

But hey, it worked, so I'm not complaining.

Sounds kind of like you ARE complaining. Is it the fact that all the Republican big shots gave dire warnings that the auto bailouts would end in disaster and they now look like fools and can look forward to being beaten over the head repeatedly with their foolishness by the Democrats in the next election? That's something worth complaining about.

BTW: The auto bailouts were NOT part of the original TARP program. Your attempt to credit Bush for what Obama accomplished is about as lame as the GOP attempts to credit Bush with getting Bin Laden.

Thanks for the information White Collar. To hear Patrick's version one on come away with the impression that Obama deserves all the credit.

It appears that he does not.

That's alright Houston, we'll let White Collar live in his own deluded fantasy world, it's all he and the GOP/TP have left.

muffintop1

Thanks for the information White Collar.

You mean, thanks for the MISmisinformation, so you'll believe whatever anyone says if it's what you want to hear.

muffintop1

The Republican mantra was "let the free market correct itself." Conservatives ran in 2010 saying government solutions threaten our "freedom." Now the Chrysler company has rebounded, thanks to federal help, and you want to deny the Democrats credit for the results of their policies? When will Republicans acknowledge their ideology just doesn't work in the real world?

Houston - just like most of the liberals on this site, you are woefully uninformed.

President Bush Announcement Auto Loans TARP Dec 19 2008

http://youtube/W1C_ZdborAk

There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance — that principle is contempt prior to investigation.--William Paley

Amy the government should not be in the business of picking winners and losers. As you know Ford too no money and is far more successful than GM or Chrysler. As of right now the projections are for a very poor IPO for GM.

And if you get down to it, as noted by White Collar, it was Bush that implemented the policies.

As for the real world and policies - the only time the democrat's policies work are with, or because of, government .

I'm not going to deny credit to Bush the way White Collar Auto wants to deny Obama the credit he deserves. Here's a balanced opinion from E.J. Dionne on the credit allocation:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128925681

Let there be no mistake: rescuing GM and Chrysler took political courage, and I want to put in a good word not only for President Obama but also for George W. Bush.

True, Bush's electoral career was over in December 2008, when he extended $17.4 billion of TARP money to keep the companies alive long enough to give Obama a chance to act. Still, it took guts for Bush to decide not to "leave the next president to confront the demise of a major American industry in his first days of office."

Yet it was Obama who put in the bulk of the cash — in all, Bush's input had grown to $25 billion before he left office while Obama put up an additional $60 billion — and created the tough restructuring plan.

Both presidents faced broad public resistance. A CNN Poll in December 2008 found that 61 percent of Americans opposed the bailout; only 36 percent supported it. When Obama acted two months later, a Gallup Poll found 72 percent opposing the additional money for the auto companies and only 25 percent in favor.

At the time, I was in the bailout-supporting minority because a collapse of the car industry would have devastated an already ailing Midwest. Enterprises dependent on the auto companies would have come crashing down. A White House report last week concluded that 1 million jobs would have been lost if the government had not intervened, and some estimates last year went much higher.

As a general principle I agree that the government shouldn't pick winners and losers.

When staying out means watching a million workers lose their jobs during the worst recession in 70 years and an entire American industry die it's time for the government to step in.

That time came, President Obama and congressional Democrats stepped in over the objection of Conservatives.

Houston - BTW: The auto bailouts were NOT part of the original TARP program. Your attempt to credit Bush for what Obama accomplished is about as lame

Houston - I'm not going to deny credit to Bush

WCA - Obama continued the policy of Bush in the LOANS to GM and Chrysler

Houston, we have a problem. You are so twisted up in your hatred that you can't even keep your facts/opinons/comments straight!

Muffintop - Ford was a different story altogether. See they had mortgaged everything down to the Iconic Blue Oval, 9 months before the bank crisis. See, they were in trouble too, just earlier than GM and Chrysler and managed to get their loans in a traditional fashion. They bet the house on their future portfolio and came out way on top. Timing is everything.

John B - When staying out means watching a million workers lose their jobs during the worst recession in 70 years and an entire American industry die it's time for the government to step in.

I completely agree with you. When an industry that is responsible for 1 in 10 jobs in America is in trouble, the government must step in. I would however, give some credit to both sides even though some on the far right said to let it fail. That was a position I never agreed with. Of course, I'm biased, my liveliehood depends on a successful Auto Industry.

I thought the Republicans were against the help for car companies. Weren't they the ones saying that the White House was now running car companies? They also said it was a waste of the "American Peoples" money.

"This President is so naive, he can't run the country, but he has now taken over and is trying to run car companies. Which other Government run car companies? He should leave this to private business. He is just proving that he is a socialist. What other private business will be taken over."

Those were all Republican comments. Now we shouldn't bring up the 'Bush' name. Don't blame Bush for anything, he is no longer President and Obama now owns all the problems. Just make sure Bush gets credit for everything Obama does, that have positive results.

The hatred without cause for this President, shows up every day when these warp-minded people shows up.

Let's see chrysler is paying back full value + on its loan from the US taxpayer and obama gets the credit.

GM gave the taxpayers GM stock as collateral and obama and company wants to sell it all at a loss to the US taxpayer. Obviously this will be bushes fault.

AIG, fanny and freddy are still on the hook to the American taxpayer, so obviously if they come up in the loss column, it will be bushes fault. If by a miraccle they come in on the plus side it will obamas win.

Can hardly wait for a long term resolution on our debt/deficit issues. If the right doesn't increase revenue it's the rights fault and if the left doesn't look at spending cuts it will be therights fault for refusing to compromise.

Looks like david stockman is right, it is going to take a serious financial meltdown for obama and congress to man up on their incompetence.

White Collar Auto

Houston, we have a problem. You are so twisted up in your hatred that you can't even keep your facts/opinons/comments straight!

Now you're just plain lying. I acknowledged that Bush's TARP contribution were a factor, but your hatred of President Obama has shriveled your soul so much that you can't acknowledge the fact that he deserves any credit at all, let alone the lion's share of credit he clearly deserves for the success of the auto bailout that the GOP misrepresented as a socialist government takeover.

And, by the way, the reason I didn't remember anything about Bush using TARP money for the auto industry is because the GOP downplayed it. Apparently, acknowledging that fact didn't fit their agenda of hanging the bailout around Obama with th

White Collar Auto, thanks for stepping up with a good explanation of how Ford is different from GM and Chrysler--timing.

Ford was actually in MORE trouble EARLIER, while the market was still a bit stronger. They restructured heavily, fired a bunch of their top management, even mortgaged the blue oval in order to turn things around.

All 3 companies did basically the same things, but with the additional headwind of a crushing recession GM and Chrysler had no access to the additional credit they needed.

Ford is stronger now, but it's because they started on this path sooner and with better terms. That doesn't represent smart management or prescience on their part, the piper just came calling for them sooner.

Why does the Republican party want to keep subsidies for corporate people (who really don't need them), tax breaks for the wealthiest (which is a big source of the budget deficit), but end programs that help the elderly and needy?

Don't know Nash. It just seems that the administration wants to help the wealthy by extending the Bush tax rates and then pay for it by cutting programs that help the poor.

money.cnn.com/2011/02/11/news/economy/obama_heating_cuts/index.htm

Oops...did I say the administration?

It becomes clearer and clearer each day who is running this country, and it is not "we the people".

Ain't that the TRUTH Nash!

We currently have the best Government $$$ can buy...

Thanks to the COC & Koch Brothers!

NASH, VERY SUCCINCT AND POINTED OBSERVATION.

"We the people" aren't running the country. Grover Norquist, the Koch Brothers, and a few other slimeballs have their hands on the wheel. The selfish toads in the Tea Party, and of course the zany Libertarians, are essentially digits on the hand of that band of conspirators.

So, come on, independent, liberals and moderates who reject the insane ideology of the ultra-right, all together now, one, two, three:

"WE WANT OUR COUNTRY BACK!!!!"

Well, Nash--seems to me that the Republicans are very faithful to those who pay the way for them---with campaign contributions, lobbying jobs, positions for family members, etc. Why bother with the elderly and needy---they don't have money to spare for the Republican party.

Alan:

Good morning! President Obama is a reality based president, willing to make the tough and distateful choices required to keep the country moving forward, no matter how slowly, in the face of historic and non-fact based opposition from the well financed interests represented by the Republican Party, who only care about one thing - making more money.

I am glad the President gave some relief to all those left unemployed because the Republican Party shipped their jobs overseas to avoid paying them a living wage. With or without a tax cut, the rich will be fine . . . the rest of us . . . not so much.

P.S. Glad to see that you are still trying to defend the indefensible . . . good luck! :o)

Feisty and John A.: Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

Good morning! President Obama is a reality based president, willing to make the tough and distateful choices required to keep the country moving forward

By cutting a heating subsidy for the poor? It's a shame when facts get in the way of a narrative. Or is the narrative still the nasty Republicans made me do it?

Alan:

Please name one Republican that is fighting to restore the heating subsidy please.

Eliminating Medicare as we know it? No problem.

Heating subsidies? Now you're upset.

Whatever floats your boat Alan. Go on ignoring what is right in front of your face . . . it is the President's fault. Always.

Good morning Steeler fan . . . saw a little bit of Hines Ward on DWTS last night . . . he probably should win . . . but can't help but root for Kirstie Allie . . . takes a lot of moxie for her to . . . *ahem* . . . represent REAL WOMEN on the dance floor . . . nice to see a real body on the dance floor for a change! :o)

Thanks for the shout out about Hines, Nash---he does have some moves, doesn't he?! And how about Franco Harris, Jerome Bettis and Lynn Swann cheering him on with their Terrible Towels! I was impressed by Kirstie as well---how about that cartwheel!

Now back to politics-----gotta give Alan credit for bringing up the heating subsidy thing (although winter is finally over so is it necessary) while ignoring the elimination of Medicare.

Whatever floats your boat Alan. Go on ignoring what is right in front of your face . . . it is the President's fault. Always.

Actually I don't blame the President for very much. He is who he is...a politician. What floats my boat is calling posters out when they make obviously one-sided comments.

To me both sides are showing no leadership and I think we are heading towards a debt crisis. I think both sides are sticking their heads in the sand, the Republicans for pretending that taxes must not be raised and the Democrats for pretending that government should cannot be cut (Cowboy poetry for C'rstsake). I do not think the Ryan plan is feasible or that it goes far enough in debt/deficit reduction but it is a starting point for a debate. I want see some adults lead by telling people like Pincus that Medicare cannot survive in its current form so here's how were going to change it so that the basics are still protected. This WILL involve a reduction in services offered and a increase in revenues for the program. Whether it is done through vouchers and the private sector, or through government bureaucracy an expert panels is a debate worth having. Also on taxes I think the Ryan plan shows some real promise. Reform that removes many deductions that benefit the wealthy is a good/fair way of raising total revenue. Doing the same for business is pro-market, which I am for, rather than pro-business which leads to crony capitalism. Once the deductions have been argued about, and I realize special interests will fight for their deductions, the setting of rates will be much more transparent. Again to use the example of the president, I use him only because the number are in the public domain and it is a good example, he paid 26% on $1.7m. A target of 31% - 35% in federal taxes for people earning $1.5M - $2M is transparent and debatable.

In case conservatives didn't notice--by the time the heating subsidy was cut, the need for it had passed, warmer weather had arrived. The extensions of the budget last Dec and earlier in the year contained the funding; what was cut was the unspent money.

Alan:

I appreciate what you are trying to say . . . but the "both sides" just doesn't work for me. Why?

Because the side that blew up the deficit is now telling lies and trying to blame it on the President.

Sorry, that is just not acceptable. The Republicans have run amok, their plan didn't work, and now they are lying about it.

There just ain't no hiding from that.

I appreciate what you are trying to say . . . but the "both sides" just doesn't work for me. Why?

Because the side that blew up the deficit is now telling lies and trying to blame it on the President.

...and just as the Republicans blindly followed Bush how are you different.

If a President McCain had extended the tax cuts and unemployment benefits would you have called him pragmatic? If John McCain had increased the number of troops in Afghanistan would you have supported him? If John McCain had cut $500B from Medicare would you be claiming that it will help save Medicare?

Or is just that President Obama has a (D) after his name?

Alan:

Here's the thing - I judge policies by whether they work or not, not by who proposed them.

I don't dislike Republicans as people, I dislike their policies because they haven't worked.

And then of course, there are the lies.

It's not about personalities, it's about results. So when (and if) a Republican can propose a reality based solution to an actual (not created to win an election) problem, I'll be first in line.

P.S. The money that health reform removed from Medicare were funds set aside to subsidize private insurance companies to do absolutely nothing, so that dog won't hunt.

White Collar Auto

Houston, we have a problem. You are so twisted up in your hatred that you can't even keep your facts/opinons/comments straight!

I said I'm not going to deny Bush credit, you moron. But your soul is so shriveled with hatred of President Obama that you would deny him any credit at all for the success of the auto bailout, let alone the major share of credit he clearly deserves, as E.J. Dionne explained .

BTW: The reason I didn't remember Bush using any TARP money for the bailout is because the Republicans never talked about it. Apparently, they didn't want people to remember Bush's part because they were tying it to Obama in hopes that it would fail and give them something to attack him for later. Bush's role wouldn't have fit their narrative.

nashville - medicare is projected to become insolvent some time between 2024 and 2029. Care to enlighten us on how maintaining the democrat notion of "doing nothing" is going to fix it?

How do you think obama and company hope to contain every increasing medical costs at the healthcare provider level?

Tell them that if they want to get medicare reimbursement they can only charge $X dollars when actual costs are $X++?

Will obama and company subsidize the drug makers for research and development?

How about if obama and company limit insurance malpractise claims to what the patient had in out of pocket expenses?

Why do libbies think that having someone else pay is the appropriate way to go?

american:

Holler at me when ya'll rescind those oil subsidies and tax breaks . . . till then, you are just robbing from the poor to pay the rich . . . again.

Not Politics, well on the other hand, I guess maybe it is. It's politicians crapping all over themselves like Paul Ryan is doing.

Nice post and good question to think about, Journey.

Journey,

Great post. The Republicans asked Obama 'where are the jobs Mr President'? They ran on jobs and the economy. As soon as they were sworn in they forgot about job creation and focused like a laser on attacking women, cutting jobs "so be it', attacking the elderly and children, all the while protecting the rich and making sure they get their welfare.

Not one jobs bill, yet the blocked every that was presented. Republicans are always calling Obama a liar. in an effort to try and make sure no one pays attention to their lies.

Thanks, Jody :-)

I'm thinking this is an issue the Federal level of government cannot solve on its own. It will take involvement and negotiation with State level governments. Perhaps they will come up with a plan where parents and / or individuals receive full credit against income taxes (tax holiday; if you will) while they are paying for education for themselves or a direct family member. Additionally, grandparents, uncles, aunts, and other direct family members could help with the costs and have an option to transfer the tax credits back to the parents. It's definitely a complex issue.

Thanks, Fletch -

From what I can determine, investors have done what they could...taking the DJIA from 8,000 to over 12,000 points. Business has plenty of money to expand. Unfortunately, for the American worker that means more overseas investment. You can't blame them, they are making full use of the advantages offered by a global economy.

Though I fully support our troops overseas, I don't want a military career to be the only option for my children and grandchildren. So, the only path is through education and business is not providing clarity so that we can provide informative information to those searching for a new career.

Journey - obama has created a panel of business cronies to address what business needs from the government to create jobs.

Either obama has chosen to ignore their advice and not do anything (like his debt commision) or he has no concern at all on our economic well being.

Perhaps if enough people complain he will give us another campaign speech on the matter.

Thanks for the reminder, american -

Hope you won't mind if I don't take your word for it Groucho...

Sources for your info please?

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL

No offense taken.

The Huffington Post...

Groucho: Thanks for the post.

A word of caution: It is a waste of time to try to present facts to Feisty, Retired Navy or Bev. They must be staffers of First Read as they are routinely the loudest voices on the discussion board.

Thanks!

Would you give me the link - so I can check it out?

Somehow I missed it...

Link to Huffington Post story. Pretty easy to find. Major headline on Politics page of the site.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/23/house-gop-proposes-budget_n_865915.html

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL

Article entitled..

House GOP Proposes Budget Cuts To Domestic, Foreign Food Aid

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL

...anf thanks Go USA-851295 for also posting it.

Thanks for the link!

Imagine my surprise when I followed it and this is this is what was actually written:

WASHINGTON -- House Republicans are targeting domestic nutrition programs and international food assistance as they try to control spending in next year's budget.

In a bill released Monday, Republicans proposed cutting $832 million – or 12 percent – from this year's budget for the federal nutrition program that provides food for low-income mothers and children. The 2012 budget proposal for food and farm programs also includes a decrease of almost $457 million, or 31 percent, from an international food assistance program that provides emergency aid and agricultural development dollars to poor countries.

The legislation would provide $71 billion for food stamps, $2 billion less than the Obama administration projected would be necessary for next year.

Republicans who wrote the bill said the cuts in domestic food programs are taken from excess dollars in those accounts, and participants won't see a decrease in services.

Domestic nutrition programs are mined for dollars in tight budget times because they often have extra money sitting in their accounts. Money is allocated for the programs based on projections of need and food costs, and those needs are sometimes overestimated.

Hunger advocates have warned against stripping those programs of those reserves. Two analysts from the liberal research and advocacy group Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Zoe Neuberger and Robert Greenstein, said Monday that the cuts could mean turning away as many as 475,000 people from the Women, Infants and Children program if food prices continue to rise.

Almost 9 million low-income mothers and children participate in the WIC program, which provides food, health care referrals and nutrition education.

Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., said the GOP budget "rolls back years of progress."

"This budget threatens the health and security of American families, while asking the most of low-income seniors and the most vulnerable among us," she said.

The bill would cut almost 12 percent of the Food and Drug Administration's $2.5 billion budget, with fees charging industry for regulation potentially making up some of that difference. The legislation also cuts rural development programs, rural housing programs and agricultural research programs administered by the Agriculture Department.

Georgia Rep. Jack Kingston, the Republican chairman of the House Appropriations agriculture subcommittee, said the cuts would "root out waste and duplication."

"Where they have strayed from their core mission, we rein in agencies so they may better focus on the responsibilities for which they are intended," Kingston said.

So let's recap shall we?

It is the Repubicans who claim excess dollars are in these accounts, with as usual nothing to back up the BS!

I read it three times and cannot locate the reference to:

The legislation, by the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture, cuts $2.6 in discretionary spending. Discretionary spending. The Chairman of the House Agricultural Sub-Committee said, "For our part, the Agriculture Subcommittee has sought to begin making some of the tough choices necessary to right the ship, we have taken spending to below pre-stimulus, pre-bailout levels while ensuring USDA, FDA, CFTC and other agencies are provided the necessary resources to fulfill their duties. A release by the subcommittee notes that the proposed funding level "will continue critical meat, poultry, and egg product inspection and testing activities, and supports an expansion of a poultry inspection pilot project that will lead to improving food safety

Around these parts - copying something without giving proper credit to the author and or source is called plagerism pal!

Show me again where that is in the HP article?

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL..

First, look for the quotation marks, in my posts. LOOK AGAIN.

Second: From

Food Politics

'

House GOP Proposal Seeks $285 Million in FDA Cuts

by News Desk | May 24, 2011

A new budget proposal put forth by House Republicans Monday would cut the

The legislation, unveiled by the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture, cuts $2.6 in discretionary spending'

"As is the goal of all our Appropriations bills this year, this legislation reflects hard decisions to cut lower priority programs, reduce spending in programs that can be scaled back, and target funds where they are needed most so that our nation continues on the path to fiscal recovery," said House Appropriations Chairman Hal Rogers in a statement.

Got all the links now...

Yeah, the GOP can't add.. only dems were taught arithmetic. Cause it's a GOP assertion does not make it wrong. Did anyone dispute it? No.

Really quick to accuse people of stuff aren't you..remember take away facts and arithmetic and you have fear.

First, look for the quotation marks, in my posts. LOOK AGAIN.

Nah! I'm done playing silly games with you!

You were outed as a liar and a plagiarist who is not worthy of paying any more attention to!

Thanks for playing - we have some lovely parting gifts for you! ;o)

Feisty..

The link..

www.foodsafetynews.com/2011/05/house-fy-2012-budget-proposal-seeks-285-in-cuts-at-fda/

You were outed as a liar and a plagiarist who is not worthy of paying any more attention to!

Thanks for playing - we have some lovely parting gifts for you! ;o)

...................................................................

So I provide both links, for the post. Quotations are properly notated and your reply is that I'm a plagiarist not worth paying attention to. OUTED as you said.

The previous poster was right. Facts mean nothing to you unless they support your agenda. The only person outed here was you for refusing to argue facts and resorting to insults.

Enlightening and intellectual retort.

Sorry Groucho - it's too late...

I politely asked you for your source(s) and, you along with GoUSA claimed it was the Huffington Post...

It's kind of like closing the barn door AFTER the horse escaped... ;o)

PS: WHAT facts? Are you referring to the one where 'the Repubicans who wrote the bill' said so? LMFAO!

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL..

Yeah it's always too late to read facts....how intellectual!

The $26 million cut is a fact. Compare last years budget to this. Add and subtract.

You still didn't dispute a word I said except to say the republicans wrote the bill.

Please point out the falsehoods.

Actually the whole basis of the disagreement is clear within the article. Republicans claim this is unneeded funding. Advocates for the hungry and poor believe large numbers of needy will be turned away due to these cuts. The Republican position is stated above as "fact" when actually it's an assertion.

John B, Des Moines, IA..

The GOP said it was padding in their budget and therefore unnecessary. Please make that clear.

I would venture to say that Obama doesn't stand a chance. I don't care if the Reps run Bugs Bunny; ANYBODY can do better than this failure. The Hope and Change BS that he spewed is diminished; his lies are catching up to him; he's an embarrassment all over the world and has screwed all of our allies. The UNEMPLOYMENT is still around 9% and all you progressive/socialist liberal Dems have managed to double the debt and the Feds have devalued the dollare. All in all...........I'd say he's done a pretty @!$%#ty job.

Good Response Feisty.

I always remember that these Republicans-Tea People just make up their own facts, to present to the low information voters, stuck on stupid.

Job1.

Uh duh...follow the links, read the articles, look at the quotes and come back and say that again. Let's see who is stuck on stupid.

Made up facts my butt.

John Kyl,

"(sic. My) words were not intended to be a factual statement!"

Newt Gingrich,

“So let me say on the record, any ad which quotes what I said on Sunday is a falsehood. Because I have said publicly those words were inaccurate and unfortunate and I’m prepared to stand up . . .

“When I make a mistake — and I’m going to on occasion — I want to share with the American people ‘that was a mistake’ because that way we can have an honest conversation.”

In other words, like everyone else in the Republican Camp, "Don't believe YOUR lying eyes,...and don't dare use MY words against me; because I will spout off at the mouth and not back it with actual FACTS or even for public interest sake my own mea culpa."

Here's a new CHEER for the Jos on the board:

"Walk it back, Walk it back Walk it WAYYYYYYYYYYYY Back!"

You'll see your side doing a lot of that in the coming months as they try to find just the right message of smear and fear that will RESONATE with their pollsters.

Republicans are Lying Bastards, this statement INTENDED in the manner I hope it was received.

The first step in an HONEST conversation is admitting you have no intention of being truthful. The rest is window dressing, no?

Clara KCMO

Republicans are Lying Bastards,..

Lincoln, Grant, Teddy ZRoosevelt and Eisenhower were Republicans.

They lying bastards also.

Fiesty.

The man gives your dumb azz links and then you accuse him of lying. That is why I say you are a first class, trifling, trashy jackazz that could use a couple of bottles of Summer's Eve.

.....and on top of that, here comes the stupid is as stupid does peanut gallery co-signing.

I'm glad my father taught me the truth about Liberalism.

GM, Republicans say there's unnecessary fat in the budget.

Advocates for those whose food security is questionable disagree.

Accurate description of the situation? That's what's described above.

John B, Des Moines, IA....

Not republicans, the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture said it. That's a bipartisan committee. They voted. This was NOT a republican only vote.

I realize the committee has Democrats as well. What was the vote on this measure? The article doesn't say that. It does say;

Republicans who wrote the bill said the cuts in domestic food programs are taken from excess dollars in those accounts, and participants won't see a decrease in services.

Nothing bipartisan about THAT.

Please chill, libfreak.

Ryan is one of the best gifts handed to the Democrats yet, and the GOP has been giving us several.

There are the people who will vote GOP regardless even if the worst candidate in the world was running, and there are plenty of gullible people who can be convinced of anything as long as it's repeated enough and enough ad dollars are spent on it, but they still don't constitute a majority by themselves. It'll take moderates and independents to tip the scales for the GOP to win and with Ryan and the Tea Party and the current GOP plans, those people are running away from the GOP as fast as they can.

And what happened to those issues they spoke so frankly about before the 2010 election Go USA? That's what I thought they were lying to you then and their lying to you now and you keep falling for it hook line and sinker. Kind of like the suckers in the creek, they keep throwing you the bait and you keep taking it. SUCKER

No one has lied to me. Pawlenty wasn't running in 2010. Ryan's budget hadn't been released in 2010. Do try to comprehend what you are reading.

The biggest problem in the dialogue is that (news and pundit) media on the left keep ACCEOTING the KYTH that the entitlements are even part of the budget.

They are separately funded, and designed to be adjusted independently.

That adjustment (such as lifting the contribution caps) is not only accepted but intended.

As far as there "not being enough of the rich to tax," that isn't the point. The point IS, they're assuming timidly ineffective LEVELS of that taxation.

The inequality perpetrated by their corrupting abuses over history, dictate much more stringent measures than that assumption includes. Eisenhower knew that politically, closing so many loopholes would never work, and even with the will, there are too many for the time frame needed to save the economy.

A TMR larger than 90% (in fact 91-94%) produced the most successful decade this economy had seen, or has seen since - and "the sky didn't even fall" for the rich.

Dems need to stop allowing the press to assume and accept the myth of entitlements; either being "the problem with the budget," "in trouble" (due to 'projections' assuming FAR too much), or available to help fix the real problems - wars and tax breaks/subsidies; both grossly in the service of corporate abuse of the individual citizen and eliminating or corupting the core functions of government (regulation of capitalism and defending the individual FROM corporate abuse.)

Read Jefferson's letters on the danger of corporate abuse of democracy, recognized and realized long before the Koch Brothers' ancestors blatantly shorted their first customer a barrel of oil and got away with it.

(That's "ACCEPTING" and "MYTH," obviously.) Sorry - slow connection and too short an edit window for this netbook.

GREAT post RHytonen, right on target and well put.

You must be burning and huffing the post .

Wow. Espousing some "sour grapes" or just complaining because you don't have the intelligence or maybe the ambition to become "the rich" and just want things handed to you.

Instead of complaining about the rich for being bright enough to take advantage of opportunities presented to them, focus your anger at the people of both houses (right and left) who allow them to get away with it. Not until we change how all government is done will we get a change in how we are represented.

Y'see Rick, that's what's the big difference in today's Conservative Movement--the assumption that the rich are actually better than the rest of us. They deserve what they have and the only necessary proof is that they're already rich. Never mind the fact that the vast majority of the rich became that way by INHERITANCE, not hard work.

Missing from all this is any sort of belief that an honest days work is worth an honest days wage, or that all work which requires doing has value. Instead 98% of us are just overpriced labor which has yet to be adequately beaten down by the rich.

That's a fundamental change in American thinking, a mindset that has more in common with the aristocracies of old Europe than the incredible growth, strength, and resiliency represented in the history of the United States.

And saying "both sides do it" is just an attempt to camouflage the reality that the Conservative Movement is the main advocate and prime mover in this attempt to change the modes of thinking among Americans.

John B, Please don't assume what I am saying. No where did I say the rich are better than us. i said they have the capability to fix the system to their way. I don't care ifit is from INHERITANCE as you state this time or by "stealing" from the poor as so many from the left like to say. The have it, learn to deal with then learn how to change it without whining.

While I didn't exactly say both sides do it don't give me the crap that its mostly conservatives (Rangel while Chairman getting a donation from GE and suddenly GE getting a huge tax break comes to mind).

Finally tell me what is an honest days wage and who determines it, you?

I don't have to assume what you're saying. You're the one who said;

Wow. Espousing some "sour grapes" or just complaining because you don't have the intelligence or maybe the ambition to become "the rich" and just want things handed to you.

If the rest of us aren't rich it's entirely because we lack "intelligence" or "ambition" and we "just want things handed to (us)."

Actually we agree on this, but for different reasons.

No smart Republicans will get into the race because they don't believe they can actually win and being an ex-candidate who lost can put a real damper on your political career. It's good if you want to be a TV commentator on talk shows for the rest of your life, but not if you want to keep rising in your party's ranks.

Let me know how that worked out for you in 2015, Mike.

The other problem with all this debt is that the value of the dollar is too low

The REAL problem with the debt is that tax rates, now at their lowest level in SIXTY YEARS are TOO damn low. The Democrats have taken the moderate position that both tax increases and spending cuts are necessary to address the deficit. The Republicans have taken the extremist and totally insane position that taxes can never be raised no matter what and that the current tax rates must be lowered further in order to compensate for cutting the federal budget for vital agencies like the EPA and FEMA.

How about an increase in the amount of Medicare taxes paid, especially on income in excess of say $500,000.

Hi Steeler Fan,

I like your idea and I would like to see the same for social security.

Ayn Rand is dead and has been since 1982. So, she doesn't think anything anymore.

Paul Ryan is a practicing Catholic.

blueingoregon..

Lets see..

You know that "Paul Ryan's Messiah is Ayn Rand who is an Atheist!" so therefore Paul Ryan must be an atheist. No giant leap there. He therefore must be anti-Christian and " HATES everything Jesus taught us to do in the bible. She thinks Christians are weak minded imbeciles and she scoffs at everything good deed Christians do!"

The anti Christ proposed a budget. We must demonize him.

As far fetched as the above post is, read some of the other posts and tell me they don't sound the same. He proposed a BUDGET that needs to be debated and compromised on. Debate not hate.

There's actually a kind of sick hybrid of Christian beliefs that explains this. It's not mainstream, but it works for the ones who use it. The idea is that people are wealthy because they have been rewarded by God for being good, while people who are poor are either bad, lazy, ignorant, or any or all of the above.

That's how they can sleep at night. Closing a factory and off-shoring jobs? Expanding the gap between rich and poor? They're just doing God's work.

The bible says a rich man has less of a chance getting into heaven than a camel passing through the eye of an needle!!

A Rich man doesn't give a Rats ass about heaven.

Actually the Republicans PASSED a budget with every intent that it would become the model for American society in the future. The only reason it's now being treated as a trial balloon is that the American public reacted so violently against it.

If their intent were to debate and compromise they would have done so from the beginning instead of trying to ramrod an entirely new America into existence.

A very good Idea which the Republicans will fight tooth and nail so that it doesn't happen. After all that is why there is a Republican party in this country, to protect the welfare of the Wealthy.

Not sure about Gates, but this is part of what Warren Buffet is talking about when he says his effective tax rate is lower than that of his secretary.

All I want is to see all income treated as income regardless of the source. I see no reason to pay different rates on capital gains, oil royalties, or the income I earn by working each day. (I paid all three last year.)

Exactly, Kelly. There is no earthly reason that someone who is fortunate enough to live off of the returns on investments should pay a lower rate of taxes on that money than someone who punches a time clock every day.

That BS is always sold under the "Job Creation" banner, IIRC, whether it creates any jobs or not.

Very true. Even Ronald Reagan recognized that and set the capital gains tax rate appropriately to that belief.

I am sure that Senator Brown would love Elizabeth Warren to be his opponent. My Mother is known by more Massachusetts voters than Ms. Warren!