Today our President is going to outline his plans for the withdrawal of our troops from Afghan. Just watch, no matter what he does there will be those that will complain that it is not enough or it is too much. It will be too soon or not soon enough.

We need to bring all our troops home and stop spending money on rebuilding their countries. We need to use that money to rebuild America and get us ready for the 21^st Century.

Why are we rebuilding their infrastructure while ours is falling apart?

Why are we footing the bill, these countries have resources that may be tapped to pay for our services, why are we not demanding that. Why is it always on our nickel?

We are not the World’s police department and we are never going to change the culture of some of these countries. It is time they take responsibility for their own. Help and support them in their quest for freedom, absolutely, but we can not do it by ourselves. They have to step in and help themselves.

We always send the most to these countries and get back the least. This needs to change.

We should leave an intelligence operation and fast strike force in Afghan for a limited period of time so if something does happen we can respond quickly and decisively.

With countries like Pakistan claiming to be our friends, we do not need any new enemies. Just recently they arrested those people that helped us take out Bun Laden and the second in command. Stop sending them any more money and use those dollars here in this country first.

Do we need to provide aid, support and financial aid to those in need? Of course we do but we also need to be prudent in what we do. We cannot continue to be the first in with the most and the last out with the least.

It is time for our Politicians to put America First and take politics off the list. We need to make sure that our Citizens have:

1. Good paying Jobs here like rebuilding our Infrastructure

2. A stable Economy that is growing

3. Quality Health Care for everybody, not just for those that can afford it

4. Quality Education for all our children, again not just for those that can afford it. Intelligence, creativity, vision etc are not by products of being wealthy, they are in everybody and our History is full of pioneers in technology, science, medicine, etc that have their roots in modest settings.

If we just concentrated on these goals and do what is necessary to achieve them with everybody making some sacrifices instead of what ever the he!! it is we are doing today, we can all move this country forward.

If we do not, we run the risk of some Foreign Nation rebuilding us.

Fake Outrage? You ain't seen anything yet. Seen the headline about Medicaid? If it's as big a foul-up as they say, it needs to be fixed and fixed asap. But until then, get ready for the onslaught from the Obama detractors and haters today.

Don't say you weren't warned.

Today our President is going to outline his plans for the withdrawal of our troops from Afghan. Just watch, no matter what he does there will be those that will complain that it is not enough or it is too much. It will be too soon or not soon enough.

We need to bring all our troops home and stop spending money on rebuilding their countries. We need to use that money to rebuild America and get us ready for the 21^st Century.

Too funny. YOU are already complaining that he is not bringing home all the troops.

BTW I happen to agree with you.

US Navy Disabled Veteran - Retired

It is time for our Politicians to put America First and take politics off the list. We need to make sure that our Citizens have:

1. Good paying Jobs here like rebuilding our Infrastructure

2. A stable Economy that is growing

3. Quality Health Care for everybody, not just for those that can afford it

4. Quality Education for all our children, again not just for those that can afford it. Intelligence, creativity, vision etc are not by products of being wealthy, they are in everybody and our History is full of pioneers in technology, science, medicine, etc that have their roots in modest settings.

If we just concentrated on these goals and do what is necessary to achieve them with everybody making some sacrifices instead of what ever the he!! it is we are doing today, we can all move this country forward.

If we do not, we run the risk of some Foreign Nation rebuilding us.

What a great way to start the day off by opening the eyes of the phonies. Personally, I'm tired of crack head, Karzai making a fool out of US and the Pakistani

US Navy Disabled Veteran - Retired,

Good morning, Navy.

That was a well thought out piece and I agree on most of it. We need our precious dollars here and not be spending about $10 billion a month on wars that are not in our national interest.

You keep saying infrastructure as a source of job creation. I was wondering, do you think that people just pick up shovels and climb into the cabs of heavy machinery and are ready to start work. They need training and there are the physical demands of hard labor that construction jobs demand. Training takes time and we should retrain those in other jobs that have been lost. Takes time. That's why those shovel ready jobs never materialized.

The quality health care you want. Any idea on how to pay for it? Since the President extended the Bush tax cuts for 2 years, there is no extra money to be had by taxing the rich. Where do the funds come from? Love to cut defense and end the wars but that is just not happening any time soon.

Also saw today that there's a loophole in the new HCR law that would allow persons who retired early and make $64,000 a year or less can apply for Medicaid. That's going to add a bundle isn't it when added to the 16 to 20 million kids added already.

Can't argue about education. We need to give our kids the best education possible to compete in this global market.

Hey dude, nice post today.

For those having trouble understanding Bev's opening post, here is a link

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/06/21/a_twist_in_obamas_health_care_law_110304.html

The opening line of the story-
President Barack Obama's health care law would let Several million Middle-class people get nearly free insurance meant for the poor, a twist government number crunchers say they discovered only after the complex bill was signed."

Looks like they made a giant, costly, boo boo.

The chief actuary for Medicare, Richard Foster, says that "the situation keeps me up at night."

The White House first said that this was intentional- not until later did they admit that it was a mistake. A costly mistake.

Kind of like the entire Obama presidency.

Time to stomp a talking point to death. Corporate America, greedy business owners and their ignorant sycophants would have us believe that REGULATION is pure evil. If you believe that dead lakes, burning rivers, clear-cut forests, bankers who brazenly steal, filthy air, and poison food are GOOD - then yes, regulation is BAD. Me? I think clean air, water, and soil are not just important, but absolutely necessary for mankind to survive.

It is true that regulation can be a pain in the neck. It adds costs to the products and services we buy. Some times rules make our lives a little more inconvenient. Some rules seem just plain dumb.

But there is a huge upside to regulation. The air in the Los Angeles basin is far cleaner than it was 50 years ago. Lake Erie is coming back. We are protecting endangered species. We hardly question whether our food and drugs are safe. We expect it - thanks to government rules and regulations.

We still have a long way to go. We treat the Gulf of Mexico as a dump. An almost inconceivable amount of pollutants from Colorado's Front Range, from the Dakotas, Ohio and southward all dump into the Gulf. The lie of "clean coal" persists. Groundwater is dropping precipitously, even as its being polluted thanks to fracking and chemical dumping. Of course, when you can't see it, it's not there, right? The world's largest garbage dump is the Pacific Ocean. The oceans are crucial for life on earth. See for yourself, or do we just continue to plug our ears and close our eyes. Look at this. This is what we are doing to Mother Earth. http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/earth/oceanography/great-pacific-garbage-patch.htm

Those horrors have a very nice name - EXTERNALITIES. Externalities are costs that future generations will bear tomorrow, because Megabuck Monstrocorp and their stockholders wanted profits, right now. They poisoned us and pretended they didn't. Love Canal ring a bell? DDT, PCB's? Remember the Superfund? That's a taxpayer fund that cleans up the messes of Megabuck Monstrocorp and still the size of the mess grows. That's your shining example of the excellence of private enterprise. That's why they're so damned efficient. That's why they make their eye-popping profits. They make taxpayers clean up their destruction.

Restoring Mother Earth to an acceptable condition is going to be very expensive. Very, very expensive. Didn't I hear the right wing telling us about their concerns about our children and grandchildren? Well, we made the mess. How come we're making the kids clean up after us?

If we insist that Megabuck Monstrocorp clean up its mess, the costs of their products and services will go up - quite a bit. (Quit sniveling right-wingers, this is about your children and grandchildren, isn't it?) However, it means many, many jobs. No, they're not going to be high-paying jobs. Clean-up is drudge work, but it's work, and it pays. Regulation means hundreds of thousands of new jobs.

That's just the blue-collar stuff. Once we take on the white shirt and wing-tip crowd, we will find their work is not nearly as sophisticated as they led us to believe. They add nothing to the economy - nothing. They simply manipulate numbers, gut industry, and pocket the change. Ask Mitt Romney. That's what these guys do. If it's not that, they're rolling worthless paper into pretty little bundles, selling them, and pocketing money that's stolen from taxpayers.

The rich will trot out their flaks and start screaming about class warfare. The left will trot out their nonsense about the death of the middle class. Folks, it is a statistical reality that there is NO middle class. There's an upper class and a lower class - that's it. There need not be an outright class war, but while it is late, it is not too late to demand an end to the destruction of the planet and to being dragged into perpetual servitude.

Th welfare queen ding bat Michelle Batwoman gets farm subsidy. She is announcing her canidancy today. Hello, she did it in the debates. The woman is nuts!!!

How many times times does she have to announce her candidacy since she did it in the debate???

Anyone who takes this ding bat seriously is crazy.

Fesity:

Great post today

Medicaid does have a lot of problems including run away fraud. My wife is a RN (almost 40 years in service) and she tells me stories of abuse that would curl your toes. It does not to be fixed and I have said so many times here on this board that the government really needs to crack down on the fraud. Same story with Food Stamps

They started with a good idea to help those in need. But people, being what they are, will scam any system. There are those that feel entitled and those that just basically commit outright fraud.

Now, this does not mean you throw the baby out with the bath water. You fixed it and make the penalties so stiff that it becomes a very bad idea to try. We do have laws on the books but they are not being implemented properly and this is the problem.

The ideasare a good ones in theory but the implementation and controls suck.

Will we every get to a time of zero fraud - NO.

Another good example is the DOD, just look at the billions of dollars wasted there (fraud). And what makes that so troubling is that those they get caught still get to bid on contracts and win them. They may get a fine but the profits are far greater so they will continue to do it and call it a cost of doing business. Once caught and you a banned from any further contracts.

drive-by-observer

Fake Outrage? You ain't seen anything yet. Seen the headline about Medicaid? If it's as big a foul-up as they say, it needs to be fixed and fixed asap. But until then, get ready for the onslaught from the Obama detractors and haters today..

Fake outrage? There's a loophole that you can drive a truck through. If you've retired early and make $64,000 or less you can apply and be approved for Medicare, a program designed for the poor. Add that to the 16 to 20 million children that will be added to the program in 2014 and you have a massive amount of money that we simply do not have. Feds pay 60% and states 40%.

Mr DBO...please explain how and where this money comes from. The states are broke and so is our Treasury. Fake outrage? This is a serious problem that needs to be addressed.

Not a partisan problem, a deficiency in the law that needs to be fixed by legislation.

@ Bev - yeah we survived sirens went off for awhile - WILD & CRAZY night that's for sure! ;o)

Thanks for asking!

@Navy - Speaking of fraud - there was a diet Dr. here in Chicago who was constantly either advertising or appearing on a lot of local stations pushing his pills.

Maybe that's why I wasn't surprised last night when I heard on the local news they had issued an arrest warrant for Medicaide fraud to the tune of MILLIONS!

Unfortunately he's already fled back to India!!!

FRAUD has been around since the inception and NO party has done anything to clean it up or stiffin the penalties.

I think this is an issue that any rational individual could agree upon no matter which side of the aisle we sit on.

Woim

You keep saying infrastructure as a source of job creation. I was wondering, do you think that people just pick up shovels and climb into the cabs of heavy machinery and are ready to start work. They need training and there are the physical demands of hard labor that construction jobs demand. Training takes time and we should retrain those in other jobs that have been lost. Takes time. That's why those shovel ready jobs never materialized.

The infrastructure requires more than just shovels. There are green jobs that could be implemented in the mean time.

The quality health care you want. Any idea on how to pay for it? Since the President extended the Bush tax cuts for 2 years, there is no extra money to be had by taxing the rich. Where do the funds come from? Love to cut defense and end the wars but that is just not happening any time soon.

Since that's the case, let them give it back by bringing the jobs home, paying their fair share, stop the loop holes, and no more subsidies.

Also saw today that there's a loophole in the new HCR law that would allow persons who retired early and make $64,000 a year or less can apply for Medicaid. That's going to add a bundle isn't it when added to the 16 to 20 million kids added already.

Do you think they may need it; particularly if they have children? My outrage is the top 1% sitting on nearly 2 trillion in capital and 32 companies that paid their top executives more in 2010 than they paid in cash income taxes. I'm sure they don't need and can't speed that much money

David:

Remember the Superfund? That's a taxpayer fund that cleans up the messes of Megabuck Monstrocorp and still the size of the mess grows. That's your shining example of the excellence of private enterprise. That's why they're so damned efficient. That's why they make their eye-popping profits. They make taxpayers clean up their destruction.

Oh, yes. I remember it WELL. The ones who REALLY profit from Superfund litigation are the "environmental" lawyers" who represent the "Megabuck Monstrocorps" (love that). A lot of what the corporations could be paying to clean up their messes goes to lawyers instead, increasing the burden on the taxpayers even more.

The real irony, of course, is that this particular batch of greedy lawyers are NOT the "trial lawyers" that conservatives love to deride. These are the "defense" lawyers -- the ones who bill by the hour and collect every penny for defending those downtrodden corporations against the tyranny of the government, which dares, on behalf of its citizens, to make the corporations accountable.

It's nice work if you can get it -- the very sort of thing that Spanky would love to do, while complaining all the while out of the other side of his mouth about the very government who was generating the litigation that he was profiting from.

Some nice posts already.

I think we should leave a small force in Afghan for intelligence operations and have on call a fast strike team to handle problems as they arise. It was intelligence gathering and a surgical strike that took out OBL. We have spies in the sky and other tools that should be used. We have way too many boots on the ground in Afghan and I want they home. Whatever the savings are can be used here. By the way, there are Trillions of dollars in minerals and such in Afghan that should be used to pay us back. Why are we not looking at those? Why do we always foot the bill for everybody else?

As for shovel ready jobs I do not know what that is. I know people used the term I think it is a very stupid term. I think a very targeted infrastructure jobs bill can go a long way to create good paying jobs, increase revenues at both the Federal and State Levels, hence taking some of the pressure off the rest of us. These jobs will create secondary jobs (multiplier effect) that will add more jobs and revenue and further stimulate the economy. There will be more people who can afford the products and services of local businesses etc.

I agree in that we should be improving education and not the other way around.

Quality Health Care is not free and I do not think anybody expects it to be. We need to put out a plan that requires some premium dollars from the beneficiaries. We should negotiate with Drug Companies for example, for lower drug prices and a bevy of other things to bring costs down. I think a plan similar to Medicare for everybody would be a benefit. There are too many middle people running around in Health Care, all of them getting a piece of the pie. All that does is drive up cost with no corresponding benefit. Medicare Advantage is a primary example of this.

Beverly in Chicago

First, what Green Jobs, if they were available, they would be filled.

Second, there is no more fair share for 2 years. The President extended the Bush Tax cuts for 2 more years. Who you going to tax. You now need to make cuts.

I think all children should have medical coverage. What does that have to do with CEO's salaries? If they get paid less, does the difference go into our Treasury.

Just somethings to think about.

I see events getting much better under President Obama’s second term. During that time, Republican numbers in office will have diminished in the state and federal levels. Then the ones remaining will have to tow the line and start doing their jobs for the people of the United States.

Great posts to start the day, especially David Walker's comments on the environment. This at a time when our oceans are endangered as never before. http://sanfrancisco.ibtimes.com/articles/167103/20110621/mass-extinction-by-2050-ocean-and-marine-life-in-danger-photos.htm

Meanwhile there's a small hiccup with Affordable Care. Big deal. Fix it before the law takes effect and move on. Even President Obama was candid about the fact the law would need some adjustments, as does every major piece of legislation.

A costly mistake.

Kind of like the entire Obama presidency.

That would be too funny. Except it's too true.

It is interesting that pretty much every week we see a Doctor or some Insurance Company (Gov. Scott) scamming the system for Millions of dollars rolling into Billions per year.

What we do not see, is the benficiareis that are doing the same thing.

There is no doubt that the system is screwed up and does need to be addressed, and soon.

I was born in Buffalo NY and I remember our "Love Canal" that was an area of homes that was polluted by Chemical Companies. They hired private contractors to come in and clean up the mess costing a kings ransom. When I left Buffalo 10 or so years after, the area was still not compatible for human habitation.

Anna Molly and David Walker have inadvertently revealed the issues with government regulations.

I will give you one case in point:

Here in New Jersey, we had a pretty large pharmaceutical company that had done business for about fifty years. They employed THOUSANDS- in labs, offices, and manufacturing. Union manufacturing, I might add.

For years, they followed the regulations that stated that the waste from their plants be treated, rendered inert, before discharge. They contributed to laical charities, funding YMCA programs for disadvantaged youth, the Red Cross, and a host of local charities. They were good neighbors- an asset to the community and the state.

Along came someone who wanted to start a group. She set her sights on them, and began lobbying for new, more stringent regulations. Well, they adhered to the new regulations, but found themselves under fire for adhering to the old regulations. Lawsuits ensued. Finally, after the costs had escalated beyond reason, try shut down the operation and moved out of state.

Our new, local celebrity declared victory. Those who lost their jobs did not.

All of that happened about twenty years ago. Today, the fines for following old regulations would be so astronomical, Ciba Geigy would have had to declare bankruptcy.

Of course there is an evolution in regulations- better understanding of the way things work will necessitate changes. However, punishing companies for following extant regulation is ridiculous, and self defeating for a government that needs tax revenue in order to function.

Until the members of the flat earth society and various government regulatory bodies understand that, there will be no job growth.i

Edit- I should have identified them as a specialty chemical company, not a pharmaceutical company. They manufactured pharmaceuticals at another site, not the New Jersey site. The New Jersey site manufactured resins, dyes, and epoxies.

John B, Des Moines, IA

You wrote:

Meanwhile there's a small hiccup with Affordable Care. Big deal. Fix it before the law takes effect and move on. Even President Obama was candid about the fact the law would need some adjustments, as does every major piece of legislation.

Just a hiccup, big deal. This is the second huge problem already discovered with HCR, the other requiring the issuance of waivers as implementation would cost 2 million people their insurance coverage.

So, you think the Republicans are just going to go along with the fix to this little hiccup or use it to debate the flaws in the legislation and look for additional amendments to weaken it. You think they will passively go along with a fix to law they have vowed to repeal.

This gives them an excuse to reopen the debate.

It's not "no big thing", it a very big thing.

The New Jersey site manufactured resins, dyes, and epoxies

WHOOPS!

Nothing hazardous there... lol

Beverly:

That's why those shovel ready jobs never materialized.

Well, there's that training thing ... and then there's the fact that guys like Texas Governor Rick Perry used stimulus money -- in his case $6.6 billion -- to hide their states' looming deficits. Not many "shovel ready" jobs were created there, either.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/01/texas-used-stimulus-to-cover-97-of-its-deficit/70077/

Turns out Texas was the state that depended the most on those very stimulus funds to plug nearly 97% of its shortfall for fiscal 2010, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Texas, which crafts a budget every two years, was facing a $6.6 billion shortfall for its 2010-2011 fiscal years. It plugged nearly all of that deficit with $6.4 billion in Recovery Act money, allowing it to leave its $9.1 billion rainy day fund untouched.

"Stimulus was very helpful in getting them through the last few years," said Brian Sigritz, director of state fiscal studies for the National Association of State Budget Officers, said of Texas.

The irony, here, of course, is that, now faced with a looming $25 billion dollar deficit in the next biennium, Perry is about to bail and run for President on his great fiscal record.

Making him not the first, but merely the NEXT, Tim Pawlenty.

http://politicalcorrection.org/factcheck/201104270005

During an April 25 interview on Fox News, GOP presidential hopeful Tim Pawlenty stumbled when host Greta Van Susteren pointed to the massive deficit he left behind in Minnesota. The former governor was quick to blame Democratic state legislators for the state's budget woes, while claiming, "Every budget during my time as governor was balanced." In fact, Pawlenty's temporary budgetary fixes relied heavily on federal stimulus money that didn't prevent him from leaving behind "one of the worst" deficits in the nation.

....

Federal Stimulus Money Allowed For Slight Surplus In 2009. As MinnPost.com reported: "A revised budget forecast released this morning shows that the deficit has grown from $4.8 billion to about $6.3 billion. But because of federal stimulus money, directed mostly to Medical Assistance, the projected budget deficit is forecast to be $4.57 billion for the 2010-11 biennium. The one bit of good news is that thanks to stimulus money, there will be a slight - $200 million - surplus at the end of 2009, meaning there should be no need for another round of unallotments for the current biennium."

Beating issues is what we're good for this days and end up getting nothing done. That's corporate america way of distracting us from the reality while they pick our pockets. thanks to GOP and their indifference to how we should move forward as a nation. trillions have been spent to kill one man, OBL with thousands of american lives lost. but we debate ourselves to death on who is ideologically right and wrong. a great nation, stagnated because we've refused to do what's ideal rather we do what's ideologically correct which amounts to stagnation. jobless citizens wake up hoping for some kind of miracle and we tell them to wait because an undeclared war in Libya or Weinergate are more important. let talk about Jobs, jobs jobs jobs. move this country forward.

no joe:

However, punishing companies for following extant regulation is ridiculous, and self defeating for a government that needs tax revenue in order to function.

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. So stop talking about it as if you did. If businesses were all perfect and took care of their own messes, there would be no need for regulation.

But that doesn't happen in the REAL world, does it?

Government is NOT the evil-doer in these cases, no joe.

Anyone who would favor toxic jobs over a clean environment has their values -- and their logic -- so far twisted into a pretzel that there is no room left over for the salt.

They contributed to laical charities, funding YMCA programs for disadvantaged youth, the Red Cross, and a host of local charities. They were good neighbors- an asset to the community and the state.

Is this the Ciba Geigy you’re referring to?

Ciba-Geigy Corporation

From 1952-1990, the Ciba-Geigy Corporation (now Ciba Specialty Chemicals)
operated a dye manufacturing plant in Toms River. Waste products from the plant
were either stored in some 69,000 drums or were treated and pumped through a
pipeline to the Atlantic Ocean. In 1980, the New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection required Ciba-Geigy to begin groundwater monitoring
and drum removal at the plant site. In 1983, the Toms River site was placed on
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Superfund list. The EPA
discovered that the waste on the site was leaching into the groundwater below.
In 1989 it ordered Ciba-Geigy to begin cleaning up the site and the
groundwater.

Childhood cancer rate rises

In the 1990s it seemed as if the number of children with cancer in the Toms
River area was growing. In response to the residents' concerns, the New Jersey
Department of Health in 1996 studied the problem and found that between 1979
and 1995, 90 children in the township were diagnosed with cancer. This was 23
more than would be expected in the population, meaning that the children had
developed leukemia and brain and central nervous system cancers at higher than
the national rate. Families were outraged and demanded the government
investigate.

Study finds links

The New Jersey Department of Health and the federal Agency for Toxic Substances
and Disease Registry conducted a study to evaluate the relationship between the
environmental exposures and the cases of cancer. It concluded:

• No single risk factor appears to be solely responsible for the
  rise in childhood cancer
• An association was found between prenatal exposure to the
  contaminated water and leukemia in female children
• An association was found between prenatal exposure to the air
  from the Ciba-Geigy plant and leukemia in female children diagnosed prior to 5
  years of age

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Frarediseases.about.com%2Fcs%2Fleukemiasrare%2Fa%2F031602.htm&ei=SvoBTr3oBMOp0AGA85WTDg&usg=AFQjCNFiaVSx2S_WqiIZsMIzP6GjykAShg

You’ll excuse me if I can’t get all warm & fuzzy over you’re ‘good’ neighbors!

Oh, and, while you're at it - maybe you can explain why they settled for 20 million if there was NO wrong doing?

Poisoning kids in MY book just ain't COOL!

Woim- I agree with your post, and retract the 'fake outrage' part of my comment.

Me First, Fairfax and NJNB: Reminder- everyone likes a little ass, no one likes a smart ass.

I had mentioned this before, but the medicaid issue in the health care law is going to be a real test for the TP/GOP. There's no doubt the Dems will introduce legislation to amend the "loophole," but the question arises -- will the GOP vote for it? It's a real "damned if you do, damned if you don't" moment for them.

If they vote for it -- they're showing support for the healthcare law, and they'll lose popularity with their constituents and with their core base.

If they don't vote for it -- they're showing they aren't at all serious about fixing this country. They'd rather see this wasteful spending take place even if it meant backtracking from their very own ideology. It also shows they're willing to be disloyal to their constituents just to make a law fail and look bad.

Poor TP/GOP, they've backed themselves so far into a corner with their rhetoric that if they act anyway on the healthcare law (or anything really) they hurt their image to their constituents and reasonable voters.

So B.O. is going to fly his own "Mission Accomplished" banner, is anyone surprised?

It kills me how off topic this whole #1 thread is. Did you read the article you are commenting on? It is about declaring "job well done" in Afghanistan. You regulars on here crack me up.

My point, AM, is that companies should not be punished for following regulations that are replaced by new regulations.

If the ethics committee of Wisconsin declares that, in the interest of the public good, you can bill no more than $50 an hour, do you think you should be fined for having previously billed $75 an hour? Make reparations to the clients you billed at that amount?

No one is suggesting that regulations not be reviewed to assure they are achieving their goals- but punishing people for following extant regulations is unfair- an a pretty big reason that firms that can afford to go elsewhere.

On the other hand, maybe the country should be peopled with government workers and lawyers. We can make our livings suing each other.

Think that will work?

He's still bringing troops home, I fail to see why people are complaining about that. Are they're any people here that remember the day when the American people supported their president, and wanted to see him succeed? Whether you hate Obama or not, whether you agree with him or not, can't you just be happy 10,000 troops are coming home? Sure, its going to bring political gain for him, which some of you may not like, but for any POTUS to bring troops home is a political gain. It was for Bush, Clinton, etc. So just shut up and be happy, I fail to see how this is a problematic issue.

Woim

Beverly in Chicago

First, what Green Jobs, if they were available, they would be filled.

How right you are. The fact is that progress in the green economy is happening, just in subtler ways than some thought. Consider the story of Brad Fields, who was laid off last year after spending most of his career at an auto plant in California. He found new work at Bloom Energy, which makes fuel cell boxes to power buildings. In addition to Fields, 20 other former workers from the auto plant have found work at Bloom, which has doubled its staff to 714 full-time employees in the year since it launched its fuel-cell technology.

There are many more incredible stories like this -- of people thrown out of dying industries who have found new opportunities in new sectors -- you just haven't heard about them

That's because the success of the green economy isn't about headlines; it's about people -- who work 9 to 5 every day -- and are providing for their families. It's the single mother who holds a manufacturing job making mercury-free batteries; the young person who got his first job as a mechanic working on hybrid cars; and the stranger driving the energy-efficient bus you take every morning.

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2011/06/green-revolution-working-for-people-not-publicity.php

You see people would rather pay attention to Glenn Beck and his vast cockamamie conspiracies about green jobs czar, Van Jones.

BTW: Van Jones is considering legal action against Beck-employer Fox News.

http://weaselzippers.us/2011/06/21/former-obama-green-czar-van-jones-considers-legal-action-against-fox-news-demands-glenn-beck-retract-claims-hes-a-communist/

That's fantastic, I think, perhaps the FCC will follow Canada's lead and take Fox off air for its lies and misinformation.

Also: Daily Show Ratings Beat All of Fox News

http://www.bilerico.com/2011/06/daily_show_ratings_beat_all_of_fox_news.php

I'm willing to bet with the lies exposed about FOX next will be Sponge Bob Square Pants to beat out FOX.

Second, there is no more fair share for 2 years. The President extended the Bush Tax cuts for 2 more years. Who you going to tax. You now need to make cuts.

I think all children should have medical coverage. What does that have to do with CEO's salaries? If they get paid less, does the difference go into our Treasury.

It' s a lot people are getting sicker while CEO's salaries are paying less and wages are stagnant. Even though the tax cuts were extended still there are other ways; for example stopping speculators and ethanol subsides which Coburn didf

Anna Molly-

There seems to be a growing consensus, both with the public and among prominent economists across the political spectrum, that the Obama stimulus largely failed to accomplish its goal of creating significant, sustainable economic growth, and the large numbers of jobs that accompany such growth.

Your criticism of Govs. Perry and Pawlenty for using federal stimulus money to balance budgets in their respective states obscures a central truth about the way the stimulus package, presumably intended to induce economic growth and job creation, was crafted.

If you find fault with the use of federal stimulus funds by governors (of either party) to balance their state budgets, do you similarly find fault with the Obama Administration for allowing them to do so, and diluting the effects of the only stimulus package we're likely to see for the forseeable future?

I mean, if you're going after Republican governors for hypocrisy regarding the use of federal stimulus money, shouldn't you be calling out the President Obama for providing that opportunity?

Because...that was it, Anna Molly. There won't be another large stimulus package. That one had to get it right the first time.

By most accounts, it didn't.

Jon Stewart Slams Fox News For Editing Interview With Chris Wallace (VIDEO)

http://thedemocraticsocialist.blogspot.com/2011/06/jon-stewart-slams-fox-news-for-editing.html

Just one more reason to repeal the entire mess called Obamacare. Small hiccup?? 3 million more on medicaid that can afford coverage? How much is that going to cost? Then there was that small hiccup of misstating the cost of Obamacare and counting $500 billion in medicare savings twice. Oh, and that "savings" has been deemed unfeasible in the latest Trustees report.

Add to that the little hiccup about the individual mandate being unconstitutional.

Don't forget that little hiccup that changed the bankrupcy date on Medicare from 2029 to 2024 in one year.

The entire law was poorly written and didn't accomplish anything but driving more jobs away and driving up the cost of care.

Obama is gearing up for a speech tonight about Afghanistan. Brought to you by his team of spin doctors that are saying "you're really in trouble in Libya, so better tell the people you won Afghanistan".

The stimulus didn't work because of job training? Really? Union members need training on how to work a shovel?

The reason the stimulus didn't work is because 80% of the stimulus money went overseas....China thanks all you taxpayers for helping their unemployment rates.

@ Bag Boy:

I have no problem with that, unsurprisingly. I didn't write it and if you had been around me at the time, you would have known that I didn't like the way it was written, for exactly that reason.

But a guy like Perry has absolutely no right to crow about anything when he opposed the stimulus on philosophical grounds, used it to buy down debt instead of create jobs, and now claims that Obama is the one who done wrong.

Perry -- and the other governors -- had choices, too. But now they have absolutely no desire to take responsibility for the choices THEY made.

Gotta run to work. See you later.

You are not correct about overseas money from the Stimulus. Where are your numbers?

You can't just make stuff up.

Joe-755363

Obama is gearing up for a speech tonight about Afghanistan. Brought to you by his team of spin doctors that are saying "you're really in trouble in Libya, so better tell the people you won Afghanistan".

The stimulus didn't work because of job training? Really? Union members need training on how to work a shovel?

The reason the stimulus didn't work is because 80% of the stimulus money went overseas....China thanks all you taxpayers for helping their unemployment rates.

Why don't you take you fake post to the recylce bin?

You are a liar and phony for posting a unproven statement. your "Pants Are on Fire!"

"We are only inches away from ceasing to be a free market economy."

We concluded that the government’s spending footprint has expanded over the past few years -- to a rate approaching 40 percent -- due in large part to the recession. But that’s not an enormous rise by historical standards, and we found little evidence that the government’s increased role is either a permanent change or that it threatens the kind of free market that the United States has operated under in recent decades.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2011/jun/02/testing-mitt-romney-truth-o-meter/

Like I told Spanky you are not even looking at what financial precipated before the slow down in the economy. Nevertheless, there are jobs. Under Bush there were none.

You mean things like "Hope and Change!"....."Change we can believe in!"......Yes we can!".......and "Summer of Recovery (2010)!!"? ..........you mean that kinda stuff?..............who cares anymore?

just returned from a weekend in Charleston, SC. Interesting debate going on in that area. Why is the NLRB involved in where Boeing wants to be a plant? Who cares? It is jobs for SC. Boeing should man up and announce that either they build a plant in SC or they are going to build one in China. How will you take that libs? It's a free country or is it?

Speaking of fraud Feisty,

How about the Prez's Aunt living in Boston drawing medical disability and she is not even a US citizen. She should have been on Michelle and family's flight to Africa and taken back home.

Maggie, I believe the poster was referring to this

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/obama-stimulus-money-spent-overseas/t/story?id=10002592

79% of the "renewable energy" stimulus funds went to China.

Obama is really not big on unintended consequences, is he? He tends to ignore those pesky little details.

Kind of like his recent visit to Cree Industries. Got $39 million in 2009; used it to build a plant in China in 2010.

Maybe that is what Obama means when he says his stimulus created 3 million jobs. He does not say WHERE those jobs were created. China, U.S.- what's the difference?

False statement Joe-755363

GOP senate group says Tim Kaine's stimulus failed to create jobs
The stimulus may not have created as many jobs as Republicans and Democrats hoped. But there’s no doubt it put many people back to work and preserved the jobs of many more. We rate the NRSC statement False.

A March report by the president’s Council of Economic Advisers estimated that between 2.5 million and 3.6 million jobs were created or saved by the stimulus through the fourth quarter of 2010.

Separately, the council’s report cited four independent analyses by the Congressional Budget Office and three private economic analysis companies. Here’s what the groups found:

*CBO: Between 1.3 million and 3.6 million jobs saved or created.

*IHS/Global Insight: 2.45 million jobs saved or created.

*Macroeconomic Advisers: 2.3 million jobs saved or created.

*Moody’s Economy.com: 2.5 million jobs saved or created.

http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2011/jun/20/national-republican-senatorial-committee/gop-senate-group-says-tim-kaines-stimulus-failed-c/

So, you think the Republicans are just going to go along with the fix to this little hiccup or use it to debate the flaws in the legislation and look for additional amendments to weaken it. You think they will passively go along with a fix to law they have vowed to repeal.

Thanks to Woim for inadvertently speaking truth. The Affordable Care thing is a minor fix. There's no reason for it to be a bigger deal except the GOPTP will try to turn it into an excuse to overturn a law already helping large numbers of people.

Until the members of the flat earth society and various government regulatory bodies understand that, there will be no job growth.

You're spot on no joe, let me add this. Forty years or so ago, this nation made a decision to address environmental problems such as air and water quality. We've made huge strides in that regard, and no one that I know of is suggesting we turn back the clock to a different era where folks didn't care about – or didn't know about – the impact of personal and corporate activities on the environment. Be that as it may, pontificating about such perceived evils today (whether they be real or imagined) is always good for a few brownie points from the extreme tree hugger fringe.

But it's today's present when we are all living. And in the present, there are legitimate concerns about the deleterious economic effects of overly aggressive federal regulation, whether that regulation be in the form of EPA trying to regulate greenhouse gases or so called financial reform that purports to protect us from evil bankers or the insanity of an agency like the NLRB trying to tell Boeing where it can build its world class airplanes or HHS creating reams of rules governing how health insurance companies will be allowed to do business.

The default position of the left in such matters tends to be heavy on the regulation side and lite on the economic impacts side. They talk the talk of the economic growth needed to provide the good paying jobs necessary to nourish our society, but they don't walk the walk. Unless of course it's the government doing the spending that allegedly leads to said jobs. But after the dismal results of the grand Keynsian experiment we've all just lived through, that fantasy has less credibility than ever before.

So we're back to walking the walk. Obama and his buds came into office with a decidedly hostile view towards an evil private sector they wanted to hold accountable for their presumed sins of the past. And the walk they chose to walk was down the path of more regulation which tends to increase the costs of doing business. Fine. Presidents come and go, and this president turned out to be an anti-business jerk. Time to hunker down, keep their powder dry and wait for either a new president or a come-to-jesus-moment from this president where he sees the folly of his misguided ways.

In the meantime, there's not much stomach out there for expanding one's business and hiring more folks. How else to explain the $1 trillion to $2 trillion in cash companies are reportedly sitting on rather than putting to work? Here's a thought: our national policy priorities are not focused on creating an environment skewed towards enabling business to grow. It's more like the opposite, Obama's policy priorities do more to stifle growth. And if Obama and his ideologues want to walk their uber regulatory walk, they'll just need to accept the consequence of the uber anemic economic growth that comes with it.

Speaking for myself, if it comes down to killing a few fish versus providing jobs for Americans, I'll pick jobs every time. If it comes down to making a credible effort towards controlling one's discharge of waste into the environment versus making a more costly near perfect effort, I'll pick the former. If it comes down to letting private companies locate wherever they damn well please versus having an intrusive government intervene in such matters, well by golly that's an easy choice.

Overly aggressive federal regulation stifles economic growth and the job creation that accompanies that growth. It puts us more firmly on the path towards chronically high levels of unemployment that becomes more structural over time. In short, it condemns us to the anemic economic performance of many European countries. Many – dare I say most – Americans don't want that. That's why it is critical for the future of this country to defeat Obama in 2012. The damage he could inflict in a second term could well be irreversible, and that would be a hugely bad thing for all of us.

David Walker, great post on the environment. These things need to be said and attention needs to be paid to the problem. You put it very succinctly.

http://www.economyincrisis.org/content/stimulus-creating-green-jobs-overseas

“Very few jobs here, lots of jobs in China,” Schumer told ABC News. “That is not what I intended or any other legislator who voted for the stimulus intended.”

The problem would have never arisen had the stimulus bill included strict “buy American” language. Legislators that fought to include strict domestic procurement wording in the package were rebuffed by White House officials, whom feared to be labeled “protectionists.”

That's your boy Chuck Shumer...the same guy that demands the keyword "draconian" be used once a day.

Fake post? What about my post was fake Beverly? As opposed to your lie in the opening post about 64,000 qualifying for medicaid when the number is over 3 million. And using politifact as a newssource is like me linking fox articles.....biased and untrue.

Newt appears to have a 'spending' problem! lol

Former House speaker Newt Gingrich had a second line of credit at the high-end jewelry store Tiffany and Co. for as much as $1 million dollars, his presidential campaign acknowledged Tuesday.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/newt-gingrich-had-second-line-of-credit-at-tiffanys/2011/06/21/AGP4U0eH_blog.html

These crazy christian conservatives are SO in touch with middle America!

Most people HOMES aren't worth $500K these days thanks to them!

They're not coming home, just trading one desert wasteland for another, this one on the Mediterranean. The Marines in particular will be overjoyed to return to the shores of Tri-pooooo-liiiii.

President Nobel Peace Prize is gearing up to invade Libya. It could be that all these reports of massive Marine Corps maneuvers including the entire 2nd Marine Air Wing and Army's 1st Cavalry Division mobilizing for deployment are just a coincidence, but hell if they're not going to Afghanistan what does that leave?

Hey Penguin,

If his aunt has a green card, she is entitled, not being a citizen does not preclude one, they work and pay taxes just like the citizens. About the only thing you cant do with a green card is vote.

Bill, we see the rhetoric ramping up in the face of another election. Houston on his "we're all going to burn alive" rant- complete with vile "deniers" reference, Walker with his "we're killing the planet" post- but, I wonder, to what end?

To fire up the flat earthers to campaign, donate, and vote for Obama? Well, nice try- they have big mouths, but small numbers. Moreover, given that it is jobs and the economy that are consistently numbers one and two in polls of voters, going "there" is not, exactly, going to get Obama much traction with the majority of the electorate.

On the other hand, perhaps it is exactly because the majority of the electorate has no confidence in his ability to get this economy growing again that this has been trotted out.

I agree that we will not survive a second Obama turn- and am grateful that he has adopted such a succinct term that so neatly summarizes the fears of the electorate.

I need a second term to finish the job. That is exactly what gives voters nightmares.

@Feisty

Newt appears to have a 'spending' problem! lol

It's okay, because we also know how important fiscal responsibility is to him as well!

Didn't I hear the right wing telling us about their concerns about our children and grandchildren

Keep treating Mother Earth like a GIANT toxic dump site and there will be NO children or grandchildren around to inhabit it!

We're ALL going to pay a HUGE price for contaminating the ONLY place we can call home!

A year ago we had BP spewing unprecedented amounts of oil in the Gulf and we still don't know what the long term effects of polluting over profits will yield!

All their 'profits' in the world can't buy them a seat on the 'ark'!

Beverly

A March report by the president’s Council of Economic Advisers estimated that between 2.5 million and 3.6 million jobs were created or saved by the stimulus through the fourth quarter of 2010.

FALSE:

Here is the stimulus map:

http://www.recovery.gov/Transparency/MapGallery/Pages/ComparisonMaps.aspx?leftId=award-allRecoveryFunding&rightId=comparison-UnemploymentRate

Now if you do a little math, it's 574,000 temporary jobs created for 264 billion dollars. Great spending Obama....it's only costing us $460,000 per job

Unless you are counting the number of Chinese jobs created or saved in that 2.3 million number.

So Monday Feisty, bless her libbie heart, assured us that Obama was going order a "MASSIVE" reduction in the troops.

Sure it'd be easy to say she's clueless, or her crystal ball is broken, but the reality is she is just that bad at math, like nearly all the libbies here. {yes Drive By, I am looking at you again. 3 million new, middle class people dumped onto Medicaid and you say it's just fake outrage. Ok brother do the math on the cost of that little screw up.]

But Feisty just doens't understand that 10,000 troops is only 10%, and that Obama himself increased the troops by over 50,000.

So Feisty, does 10% = "massive" to you? Really?

Oh and AM love you counter to NoJo. Problem is carbon is a toxin that is now regulated. Yeah, that's fantastic, given we are carbon based life forms [I know cause I used to watch Star Trek].

John B, Des Moines, IA

Thanks to Woim for inadvertently speaking truth.......

Really, inadvertently? I didn't explicitly spell out why it was important?

Your post called it a hiccup, no big thing, we'll fix it no problem.

Did you give any thought at all to the comment before you posted it.

My comment was inadvertent.....you are really clueless.

No joe:

Your hypothetical is called an ex post facto law. Such laws are expressly unconstitutional.

Bill, Fairfax:

You post goes to the heart of the issue. We tree huggers are big on matters of the heart. In a nutshell, your post is nothing more than a warmed-over defense of profits over safety or in G.O.P. world - Wealth trumps health.

I clearly pointed out that regulation does indeed spawn jobs. Strip mines must be restored. Water quality must be protected. Forests need to be re-planted. Infrastructure must be maintained. The goal should be that the earth is returned to the state in which we found it, or as close as possible.

Yes, that means money....lots of money. Those costs must be included in the price of the goods or services produced. That means your vaunted private enterprise must charge its consumers the TRUE cost(s) of their goods and services. It does not mean that the government will come along later and clean up their mess. In the starkest of terms, there has been a massive transfer of wealth from the lower class to the upper class via taxation.

A "free market" does not mean Big Money and Megabuck Monstrocorp are FREE to pillage the environment. It does not mean they are FREE of their civic responsibility. In a true "free market" prices are determined by what the market will bear. If the true cost of a car includes the costs of the "clean" energy required to extract iron ore or bauxite and turn it to steel and aluminum, so be it. So should it be for all goods and services. When a forest is denuded, it must be replaced, not with a worthless monoculture, but with a very close approximation of what was removed. There is wildlife and watershed and fisheries that figure in this equation. The web of life is very intricate and very extensive. Restoring the environment to normalcy means jobs. Lots of job.

Then you tell us that this is pontificating for brownie points. No one you know is suggesting we turn back the clock. Well bub, you need to get out more often. Gutting the EPA is a major G.O.P. talking point. Gutting education is another. They refuse to allow a consumer protection agency to monitor banks. Really? Oh, that's right, those bankers do a spiffy job policing themselves. Your credibility is at zero.

Atmospheric loading will kill us. It's not likely that regulation will. Bankers have already demonstrated they are willing to plunge the planet into economic chaos. It's not likely that regulation will do that.

No one with a lick of sense says that corporate America is evil. The net effect of a corporation's actions do tend to give that impression however. They have one purpose - to generate profits. Killing people is not a concern. Examples abound where a cost has been assigned to human life whether its in Bhopal, at Philip Morris, or United Health Care. That is merely a cost of doing business.

I'm going to stomp another talking point to death right here and now. Keynesian Economic theory has never been implemented anywhere in the world, much less the United States. NEVER!

I'll also give you a plain and simple answer as to why the Big Money boys are sitting on one or two-trillion dollars. It's because they're gutless. They're nothing more than monkeys who manipulate numbers. They're terrified of risk.

It's pretty easy to see what you're about. Given a choice of wealth or health - Well, you're all about money.

nojonob

Bill, we see the rhetoric ramping up in the face of another election. Houston on his "we're all going to burn alive" rant- complete with vile "deniers" reference, Walker with his "we're killing the planet" post-

Gee, I don't check in for a day and nojonobo starts lying about me. I never said "we're all going to burn alive" you liar. Stop putting crap you wrote in quotes and attributing it to me, liar.

What I was pointing out that you are either too stupid to understand or too dishonest to admit is that past malfeasance by the Bush administration and his corporate cronies have consequences in the present that nobody, including Obama, can fix quickly. And whether or not nojonobo chooses to deny it, the climate has already begun changing because of human-induced global warming. That's not what Al Gore says, it's what the overwhelming majority of scientists have concluded based on their data.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43488239

So I want to again say I have no party affiliation..repubs and dems can both kiss my azz...I just want opinions on what u all think about this guys ad here in Nevada..is he being overdramatic?/..or is he closer to being right??

@ no joe ~ Once again, you prove you don't know what you're talking about. In part it's that you don't know what a regulation actually means, and in additional part, you don't know the difference between a contract and a tort.

A regulation -- in the environmental arena -- sets a threshold below which or above which the polluter cannot legally go. It doesn't necessarily prevent the polluter from doing better, nor does it -- or should it -- absolve the polluter from liability if they know that even at levels within the regulations, they may be causing harm. In tort law, the question is whether the tortfeasor had a duty toward the victim and whether the harm was foreseeable -- not whether what the tortfeasor did was within government regulations. It is a logical -- and sometimes a legal -- fallacy to conflate those two things.

Let me give you an example that's easy to understand: If you are driving 50 mph in a 55 mph zone in the fog, and you plow your car into the back of the school bus stopped to let off children, it will be tough to argue that you aren't liable because you were within the "legal" speed limit. You were still driving too fast for conditions, and you should have known that you could cause injury.

The other issue -- my fees -- involves a contract, not a tort. Government conceivably could set the rate for contracts going forward, but if it tried to do so going backward, that might very well constitute impairment of contract in violation of the US Constitution, Article I, Section 10:

http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_A1Sec10.html

No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility

Sure Woim, we all get that it's as important as Conservatives can manage to spin it. That's true of all the small things that become big deals because the right-wing echo chamber manages to turn them into opportunities to impose their will.

Remember, Conservatism isn't about consistency of thought or principle, it's a giant PR campaign. Whatever comes up, use it to sell your agenda.

Th welfare queen ding bat Michelle Batwoman gets farm subsidy.

Not factual Bev.

Let me guess......thinkprogress or mediamatters?

David Walker -

You are absolutely correct. The whole "defund the EPA" and remove the environmental regulations is one of the largest reasons I no longer vote Republican (I am still registered but have not voted GOP in the last 4 years).

I live by the beach, and I happen to enjoy swimming and surfing in clean water. I also have a penchant for clean air . . . silly me.

The republican idea that we can NOT have both clean air/water AND business jobs is ridiculous. Over the last 40 years the air quality has become 60% cleaner and the GDP has risen 207%. So BOTH regulation to help the environment AND business growth has occurred in the past. But for some reason the republicans want to ignore this fact.

Currently the EPA is trying to regulate mercury standards in the air we breath, which will actually prevent premature death in babies. Half the power plants in the country currently have controls for mercury, proving that it can be easily done. And the other half would need to implement these controls by hiring people (creating jobs) to build these controls. Yet the Republican party claims that this small regulation is a "job killer".

Let me reiterate that . . . the Republican party, who wants to cut funding to any organization that performs abortions, under the excuse of protecting babies, wants to STOP regulation that will prevent premature baby death. The party that claims to be pro-life wants to STOP a regulation that saves the lives of babies. Furthermore, the Republican party claims that this regulation is a "job killer" even though every model created for it shows that jobs will be created.

The EPA is the biggest pro-life organization on the planet, and the republicans want to remove all funding to them, and let business do whatever they want to our air, water and environment. And people wonder why I no longer vote republican. *face-palm*

Spanky:

When I was a kid, people like you were referred to as EMR's. I'm not quite sure whether you are educable though.

Of course we're a carbon-based life form. Proteins, carbohydrates, sugars, gases, all have carbon. We need these things to survive.

We need water to survive. Maybe even you know that. Have someone hold you underwater for 10 minutes - please. Let's see if you survive immersion in that "harmless" substance that is nothing more than Hydrogen and Oxygen. Take those same two elements and combine them with Carbon, and depending on a few variables, you have proteins and carbohydrates.

So far you've demonstrated you have zero understanding of the political world. Now, you've added chemistry to what I have to imagine is an impressively long list of things you don't understand. Please, stop now.

Sorry DP, saying the Bachmann family farm doesn't receive federal farm subsidies doesn't make it true;

http://www.legistorm.com/memberdisclosure/823/Rep_Michele_Bachmann_MN.html

http://farm.ewg.org/persondetail.php?custnumber=A03729514

She's a pretty typical Conservative--whining about government services for others while she becomes rich from those services. http://minnesotaindependent.com/11329/michele-bachmann%E2%80%99s-housing-crisis-is-resolved-with-a-127-million-golf-course-manor

retired Navy vet,

Great post on how we need to stop the wars and our foreign policy of giving BILLIONS to countries like Pakistan and use that money here at home. It is true these wars and unsustainable foreign policiesare bankrupting our country. Heck we have already wasted over a BILLION dollars on the Libya war and we have morons Kerry and McCain trying to extend it another year, at the rate of a Billion every 90 days that will bring our total for this debacle to 5 BILLION.....IF IT ENDS THERE!

You sound just like the only politician that has the balls to tell it like it is...RON PAUL.

out of the 70 previous posts, there are only a few comments that are directly related to the topic. some comments briefly skim the topic but eventually spiral off into other things... this is why i rarely ever comment on articles from msn anymore. it always goes into politics, even on non-political stories, and it just turns into the blame game and comment bashing. i'll admit it, i've been a part of it before, but it's kind of sad... i fully support our troops whether the decision be they stay in afghanistan or come home!

... this is why i rarely ever comment on articles from msn anymore. it always goes into politics,

You DO realize this is a 'political' blog? Right?

yeah for some reason firefox 4 decided to fail and cut the article off after the "declaring success" part and reattach it after the "on the 2012 trail" part. it put the ad by Pulse 360 over the text i guess and i couldn't read it. really weird! but since the title of the whole thing was "declaring success" i thought that was all to it. but after refreshing it and reading your comment i went back up and noticed it loaded correctly this time... still doesn't change my comment though. although my comment doesn't really apply to this article anymore, most of the articles end up in an uncalledfor political bash haha.

I can't believe that any Republican is asking this question. Free trade -- not fair trade -- is the answer.

And it was your side's idea.

OK I'll bite. What is your definition of the difference...btw I'm not a Republican

Yeah, Huntsman's answer will fly - like a bird into a glass building!

Fair trade has to do with making sure you are not exploiting foreign workers or their environment, with the result that fair trade products cost more. Free trade doesn't care. Most American companies choose free trade, which means that American workers, who have the audacity to expect a fair wage and decent working conditions, don't stand a chance of competing. Republican policies, including low tariffs -- which are admittedly aided and abetted by certain Democratic presidents -- foster free trade, rather than fair trade.

By the way -- you keep saying you're not a Republican, but everything you say seems to be slanted from that angle. It's an easy mistake to make. If you don't want to be perceived that way, don't slant your words.

Anna Molly,

Good post and explanation.

If we raise our excise taxes from 2% to the levels we see in China and India which top out at 40%, we would almost make this a level playing field and almost balance our trade deficit.

You make their products more expensive and eliminate the Free/Fair Trade controversy.

Great point, Anna Molly.

Step right up and get your "label" Yes, you know that there can be no liberal republicans and no democratic conservatives accepted here..and don't you dare claim to be be an independent or a moderate anything.

Just allow one of our self-anointed arbiters to tell you where you stand.

And if you lack a label, I have one of just about every stripe you are welcome to take...:)

For once we seem to be in agreement, at least early on. "Free trade" was mostly unilateral disarmament. We immediately eliminated all of our tariffs and restrictions, the rest of the world not so much.

Care to address the substantive point, dangerfield? Or do you prefer to just sling a few arrows in my direction?

Well, then, better try again, your tips are blunt.

Fair trade has to do with making sure you are not exploiting foreign workers or their environment, with the result that fair trade products cost more. Free trade doesn't care. Most American companies choose free trade, which means that American workers, who have the audacity to expect a fair wage and decent working conditions, don't stand a chance of competing. Republican policies, including low tariffs -- which are admittedly aided and abetted by certain Democratic presidents -- foster free trade, rather than fair trade.

Do we have a free trade agreement with China? If American companies agree to "Fair Trade" standards how do you compete with companies that don't? Even after implementing "Fair Trade" wages and conditions for foreign workers their labor costs are still likely to be lower than that required for "fair" wage for an American worker so how does that bring manufacturing back here?

Your answer has some nice ideas but when the rubber meets the road there are many difficulties. Also, your answer implies that Republicans are solely responsible for the trade environment in this country. Now I liked President Clinton but he signed NAFTA and it was supported by many Democrats in congress. Similarly the three current free trade agreements with South Korea, Columbia and Panama will be passed with bi-partisan support. As I said, I am not a Republican. I understand that both parties are complicit in many of the issues facing our country.

So, as I said before I would like to hear specifics as to how, or even if, it is possible to reverse the loss of manufacturing jobs. To use your example on "Fair Trade". Suppose we could implement this framework and produce goods in America at the higher wage levels required to support the American standard of living. What foreign consumers could afford to buy these goods? Unless their wages are at a similar level have we not priced ourselves out of the market? This is the true driver of moving manufacturing jobs closer to their markets. At a global level you can hardly deny the success of this theory. You may claim that foreign workers are being exploited, and I have no doubt that many are, but at a macro level literally billions of people are moving out of extreme poverty to a higher standard of living. Do you deny that living standards in the Far East and South America are rising to the benefit of the majority of people in those regions?

It may be that it is not possible for America to have manufacturing jobs that are economically viable and then we will have to look for solutions that involve creating new markets and jobs but this is what I want to find out.

Anna Molly - Well, then, better try again, your tips are blunt.

I thought we agreed to stop talking about Anthony Wiener?????

AM-

Sorry if you seem to resemble that remark. You have no reason to shoulder that particular title or "talent" exclusively, there are arbiters galore herein, on both shores of the great divide...

Yet I made my point...:)

Alan:

Also, your answer implies that Republicans are solely responsible for the trade environment in this country. .

This is completely false. Read my answer again. I said they were Republican IDEAS, aided and abetted by Democratic presidents. What's substantially different between that and THIS:

Now I liked President Clinton but he signed NAFTA and it was supported by many Democrats in congress. Similarly the three current free trade agreements with South Korea, Columbia and Panama will be passed with bi-partisan support.

I never said there wasn't democratic support in Congress for this stuff, only that the ideas came originally from republicans and were aided and abetted by Democratic presidents. If Clinton hadn't signed this stuff, it wouldn't have passed. If Obama doesn't sign it, it won't pass this time, either.

As I said, I am not a Republican. I understand that both parties are complicit in many of the issues facing our country.

Then why are you making such a big deal about what I said, which isn't that far from what you said? Why do you keep leaping to the defense of Republicans and attacking Democrats?

Dangerfield:

Yet I made my point...:)

You only wish.

there are arbiters galore herein, on both shores of the great divide...

And what does that make YOU? Judge and jury of ALL the rest of us? Move over, Albany Joe.

White Collar Auto:

I thought we agreed to stop talking about Anthony Wiener?????

You mean dangerfield is really Anthony Weiner? In his own mind, maybe. ;-)

You mean the point on the top of your tin foil hat dangerfield?

@AM

Then why are you making such a big deal about what I said, which isn't that far from what you said? Why do you keep leaping to the defense of Republicans and attacking Democrats?

Because this is a strongly pro-democratic board and there is a tendency here to see everything in black in white - Four Legs good, Two Legs Bad. However, I apologize as you are more nuanced. At the end of the day though you had no comments on the rest of my post regarding Fair Trade and I am interested to hear your reply.

Oh no you didn't, Mo...

You KNOW what dangerfield always does to you...

AM-

I have really made my point in BOLD this time...and it's evidently under your skin...:)

So you called (Labeled?) one guy a republican for his "slant" and now I'm "albany somebody" and weiner too?"

Wasn't THAT what I was talking about?

And if you lack a label, I have one of just about every stripe you are welcome to take...:)

MB-

He's mine and you can't have him!

Lacking sycophants who praise my every musing, I have instead acquired several, for lack of a better term, "followers" (Hecklers? Stalkers?) who are true to yours truly as that "little lamb" was to Mary...:)

Happy Birthday Moe!

Moe Howard was born in Bath Beach, now called Bensonhurst, a Brooklyn suburb, yesterday, June 19th, in 1897. Everyone knows Moe as a member of The Three Stooges.

What many don't know is that his early acting was far from the slapstick comedy that would make him and his fellow Stooges so famous. Moe began his serious acting career on a Mississippi riverboat called the Sunflower and studied Shakespeare.

http://www.threestooges.com/news/article.asp?intNewsID=115

"What's that for? I didn't do nuthin'!" "That's in case ya do and I'm not around!"
- Larry and Moe (HOI POLLOI, 1935)

And that's why I love Anna Molly - always tilting at windmills.

Problem for her is the fundamental truth that life just ain't fair. We all learned it when were were toddlers. How come Anna, the unions, and the libbies always seem to forget it?

Yep, you can try to write a law to ensure fairness. It will never work, and will get heavily litigated, because it will always be to someone's disadvantage.

Are you all aware that our nations budget was financed until 1913 when the income tax was adopted by trade tariffs and import duties. And we didn't import near as much then as we do now.

I agree we should use recriprocity in trade, meaning that if country x charges us no tariff we do the same for them, and if country y charges us 40% tariff we do the same. I believe this would even things out very quickly. Simply put, we charge them exactly what they charge us. I believe you would see tariffs charged to us drop very quickly, and if not we do business with countries that give us the best deal.

My idea for getting jobs back to the US would be that any US company that does not do 90% of it's manufacturing in the US would have to pay a 75% tax on all money earned wherever in the world it was earned. You'd see jobs coming back quite fast I believe.

My take on the economy is that with CEO salaries increasing at 27% per year and workers wages increasing at 1.5% it's no wonder the economy is tanking. Inflation is at 2% so that's .5% more than wages are increasing so in reality worker's checks today are worth .5% less than they were a year ago, even with a 1.5% raise, not to mention those who got no raise. Add to that that each and every day you hear of the price of something is going up by 5 or 10% and it doesn't take a degree in economics to understand that the reason the economy is in this shape is because people just don't have any extra money to spend. Any CEO knows that you have to put money back into a business to make it work. Part of that equation that has been lost is that you have to put it back as wage increases or your employees won't be able to buy the goods or services you provide.

Soldier's Dad

Bravo. But so SIMPLE, it will NEVER happen. The lobbyists will guarantee that any increase in tax revenue will find it's way to a Corporate Handout,...as has happened in the recent 10 years or so! The SALE on tax rates NEEDS to end. The 'inventory' of goods has depleted and the costs to produce more have increased. Any company knows that you don't mark down merchandise you haven't produced at LESS than it costs to produce it.

END THE TAX SALE!

dangerfield:

I have really made my point in BOLD this time...and it's evidently under your skin...:)

LoL Once again, you wish. (p.s. I got it the first time, metaphorically speaking, of course; btw Diana Krall does a nice version of that)

Spanky:

Yep, you can try to write a law to ensure fairness. It will never work, and will get heavily litigated, because it will always be to someone's disadvantage.

Sure. Mostly yours. Until the litigation hits. In my world, we sometimes joke that we keep our clients happiest when we talk Republican, but we always vote Democrat, to keep US happiest.

Tilting at windmills? LoL The windmills of your mind, Spanky. How am I doing so far?

BTW -- de la Mancha, you ain't. Sancho Panza to your corporate masters, maybe.

Anna...great post on free versus fair trade. I agree and think that it was both sides of the aisle that completely sold us out for the interests of lobbyists.

Not only would I reinstitute tariffs, I would legislate that any company with foreign payroll still have to pay the FICA match in the USA. That would solve a lot of the social security problems, medicare funding and promote American hiring instead of outsourcing.

Huntsman is a distraction and I hope he doesn't get very far with his campaign. The fact that his company is building in China instead of the United States is telling in that he's more worried about his bottom line than jobs here. The fact that he was the ambassador to China makes me question what kind of obligations/loyalties he has to China and if they come before the United States.

I have no substantive complaints with President Obama's conduct of the Afghanistan war. Generally speaking, I believe his decisions in and management of the conflict have been responsible and importantly, he kept his campaign promise regarding Afghanistan. Credit where credit is due.

I have no reason to believe that he'll act rashly or ignore the advice of the leadership of the U.S. military on the ground in Afghanistan with regard to drawing down the forces there.

He simply has too much at stake.

As do we all. Godspeed to him and especially to our brave men and women who lay it on the line for us every single day.

But we had better watch out, Bag Boy, before agreeing with each other gets to be a habit. ;-)

MB:

Well said and I agree.

Mixed Bag,

I'm confused by your post.

He kept his promise? During the campaign he said all troops out of Afghanistan by 2011 and now 2014 at the earliest. He inserted 33,000 troops as part of the surge. If he even brings a third of them home before the end of 2012 I would be surprised.

Spring in Afghanistan is the start of the fighting season, where hostilities get very ugly. Keeping them there till 2012 gives him 2 more fighting seasons to go after the Taliban. His draw down today will be minimal as this seasons fighting season has just begun.

So you want this to be conditions based, based on conditions on the ground? Why?

Our goal in Afghanistan was to remove the Taliban from power. We did that and in fact are now negotiating a truce/peace agreement with them.

Our goal was to rid the country of Al-Qaeda. Not a serious threat. We are mostly fighting the Taliban.

Our goal was to get OBL. I can honestly use the phrase, mission accomplished here.

After 10 years, isn't it time for the Afghans to do some or most of the heavy lifting?

Don't you think that a small counter-insurgency force would do more good than almost 100,000 troops? They got OBL that way and much of his leadership.

How can we afford $10 billion a month on this war and expect to effect any recovery at home?

How is being there in any way in our national interest?

T

Woim:

President Obama never promised to have all troops out of Afghanistan by 2011. He actually campaigned on sending more troops into Afghanistan. You are conflating Iraq and Afghanistan.

Nashville_fan

Woim:

President Obama never promised to have all troops out of Afghanistan by 2011. He actually campaigned on sending more troops into Afghanistan. You are conflating Iraq and Afghanistan.

Sorry, but I beg to differ.

Even as a candidate, Obama maintained that Afghanistan should be "the focus" of Bush's terror war, and he pledged to make it so. But the president was also swept into power on a wave of anti-war fervor behind his calls to end the occupation of Iraq. Iraq has calmed down quite a bit as U.S. troops steadily stream out of the country, but Afghanistan is more violent than ever amid Obama's own "surge."

Even though the president promised his Afghan occupation would conclude in July 2011, military officials have admitted that sometime in 2014 is more likely. Elsewhere, American forces are dropping more bombs on more countries today than at any point during the Bush administration, with continued occupation forces in two massive countries even as they stage aerial bombardments of Pakistan, Libya and Yemen.

Anna - if he says anything remotely about defeating al quada in the area it could easily come back and bite him just as you so relish commenting on bush's "mission accomplished" statement. BTW - even bush said he regretted making that comment.

Thanks, Nash.

That's also my interpretation of what the President was saying during the 2008 campaign.

Woim-

Nothing you've said changes my thoughts about what I said. We clearly have fundamentally different views of the conflict in Afghanistan.

In this case, my views of the situation generally coincide with those of the President.

Thanks for weighing in.

woim:

Please provide a link showing the President said we would withdraw from Afghanistan by 2011. There is no such link because the President never said it.

Here is a great right wing news link for you making my point:

Candidate Obama Repeatedly Said He Would Reinforce U.S. Troops in Afghanistan

http://www.cnsnews.com/node/54753

Nashville_fan,

Here you go as requested.

Mr. Obama will be criticized for whatever he says this evening, as would a Republican President were he/she in office. I do not subscribe to Mr. Obama's idealology, but this business of criticizing golf and trips to Africa etc. has gotten to the point where it is far, far, far beyond ridiculous.

War is a difficult business as I'm sure Navy Vet would attest to, and even with a 99.9% consensus on the war in Afghanistan it would still be a tough "win". Turning it into a political/election issue only serves to make OUR country less safe. Regardless of whether or not we can attain all of our goals in Afghanistan, I wish the country would at least get behind our President because I believe he has done his best in this virtually impossible situation.

Nashville_fan,

It won't take it.

From Raw Story.

posted it twice and wont take it.

President Obama’s top 5 broken campaign promises

By Stephen C. Webster
Tuesday, April 5th, 2011 -- 1:09 pm

5. End the wars
Even as a candidate, Obama maintained that Afghanistan should be "the focus" of Bush's terror war, and he pledged to make it so. But the president was also swept into power on a wave of anti-war fervor behind his calls to end the occupation of Iraq. Iraq has calmed down quite a bit as U.S. troops steadily stream out of the country, but Afghanistan is more violent than ever amid Obama's own "surge."

Even though the president promised his Afghan occupation would conclude in July 2011, military officials have admitted that sometime in 2014 is more likely. Elsewhere, American forces are dropping more bombs on more countries today than at any point during the Bush administration, with continued occupation forces in two massive countries even as they stage aerial bombardments of Pakistan, Libya and Yemen

I have read all the posts thru 3.5. Many good topics and great posts on Medicaid, War in Afghanistan, Free?/Fair trade.

My frustration is the way this blog is set up. No way to have topics group together, just a long stream with topics jumping all over the place. Just when the discussion really becomes one , another road open ups and down the road we go.

Sorry, I am guilty of this very thing, interrupting the Afghan posts. Just need to voice my frustration this am.

woim:

I think that there is a waiting period before new users can post links. Perhaps you can give us a phrase to Google.

Edited to add:

Surely you understand that a "news" article where someone claims the President said something is not the same as a link to the President actually saying it, right? The media is full of false claims about stuff the President . . . don't get me going on that please! :o)

Tawkedy.

Thank you.

I could not post the hyperlink.

Sorry to all.

Here is a link:

Read the description in the video. The video outlines several things about troop withdrawls, but only mainly deals with Iraq. But in the description box, you'll read the entire list of promises he did make, which does include Afghanistan withdraw in July 2011. I am with Woim on this one. I do remember Obama stating an end to Afghainstan, or at least a big withdrawl in July 2011. Actually, I'll save you the trouble and copy and pase it here:

"The real Barack Obama said he would end the war in Iraq (there are still 50,000 US troops there), close Guantanamo (it's still open), Bring the US troops home from Afghanistan in July 2011 (only a handful will be withdrawn), end rendition flights (they are still flying), stop US using torture (it still does), end US threats against small nations like Iran (they still happen), lift the embargo on Cuba (it's still in place). The fake Barack Obama that got elected in 2007 has been intent on adopting the policies of George W. Bush, and even more, starting new wars in Pakistan and Libya."

It may have been in this speech, which is an hour long, that he made that promise. I am not going to wade through an hour of Obama lies just to find a sound bite LOL. So you can be my guest if you'd like:

NOW, for 7 Obama lies in under 2 minutes, please watch the following and enjoy:

How are these promises coming along?

http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/newenergy_more

It is kind of sad to see folks reject the truth out of hand in their rush to post links to lies. Oh well, I led the horse(s) to water . . . but I can't make 'em drink.

Whatever.

Ignorance is indeed bliss.

Nashville,

Perhaps you missed the post at 3.12

and Cody-3001112 comment at 3.17

From Raw Story.

posted it twice and wont take it.

President Obama’s top 5 broken campaign promises

By Stephen C. Webster
Tuesday, April 5th, 2011 -- 1:09 pm

5. End the wars
Even as a candidate, Obama maintained that Afghanistan should be "the focus" of Bush's terror war, and he pledged to make it so. But the president was also swept into power on a wave of anti-war fervor behind his calls to end the occupation of Iraq. Iraq has calmed down quite a bit as U.S. troops steadily stream out of the country, but Afghanistan is more violent than ever amid Obama's own "surge."

Even though the president promised his Afghan occupation would conclude in July 2011, military officials have admitted that sometime in 2014 is more likely. Elsewhere, American forces are dropping more bombs on more countries today than at any point during the Bush administration, with continued occupation forces in two massive countries even as they stage aerial bombardments of Pakistan, Libya and Yemen

Ignorance is indeed bliss....

Ignorance is indeed bliss....

I guess that's why you're working so hard to spread ignorance. Figures don't lie, but Woim's figure, so you're twisting the numbers to give the impression that President Obama hasn't accomplished anything. It fits the Conservative narrative, after all. It's pretty heavy lifting, though, to ignore the current count of 136 promises kept, 40 kept with compromise, and only 42 broken. Most of those "broken promises" have been the result of Republican filibuster in the Senate. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/

woim - it appears that you are new to newsvine. There is a waiting time before a poster can post links. Welcome to FR where the libbies run wild with half truths, misdirection and some even refuse to answer questions.

Here you will find many links to think progressive and other liberal op ed pieces. citing hard facts and numbers to many of these libs only goes over their heads, regardless of what they say.

Newsvines code of honor is rarely enforced here on 1st read but is enforced on other newsvine blogs with a vengeance. If you remain civil you will find that it befuddles many libs.

Jody, Iowa

This is an excellent analysis. As you said yesterday, President Clinton made efforts to get NATO to intervene in Bosnia. What is the difference there?. President Obama keep his campaign promise of getting out of Iraq and focusing on Afghanistan to get bin Laden which he did.

We did nothing as in Rwanda and Darfur. In fact, Clinton regrets personal failure on Rwanda genocide. If the USA is "exceptional", then "exceptional" means using our military might to prevent the mass killing of innocent civilians not just fighting all-out wars as in Afghanistan, Iraq.

At least, PRESIDENT OBAMA DIDN"T LIE TO US about Iraq and Afghanistan. He said he would go after bin Laden in Afghanistan. He said he would go after bin laden which he did and got him. he promised to bring down and he is.

Besides the Libyans asked for our help and appreciate the help for the most part. Karzai and opium dealers as well as Pakistan are making a fool out of US.
http://allafrica.com/comments/list/aans/post/post/id/201102190023.html

The nerve of Karzai to call US occupiers when he asked US to stay.

Out of cash and out of time; well, I think; Gaddifi has less time that the funding.

I appreciate what Senators John Kerry and John McCain are doing. In an effort aimed at countering a House Republican plan to defund American military operations in Libya, Senators John Kerry, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee and a Democrat, and John McCain, a Republican, announced the introduction of a joint resolution on Tuesday authorizing the limited use of United States Armed Forces in Libya.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/21/kerry-and-mccain-introduce-libya-resolution/

Outstanding analysis.

Thanks. Bev, thanks for adding more to it, well said. I appreciate Kerry and McCain's efforts as well. The entire argument over Libya by the right is simply political gaming and nothing more. I'll add it is good to see the "real" John McCain back, even when I disagree with him, he again sounds like his 2000 self.

Hmmm ... which is worse? Liberal posters who cut and paste, or conservative posters who cut and paste without attribution?

I seem to remember one of the leading conservative posters here going wild the other day over a liberal poster who did almost exactly what you just did -- no citation to accompany the words. For all we know, you could be making that up, or changing the words to suit your purposes.

So what? Congress passes a minor fix to the law, President Obama spends it...before the provision even takes effect. Problem solved. That's already happened with record keeping requirements for small businesses. It can happen again.

John B:

Good point. The Health Care Law is a Work in Progress (WIP) just like Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. As issues arise, and they will, they always do not matter how due diligent you try to be, you address them and either fix it or delete it and move on. That is the evolutionary process of all major legislation.

You just cannot catch every mistake. It is what you do when they are found that counts.

So what? Congress passes a minor fix to the law, President Obama spends it

Freudian slip John B??? ;-) Just kidding. Knew what you meant. I'm hoping it is as easy as that. Mr. Foster is a sharp guy...I've met him before and he doesn't ordinarily speak up about things like this. So I'd take what he says seriously. Seems like a fairly easy fix although it certainly makes you wonder what other problems will be discovered.

Or you realize the law you signed is so ridiculous rather than admit it. You just pass out an endless number of waivers to comply with it. Seriously I understand how important it was for Obama to pacify the liberals and poverty lobby by expanding welfare and entitlement programs. He has expended a record amount of money to appease public and private unions as well. Now let's elect a better leader who can dig us out of the hole. VOTE FOR CHANGE IN 2012!

uaw - interesting how the FR libs say no big deal about passed legislation, but run around shouting and condemming proposed legislation from the right. Seems that they want to promote a one party system.

UAW. The discussion was about Medicaid not Medicare at the beginning of the thread. The glitch refers to 2014 when all folks will have insurance coverage. The specific case cited is the hypothetical about couple retiring early at 62 and receiving SS (at a reduced rate) and deciding to see if they qualify for Medicaid for insurance coverage. Under the HCR Law

they could even though their total income is $64,000. Which by the way is 4x the federal poverty level which is $14,710 for a two person household.

The Medicaid expansion was to "benefit childless adults with incomes up to 133 percent of the poverty level". I can think of couples whose spouse has dementia and cannot be cared for at home. That person could receive Medicaid , which pays for nursing care facility. That is the way I read the source article"A twist in Obama 's heath Care Law" on Realclearpolitcs.com web site.

In conclusion, to fix this "twist" see JeffP #1.31 excellent post above.

Heealth Care Reform is a very complex law, made so by the number of differing opinions and requirements that went into the making of it. Many provisions were introduced by many different interests in order to gain its acceptance and passage.

That's exactly why Pelosi said congress had to pass it in order to stop the constant tinkering so that the public could understand the content.

It's no surprise after all the dealing and patching that some irregularities would exist. That's why complete implementation was set to take several years.

This Ridiculous healthcare law will indoctrinate a whole new generation of "Childless Adults" into the welfare system. It does not address any issues regarding healthcare expenses. (stop confusing health insurance with healthcare) In light of this law and that ridiculous Frank/Dodd Act it's obvious more Democrats should have stood up and joined the party of "NO". In 2008 this country made a huge mistake allowing an inexperienced politician in the White House. Part of that was corrected in 2010. More is needed. VOTE FOR CHANGE IN 2012!

Thanks for the "waiver" Frank, of course I meant "signed."

UAW, I see you want to move on from specifics that you raised earlier about MEDICAID to the your general view of healthcare and other things. I am not confusing health insurance with healthcare. WE all need healthcare sometimes in our life, but not all people have health insurance for the care they need.

WE will all vote in 2012 and indeed change will happen . It always does.

Bravo, Nashville Fan!

Congress has not done its job and the last two plus years, the GOP has not even bothered to at least look as if they are earning their pay--saying "no", obstructing every piece of legislation and every Obama nominee is all they have done. Both sides are guilty but none so much as the GOP since Jan 20, 2009.

I'll add: Where were Darryl Issa's "investigations" during the Bush/Cheney years? Where was the GOP's demands for more details regarding the lead up to Iraq? Where was the demand to finish the war in Afghanistan first before Iraq? Where was the demand to pay for the wars?

Nashville_fan

P.S. Jon Huntsman seems like a totally nice guy. Too bad that he would be running to represent a party that is a bought and paid for by "corporate people". That makes Mr. Huntsman a "trojan horse" to me, but hey, I have discovered that the Democratic party has a certifiably loony section as well, so I won't hold that against him. Looking forward to hearing what Mr. Huntsman proposes to do for America

He was on Fox And Friends this and last night on Hannity. I didn't watch Hannity, really don't like seeing others Hannitized I did catch a glimpse of him this AM. here is a clip.

Huntsman Makes Case for Candidacy

Jun 22, 2011

- 5:57 -

Will the former governor impact the 2012 field?

http://video.foxnews.com/v/1012686379001/huntsman-makes-case-for-candidacy/?playlist_id=86858

Good morning Jody and Bev!

(Bev you are cracking me up with the phrase "Hannitized" . . . sounds painful!)

Nash:

Easily one of your best. Kudos.

Out of all the Presidental Candidates running on the right I like Huntsman the best. He seems to be a person that will compromise to move this country forward, he seems to be a reasonable fellow and I need to see more of what he really stands for. He is not very exciting to watch for sure and he seems to be gotten caught up in some of the Tea Party Ideology, basically trying to gain some favor there. This is why I said yesterday he probably should have waited until 2016. His ties to President Obama are still too fresh and I am sure that he has supported many of President Obama's agenda items and this will come out and hurt him.

Time will tell -

Nash:

Today on the TV, I heard Morning Joe-ke going on and on about the "three wars" the U.S. is in (we are in one) ....,

I love you, Nash, and can't stand Joe Scarborough, but be careful about saying so dismissively that we're not at war in Iraq, where 18 soldiers have died during fighting there so far this year. We no longer call it a war, but what do you suppose the Iraqis call it? And do you believe those soldiers -- and the 22 that also died during fighting last year -- all after the purported withdrawal of "combat forces" -- are entitled to purple hearts, or not?

If we want to be taken more seriously than Joe Scarborough, then we need to be serious about how we address these things.

Anna Molly:

I agree with you. But lazy journalism is one of the things that led us to be in Iraq in the first place. And continuing to say that we are at war in Iraq when we are no longer running combat operations there is lazy journalism.

We still have a footprint there, our soldiers (and Iraqis) are still being killed there, and that is not a minor thing. How about we just call Iraq exactly what it is: a disaster for our country. We are dealing with the remnants of the Iraq War . . . but the war is still over. That doesn't mean its all sunshine and roses however.

Finally, someone that talks some sense ... Congress is NOT our friend, we're their vehicle to getting what they want. Actually I hold us ALL responsible for agreeing, as tax paying citizens, to accept the crumbs of Washington as we watch these self-motivated liars continue taking advantage of the hardest working taxpayers. Over the past 40 years Congress has gotten progressively bolder and open with their ill-doings, almost daring anyone to stop them.

We are still using fossil fuels that we should have ridden our country's use of decades ago, but haven't because of the BIG MONEY padding the pockets of the very ones that proclaim their loyalty to us. We have watched our savings & personal wealth disappear over the past 30 years as these thieves have robbed the past excesses of SS & spent them on themselves, lining their own pockets with every imagineable PERK, and giving us "promises" that they now wish to rid themselves of. Some of us, even after being taken time & time again, continue believing these liars (both parties) and side with one or the other party ... listen, THEY ARE ALL ALIKE ... they are self-profitting thieves. And those of us that are stupid enough to believe an ounce of their venom deserve exactly what they dish out to us.

I, for one, am majorly disappointed in Obama's insistance to remain in Afghanistan, or our involvement in Libia ... these people pray to their GOD every day for the death of America. Its time we rid our country of their stinch and focus on America.

Wow Da Noid . . . wish I saw your post before I just posted a link to the same! :o)

Da Noid,

simple answer, they are both fake news shows but only The Daily Show admits it...

newbook

Da Noid,

simple answer, they are both fake news shows but only The Daily Show admits it...

I couldn't have said it better. How about this FOX LIES?

Remember the study that was done by University of Maryland, which sited FOX news viewers as more misinformed about American political issues than any other network.

Nashville_fan

This segment speaks for itself and confirms that Fox "News" is the propaganda arm of the Republican party.

Yeah I said it.

Navy, Roger Ailes Built the Fox News Fear Factory Which he is a paranoid victim of...

Ailes begins each workday buffered by the elaborate private security detail that News Corp. pays to usher him from his $1.6 million home in New Jersey to his office in Manhattan. (His country home – in the aptly named village of Garrison – is phalanxed by empty homes that Ailes bought up to create a wider security perimeter.) Traveling with the Chairman is like a scene straight out of 24. A friend recalls hitching a ride with Ailes after a power lunch: “We come out of the building and there’s an SUV filled with big guys, who jump out of the car when they see him. A cordon is formed around us. We’re ushered into the SUV, and we drive the few blocks to Fox’s offices, where another set of guys come out of the building to receive ‘the package.’ The package is taken in, and I’m taken on to my destination.

”Ailes is certain that he’s a top target of Al Qaeda terrorists. “You know, they’re coming to get me,” he tells friends. “I’m fully prepared. I’ve taken care of it.” (Ailes, who was once arrested for carrying an illegal handgun in Central Park, now carries a licensed weapon.) Inside his blast-resistant office at Fox News headquarters, Ailes keeps a monitor on his desk that allows him to view any activity outside his closed door. Once, after observing a dark-skinned man in what Ailes perceived to be Muslim garb, he put Fox News on lockdown. “What the hell!” Ailes shouted. “This guy could be bombing me!” The suspected terrorist turned out to be a janitor. “Roger tore up the whole floor,” recalls a source close to Ailes. “He has a personal paranoia about people who are Muslim – which is consistent with the ideology of his network.”

“He feeds them exactly what they want to hear.”

From the time Obama began contemplating his candidacy, Fox News went all-out to convince its white viewers that he was a Marxist, a Muslim, a black nationalist and a 1960s radical. In early 2007, Ailes joked about the similarity of Obama’s name to a certain terrorist’s.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-roger-ailes-built-the-fox-news-fear-factory-20110525?page=11

Has any one noticed the resemblance between Roger Ailes and thriler producer Alfred Hitchcok? I you look below it the picture there is hardly a difference.

http://assets.rollingstone.com/assets/images/embedded/3f2b5f630f7ef51503f6c893c32a1daf3cc2b479.jpg

David, the real question is what would YOU do about it? We could stay in Afghanistan for another 10 years and who knows how many more American casualties. We could start a gradual withdrawal, which is what Obama has chosen (by all accounts), or we could yank all our troops out this year. It sounds like Obama is choosing the middle path. What would YOU do?

By the way, that applies to all the bloggers on this website. It's not enough to bitch and whine, you need to make positive suggestions for what you think WE need to do. As Ben Franklin said, "we must hang together or assuredly we will hang separately."

Alan1234, well said.

I think the middle path to leave is the best approach of the many bad options. I would be happy if we brought every soldier home tomorrow but doing so would likely result in total chaos in Afghanistan and likely even problems in Pakistan. Even at a slow pace, there will be difficulties, problems and in-fighting but at least leaving slowly provides the opportunity for Afghan to stabilize itself--what they do with the opportunity is beyond our control and should not be our main concern.

I feel your pain, but giving up is what the "corporate people" are counting on us to do. Maybe take a break? Knowing too much about this stuff and feeling powerless to stop it is very disheartening no doubt.

The solution lies in us not doing what they expect us to do and not depending on our broken political system as the only vehicle to enact change.

As in, we can do stuff on our own without waiting for the political hacks to do it. Enrich our own failing schools with our time and talents, not just money. Raise money to build health clinincs that provide free and/or affordable care here, not just in the third world.

Politics is frustrating . . . time to stop relying on these clowns for solutions and come up with our own. THAT is the American spirit.

Peace.

The American people don't seem to count much to those we elect to represent us in Washington. It's obvious they have their own agenda and it has nothing to do with the wellfare of the American people, it's all about sending our tax dollars overseas so they can be kicked back to secret bank accounts off shore and squandered and wasted on nothing but greed.

Yes, fishydigit, the American people are to BLAME for falling down on the job when it comes to electing our representitives in Washington.

Why am I blaming the American people?

It is because we STUPIDLY vote for the 'shiny new object' of the election cycle. We do NOT do our due dilligence and find out about our candidates. We go to the polls and vote for a 'D' or an 'R' because we love/hate the President. We are irrational when making our choice(s), and expect rational results.

And you expect the elected official to represent YOU when in actuality the electorate has NO IDEA of what it wants or needs?

Why is it OK for us to CONTINUE to elect a Congresscritter that does NOTHING but take our money, our votes and returns empty platitudes?

How come we are not seeing the electorate kick in the doors of their elected officials for some of the nefarious things that they are doing?

Why are we not stomping the guts of the Congresscritter that votes (consistently) against the good of the American people?

The SILENCE FROM THE ELECTORATE IS DEAFENING. This is why the elected Congresscritter does what they want - it is because the electorate is NOT PAYING ATTENTION.

Nashville Fan has it absolutely right - it is time for US - the ELECTORATE - to STOP putting our 'faith' in our elected officials to 'do what is right' because they will not. It is time for US - the ELECTORATE - to STOP accepting what the Congresscritters are doing as 'OK'.

Our Congresscritters are like spoiled children. They need OUR - the ELECTORATE's - correction from time to time to keep them on the straight and narrow, representing US and not Corporate interests.

We are losing that fight because WE - the ELECTORATE - couldn't be bothered to DO SOMETHING.

David-1023706

Hey David. We're negotiating a peace/truce with them right now.

That's our exit strategy.

What do you think happens when we leave.

Cut our loses and leave now.

Might save a lot of American lives and money.

David, that's not true. We routed the Taliban, killing thousands of them and have killed most of the leadership of Al Qaeda. I think it's fair to say we got our revenge for 9/11. What you are saying is that if the Taliban ever regains strength, then we have failed. I disagree. Short of occupying Afghanistan forever, there is no way we can convert them into a good little Western democracy. Whenever we do leave (hopefully sooner rather than later) they will go back to their own ways. If they become a threat to us again, we'll have to deal with that when it happens.

Another option is for you to not post if you don't have anything to say, you original thinker you.

Or maybe just a one word post next time: WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!

You minimize the value of finally getting Bin Laden, but you completely ignore the accomplishment of stepping up the Predator drone strikes in Pakistan and now Yemen. We have killed more Al Qaeda leaders under Obama than we did under Bush, and the drone strikes are far more cost effective than boots on the ground, both in terms of dollars and in terms of American lives at risk.

If you look at the stock market since Obama took office, guess what direction it is going? Up, mostly.

If you listen to the Ed Show, it's similar to what you hear at Faux News. Both sides are slanted. Actually all news sources have some bias, so try listening to a variety of sources. Like BBC, for example.

Speaking of slanted, your entire commentary above is highly slanted. For example:

The Democrats know they have lost the confidence of most American and are in trouble. Unless a miracle occurs which it won't,, the Democrats have totally disqualified themselves with the Far Left Agenda which is failing and will destroy America.... Something very bad is going to happen unless the Democrats are almost completely removed from government. As a country, we would better off to face Default Right Now,, then allow the Democrats to take us over the cliff,, and that is Obama's plan,, Destroy America .

Are you aware that this is a two-party system? Do you really want to turn this into a war between Republicans and Democrats? If you want one-party rule, try moving to a country where there is only one party. Otherwise, try figuring out a way to work WITH Democrats to make things better.

Knowing what the last Texas governor did to our economy while residing as the worst president to ever hold office, I don't think we have to worry about your choice (Texas Gov. Perry) running our country anytime soon.

THANK GOD!!!!

PS-Bin Laden was never killed under Bush's watch because he did not give a rat's azz! So give credit where credit is due; after all, the decision to procede with the mission was, dare I say it? OBAMA'S!!!