Well it is only Wednesday and the Reproductive Rights of Women have gone from bad to worse in a big way. Three things of note and did I say it is only Wednesday morning.

Both Wisconsin and followed by Texas have passed laws to defund Planned Parenthood. This has nothing to do with abortions as the radicals on the right are claiming. Planned Parenthood does not use Federal Money to pay for abortions – period. It is against the law and has been since the Hyde Amendment. Besides secondly only 3% of the services offered by Planned Parenthood have to do with Abortions and not all PP Outlets do abortions anyway.

No what this is about is control and the intimidation. Now thousands and thousands of women from all walks of life but mostly lower income will loose their primary source of Primary Health Care Services like cancer screening, diabetes, heart disease screening, medicines etc. This is nothing more than a “Death Warrant” on the women of this country so the fat cats wearing the pants can increase their wealth and power. Cut spending on women’s health and use that money for tax cuts for the 2%. They are not happy that only 10% of the population controls over 80% of the power and wealth now. Women you better wake up, the New GOP/TP is stamping a price tag on your forehead like some much cattle at market.

Hell, the radical right wants it all even if it kills some women along the way. Only the GOP/TP has real DEATH PANELS. They are in the Ryan Bill, in the defunding of Planned Parenthood and the defunding of any Medical Entity that receives Federal Funding. These assassins are lurking and just waiting to pull the plug on you.

We now have a “Heartbeat” Bill passed in Ohio. This should have every women of childbearing age shaking in your high heels. What this little gem has done is if your get pregnant by any means love, rape, incest, accident, what ever, you have 4-6 weeks (from conception) to do something, about the time most say a fetal heartbeat will become detectable.

First many women will not even know they are pregnant within that time frame and believe me this is the exact thing the radical religious groups are counting on. And face it people, the abortion thing is about a segment of this society trying to push their religious beliefs on everybody else. It is none of our business. I support what ever beliefs that individual peoples may have, that is fine I have no problem with what you believe in. I just do not want to have to adopt your beliefs if they conflict with mine. You go do your thing and I will go do mine.

But here is the repugnant part, if your high school daughter got raped by somebody on the way home from her prom, or was attacked by a family member, whatever, after 4-6 weeks (just about the time she may think she is with child) it may be too late and that young lady will be forced to carry the baby to term, even if it was RAPE, INCEST, you name it after 4-6 weeks you own it.

People, especially you women, wake up. Where the he!! are we going with this stuff?? Is this really how you want to be treated? Is this all you think you are entitled to?? What happen to equal rights, pay, and control of your own bodies that so many women have fought for?? Did you guys give it up someplace and I missed it??

Well it looks like some of our Governors have gone MIA. Governors Scott, Perry, McDonald took off and nobody knew where. Well it appears that they all were at one of those closed door secret get together hosted by the Koch Brothers. No word yet on how many SCOTUS Justices were in attendance waving their pompoms.

Michele Bachmann:

Yesterday a conservative blogger on FR noticed that I have changed my tune regarding Michele Bachmann. BTW, thank you for reading what the ol’ professor has to say. I have adjusted my thinking regarding Michele. In fact about a week ago I wrote a predictive piece laying out her path to the GOP/TP nomination.

So what brought on the change in thinking? It was the realization that Michele Bachmann and the new GOP/TP are one and the same. For over a year now I’ve commented on how the Tea Party was infiltrating the GOP. Congressional leaders are afraid of the Tea Party. Fox News is the voice of the Tea Party. The Koch brothers fund the Tea Party. Big oil companies and the financial institutions support the Tea Party. The National Republican Party chairman is a Tea Partier. Moderate republicans have been pushed out of the GOP. All republican candidates have to pay homage to the Tea Party. Yep, the Tea Party owns the Grand Old Party.

It’s fair to say that Michele Bachmann is the new poster child of the Tea Party. On policy issues, she’s anti-taxes, anti-government regulations, pro-life, and the list goes on. By nature she is a brawler, one who likes a good old fashion mud fight. (She would fit-in right here on FR.)

But there is a problem with Michele and the GOP/TP. Beside the obvious that she is a bit crazy and unstable: what she has to say is inconsistent, she has no sense of history, doesn’t know that government works through compromise, has no knowledge of foreign policy, and could never pass the Commander-in-Chief bar.

As a solid progressive, I wish her well on her road to the nomination. But she will never be the POTUS

Sounds like it’s time for another road trip on Barry’s really tricked-out sky ride to give some speeches at $40,000 a plate fundraisers, then a couple of rounds of golf over the long weekend. Running the country?? That’s so not on the agenda. He’s too busy auctioning off a dinner with himself and Joe Biden like $5 whores.

From Politico:

President Obama meets the press
By: Glenn Thrush and Julie Mason
June 29, 2011 04:32 AM EDT

The world has whirled in the 15 weeks since President Barack Obama last held a big press conference — and the questions have stacked up to his presidential seal.

One central question looms as Obama faces the media in the East Room on Wednesday, and one for which he isn’t likely to offer a concrete answer: Will Obama accept any debt ceiling deal with Republicans that doesn’t include some kind of tax increase on the wealthy?

Besides the fast-approaching showdown on the debt ceiling, the Obama-starved White House press corps also is likely to press the president — a constitutional lawyer – for a more detailed explanation of why the War Powers Act shouldn’t apply to his limited and divisive Libya intervention. Many Republicans and Democrats have insisted that it should.

Another intriguing line of inquiry: How does Obama, a champion of a cleaner and more transparent political process, feel about criticism from good-government advocates that he engaged in a legal, but arguably unseemly, outreach to woo big Democratic donors at a briefing session in the White House residence sponsored by the Democratic National Committee?

The hailstorm of questions on these and other topics will take place against a changing backdrop: The last time Obama met the press, there wasn’t a single declared GOP candidate for president. Now there’s a swarm, and every one of them is blaming him for everything that ails the U.S. economy — and the rest of America’s problems as well.

It's very strange how two people, one you despise and one you love, can drive home the same point. Yesterday, a man I hold dear took his final breath. He was a farmer, an honest, hard-working, stand-up man who rose from the earth, lived WITH the earth, and has now gone back to where he began. He was a veteran of WWII and served in the European theatre. He told me once, when he and his mates were called, they simply went to serve. He said they left knowing they might never come back. I can't help but think that's what we call courage. That jarred me mightily. I served too, but in a different time, and I knew that if I could make it just one year, I would come back. Those guys - he and his friends - left me a country that most of the time makes me very proud.

Politically, we were very different. He couldn't stand President Obama and it was simply because he was not white. I hated that, but I didn't hate this man. He came from a different place than I, and there are many reasons to love another person. Like myself, he was deeply-flawed, but he taught me much and on the whole, the scales tipped heavily in his favor.

My friend understood farming - it was his life. He explained subsidies to me. Those subsidies keep food prices low. That's the reason food is a relatively small component of our budgets - ridiculously small. He didn't know much about Medicaid. I know he didn't qualify for treatment at the V.A. He had Medicare, but he still paid a great deal for his medical care. Thank you for your service. (Why don't keyboards have a sarcasm font?)

How could this man, who shared so many of my values, teach me the same lesson that a woman I despise - Michelle Bachmann - could teach? Yesterday, we learned that the Bachmann's take even more money from the federal government than we knew previously. We already knew about the farm subsidies that go to the family. Now, we learn they take federal money in the form of Medicaid. We can only hope it was used for its intended purpose, because Medicaid is a good program and we need it. Yet, she condemns the government for being evil. How can anyone be so stupid? The word "hypocrite" certainly doesn't suffice here.

The truth is that the federal government DOES help. It is NOT the enemy. Does the government waste money? Yes. Can it be an irritant? Yes. Is it evil? No, dammit, a thousand times NO!

The government touches our lives in myriad ways. We drive the Interstates, our children go to public schools, we have parks, defense, Social Security, and the list goes on and on and on.

The Bachmann's and her followers don't get that. My friend didn't understand how far-reaching and pervasive the government's influence and dollars reached. That's something I taught him, and after watching the government at work - at every level - I still find it reaches further than I thought. I find more waste and fraud than I thought was there. I see programs that are wildly abused. Yes, there are problems.

That's where we need to look. We need to see how we can make government better. You don't starve it. You don't kill it. We really should see government as our FRIEND. Friends are good, and you miss them very much when they are gone.

You said it, Louis J. The GOPTP is not about doing what is right for the country, it is about seeking a return to the White House--nothing more, nothing less. Meanwhile the American people suffer but hey, the group that caused the economic collapse, they are doing just fine.

" The Cry of Mad Doodle Heads”

Oh, the petulance and pettiness of the GOP/T-baggers is simply not right. Spinning, falsifiying and giving new form to history and the national conversation means nothing when unemployment and the debt ceiling continues to loom.

Eric Cantor's glaring conflict of interest. He's the GOP's chief debt ceiling negotiator. He's also invested in a fund that will skyrocket if there's a default.

When Eric Cantor shut down debt ceiling negotiations last week, it did more than just rekindle fears that the U.S. government might soon default on its debt obligations -- it also brought him closer to reaping a small financial windfall from his investment in a mutual fund whose performance is directly affected by debt ceiling brinkmanship.

"Cantor's involvement in the fund and negotiations is not ideal," Koppenheffer said. "I don’t think someone negotiating the debt ceiling should be invested in this kind of an ultra-short. We can only guess how much he understands what’s in his portfolio, but you’d think a politician would know better. It looks pretty bad."

http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/06/27/eric_cantor_conflict_of_interest

Tut-Tut Eric Cantor< snark >fill in the blanks.

For me, it's simply dazzling to see how productive Eric Cantor anti- Americanism is.

John Quincy Adams Wikipedia Page Edited To Describe Him As A ‘Founding Father’

GOP presidential doodle" head candidate Rep. Michele Bachmann is now getting the Sarah Palin treatment on Wikipedia. In light of Bachmann’s latest historical hiccup, people are trying to edit John Quincy Adam’s Wikipedia page to reflect her recent gaffe. One edit, for example, changes his description from “John Adams was the sixth President of the United States” to “John Adams, a founding father, was the sixth President of the United States.”

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/06/28/256227/john-q-adams-wiki-editing/

If Americans belive these doodle heads we’ll all be living vicariously through their LIES and hate.

They are only trying to turn back the clock on civil rights, because President Obama is doing his best to stop them in our behalf. He is doing his best to fix the economy while the GOP/T-bagger Party is trying their best to tear it down through their being wholly owned puppets of the Kochs and Fox noise.

The GOP/T-bagger Party only knows added value when it culminates in their quest for continued greed and anti- democracy.

Good morning Bill. Sorry you missed out on all the Libs R Us fun . . . its been a blast! :o)

Oh well, there's always the next scandal . . . see you then!

Bloomberg News: “President Barack Obama will hold a news conference at 11:30 a.m. Washington time today as his administration arrives at a critical juncture in negotiations over the federal deficit and an increase in the debt ceiling

What would Obama know about either of them? He spends a few minutes talking to one congressperson and/or Senator, then he runs off to Iowa to campaign, or to New York to fund raise. He is so disengaged from the process he's beyond useless to solving the problems.

Louis:

Kudos, right on. Glad to see ya back. Missed your early morning wisdom.

The GOP/TP is betting the shop on the fall of the American Economy, make no bones about it. They will try and tear down everything Our President tries to build. The GOP/TP is going to be the cause of the financial ruin of this country and the global problems that follow.

They will then blame President Obama and claim they did this for the good of all Americans. Right, if and only if you are Wall Street, Big Business and a Millionaire/Billionaire.

Other than that you are screwed.

Connecting those dots it's more clear every day--the GOPTP is a radical, reactionary party seeking only the enrichment of the rich and more power for the powerful. To allow the small number of people who will actually benefit from these policies to have any shot at winning elections they add a Social Conservative spin, promising to enact a theocracy in order to buy the votes of Evangelical Fundamentalist Christians. It's an ugly mix, one that promises enormous fundamental changes in the America we know.

David Walker, your post was excellent--honest truth said well.

Ron Indiana

It’s fair to say that Michele Bachmann is the new poster child of the Tea Party. On policy issues, she’s anti-taxes, anti-government regulations, pro-life, and the list goes on. By nature she is a brawler, one who likes a good old fashion mud fight. (She would fit-in right here on FR.)

But there is a problem with Michele and the GOP/TP.

I'll say; professor. Michelle will not get past the Iowa Caucus. I may be wrong; but I think due to her instability, gaffs, and flat out lies she will falter.

Although, she and the Fox Noise crowd will push the female misogynist card; I just don't think rational women and people will buy it. I saw this pandering with Fox Noise and LAURA Ingrahm last night.

Michelle Bachman a no go.

Ron:

It’s fair to say that Michele Bachmann is the new poster child of the Tea Party. On policy issues, she’s anti-taxes, anti-government regulations, pro-life, and the list goes on. By nature she is a brawler, one who likes a good old fashion mud fight. (She would fit-in right here on FR.)

As a lover of irony, I feel compelled to point out a few things about Ms. Bachmann that some conservatives may not know.

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

First, her experience as a "tax lawyer" was as a government tax lawyer, working for the IRS. So far as I am aware, she has no private sector tax law experience.

In 1988, Bachmann received an LL.M. degree in tax law from the William & Mary School of Law.^[15][16] From 1988 to 1993, she was an attorney working for the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).^[17] She left her position with the IRS to become a full-time mother^[18] when her fourth child was born.^[19]

Second, her foster care experiences are not quite what you may think they are. She and her husband accepted government money to run a "treatment center" for teenage girls with eating disorders. In short, fostering children was a business for Michele Bachmann.

Bachmann and her husband also provided foster care for 23 other children,^[21][22] all teenage girls. The Bachmanns were licensed from 1992 to 2000 to handle up to three foster children at a time; the last child arrived in 1998. The Bachmanns began by providing short-term care for girls with eating disorders who were patients in a program at the University of Minnesota. The Bachmann home was legally defined as a treatment home, with a daily reimbursement rate per child from the state. Some girls stayed a few months, others more than a year.

Third, Bachmann and her husband have accepted government farm subsidies, which she has omitted from financial disclosure forms.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-bachmann-20110626,0,7400031,print.story

But theMinnesota Republican and her family have benefited personally from government aid, an examination of her record and finances shows. A counseling clinic run by her husband has received nearly $30,000 from the state ofMinnesota in the last five years, money that in part came from the federal government. A family farm in Wisconsin, in which the congresswoman is a partner, received nearly $260,000 in federal farm subsidies.

And finally, Bachmann and her husband have accepted a whole bunch of federal Medicaid funds for the mental health business that they run -- a LOT more than she has admitted to.

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/43570552/ns/politics-decision_2012/

While Rep. Michelle Bachmann, R-Minn., has forcefully denounced the Medicaid program for swelling the "welfare rolls," the mental health clinic run by her husband has been collecting annual Medicaid payments totaling over $137,000 for the treatment of patients since 2005, according to new figures obtained by NBC News.

For a woman who claims to be against big government, for tax cuts, and voted for the Ryan budget, these seemed like a few things that it might be important to know.

Some out here have said it's no big deal for her to have accepted government money because it was all legal. That's always what conservatives say when they get caught with their hands in the government cookie jar. And it's exactly what makes people like Michele Bachmann hypocrites.

To them, all government spending is evil, except for the government spending that benefits them.

Curious why the MSM is ignoring this:

When Eric Cantor shut down debt ceiling negotiations last week, it did more than just rekindle fears that the U.S. government might soon default on its debt obligations -- it also brought him closer to reaping a small financial windfall from his investment in a mutual fund whose performance is directly affected by debt ceiling brinkmanship.

Last year the Wall Street Journal reported that Cantor, the No. 2 Republican in the House, had between $1,000 and $15,000 invested in ProShares Trust Ultrashort 20+ Year Treasury EFT. The fund aggressively "shorts" long-term U.S. Treasury bonds, meaning that it performs well when U.S. debt is undesirable. (A short is when the trader hopes to profit from the decline in the value of an asset.)

http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/06/27/eric_cantor_conflict_of_interest

In other words, we as Americans have become so complacent, we no longer CARE the fox is guarding the hen-house!

Who cares about all this other stuff when the outsourcing of our jobs continues???

Why just today I found out that Swedish Fish are made in Canada!!!

When will the madness end???

Anna Molly:

Great post and true. Bachmann made Foster Children a "Cottage Industry" and not what most people think of when you say "Foster Care".

She is a Fraud pure and simple. We are just seeing the tip of the iceberg, just wait there is more to come, not just on her but the other "flea bags" as well.

The ironies around conservative hypocrisy keep piling up. The husband of Olympia Snowe, our former Republican governor, Jock McKernon, is the CEO of a for-profit educational company, and has been criticized because his company is charged with pressuring it's admissions people to accept unqualified students, who were more likely to ultimately default on their student loans. His company makes the bulk of it's profits off the federal program for student loans. Seems like Republicans get elected by criticizing the very programs they profit from. (See Paul Ryan and his cadillac Congressional healthcare and retirement benefits.)

Nearly three years to the month after the GOP's initial refusal to address the looming financial crisis caused the collapse of Wall St, the GOP is poised to repeat their folly with the debt ceiling.

While Rep. Michelle Bachmann, R-Minn., has forcefully denounced the Medicaid program for swelling the "welfare rolls," the mental health clinic run by her husband has been collecting annual Medicaid payments totaling over $137,000 for the treatment of patients since 2005, according to new figures obtained by NBC News.

For a woman who claims to be against big government, for tax cuts, and voted for the Ryan budget, these seemed like a few things that it might be important to know.

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

Imagine that. A health care provider accepting Medicaid payments.

Once again, the Left is left to their petty whining. I guess Bachmann travels on roads too, public taxpayer funded roads. Soon they'll be a story about her "hypocrisy" of doing that too.

Until It's Time For You To Go - Don't Ask Why Of Me

Rep. Sharpton filled in for Ed Schultz last night and one of his guests was a Mr. Vargas, who came to our country when he was 5(?) years old illegally. He has just finished law school and is now preparing for the Bar. What a lovely man he is. His heart is broken, and it should not be. He has worked hard here in America.

Our government is turning its back on him. Their concerns are the wealthy right now. And will be for as long as they're in power.

Yes we're different worlds apart
We're not the same
We laughed and played
At the start like in a game
You could have stayed outside my heart
But in you came
And here you'll stay
Until it's time for you to go

What is to become of him here in America? What is our government's job? To me it's to take care of this problem. They have it within their power to do so.

I'm not a king
I'm a man
Take my hand
We'll make a space
In the lives that we planned
And here we'll stay
Until it's time for you to go

Please Congress – do something. This isn't about Democratic votes. It's about decent humanity. Do not turn these kids away.

This love of mine
Had no beginning it has no end
I was an oak now I'm a willow
Now I can bend
And though
I'll never in my life see you again
Still I'll stay
Until it's time for you to go

We are supposed to be a country of immigrants. Continue this practice. To not pass The DREAM Act is cruel, just downright cruel.

This is about who we are as a Nation. If this doesn't pass, if we turn these kids away, then we're nothing. We have lost our soul.

Neil Diamond - Heartbreaking song. It reminds me of Mr. Vargas and all those kids who only know one country - The United States of America. Can't we live up to what it means to be The United States of America?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rYomi8B-Wo

Please everybody, fight for them.

Ah, so Michelle Bachman is starting to catch the eye of some. Reminds of the dangerous path ahead for her.

Strong conservative women -- the left can't stand them. Indeed, women politicians who gain traction by deviating from the leftist hymnal are a serious threat because they expose the fiction that the left is the noble champion of women and their causes. That's why they made it their mission to savage Sarah Palin, and that's why they're going to try and do the same to Michelle Bachman.

So sit back America, and watch how the left plays the game. Watch for the viscous personal attacks and slanders, watch for the cutting remarks meant to demean and marginalize. Heck if anyone wants a preview of that, all they need to do is drop by this board any day of the week and observe how the usual leftist suspects around here "engage" with their counterparts on the right. Whether it be at the national level or on an obscure FR internet board, the tactics of the left are the same. It's their way.

Chris:

How true, one of the big wall street firms is hiring 1,000 people. Problem, they are all farmed overseas. And the saga continues.

People the GOP/TP Party has nothing for America but everything for Wall Street, Big Business and the Millionaires/Billionaires.

We better learn how to say "yes sir, no sir" Your wish is our command.

This is the path the "flea bags" have put us on.

Fascinating story that Eric Cantor would benefit financially from creating a government shutdown. That's a conflict of interest that would make even Clarence Thomas blush (maybe).

Good morning, Louis, Navy, Ron and David

HOME RUNS

Well, the proof is out there. The Republicans are attempting to destroy the poor and middle class. We have Republican Governors defunding planned parent hood and the House Republicans playing chicken with the debt ceiling all in the name of continued tax cuts for the top 2% along with corporate welfare for big business.

It time folks. It time to get fired up and make the big push to throw all of these Republican bast@rds out of office. Currently, this group of Republican are no longer hiding their agenda. The agenda to take care of the likes of the Koch brothers, who last weekend hosted their bought and paid for Republican Governors at their little retreat.

What is really weird is we have people of middle class means, supporting these bast@rds. It doesn't make a damn bit of sense. Are these supporters crazy, or simply just plain stupid?

It's like their supporters are little blind sheep that have lost their way. What is going to happen to the people in need? Are we going to set up camps for them to live in?

Come on folks, pull your heads out of you real ends and look at what is being done to the United States.

Remember the only good Republican Politician, is one who has been voted out of office.

Anna Molly:

Thanks for the update/clarification. The way I read the "tea leaves", the Tea Party doesn't care what she says, lies and all. It doesn't matter to them as she is one of them.

Bill, Fairfax, VA: So sit back America, and watch how the left plays the game. Watch for the viscous personal attacks and slanders

They've started. And they won't end, not from the MSM. ABC's George Stephanopoulos asked Bachmann if she was prepared to have her 23 foster children investigated. CNN's Kiran Chetry asked Bachmann if she is "prone to misstatements" and asked her "Did you mean to make false statements intentionally or were you just misspeaking?"

I guess the "Have you stopped beating your husband?" questions come next.

While Rep. Michelle Bachmann, R-Minn., has forcefully denounced the Medicaid program for swelling the "welfare rolls," the mental health clinic run by her husband has been collecting annual Medicaid payments totaling over $137,000 for the treatment of patients since 2005, according to new figures obtained by NBC News.

@AM

Not that I support Representative Bachman because I would like our next President to have prior executive experience, but what would your comment have been if it had been reported that this clinic did not accept Medicade patients? Even worse what would your comment had been if they didn't accept Medicade patients on principal? The Representative's position that Medicade spending should be reduced and that a clinic in which she has a business interest accepts payements from the system are consistent. Please explain to me your argument of how she is being hypocritical. Would you have preferred that the clinic turn away patients on Medicade?

So, you think that in addition to announcing that the secret shopper program will not go forward, (hurray for the taxpayers!)- Obama will announce that the debt ceiling is unconstitutional, so he has every right in the world to spend as much as he pleases?

You think that will be a winning argument for democrats?

You believe in unicorns, too?

For any democrat who buys that line of malarkey, I suggest you remember how true were Obama's words, "the difference between now, (2010) and 1994, is, this time, you've got me".

It made a difference, all right- the losses last November made the losses in 1994 look like a democratic love fest.

Please keep "helping" him, Team Obama! Republicans find it invaluable.

bob:

That was a most excellent rant. Since most of what you wrote seems to be your own personal spin on the questionable stats you presented (got a little jumbly), I'll just consider it your personal opinion and thank you for sharing it.

Good morning Louis J

You don't know how glad I am you're back

We are in an era when the chips are down, that support for the president should be up. But when times are tough, the voice of America settles for extremists and insanity as a voice of reason. The Republicans are the party of exclusion and division. I like clowns, just not the type that try to run a government.

You see those stup-tas-tical firgues and solutions from the Minnesota Republican, Rep. Michele Bachmann, the faux presidential candidate will not appeal to the people since she and husband are sucking off the mammary glands of government subsidies press.

Then there is that clown Cantor who truly does NOT cares about “America’s prosperity,” otherwise he would NOT literally betting against AMERICA'S financial future.

The media propping up this anti-America fervor and praising the ignorance, bigotry is a major plus. People can see this stupidity

I am one liberal voice on the left who supports President Obama because I know the darkness lurking on the right wing is intended to take back to pre- civil rights days. The GOPP/T-Baggers think if they can stop us from voting, education, and stop women from having the

United We Stand, Divided We Fall

"Sir Golfsalot"

_________________________________________

Now, THAT'S FUNNY.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

Job1: It time folks. It time to get fired up and make the big push to throw all of these Republican bast@rds out of office.

Sure, "get fired up". That's all the Left has is to "get fired up". They can't run on their successes, they have none. So they have to "get fired up". Get fired up about what? What plan does the Left have to address the deficit/debt? The answer is none. Where is the Democrats budget? The answer is they haven't passed one in 790 days and counting. Where are the Democrats entitlement reform plan? Again, no where to be seen.

But do go "get fired up". That the answer to all the issues of the country.

Alan J:

Not that I support Representative Bachman because I would like our next President to have prior executive experience, but what would your comment have been if it had been reported that this clinic did not accept Medicade patients? Even worse what would your comment had been if they didn't accept Medicade patients on principal?

It would have been that at least she was consistent. But she's not, and your attempt to attack me for pointing out that she's not by creating such a weak and silly strawman is pretty ironic.

The Representative's position that Medicade spending should be reduced and that a clinic in which she has a business interest accepts payements from the system are consistent. Please explain to me your argument of how she is being hypocritical.

Huh? Please try to pay attention. In what way are those two things consistent? The hypocrisy is EXACTLY that she argues for reductions in Medicaid while at the same time depending on Medicaid for her own income.

Would you have preferred that the clinic turn away patients on Medicade?

Not at all, but that's because I'm a Democrat. Ms. Bachmann is the one who doesn't believe in Medicaid, except when it goes into her own pocket, apparently.

Bill:

Strong conservative women -- the left can't stand them.

You're projecting again, Bill. I'm sure you really meant something along the lines of how Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice David Prosser can't stand strong LIBERAL women. As you may know, Prosser has now verbally and/or physically assaulted two of his female colleagues on the Court.

My own experience with so-called "strong" conservative women is that they may be strong on ideology but they are very weak on knowledge, experience, and information. Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann are probably not your best examples if you're trying to make a point about how we're intimidated by conservative women. How funny that is.

I'd take five minutes alone in a room with either of them, any time.

Not at all, but that's because I'm a Democrat. Ms. Bachmann is the one who doesn't believe in Medicaid, except when it goes into her own pocket, apparently.

Medicare and Medicaid are broke. The both need to be reformed. If they were not broke, then people like Bachmann wouldn't be attempting to address the problems with those programs. No one is against what those programs provide. What they are against is how they are run and how they are funded. With no changes, both programs will die on the vine. If the Left wants to continue to block those reforms, they will be held responsible for the failure of these programs.

JOB1:

Great posts and I agree 100%. You are right on target.

Welcome back, bob! The Sir Golfsalot line was one of the funniest I have ever heard.

Let's address the "fired up" meme, shall we?

Obama's campaign team, (as distinguished from the First Read Team Obama team), is finding it a little difficult to get folks as "fired up" as they think they ought to be- so, they have a plan.

This involves getting "little people" to commit to a two year donation pledge-of $78,000. Why two years? Well, try are having some difficulty parting people from their money NOW, without an opponent. They fear that when there IS an opponent, Obama's number will be so weak that these same "little people" will be unwilling to part with their highly lucrative paper route money- thus, the need to lock them in now.

The issue this creates is that, by locking up funds for Obama, there is very little left for Democratic Senators and Congressional representatives to go after.

They do not have much to worry about- there have been no takers that I have heard about thus far.

Nash:

That is funny. Did not have to see it to imagine the stupid remarks that he continually tries to to pass of as facts. That is why I got most of them on ignore now. Makes this site easier to read and navigate and it smells fresher like somebody put the lid back on the diaper pail.

Just to clarify the Bachmann hypocrisy on receiving farm subsidies, it appears that she DID report receiving the subsidies on her financial disclosure forms.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-bachmann-20110626,0,7400031,print.story

Bachmann said in December that the subsidies went to her in-laws and she never received "one penny" from the farm, according to the Minneapolis Star-Tribune. However, in financial disclosure forms, she reported receiving between $32,503 and $105,000 in income from the farm, at minimum, between 2006 and 2009.

It was actually just that she was AGAINST receiving such subsidies:

Publicly, Bachmann has objected strongly to federal farm payments.

Oh, how it must have hurt her to accept those subsidies. Poor, poor Michele.

Big nanny government strikes again.

Hey Nash...

Personal opinion?

Well the value of Feisty's comments and the dead bird analogy for Navy were personal, but the Geithner quote was real and real revealing.

How can a sensible person not interpret his words the same way?

The taxing the rich won't cover Obama's spending is more than accurate and indisputable. I've got more too, if you would like.

So who do you think will end up paying for Obama's asinine spending? You have the poor, the middle class and the rich. The rich can't, business will sit on their money or flash it overseas ...... so who does that leave?

Just like Obama's energy policies ...... who does it really hurt with $4 a gallon gas (and rising in the long term). The rich in their Porches or the moms in 10 year old vans?

How come libs don't get it?

Thanks for your comments, Nash.

BTW - the oil subsidy math looks right, the tax code number is good, the amount of times on the links, the number of fund raisers, the safari comment (tax payer cost of $500,000.00 -$800,000.00) are all good ........ not sure if Obama takes food stamps for that raffle though.

Pat, Boston. Really enjoyed your post. These young people are as American as those of us born here. As Mayor Bloomberg said, "The American dream cannot survive if we keep telling the dreamers to go elsewhere."

Hey Navy,

So is it #1, #2 or #3?

Thanks for your non-response in advance.

The American dream cannot survive if we keep telling the dreamers to go elsewhere."

Thank you dear Jody. This quote brought tears to my eyes.

bob: So who do you think will end up paying for Obama's asinine spending?

That one is easy. Our children of today, when they become taxpayers tomorrow.

Recall that children don't vote. If they could, they wouldn't vote for Obama.

Bob: How come libs don't get it?

The Senate, the Democratic led Senate, who haven't passed a budget in over 2 years, spent yesterday working on the DREAM Act. We see where their priorities are at.

I will not vote for Michele Bachmann. But I do have one question.

How many of you who are for tax increases sent in extra money to the IRS this year out of the "goodness" of your own heart?

Michele is against medicaid but took money. You are for tax increases and sent more in than you owed?

Just curious as to who follows through with what they believe in.

@AM

Huh? Please try to pay attention. In what way are those two things consistent? The hypocrisy is EXACTLY that she argues for reductions in Medicaid while at the same time depending on Medicaid for her own income.

Sounds like the same hypocrisy that comes from Bill Gates and Warren Buffet and all those other wealthy limousine liberals. Taxes are too low but because they are I don't mind benefiting from them. In fact why stop at the limousine liberals? What about all the posters on this board who want the Bush tax rates ended. Are you sending the government the extra money or do you keep the benefits of a policy you disagree with? What about it AM? Are you sending a check for the difference between the current tax rate and the one you would like to the IRS?

The failures of the Republican party are the successes of the Middle Class. As long as they continue to fail, our seniors, our youth and everyone in between will survive and even thrive.

I don't see the Republicans backing the president anytime soon as they will be in campaign mode for the next 6 years. The Republicans will never work for the middle class. The next twenty years will be a campaign for the Rich and the next thirty years will be a campaign for changing the Constitution in order to stop diversity.

The Republicans are so lost in their campaign to remain as a party of anti-culture that they can't see the color of the rainbow for the rain. SMH.

Pat from Boston--- On the subject of illegal aliens...You never answered the question posed to you yesterday. Do you have locks on the doors to your house? If so, why? Are you trying to keep people out who don't have your persmission to come in? Please answer this time. Same goes for all you other posters who are in favor of illegal immigration and legalizing 20 million illegal aliens. Why is it ok for you to secure the borders of your home but wrong to secure the borders of your own country?

And please don't reply with another bumper sticker phrase like "The American Dream Is Lost If You Shut Out The Dreamers" or whatever that crap was.

Had to love Rev Al on "The Ed Show" last night. His final sentence , referring to Herman Cain was; "John Stewart is a comedian but your policies IS a joke." Nice grammar, Al. You go to the University Of Bevism?

Bill, Fairfax:

It's been a real hoot reading some of the exchanges on the Libs r Us scandal the past few days.

Speaking of bogus "scandals", it appears that the nontroversy over Obama doing a LEGAL campaign video from the White House same as other presidents seems to have sunk like a rock after only a day. But who knows? Maybe the right wing noise machine will cook up a new phony scandal they can keep afloat a bit longer. They seem to try out a new one every few days or so, on the principle that if you throw enough mud, some of it will eventually stick.

Damage, I didn't see your question posed to me yesterday.

Yes, I have my doors locked. To keep out the likes of Whitey Bulger and the F.B.I. The FBI. Probably all white people during Whitey's hey day.

White, legal and uninterested in the law or protecting you or I or anyone.

Perhaps one day The DREAM Act will pass. I don't quite get your point of view. These illegals came here as children.

Bob:

Help me out . . . first you call libs "useless" . . . then you wonder why we are not responding to your post?

I mean, you said I/we don't know what the $#@# we are talking about.

Let's just leave it at that. My posts speak for themselves. Your posts speak for you.

I promise you, when I have something to say to ya . . . you will know! :o)

Navy, Fiesty, Bev Lets discuss Navy's premise that the bad old republicans are attacking women and some of his statements. First, instead of citing a few provisions within an entire bill lets talk about social services including for women in general. Lets go back to 2000 and go to each service and tell me what the growth in the budgets for each of these services has been until 2011. Then compare that to either the growth of inflation or the growth in revenue for the country. Then explain to me how anyone can make any rational argument that either the republicans or the democrats have cut anything. So after looking at that, nobody can reasonably conclude on the basic facts that there has been any cut period in services for women and that the budgets for all of these services have grown much faster than the government has the money to spend. Now that we are attempting to get our fiscal house in order, we need to come up with a combination of revenue increases and spending cuts to be able to prevent leaving our children and grandchildren in a world of mess. Put aside snide partisan politics and lets discuss where those spending cuts should come from. We can discuss revenue increases later on. If we assume we have a finite number of dollars and we are attempting to reduce future borrowings and I think everyone is on the same page for that right? then we must be cutting somewhere or somewhat across all budgets. So lets assume everyone can make a great arguement that these women social services are necessary, that means we need to cut more from lets say entitlements to the elderly so does that mean democrats hate old people? or lets see we need to cut from retiree pension obligations, so does that mean democrats hate union employees? or lets see lets cut defense spending--does that mean democrats arent for national defense? No you cant make generalizations when everyone must make tough budgetary decisions that require cuts across the board. If you dont cut one budget you must cut another which doesnt mean that party hates that group such as women. I would bet that after cutting the budgets Navy mentions aboveproposed by republicans, the growth in all those budgets exceeds the rate of inflation or revenue growth since 2000 so how can you defend that as some hatred towards women.

Navy, you do realize that when mandating certain medical expenditures within medical insurance plans that the people who pay for that additional cost are the employees or all of us through higher insurance premiums, co pays etc. And when you make flat generalizations like that, its easy for me to assume that since the democrats wont push for state law changes that require medical coverage for experimental coverage on cancer treatment for children, then they must hate children right? Sometimes its not about hating women but mandating additional taxes or costs on the rest of us by legislative mandate is always a matter of why should I pay more for a woman to have free birth control when if she wants birth control she can buy it herself. Why should I pay more for mandatory Viagra coverage when if a guy needs it he can buy it himself? So its not a zero sum game Navy.

As for Planned Parenthood, please explain to me how their budget works just so I understand why you think fed funds arent used for abortion? By the way, I am not advocating any position one way or another and I am not saying I am against fed funds being used for abortion but I think we should all understand how cash works and is fungible. Do you understand that its just a matter of allocating private donations versus fed funds but it all comes out of the same planned parenthood pockets? Its no different than if you make a donation to your college and say I dont want it to go to athletics, all they do is reallocate some other donation towards athletics but its just a budgetary gimmick. Second, why is planned parenthood any different than any other charitable organization that does great things for our society? Why is the federal government providing any funding? Why isnt it all private donations? Why are my tax dollars paying for that when I would prefer my money to go to AIDS relief in Africa? So you see that making cash expense judgements isnt a matter of hating one gender versus another.

Just an FYI: Although maybe surprising by the bluntness of "his" posts, I believe Navy is a woman.

simpletonian

Just an FYI: Although maybe surprising by the bluntness of "his" posts, I believe Navy is a woman.

I believe that you are a giant sea slug from Mars. Prove me wrong.

Mars has no sea. Anything else you need me to figure out for you?

David-Sorry to hear about the loss of your friend and it sounds like personal mentor at times. I would like to address your post in several ways. First, I still dont understand the visceral reaction by the liberals on this board to Michelle Bachmann. Its no different than the reaction to Palin in some respects. I am not a big supporter of either but the ferociousness of the attacks on Bachmann are mind boggling on the personal front. Its really a similar reaction to Obama from the racist crowd as the personal attacks are so personal they render all credibility attached to the post nil. If she is as bad as all of you fear, why are you personally attacking her? She should lose hands down because obviously her moronic attributes will come to the front and nobody in their right mind would vote for her. Why not just simply discuss her positions and it will become clear how bad she is. As for her receiving farm subsidies or medicaid payments, that is such a red herring I cant believe you guys use that. In fact, my guess is that tactic will make her more sympathetic and have unintended consquences of making her more likable so I wouldnt do that. Thats like all of you saying your for tax increases but still claim the mortgage deduction on your tax return. Are you a hypocrite? You are for more tax revenue to the government but you still avail yourself of this legal benefit or welfare payment from the government? Come on her husband was getting paid for services rendered regardless of where the payments come from its the same as coming from government insurance. Even you liberals are better than that and most of you have better arguments against her that you can make.

But the real question I want to ask you is why you think farm subsidies that make food costs cheaper or any other social engineering of that type is proper? By the way I think farm subsidies make our food more expensive not cheaper by the way. They are just a form of welfare payments that provide additional income to farm product providers otherwise the cost of the food would go so low it would drive people out of business. But in any event my question is not pertaining to economics but Why do you think the government making its choice of winners and losers in the economy versus letting the market choose the product best suited to make money. Why is it better to prop up food prices and supplement farmers income versus providing subsidies for franchises like subway or hallmark stores, why do we tax gas so much which raises the price of gasoline and reduces the profit of the local gas station owners. I dont know why the government gets involved in any retail product being sold as normal supply demand curves will generally solve our economic issues as they have since the beginning of time. Why do we subsidize via our taxes any product being sold if its not in the interest of national defense? I am not being difficult just dont get why this is a good thing and why this isnt considered any different than the corporate welfare all the liberals on this board hate by the way I do too.

simpletonian

Mars has no sea. Anything else you need me to figure out for you?

It used to have oceans. You're ancestors must have moved here before they evaporated to escape extinction. And I'll be you don't have a green card, either.

Obviously the public schools on Mars are better than the one you went (are still going) to. I bet you can't wait for Global Warming to really hit hard so you can be on a perpetual summer break.

How many of you who are for tax increases sent in extra money to the IRS this year out of the "goodness" of your own heart?

(This is also for Brianb, who asked me a similar question.)

Apparently I did, but they sent it back. I'm still trying to figure out exactly why. I didn't ask for it back.

Brianb: Your snide comments are really inappropriate for someone who displays so much hypocrisy himself. You attribute to others the exact same bad characteristics you display -- in this case personal greed -- thus highlighting those characteristics over and over and over again.

We know what you are, Brianb. You apparently know nothing about me.

simpletonian:

Remember how yesterday you were wondering why we are all wasting our lives here at First Read?

Careful . . . its addictive! :o)

Now you know why I got them on ignore, just about all of them except for the few rational ones that actually makes some sense that I like to read. Ah peace is bliss.

Nashville_fan,

Unless developing hemorrhoids lets me know first, please remind me of that again if I start posting from 9am-11pm everyday (including weekends).

But seriously, my comment was meant for both sides. There has to be a better way of getting points across than attacking each other personally. For part time readers like myself, sifting through the infighting of the regulars is a great reminder of why party affiliation is a losing strategy for solving problems. Taking a break from being so politically charged up may be a way to calm down the craziness. But then again, maybe not.

Kirk:

Thanks for the thought on my friend, but it is unnecessary. What made him what he is, remains in my memory. His body wore out, but his spirit remains. I could not and would not ask for more.

Now, let's start with Bachmann. I hate liars, and I cannot understand how anyone finds them even the tiniest bit tolerable. Recently, I have written two posts here addressing honesty. The response has - after a fashion - been horrific. While most condemn lying, there is a shocking number who justify it: Everyone does it. The ends justify the means. Well, it wasn't really a lie. Oh well, you can't believe that source.

How are these people raising their children? How do they imagine they deserve an honest hearing in the court of opinion? How can they be trusted? Really Kirk, do you not understand the importance of honesty?

Bachmann has told so many lies it boggles the mind. When she is called out, she lies some more, and even worse, just as with the Palin episode with Paul Revere, her supporters actually re-write WikiPedia. They won't even acknowledge the truth when it is handed to them. That is insane. (I know what the word insane means. It is most apt here.) If you can justify that sort of behavior, we have absolutely nothing to discuss.

She has said she believes Obama is out for the destruction of the country. (This is just one instance.) When confronted, she dismisses the issue and tells us that's been addressed and then like stink on crap, she's back in BS mode and on message - facts be damned. She throws raw meat to her mindless supporters and they froth at the mouth and repeat her lies as though her every word is absolutely true. If you can justify that, we have nothing to discuss.

Do I hate it? Yes. Visceral? Hardly. This is about honesty and integrity. This is about insulting the intelligence of people who KNOW she is a liar. If you can't understand that there truly are things that warrant hatred, then we have nothing to discuss. While many issues can be cast in terms of gray, there really are black and white issues; right and wrong. It is wrong to lie. Period.

If you believe that liberals alone have this "visceral" reaction, then it would speak volumes about those you would label as "conservative". However, that is not the case. Genuine conservatives don't like lying any more than liberals. The issue is not about political leaning. It is about lying. It is indefensible.

As far as farm subsidies. I did not say they were good. I said he explained them to me. Please go back and read the post. Your questions are based on a complete misreading of what I wrote. You are reading what you want to read. That's the problem when you assign someone a label, and they don't meet your definition. Let's stick with Webster.

Here's my opinion. We would be far better off without subsidies in this arena - certainly with respect to the massive fraud of ethanol. Unfortunately, the American public in general does not understand the problem, and if subsidies were removed overnight, prices would skyrocket as resources were re-allocated and we would have serious problems. We already have a very poorly informed electorate. You don't really think they're going to get smarter when they're hungry and can't afford to eat, do you? You might want to check a red/blue map. The ag states are typically red states. Golly gosh, aren't those the guys who are railing about the evils of government. Oh yeah, I can almost smell a rational debate.

Anna Molly,

If you send in another check with "US Treasury Donation" in the memo, they might cash that one. I applaud you for taking action on your position. Not many others would do the same.

BY: Napoleon Linardatos

June 28, 2011 4:00 A.M.

The Greek Way of Sorrow

Thirty years ago this fall, on October 18, 1981, a charismatic academic with rather limited government experience and with a one-word slogan, “Change,” was elected prime minister of Greece. His name was Andreas Papandreou. Greeks may now wish that 30 years ago they had had a Tea Party movement. Things could have turned out differently.

Thirty years ago, Greece was in an enviable position on the matter of national debt, with its debt just 28.6 percent of GDP. Few advanced countries can manage that kind of debt-to-GDP ratio. By the end of Papandreou’s first term in office, that ratio had nearly doubled, with debt at 54.7 percent of GDP. By the end of his second term, the figure was in the mid 80s.

The 1980s in Greece were a time of dramatic expansion of government. Papandreou and his Socialist party created a new government-run health-care system, dramatically expanded employment in the public sector, nationalized failing companies, and increased government handouts of every shape and form.

It was a government expansion so large and many-sided that in the end it generated a revolution of expectations and attitudes about the role of government in society. No government since then has been able to reverse that revolution, no matter how willing it was or how pressing the circumstances.

It is in this detrimental position that the current prime minister, George Papandreou, son of Andreas, finds himself. A sorry state of affairs created by one generation to be dealt with by another, the sins of the father to be paid for by the son — this is the material that Greek tragedies are made of.

The statism of the Eighties got another boost when subsidies from the European Union started to pour in, and yet another boost in 2001 when Greece adopted the euro and discovered that she could borrow at very cheap rates. The euro and the subsidies played the same role in Greece that oil has played in the Middle East: the lifeline of an unsustainable economic system, the enabler of a demagogic political class.

Now the Greek government finds itself with a debt-to-GDP ratio somewhere north of 140 percent and quickly rising. Since May of 2010, that problem has also become the European Union’s problem. Because Greece is a member of the EU and the eurozone, it is feared that her instability will lead to the destabilization of other weak members of the EU. Greece cannot go out to the markets to service her debt and finance her new deficits; that has become the care now of other nations’ taxpayers across the continent.

The agreement between the EU and Greece stipulated that Greece would drastically reduce her deficits in return for European aid. That was to be achieved by budget cuts and tax increases. The Greek government since then has mostly intended budget cuts and vigorously pursued tax increases.

Such an approach is not surprising considering the political clout that government employees enjoy in Greece. One of every four working adults is a government employee. The government at the beginning made some across-the-board cuts in salaries and pensions, but since then it has basically tried to address the issue of public finance with tax increases.

The absolutely dismal results of those tax increases have not persuaded the younger Papandreou and his colleagues to reduce the size of government and its tax, regulatory, and corruption burden on the economy. The Greek government employs lots of people, even by European standards; the increase in unemployment since the crisis started has come exclusively from the private sector. Finland may have the best educational system in Europe, but its ratio of students to teachers is double that of Greece, which has one of the worst educational systems. In area after area of governmental activity, Greece has the most people employed per population but also the worst results: a way-above-average number of tax collectors but very poor tax collection; an above-average number of policemen but dismal public order; a record number of local courts but perhaps the slowest justice system on the continent; a record number of hospitals but one of the worst systems of health care.

There are hundreds of governmental organizations that employ thousands of people and no one knows what they do, how they do it, or indeed if they do anything at all. Recently it was found that there was a government agency for the preservation of a lake that was drained decades ago.

Then there are the companies owned or controlled by the government. One of them is the Railroad Organization, which has annual revenues of €100 million, pays annual salaries of €400 million, and each year has a loss of about €1 billion. Now the government pretends that it is cleaning up the Railroad Organization’s finances by transferring the employees from the company to the central bureaucracy of the government. That kind of cleaning up would embarrass even an Enron executive.

On the other hand, the Greek government has no problem increasing taxes. Taxes on income and property, on sodas and swimming pools, on cars and natural gas, on corporate profits of years past, on everyone’s electricity bill. The Valued Added Tax (VAT) for many goods is now at 23 percent.

The Greek government finds itself in a very difficult place. It cannot continue to squeeze the private sector for more euros. The Greek private sector, which has become a kind of new serf class, is very weak and rapidly shrinking. On the other hand, the public sector — with salaries two and three times that of the private sector, plum benefits, egregious pensions, and early retirements — is just too politically powerful to be messed with. There is a solution to the Greek crisis; the only problem is that solutions in Greece tend not be to politically viable things.

Greeks like me cringe when we hear people like Paul Krugman lecturing Americans on how a government takeover in a certain sector of the economy will facilitate in the future reforms that are necessary now.

There stands Greece today, a year after it was bailed out by the taxpayers of other countries, facing the choice of reforming itself or going to utter ruin, and it cannot make up its mind.

The thirty years of hardcore statism have destroyed not only the economy of the nation, but also its ability to do politics, to articulate choices and ideas for the crisis at hand. Everything seems already decided, pre-determined, and set in stone, like the annual government budgets with their immovable expenditures tied to vote-rich constituencies.

Back in the mid-Eighties I was a primary-school student. I didn’t understand the politics, but I could feel the pathos of a country that had just “discovered” that there is a thing called a free lunch. Oftentimes, one is asked what one most missed having in one’s childhood. I couldn’t have told you at the

faithfulalways01:

What is it with you guys and your daily poll results? Haven't you yet figured out that the American public is clueless? Oh yeah, that's right, you believe the daily swings mean something.

Did you ever notice, you piss your wife off one day, and she doesn't care much for you. The next day she's just fine? Did you ever notice that one day your teenager didn't seem to like you at all? Nothing changed. She just thought you were an idiot.

Oh yeah! Those polls. They mean so very, very much........to a clueless idiot.

David, its interesting in that we both must have misread each other and maybe I wasnt very articulate in my post. I actually wasnt accusing you of any personal visceral attacks on Bachmann, I was actually commenting more on the rest of the posts. As you notice, Navy, Fiesty and others make destructive personal attacks on Bachmann that are ridiculous and have nothing to do with substantive issues. I think your passionate and not sure if I would agree with you on everything because I think we both tend to look through our own rose tinted glasses and wary to agree with something that has a certain opposite label, but I havent seen you necessarily personally attack her. The reasons you gave for not liking Bachmann are real and make sense clearly to your point of view. I am in no position to defend or support her at the moment nor do I want to. My point was totally separate from her political positions. I would hope though that even if you feel that she has lied and that is something that means a voting position to you, you are not holding the stupid farm subsidies and medicaid revenue from her husband against her. Again, my guess is you advocate a variety of positions including in which it would be determined that you receive welfare contrary to that position from the government. We all do and it would be financially foolish and ridiculous to do otherwise. If you take the mortgage deduction on your tax return while advocating higher taxes you are being hypocritical in this extreme example.

As for lying, I will for the moment take you at your word that she does but I assume you probably wouldnt vote for Obama correct for all of his campaign lies right? There are websites that can list them all for you and I am not talking about promises he couldnt get through congress. I am talking about the ones dealing with government transparency or posting bills online to read prior to voting so the public wouldknow or the ones where he wouldnt have lobbyists in the white house, or even the local ones while here in chicago when he wanted to raise estate taxes to level the playing field in his mind until the Pritzker family became major contributors and supporters, or the sale of a 10 foot piece of his backyard to Tony Rezco for $300k. The list goes on and on but you know what, I could care less about any of these lies because politicians lie as an art form as its the only way for both sides to play to their base constituent voting core and is irrelevant in the larger scheme of things. My beef with Obama has always been his fiscal policies and his lack of experience and understanding and failure to listen to those who have mroe around him. I truly believe he doesnt get it and wont because unlike all the rest of us, he has never held a job, doesnt understand basic behaviorial finance and economics. Dont you think his comment about ATMs lose jobs really explains it all?

I apologize that I misread the farm subsidies as I thought from your comments that you thought they reduced the price of food and were good things for the country. I agree with you that all corporate welfare, subsidies need to be eliminated including green energy which is a waste of taxpayer money. I ahve no problem spending that money though on R&D where this country used to be good and then sell the patents, designs etc to the private sector.

Nice posts as usual David.

I sure do get a kick out of all of the Tea Bag Poll Dancers that post here! It's always look the President's numbers are down he sucks! Oh the President's numbers are up? It's because of GW or the GOP Congress that all is right in the world oh and yes he still sucks! They can never say good job Mr. President thanks for a job well done (you know like giving the order to take OBL out or supporting the ouster of Gaddafi, supporting GM and Chrysler in their darkest hour) no he must fail at all costs. I do believe it is one because of the color of his skin and two he is a Democrat.

There's nothing visceral about my reaction to Michelle Bachmann, just a reasonable assessment based on her history to date. It's best related in an old movie line. Anyone remember this one?

Q: Is it because I'm a lying, hypocritical, sexist, egotistical bigot?

Q: Bingo!

I think my issue with Bachmann is a lack of 'authenticity'. In her attempt to be folksy and local in Waterloo,...she mangled her commentary.

I would think it was sufficient to state SHE was from Waterloo. She doesn't need to 'be like John Wayne' or 'John Wayne Gacey'. She just needs to be herself. And the fact that 'followers' would alter Wikipedia to reflect a revision of history to fit her commentary; well that's just sad. I don't recall any Liberal trying to hack Wiki and say there are 57 states, did I just MISS that? Of course not. There are SOME who would sell you Green Skies and Blue Grass if it would support their beliefs. And it ain't just the politicians that do it.

Kirk, if there were proof that Obama LIED about the Rezko deal,...he'd be in prison with Tony right now. Don't think Clinton didn't work that angle like a photographer. The 'most' transparent administration is pretty subjective. LOBBYISTS won't be part of my administration,...I'm not sure which lobbyists are in his administration. I guess LOVE truly is blind,...lol; because I don't see the issues you bring up as LIES.

John, again without being partisan you can see where a double standard is applied. I dont want to nor need to defend her on specific issues you take issue with and we can all debate those and how important those issues are in the scheme of things and check and double check if both parties are being consistenly held to the same standard. Its the personal attacks that are visceral, sexist and actually I think made Palin more popular. If left to her own devices I would tend to agree with most of you that she would shoot herself in the foot but instead she was viciously personally attacked making her more of a likeable victim to people who may have otherwise ignored her. The people who attacked her werent going to vote for her anyway so they werent convincing anyone of anything or changing hearts and minds. I see that same thing happening here for reasons that will only backfire and give some comfort to people who otherwise would have ignored her more reason to support her. You also have the unintended consquences of people who voted for Obama out of some sort of white guilt, giddiness that he might be a centrist etc and give them a reason to vote against him now because he makes them uncomfortable 4 years later. I think thats already happening in michigan, penn and southern states that went blue last election. So I dont know why liberals including many on this board do that when if they have the more convincing position or argument and can back it up with solutions and results they will win anyway.

I also assume you hold Pelosi, Reid, Rangel, Waxman etc to those same lofty standards of history even if they have more palatable political beliefs to you. If not your telling me its not really the conduct and ethics and behavior that matter its the political belief. So a male politician who is pro choice can also be a vile sexual predator using his lofty position for sexual favors right? Or a politician who advocates higher taxes is able to avoid paying legally obligated taxes. I just want to make sure we use the same standards for all our politicians and not just the ones we dont like

Clara, I like how you think. Love is truly blind. Because my wife's office was temporarily next to Rezco for short period of time, all I can say he isnt a nice character. I think its a lie that cant be proven that the deal was fair market value and didnt have more ethically challenged financial motivations behind it. Its no different than Hillary's making $1 million on her one and only financial option play she did with someone that got a political favor when she was the governor's wife in Arkansas. How is that provable but it certainly is a lie to say its kosher but in Obama's case what else is he going to say.

The issues I bring up are lies because the true motivations behind saying them are different than the stated reasons and we all know it. My guess thats the same with Bachmann but I dont really follow her enough to know. At the same time, as I said earlier I dont really care that he did in these instances because its relevant no different than did I really care about the stupid birther issue and I probably would have said so what if they had found he was born in Kenya. You and I probably differ less than we think but maybe our approach is different. I have serious issues with Obama finacial policies. I also think that many of the liberal posters would too if they were objective for a second and just talked through the specific issue without our rose colored views about the type of politicians they are. Personally, I thought Bush was a disaster and I think he was a horrible president and I had no problem being critical then as now. I dont feel that same critical thinking at times with Obama supporters.

In any event, let me ask you a different question that pertains to Bachmann. Do you think female politicians are held to a different standard and are not judged in the same manner as males? Dont you think the personal attacks on Pelosi and Palin or Bachmann for example are far more vicious than on males? My informal poll opinion also says that men seem to be much more vicious on Pelosi and women on Palin or Bachmann? Why is that? Is it because Palin and Bachmann are easier on the eyes? Is it because women think that Palin and Bachmann are somehow traitors to the sisterhood? I realize that its a generalization but it seems somewhat accurate.

Feisty, so true! That helps explain the video of Eric Cantor promising speculators on Wall Street that Republicans would do whatever they can to protect them from regulation. I love the surprise release of oil reserves by the White House. Speculators artificially driving up the price of oil took a hit from that (with no violins playing).

Bill, I could barely read your post about “strong Republican women” because I was laughing so hard. Conservatives saw Dubya’s stubborn stupidity as “staying the course” and now see Palin’s vindictiveness and both her and Bachmann’s unwillingness to admit when they’re wrong as “strong.” Bill, progressives who have always supported women (unlike conservatives—did you not see the post about abortion?) and who have far more women in congress--and way before Republicans--know Palin and Bachmann are not strong. They are weak; they are VP losers, half-term quitters, living on campaign funds or the government dole, ignorant, and hateful small little people.

JS1 & Alan NJ -- Hypocrisy about a hypocrite, well what would we expect. So the Bachmann clinic accepts Medicaid, but what about lying about it? JS1, stop with the talking point about how the president "fails to lead" (the new Republican buzzword). Criticism of congress by the president is precisely to address this ignorance. Let me 'splain this to you:

The President starts the process by releasing a budget proposal each year, outlining proposed spending priorities for the upcoming fiscal year. Then the House and the Senate each create their own blueprints, often reflecting different philosophies of government.

The House has finished and voted on its proposal. It makes major cutsin social spending, preserves tax cuts, and increases military spending.

Now, the Senate is negotiating its budget proposal. The Gang of Six, a group of three Democrat and three Republican senators, is attempting to agree on a bipartisan proposal. The Senate's proposal may include new income (as FCNLhas been advising) by closing some tax loopholes and perhaps allowing certain tax cuts for corporations to expire.

Got that JS1? Congress is now responsible, not the president.

Job1, I agree. We need two parties in our two-party system, but the GOP/TP is insane. It's been made clear that the GOP/TP does NOT care about the budget. Here's the real agenda:

WASHINGTON — The Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell, said Thursday that the debt ceiling debate provides Congress with a rare opportunity to make sweeping changes to entitlement programs and spending, and that he would not vote to raise the level without significant budget cuts and revisions to Medicare and Medicaid.

"Divided government is the best time — and some would argue the only time — where you can do really big stuff," Mr. McConnell said at a news conference after a meeting between President Obama and Republican senators..."

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/13/us/politics/13budget.html

The reality is, after all the Republicans were forced to support Paul Ryan's budget and their popularity plummeted immediately, the GOP/TP is trying to hold the nation hostage in exchange for Democrats putting their necks in a noose just like they have. Not only is cutting trust fund benefits NOT part of the Democratic platform, but Democrats are not that stupid. Let's just hope the voters see this for what it is--disgusting vile politics to achieve radical right-wing social engineering.

Nope, the GOP/TP put their heads in a noose, and if they allow the nation to default, they will hang themselves. Good luck with that Republicans.

Bob – jobs, the debt – real issues, yes. Not only is the GOP/TP far more interested in making abortion illegal, there’s talk that same sex marriage could be a hot issue for them in 2012.

Ron – Most conservatives aren’t aware. If they do know about the history mistakes, etc., it appeals to their anti-intellectualism mentality-- Very disconcerting.

Kirk -- Is anyone here defending any wealthy person, including politicians, for tax "errors"? Rangel was investigated and censured. Haven't heard anything lately about calls for Vitter to resign. Until Vitter resigns, right-wing criticism is meaningless to me.

x

Wow, Kirk, you just tapped my mind cuz' I literally just covered this on the other thread we were chatting on.

Men who objectify women have a much higher tolerance level of their ineptitude. This is true in Business and it appears to be true in Politics. Yes, women are expected to be BETTER than average just to be considered competent. That is the mentality that needs to be addressed. I had my issues with Hilary Clinton that were never based on her ability to perform the job; but rather my perception that she was willing to

sometimes this site sucks,...it refreshed and posted in the middle of my comment, sorry:

back to Hilary, she was all to willing to be MRS. Clinton rather than Hilary Rodham. I personally find that sad and weak. That's my bias. My problem. But with the twins, sarah and michelle, it is worse than that because they are EAGER to dish out Red Meat and never seem to reflect on their own circumstances. Palin is AGAINST public healthcare; but actually admitted to running across the border to Canada to receive THEIR free healthcare. Bachmann has blasted government subsidies and yet a measurable percentage of her livelihood has been at the public trough. It is lacking in character to tell others to pull up by the boot straps only to find out that YOU were actually given a LEG up. There just doesn't ever seem to be an honest reflection of THEIR own circumstances. OR an acknowledgment that not every WOMAN in America has married as well or exploited their story for profit. Again, I've covered this before; but for me it is phony. and the veracity with which they PREACH is as offensive to us non believers as our mocking is to them. When caught in an 'oops' moment? These bimbos Double Down on their statements. It's too much! but hey, to each his own. She'll either be able to pass the 'sniff' test or not. The voters will speak and she'll either pull off a historic run OR she'll fall flat on her face. Kinda' what makes this country Horrible or Great, depending on where you stand on the issues. Personally, I don't think she has the depth and knowledge a person SHOULD have to lead the free world. I felt that about "W", as well.

Repost from another discussion,

According to the 14th amendment there is no debt ceiling. The president has the authority to say we will pay our debts what ever the GOP says or does.

Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized
by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for
services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But
neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or
obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United
States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such
debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Let's see the GOP in power fight this clause.

Deadline? What deadline?

Let's keep this REALLY simple;

The interest on the debt is only about $16 Billion per month - 5% of spending. The only way that we could 'Default on the debt' is if we decide to pay other things instead of the debt payments.

We should simply give the small debt payments top priority, and argue over 'deferring' some of the other 95% of spending. The place we should look for cuts is in the "Discretionary" spending category, which has gone up more than 30% (over $300 Billion per year - $3 Trillion over 10 years).

The August 2 'deadline' is indeed an 'artificial' date.

There is no argument Roy. If I need more revenue per month, I don't cut back on my other expenses, I get a better paying job. What the democrats have proposed, and I am all for it, is cutting back on subsidies for people who because of their income clearly DO NOT need any subsidies or tax breaks. If the companies create U.S. jobs without expectation of a profit, then yes they can keep their tax breaks and subsidies. The 14th Amendment takes Social Security and Medicare off the table. It is the job of the house to pay for all needed expenses. Yes some fat can be cut, but unless the wealth pay more now, some muscle may well be cut the country cannot afford. How the GOP feels about tax increases be damned, if they do not do every thing in their power to fund needed programs, up to and including additional revenue, they are in DERELICTION of the job they were elected to do.

True Patriot--your not even debating or discussing the issues. Just pulling out one aspect of what I said and ignoring the post and or posts on a variety of topics is meaningless. Saying things that your colleagues want to hear and preaching it to us is not a debate. If you feel that anything I said was wrong or you feel differently say so. I dont have an issue with your disagreeing but just pointing things you feel are facts isnt debating.

Clara, I think we are mostly on the same page and I agree with you. However, let me ask you because I do think woman are harder on other women and the personal attacks are worse because of it. You dont think the depth of either woman is worthy of being president. I dont disagree based on what I know and I would agree on Bush too. Without knowing what political party a politician was from nor what race, if someone told you that we would elect a president who never held a job, was a politician for a few years only (less than Bachmann or Palin with far less work experience than either) but had an ivy league background would you say he was qualified to be the leader of the US? I would think not nor would anyone which I think is Obama's biggest weakness. I have never attacked his abilities just his policies which for the most part are based on inexperience in my judgement. He seems to be learning on the job and thats the last thing I want as a president. I think Hillary would have been a far better president.

Wade, I despise the class warfare arguments because I think thats the lazy way of solving problems. Its always easy to ask your neighbor to pay more as long as I dont have to. So you ask Jazzy, Will Smith and Albert Pujols to pay a little more tax and after your done with the 2000 people across the country that you think can afford it (even though its not your money and they earned it), what are you going to do? The next level of wealthy down are the ones that are small business owners, successful professionals who support an enormous number of jobs and they already pay almost all the income tax now. Why do you feel they can pay more and you cant since you have gotten all the tax breaks from Bush and Obama where your tax bill is zero. Everyone always wants to spend other people's hard earned money as if they dont want to participate themselves. I think we all understand there needs to be shared sacrifice which means eliminating all the subsidies within the tax code and everyone needs to pay income tax no matter how small so they have an ownership stake in our country. Eliminating corporate welfare is fine as long as you realize thats just a tax on you and me and for multi nationals may make them less competitive with foreign competitors selling their goods in foreign countries generally with the impact of losing jobs in the US. Its much more complicated than you make it. Finally, even with all the tax, yes we need to reduce spending on Medicare and Social security as the benefits are far greater for the upcoming generation than anyone can come close to reasonably contributing so thats a problem. Otherwise our elderly are going to be pushing their grandchildren off the financial cliff.

Kirk,

What do you mean "never held a job"? See, we're going along having a perfectly nice conversation and you drop a stale talking point that just inflames the situation. Why do that?

The man is incredibly accomplished. A student of LIFE. A college professor. Why diminish his credentials? He is FAR more accomplished than the twins. And, he garnered 65.5 Million votes. More than ANY president has EVER received. Why isn't THAT a good thing?

You just DID attack his abilities. EVERY president learns on the job. EVERY one of them. There isn't an equivalent resume builder other than being President. I would argue that his childhood and early adulthood put him FAR more in touch with average Americans. There are 300+ Million citizens in this country and it's a big deal.

Sarah Palin garnered 114, 697 votes to become Governor. In 2010, Michelle Bachmann received 159,476 votes for her Congressional seat.

I guess coming from a small farming and blue collar community of 3000 people in the midwest, my definition of work experience or "job" is different than yours and I apologize if I offended your views on this. Wasnt intentional and written words without context and voice inflection dont always come across the way intended but come across based on the way the reader wants to hear it. So I apologize for that. Again, I dont want to defend either of the women because I am not debating whether either of them would make a better president than Obama. I never said Obama isnt accomplished nor do I really know how intelligent (not in an IQ sense but in a common working solving solutions sense) he is so I dont try and make judgements on any of that. Although I know quite a few people who know Obama personally here in chicago and his wife from her time in the legal profession and based on those people he seems very knowledgeable and personable. That said, a college or law school professor is not the kind of job history that someone learns basic economic financial behavior and in my mind distorts it worse as you want to think of theory rather than real life. He does have a great life experience growing up but wouldnt say its any better or worse than mine let alone Palin's or Bachmanns. I dont think Bush had real life personal experience that can be equated to most of us who grew up middle class or lower middle class in this country. Accomplishments such as Ivy league and some of things he has accomplished as a politician is certainly more accomplished than the twins but pales in comparison to say Hillary or Romney and certainly pales to both of them in terms of having any real life work experience. Whether he is more accomplished than the twins is a very low hurdle to jump and I want our president to exceed a very high hurdle. I did attack his abilities because I dont think he was nearly experienced enough for the presidency. He didnt think so when he ran either. He was going to get his name out, run for governor here in Illinois and build his resume to run after Hillary served for 8 years when he caught fire and passed her. You dont need to use him to outduel Palin or Bachmann as their popularity has more to do with their particular political positions and the fact that they get so much sympathy and press when the left wing media attacks them that it has the unintended consquences of making them more popular with people. If left alone they would probably fade away on their own.

As for his childhood putting him in touch with the average american there is no way thats true. The average american isnt biracial abandoned by his father at an early age and raised by his grandparents in Hawaii until his mom brings him to Indonesia where he lives in a foreign muslim country for years. I would say both you, I, Palin and Bachmann probably have more in common with the average american growing up but that doesnt make any of us qualified to be president.

I disagree Kirk, it is the GOP in office who is making this hard, the tax rates for corporations are the lowest they have been in 30 years. Corporations did very well in the last ten years thanks to the GOP. Why do I have to pay more so the wealthy get a break for sitting on their profits, and shipping jobs to China? It's very simple the middle class suffers more and there is no impact on those who have done very well. The GOP faces disolution if it does not act in the best interest of all americans. Not just the wealthy.

What you call class warfare in #1.83 I call the truth Kirk. I will even go so far as to double down on my position, and I quote,

"Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized
by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for
services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned."

That is in the constitution. Part of the 14th amendment.

I disagree with you. Since the divorce rate is greater than 50% I would say MOST Americans come from broken homes. And race notwithstanding, EVERY child feels they are different and have to overcome SOME external bias (be it not being 'smart' enough, 'sporty' enough, 'popular enough', 'mixed' religious background, etc.).

He was born in Hawaii and lived with his mom until he was the age of ten. Then he moved back to Hawaii where his grandparents continued his education and rearing. He was in Indonesia from the age of six to the age of ten. Lots of children have been abandoned by their fathers. In almost every socioeconomic setting (see Cindy McCain bio and her siblings).

The only offense you lobbed at me was saying I have anything in common with Palin or Bachmann. I care that I have never felt the need to wink during an interview, that I don't exploit my children or family for personal gain and that I am genuine in every dealing with people I know and those I don't know. And that's just the SURFACE differences. There are far more substantive differences which cause me to take exception; such as actively pursuing education and information, protecting my body and the bodies of other women to not be oppressed by their government and the basic comprehension that there is and SHOULD be separation of Church and State.

But yeah, other than those little differences, we basically agree.

Clara great post. In the future please name the person you are responding to so I can read the post too :-)

Clara, sorry but I thought we were talking about how he grew up not how you feel. There are plenty of children of divorce and of course he has similarities with plenty of people in this country just not most. I think his unique life experiences as a child probably brings a great perspective that we can all learn from but its certainly not typical with more in common with the average person. To be honest I dont know how I feel about his unique experience growing up in terms of shaping his adult views. I dont believe though that they are consistent and have more in common with the common american as you and I or the twins. Thats neither good or bad I think. He certainly has some common traits with some of us but thats to be expected with a country of 300 million people.

Why do you keep trying to drag me into trying to defend the women when I said he more inexperienced than Hillary and Romney in my last post and even said he thought so himself. My view from the beginning has been his lack of financial acumen and experience not any of this other stuff which to be honest I dont really know. I havent really spent any time worrying about the twins. Maybe we dont have anything in common but its hard to tell because we talk about different perspectives and never really address a common one.

Wade, I dont even know how to address your post because it makes no sense. Nobody is challenging the validity of any debt owed by the US government, what all of us are discussing are future government revenues and future government spending and how we are going to address the fact that our balance sheet shows liabilities greater than we can afford to pay without seriously impacting all of our cost of livings. I certainly understand we need to address the revenue side of things including an overhaul of the tax code to eliminate all social engineering and individual and corporate welfare. So we need a progressive tax system that doesnt give breaks just because you have a child (thats a personal choice that the rest of us shouldnt subsidize) or mortgages etc. Plus, anyone earning a living above a certain threshold should pay some income tax even if its one dollar as their contribution to our socieity. Right now 47% dont pay any income tax. Corporate rates being the lowest in 30 years is just wrong as the rates at 35% have been the same for a long time. How much revenue is collected is based on the taxable income plus the fact that since 1980 when we instituted a hard double tax system, most businesses and ventures are created under flow through entities so only one level of tax is paid which is at the individual level. So your statistics are somewhat useless. Its really stuff like green energy credits that are bad because that provides the wrong incentives rather than profit making to reduce taxes. Finally, tax rates at the corporate level only get paid by you and I through higher product costs or reduction in values of the corporations that are owned by mutual funds, pension funds, 401(k) accounts, college endowments. So raising taxes on corporations are paid by us, you and me not by the corporation. Can you explain to me what you mean by the wealthy sitting on profits and shifting jobs to China? No corporation which is what I think you meant is sitting on cash that could be invested into making more money trust me. Its not doing a corporation any good just to sit it in a bank account if they can make money investing into new plants, acquisitions or expansion or even marketing and selling their existing product. Shipping jobs overseas is generally done to make them be able to compete more effectively with their foreign competitors. Tell me this, when you go into a store and both products look the same do you buy the cheapest? So if the US company didnt move jobs to compete with its foreign competition dont you think those jobs would be lost anyway as you buy the cheapest product? Dont you think for everyjob shipped over another job might be created by selling that product overseas where they can now compete effectively. Your response is too simplistic and doesnt address real live examples. Give me an example of a job shipped to china where that job would have stayed in the US with no negative impacts as a zero sum jobs proposition? Broad generalizations dont really work so lets discuss one particular example and show me what you mean.

ARe you also saying we dont or shouldnt reduce our future government expenses? Does the fact that they have grown since 2000 and actually much earlier under both administrations at rates that far exceed inflation or revenue growth for the government make a difference to you? Explain to me your comment that why should you pay more when the wealthy ..... What are you paying more for? Do you mean why should you pay more for a service given to you for free by the government like welfare? I think you know the answer to that one. So if you paid $100 thousand in your life time to Social Security and expect to receive $350 thousand back, does that mean you think all of your children and grandchildren should hand over their hard earned money to pay you that welfare? Trying to understand what you are paying more for in terms of services you are not getting?

Sorry, wade - I didn't see you slip in the middle of my conversation with Kirk:

Kirk,

I mostly was 'ribbing' you on the twins because you made that '...we have more in common...' comment. I adamantly reject any similarities other then gender.

I went with the greater than 50% stat as my 'most' meme. Sorry if that confused. As I know you've already stated your disagreements with 'W' I won't dwell on the financial acumen aspect. I also have a strong Finance and Accounting background; but it doesn't mean I'd be great as Secretary of Defense. The Office of President is NOT to be an expert on all subjects; but rather to hire GOOD, SMART people of who's counsel you respect. And to have enough brain power to know when your own administration is BS'ing you (sorry, pardon my left jab at 'W' again). Deep financial wounds such as we've suffered are simply NOT reparable by doubling down on the policies that I personally believe got us here in the first place. Personally, I don't think ANYONE is thinking far enough outside of the box so as to reframe this problem. But we are dealing with the entrenchment that we HAVE not the entrenchment we WISH we had (sorry, Rumsfield, but you earned that one, too).

I guess we can go 'round and 'round on this; but ultimately, the impasse is real. More Tax Cuts or even continuing the Tax Sale (implemented by 'W' and re-upped by Obama) is NOT helping the situation. Closing Loop Holes, Off Shore especially are fair and common sense, ending Corporate Welfare (subsidies to Big Oil, really? Have you seen their books in the recent five years?) those are COMMON SENSE solutions. Start there and then let's widdle away at cuts and other items.

PS. Every time we go around you seem to introduce another "misconception" about President Obama that I feel is inflammatory. In post 1.92 above, you've introduced the "he's foreign, not like us - had experiences that have 'shaped' his adult view" type of nuance. I simply don't roll that way. I think he is a fine American. I think he represents a uniqueness to our National Identity that I find refreshing. I don't feel the need to question the Twins' Patriotism because I don't like their political beliefs. I can feel that "W" was about as checked out and out of tune as a politician can get without saying he is Anti American. I am positive if we met in real life we could have a civil discussion about these issues. I am passionate about politics; but even more so about my friendships and I have almost down the middle half Republican friends. (on Facebook the tool says 52% Dem and 48% Republican).

(pss. did you notice I got you to call them 'the twins' in no less than two posts? Shame on me.)

The 47 percent you want to tax Kirk? I have heard that argument before. And it has been debunked.

On Sunday, Crooks and Liars demolished the right-wing talking point dating back to the 2008 McCain campaign that over 40% of Americans pay no taxes. Of course, virtually all workers pay the Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes. And the new tax credits signed into law by presidents Bush and Obama, on top of the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) Ronald Reagan himself proclaimed, "the best anti-poverty, the best pro-family, the best job creation measure to come out of Congress," explain how the tax burden is lightened for many working families.

Yet despite record income inequality, stagnant wages and the inescapable conclusion that tax rates for the wealthy "have fallen more than any other group’s over the last three decades," the Republican echo chamber has resurrected its claim that tax credits for working Americans constitute "welfare."

Now, media as diverse as the Daily Show and the New York Times are pushing back against the latest attack in the Republicans' perpetual class war.

In a segment Tuesday titled, "That's Tariffic," Jon Stewart lamented:

"The media attacks the poor and elderly for not paying federal income taxes, but the U.S. government doesn't see a cent of Exxon's $35 billion profit."

And in Tuesday's New York Times, David Leonhardt urged Americans to "look closer":

With Tax Day coming on Thursday, 47 percent has become shorthand for the notion that the wealthy face a much higher tax burden than they once did while growing numbers of Americans are effectively on the dole.

Neither one of those ideas is true. They rely on a cleverly selective reading of the facts. So does the 47 percent number.

Labeling the 47% argument a "distraction" from "who really pays what in taxes," Leonhardt explained:

Even if the discussion is restricted to federal taxes (for which the statistics are better), a vast majority of households end up paying federal taxes. Congressional Budget Office data suggests that, at most, about 10 percent of all households pay no net federal taxes. The number 10 is obviously a lot smaller than 47.

The reason is that poor families generally pay more in payroll taxes than they receive through benefits like the Earned Income Tax Credit. It’s not just poor families for whom the payroll tax is a big deal, either. About three-quarters of all American households pay more in payroll taxes, which go toward Medicare and Social Security, than in income taxes.

Leonhardt's analysis doesn't end there.

Corporate taxes have plummeted. "State and local taxes, meanwhile, may actually be regressive" as "the typical family pays a lot of state and local taxes, too — almost half as much as in federal taxes." And while the income gap between the rich and everyone else hit levels not seen since 1929, he concludes:

If anything, the government numbers I’m using here exaggerate how much of the tax burden falls on the wealthy. These numbers fail to account for the income that is hidden from tax collectors — a practice, research shows, that is more common among affluent families. "Because higher-income people are understating their income," Joel Slemrod, a tax scholar at the University of Michigan, says, "We’ve been overstating their average tax rates."

(For more background, see "10 Republican Lies for Tax Day" and "Republicans Resurrect Welfare Charge for Tax Day.")

http://crooksandliars.com/jon-perr/debunking-47-pay-no-taxes-talking-point

I am willing to pay more in taxes if the amount the wealthy pay increases in proportion Kirk. I stand by my previous posts. Social Security and Medicare are OFF the table.

Here is an article from Huffington Post

Tax Policy Center: 47 Percent Of American Households Won't Pay Federal Income Tax This Year

WASHINGTON — Tax Day is a dreaded deadline for millions, but for nearly half of U.S. households it's simply somebody else's problem.

About 47 percent will pay no federal income taxes at all for 2009. Either their incomes were too low, or they qualified for enough credits, deductions and exemptions to eliminate their liability. That's according to projections by the Tax Policy Center, a Washington research organization.

Most people still are required to file returns by the April 15 deadline. The penalty for skipping it is limited to the amount of taxes owed, but it's still almost always better to file: That's the only way to get a refund of all the income taxes withheld by employers.

In recent years, credits for low- and middle-income families have grown so much that a family of four making as much as $50,000 will owe no federal income tax for 2009, as long as there are two children younger than 17, according to a separate analysis by the consulting firm Deloitte Tax.

Tax cuts enacted in the past decade have been generous to wealthy taxpayers, too, making them a target for President Barack Obama and Democrats in Congress. Less noticed were tax cuts for low- and middle-income families, which were expanded when Obama signed the massive economic recovery package last year.

The result is a tax system that exempts almost half the country from paying for programs that benefit everyone, including national defense, public safety, infrastructure and education. It is a system in which the top 10 percent of earners – households making an average of $366,400 in 2006 – paid about 73 percent of the income taxes collected by the federal government.

The bottom 40 percent, on average, make a profit from the federal income tax, meaning they get more money in tax credits than they would otherwise owe in taxes. For those people, the government sends them a payment.

"We have 50 percent of people who are getting something for nothing," said Curtis Dubay, senior tax policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation.

The vast majority of people who escape federal income taxes still pay other taxes, including federal payroll taxes that fund Social Security and Medicare, and excise taxes on gasoline, aviation, alcohol and cigarettes. Many also pay state or local taxes on sales, income and property.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/07/income-tax-47-of-american_n_529059.html

"We have 50 percent of people who are getting something for nothing," said Curtis Dubay, senior tax policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation.

Why am I not surprised that this comment was made by an analyst at the Heritage foundation?

It's okay for the uber rich to get tax refunds, Kirk, and you want the middle class and the poor to get none? And you accuse me of making no sense. I think you are trying to shut me up. It's not going to happen. On the one hand you talk about everyone paying taxes, then you imply that SS and medicare is a ponzi scheme.

So if you paid $100 thousand in your life time to Social Security and expect to receive $350 thousand back, does that mean you think all of your children and grandchildren should hand over their hard earned money to pay you that welfare?

Social Security is NOT welfare. People pay into the system all their working life. How dare you imply they should not get it? I see in your posts a milder version of the same GOP clap trap I reject absolutely.

If you still want to play hardball Kirk I will be happy to debunk your posts.

Great pieces Wade, packed with information. If it's quite alright with you I may use the NYT article for future reference. Thanks.

I'm glad what I posted made sense John B, Kirk inspired me to do research today. Go ahead if you can use the article.

Wade,

I had actually copied out your links, also, to use at a later date! Thanks for putting in the time. Sorry I missed your comment and thanks for enjoying mine!

What kind of grades did you get in math Kirk? $350,000 is 350 percent of $100,000. The person who paid $100,000 into the system would not get Social Security any where near $350,000. He or she might get $50,000 to $65,000 a year. The monthly payments would most certainly be subject to income tax. I'm just guessing as to the amount.

The other questions you asked in post #193 do not merit a responce because they are a request for posts I'm sure you have run across before.

I spent 8 years of my childhood in Germany, Kitseigan sp? Pirmasens, and Vogelweh in the suburbs of Kaiserslaughtern, Kirk, does that mean I am any less of an american then you? I wasn't there alone. I was there with my parents. Barack H. Obama is as much an American as I am. Any argument he is not doesn't hold water.

Wade, my math skills are pretty good as a CPA and former tax lawyer. Do you understand what FICA and medicare is? The 47% hasnt been debunked at all as income taxes are totally separate from the taxes you state. You realize that when you pay payroll taxes thats supposed to be your contribution to your social security or medicare plans right? The more you pay in the more your benefit? You cant include those taxes in the calculation of income taxes. So if someone paid in 100,000 during their lifetime, and in your example that person would get far more even on a present value basis than $350,000. If that person started collecting 50k at 67 years old and lived on average 13 years take that times 50k present value at 4% even on an after tax basis its over 350,000 so I dont even know what your trying to tell me.

Sorry Wade but both Social Security and Medicare are welfare and I will play hardball with your set of facts all you want because you didnt address my points at all. You missed it completely. My definition of welfare is any subsidized payment from the government so an Earned income credit is welfare, a mortgage deduction reducing your otherwise taxable income is welfare, corporate credits are welfare, a child tax credit or exemption is welfare and yes you get far more back from social security and medicare than you could ever claim as a reasonable return on your contribution. Sorry thats the fact and its not disputed by anyone and I am not even saying thats bad. What I am saying is that our younger generation of workers and this country cant afford it. Tax cuts for the wealthy of course disproportionately impact the wealthy because they are the only ones paying income taxes. Thats just simple math. You can argue that they should even pay more but thats cuts from our basic fact discussion. For example, the average taxpayer making $75k with 2 kids and house pays about $7,000 of income taxes. The average taxpayer that makes $250,000 pays income tax of $75,000. Thats pretty progressive dont you think? How more should he pay?

As for corporate taxes, you didnt even get what I wrote nor did you really respond. You do understand why corporate taxes have plunged right because of the double tax system? You do understand why a corporate tax is just a tax on you and I right?

As for Obama being American why did you stretch what I said? Thats so misleading to be ludicrous and not worth debating. Werent we comparing him to the average american? Now your being silly just to try and be difficult.

Clara, you can actually rib me all you want I certainly get it from everyone around me all the time ha. I think we would actually get along very well and you might even be surprised by how much and we might even have things in common in finance and accounting side of things. Again, you certainly not going to get me to defend Bush either as I think he was a very bad president and in a completely different way than my issues with Obama. You probably would find that I have issues with most politicians ha. I read Bush's book and it only validated my impression of why he was a bad president because he took pride in his decision making skills and I think they were the wrong ones.

I actually dont think we would go round and round on some of the tax stuff as I dont necessarily disagree with the stuff you point out in concept but my analytical skepticism and experience has taught me that when it comes to taxes, the unintended consequences are generally never considered. Who would have thought when Clinton passed the bill limiting the deduction for executive pay to $1 million in 1996 unless its performance based which stock options qualified would transform executive pay to the benefit not detriment of executives. The thought was congress wanted executives to take more pay in options as they would only get paid if the stock value went up. Well stock value did go up dramatically and now all these executives are making tens of millions of dollars more than before and it made short term outlook for stock value even more important. Many of these so called tax loop holes being closed have unintended consquences that arent always apparent.

Ha I love you got me calling them the twins. I think your reading into my comments on Obama that I am somehow flaming and I didnt mean to ever insinuate that he wasnt american. I have a very high degree of respect for his background and what he has accomplished. Thats totally separate from disagreeing with policy.

PS, I love KC too as I used to do some work for the old Western Auto Supply and was involved in the deal to sell them and some real estate deals with Hyatt and I grew up with my parents owning the towns Hallmark store so its a great town.

You are repeating GOP lies or you are lying yourself. The 47 percent percent figure has been debunked. You are a sore loser. What you have said doesn't make it so.

Labeling the 47% argument a "distraction" from "who really pays what in taxes," Leonhardt explained:

Even if the discussion is restricted to federal taxes (for which the statistics are better), a vast majority of households end up paying federal taxes. Congressional Budget Office data suggests that, at most, about 10 percent of all households pay no net federal taxes. The number 10 is obviously a lot smaller than 47.

The reason is that poor families generally pay more in payroll taxes than they receive through benefits like the Earned Income Tax Credit. It’s not just poor families for whom the payroll tax is a big deal, either. About three-quarters of all American households pay more in payroll taxes, which go toward Medicare and Social Security, than in income taxes.

If I am wrong do research on you own or shut it. Stop calling tax credits and Social Security welfare. Nothing you have written disproves what I have said. I have presented both sides of the argument on the 47 percent. The ball is in your court. I will not accept fallacious claims as a valid response.

And if thats the best you can do you might be an accountant but I would never hire you. I am not impressed with lies first or second hand they are equally bad. I am putting you on ignore. I will open your response if there is one. If there are any more lies you are staying on ignore. I am not impressed by responses based sole

based soley on opinions.

Oh by your argument Kirk subsidies to corporations are welfare too. Why is it okay for corporations to get tax breaks but not the middle class or the poor?

Ahh that great landmark the Western Auto building. Did you know they converted it to condos? I have a friend who's father worked there for 45 years. When they converted to condos, they gave former employees 'dibs' on their offices. I live in the midtown area and what they've done with urban communities is very exciting.

I am sure we would get along fine. I worked for Arthur Andersen (back when it was considered 'Good' experience. Was not a fan of the politics, got my two years in and went private, where I have remained. I don't even really do that much with accounting anymore (although my current employer is publicly traded and I do the bulk of our SEC filing binders - Plus SOX compliance). Mostly I run the Accounting Systems. Conversions, Upgrades, Acquisitions, etc. I love me some good technical stuff. Although, I apparently know just enough to be dangerous at times. HA

Have a good 4th of July!

Clara, no I didnt know that. Its been awhile since I have been back. I also worked for AA for two years back when it was supposedly a great place to work. Eventually became a CFO and got let go after a change in CEOs of course. Have my own business know like you. Hated the SOX compliance stuff ha. Have a great holiday yourself and look forward to more debating ha

Wade, you can put me on ignore all you want as I know its tough to start with basic facts and hear truth you dont want to hear. I have no problem with you disagreeing with me we just need to start with the facts that have nothing to do with republican talking points. You never responded to my basic conclusions on corporate and individual INCOME taxes which you dont want to hear or debate. Sorry but your article only deals with all federal taxes and not income taxes. All the taxes you want to include are for services rendered like sales tax, telecommunication or gas taxes. Social security and medicare you get back in the future so they dont count. Its hard to come to grips with the notion that most of us dont pay income tax and the wealthy pay almost all of them.

As for welfare I dont know what your definition is but mine is when you get cash back from the government greater than you contributed or are owed for services rendered. If you receive more back from the government in social security or medicare than what you put in plus a return its welfare. If you, me or a corporation takes a deduction that reduces your tax paid to the government its a form of welfare. The government does it for social engineering purposes or incentives but its welfare. Under the current system you will get back more in social security than you ever contributed plus a return. Its a fact sorry. I am also sorry you wouldnt trust me as an accountant but any other accountant is going to tell you the same thing. We can debate policy but facts are facts.

Um, Kirk,

You just described MOST Of the red states in the country with your definition of Welfare,...And there isn't a person now drawing social security that could possibly NOT get more back than they paid in from SS and Med as the dollars are not indexed for inflation. They certainly were not indexed for the exponential rise in Medical Costs. Which is one of the main problems with the program.

Don't pick on Wade, his point is valid. MOST (there I go again) people using the 47% don't pay Federal Taxes argument do NOT consider SS.

I do not own my own company,...sorry if I led you to that perception. I meant I work in the private sector (not public accounting).

I think it is sad that as a society we don't have a threshold of income that is a livable wage. And to accomodate that, we have a convoluted tax code that entrenches idealogues in their Welfare Bad, Tax Cuts Good banter. (which is ironic because isn't the EIC a Tax Credit? Just not for Republicans.) But I am a screaming liberal that-a-way.

All fluff and no substance Kirk I will never read any more of your posts. I hope the 14th amendment grants the President the power to increase Taxes as need be, without the consent of congress, but that might be a bridge too far. In any case the President can in my opinion bypass the GOP congress and take direct control of spending unless the GOP sees reason and agrees to compromise rather then dictate terms.

I am an independent Lincoln republican who wants the GOP to return to Lincolns principles. Until it does I am proud to vote for the Democrats

TY Clara I am offering friendship. Please check your newsvine account.

Wade, you cant just say all fluff and no substance when its all true and you havent disputed any fact that I have said to you. I still dont understand what difference the 14th amendment has as Obama isnt going to raise taxes as thats just a political campaign theme not any real views on his part. We need a complete overhaul of the tax system. Not sure why you are having a problem debating or discussing these issues with me. I will try and tone down and be easier on you for Clara sake but if you want to dispute my facts lets do so and tell me why I am wrong. You did once with research which is good, but I showed where your research wasnt inconsistent with what I said. So instead of quitting go to the next step

Clara, I dont think what you said is liberal at all and I agree completely and have never said otherwise. The word welfare has a connotation to it that I use to make my point but lets face it we all get some government subsidies and in many cases I dont necessarily think they are wrong. However, lets call it what it is and try to align our priorities so the governments money is better spent. I agree that the red states probably take more than they give, I dont agree with that and to me that has nothing to do with politics. I think the tax code is ridiculous and full of individual and corporate welfare. Why should we subsidize behaviorial choices like having kids, buying a house etc. I think an easy progressive tax where its fair for everyone without what most people call loopholes which are really just sanctioned deductions. We should sit down and prioritize our government spending much better and I have never taken a view as to what one budget is better than another except that we need to spend within our fiscal availability.

I wont be too hard on Wade because I dont think he understands but social security is supposed to a contributory system same as medicare so any amounts even indexed for inflation is welfare. You know these programs shouldnt be counted as the same as paying income tax because the income tax funds all the rest of the government programs similar to our previous planned parenthood budget discussion right? Half of taxpayers dont pay income tax based on I think either 2009 or 2008 IRS reported tax returns. Thats wrong regardless of whether the wealthy should pay more. We need to change the way we think of medicare and social security or these programs will bankrupt our kids and grandkids. You realize as a generalization social security and medicare are paid to the one age group that controls 87% of the wealth in this country and we cry for them. I know that people need it and pay into it but when we cry class warfare we somehow skip this statistic because its based on assets not income. I dont have the answers but I want to make sure we are all talking off the same set of basic facts or at least basis of understanding. I am on your side on your post. We might disagree although I dont know yet on where the allocation of our finite funds should be spent ha

Kirk since I have not read the last two posts I gather from your rapid responces that you believe me to be a R.I.N.O., We're even I consider the GOP in power, with a few exceptions, and the people who support the radical agenda to be R.I.N.O's. If you did not call me a R.I.N.O. I apologize. I am in my opinion a true Republican. I am behaving as I believe Lincoln would behave today, if he were alive. I am saying things I am sure he would agree with.

I have given up on trying to appeal to your logic. At best you are misguided in your zealous pursuit of dismantling social safety nets that have existed for decades. At worst you are a dedicated Fox News employee. Either way I do not regret putting you on ignore.

Wade knave no idea what you are talking about. Idont know what rhino is and you haven't at all appealed to my logic. You haven't even responded to my facts as it's clear you don't like the truth. It's like jack nickolson said "you can't handle the truth". No I have no clue why you want to personally attack me. If you don't like what I put forth critically think and explain why I am wrong instead of taking your ball and going home

Feisty:

Bachmann is a fraud. Recently Politicofact.com (SP). fact checked 24 of her statements. Only one (1) was true. What a record. Her claim that they only received 31K from the Feds is now 137K starting from 2005. Those farm subsidies that she does not get, well she reported about 160K on her financial disclosure - why do that if you did not get the money.

Lies, Lies and more lies and when qustioned on them she ignores them and goes into her teabag rant. I cannot wait for the debates, she is going to get buried alive and she will not be our next President.

Then we got the Fraud Perry, Romney who cannot keep his stories straight from day to day and T-Paw who is floundering, again. What a line up. If the were a baseball team they could not beat a T-Ball team on their best day.

The only thing they have is that they are betting the store on the economy tanking and they will do everything to do this. The Debt Ceiling talks are a joke. Look at the recent report on the fraud from Boeing where a $10.00 part is marked up over 100,000%. My God, come on GOP/TP - the DOD Budget has to be on the table.

You know it Navy!

Here's the link for those interested in reading up on the Wild MN Dingbat Pinocchio awards:

From PoliticFact:

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/michele-bachmann/

Goes to show in order to pass as a conservative these days, you must also be a serial liar

Feisty:

And do not forget the other "serial" - John Wayne Gasey. What a role model to follow. At least they both were "clowns".

Fraud is the only word for Bachmann. She actually set a Politifact RECORD for the consistency of her false ratings.

Be careful...the supporters of Bachmann are circling the wagons around her and they have their talking points clear.

Criticism of Bachman = Misogyny!

Criticism of Bachmann => "The Truth" the truth and nothing but the truth. She is a liar, a fraud, and so full of herself she cannot see beyond her own ego. Not somebody I want running this country.

Good point Da Noid...as if gender somehow excuses being a TP-crazy liar who's pushing policies designed to destroy the middle class.

Your comment about not seeing a check they wouldn't cash is unfair! They use direct deposit.

I also find it odd that of the other three members of my immediate family, who all vote Republican (I have been voting for the Democratic lesser-of-two-evils for years), one is on permanent disability, one is on extended unemployment, and the other has Medicare and Social Security. I guess they think only Republicans deserve government handouts.

US Navy---It doesn't matter who YOU want running the country. What matters is who the average American voter wants running the country. You and your extremist, left-wing views are on the fringe and do NOT represent a majority in any way. Bachmann is getting more and more attention these days and her popularity is bound to grow as people get to know her better. Average, regular ole Americans, that is. You elitist types will not have much say. Well, maybe some. The propaganda arm of the Dems (the media) will do everything they can to destroy her but if all you got is that she mistook one Iowa town that begins with a "W" for another Iowa town that begins with a "W", you're in sad shape.

Her husband taking Medicaid? Big deal. You go right ahead and make it your strategy to rip a person for helping under-priveledged children. Watch what happens.

Obama is overspending, over-regulating, and basically ruining the economy. Read his book...this is in it... From *Audacity of Hope*:
"I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly
direction." That is what is going on.

Q: Did Obama write that he would "stand with the Muslims" and that he nurses a "pervasive sense of grievance and animosity" toward whites?

A: No. A widely circulated e-mail fabricates some quotes from Obama’s books and twists others.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=3&sqi=2&ved=0CCcQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Ffactcheck.org%2F2008%2F06%2Fobamas-dreams-of-my-father%2F&ei=3loLTofAGYvKsQKE9qi8AQ&usg=AFQjCNGQq6aMCqFlevViTyJJ25GJ5dzHvQ

Here's YOUR Pinnochio award MAW!

Do you ever get tired of repeating blatant LIES?

The e-mail was sent to us by 20 PolitiFact readers who said they wanted to know if the claims were true. (For more on the e-mail and a link to its full text, read our article on Obama's book .)

The e-mails states, "From The Audacity of Hope: 'I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.' "

The quote comes from page 261 of the paperback edition of The Audacity of Hope. In the full passage, Obama talks about speaking in front of audiences of immigrants, and how he often tells them that they embody the American dream

The e-mail distorts Obama's quote and misrepresents who he was talking about, lumping together an entire religion when he was talking to two groups of people in the context of discrimination. It's a significant alteration to the meaning of what Obama said, and we find it to be FALSE.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=8&ved=0CEcQFjAH&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.politifact.com%2Ftruth-o-meter%2Fstatements%2F2008%2Fjun%2F10%2Fchain-email%2Fnot-muslims-but-arab-americans%2F&ei=l1sLTqTvNsHksQKzoIjAAw&usg=AFQjCNHNpzEdaDd4e995axxwqQWMfjeFMg

Guess if you can't dispute the truth, it's easier to spread the bullsh!t!

Damage, polls show the entire GOP lineup as being behind Obama. 10 percent of the population is hardly a majority. I hope the Tea Party is disbanded like the Whigs were in the 1900s. If I am in error please offer proof I am in error or shut it.

To all the right-wingers who claim posters on FR are a bunch of commie liberals, we should require you to take an Political Ideology test before you can post. I've taken such tests over the years, and score moderate leaning to the left. The right-wing has been moving farther to the right, with the Teabaggers so far to the right they'd score as Unibombers or something.

I am a center left independent TruePatriot. I am for what works. Not what should work and doesn't.

Bill:

If you were President, what would you do differently?

Obama once again dithers away his time giving speeches, raising money, traveling the world to drink a pint in Ireland. It's clear he'd like to have a better economy, but now he's even proven to himself that he doesn't have a clue about what to do. He can't campaign on "Getting the economy out of the ditch", most people think we never left the ditch. He can't campaign on stimulating the job market, even government jobs are now going away. He turned his back on his precious unions in Wisconsin, after dramatically campaigning in 2008 that he'd "put on a comfortable pair of shoes and walk the picket line with them." The man is lost, confused, and beaten down. Now he's raffling off his time to try get some traction on his re-election fund-raising. It so pathetic to watch Obama thrash around.

Nash- if Mr Bill were president, I'm guessing he'd holler "ME FIRST" and give YOU the finger.

Despite Bill's ranting, Obama will be elected if the unemployment rate falls over the next year. If it's still around 9% or higher, he won't be reelected. It's as simple as that. Of course, if the Republicans nominate a total nitwit like Michele Bachmann, poster girl for bad socialism, Obama could still win even if the unemployment rate remains high.

That was so cool, to see Presidnt Obama's reception in Ireland. How great is it to have a President people in the rest of the world actually like?

It seems like, in modern times, Democrats are the ones who champion innovation, "made in the USA" manufacturing, and the development of alternative energy technology. The contrast between our last governor, a Democrat, who helped our state get funding for new industrys like building tidal turbines, and our new governor, who is Teapublican, busy disparaging the new technology, is striking. In fact, regular Republicans in his own party are so alarmed by LePage's attitude they are hustling to assure these companies who welcome their investment in Maine.

www.pressherald.com/news/doubt-cast-on-wind-message_2011-06-08.html

That was so cool, to see Presidnt Obama's reception in Ireland. How great is it to have a President people in the rest of the world actually like?

Maybe he should visit Tripoli.

Bill:
If you were President, what would you do differently?

I normally wouldn't be so presumptuous as to outline the policies of a prospective MeFirstBill administration, none of you would pay any attention to it anyway. But since you asked – and only since you asked – my view is a case can be made that low levels of confidence in the future (from both a business and a consumer perspective) are having a negative impact on the economy. So when business reportedly keeps sitting on $1-$2 trillion in cash and consumer spending continues to be modest, economic growth has difficulty getting out of low gear. The prescription for change is to shift gears at the top. Because Obama has been hostile to the business community since the day he took office, not only in terms of inflammatory rhetoric but also by action. Here are some thoughts on how to fix this problem:

- Repeal Obamacare and thereby remove a major impediment to hiring, impending tax increases and a drag on the federal budget at a time when we can least afford it

- Drill baby drill, and create a bunch of jobs in the process

- Drill baby drill, and have an impact on the periodic speculation that helps drive up the price of oil – a tax on all of us that is a further drag on economic growth

- Fully exploit our huge domestic resource of natural gas that can be extracted from shale, and create a bunch of jobs in the process

- Restrain the growth of job killing regulations from EPA and other federal agencies

- Remove economic distortions from the tax code by broadening the base, lowering the rates and eliminating ALL deductions

- Improve the global competiveness of American business by significantly reducing the corporate tax rate and eliminating ALL special interest deductions

- Join most of the rest of the world and eliminate federal taxes on our corporate profits earned overseas.

- Show financial markets around the world as well as the economic players and citizens in the U.S. that we are serious about addressing our fiscal challenges by reforming Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid

- Stop onerous government interventions into the economy as exemplified by the insanity of the NLRB trying to tell Boeing where they can build their world class airplanes

- Do REAL financial reform that eliminates the notion of too-big-to-fail once and for all and removes the government (in the form of Fannie and Freddie) from the home mortgage business.

- Use the bully pulpit of the presidency to INSPIRE the private sector, rather than demonize them. Maybe even challenge industry to unleash their capacity for innovation and competition to help achieve sustained 5% growth as a national goal.

- And use that same bully pulpit to EMBRACE American exceptionalism and categorically reject the Europeanization of this great nation.

That would be a start. Think Reagan optimism versus Carter malaise. Think the empowering disposition of "can do" versus the dismal resignation of the "new normal." Think enabling a better prosperity for all Americans versus the class warfare of pitting segments of our society against one another. A change of tone and policy along these lines might do wonders in getting this country moving again.

Various Republicans both on and off the campaign trail have mentioned most of these ideas. So let's stop with the repeated twisted trash talk from the ignorant left that Republicans don't have a concept for taking this country forward. It's the Dems who don't have a clue, all you need to understand that is to take a look around. And unfortunately what you will see is not a fantasy, but the harsh real world effects of a president who has failed miserably at the job he was hired to do. Heck, the way things are going we might be seeing Obamvilles on the Mall one of these days. And that won't be a fantasy either.

Maybe he should visit Tripoli

Greece is nice this time of year too.

Excellent post Bill. But I doubt you'll get any intelligent discussion based on it from the ones that requested it from you.

Bill:

First, I want to thank you for sharing your vision for the country. Second, I wanna tell you that all of that stuff sounds just like what President Bush tried. It didn't work.

Rising healthcare costs is one of the biggest drains on business. "Obamacare" helps add the much desired "certainty" to the process by controlling costs. That is good for business.

There is not enough oil to drill to meet our needs.

The oil industry (obviously) is not over regulated.

Most corporations pay zero taxes, so the "tax rate" argument is bogus.

Lastly, one thing missing from your plan is doing anything to actually help "human people". It is all corporate this and business that.

Very telling.

(Yeah, I know Bill . . . its gonna trickle down to us . . . I'll run out and buy an umbrella.)

NF: Second, I wanna tell you that all of that stuff sounds just like what President Bush tried. It didn't work.

Most of it is from the Debt Commission report recommendations. Obama's Debt Commission.

Most corporations pay zero taxes, so the "tax rate" argument is bogus.

@Nash

Bill also said that he would eliminate the deductions. To be honest this is one area that I think the Administration is ignoring. From the pundits I have heard there is actually bi-partisan support in Washington to lower the corporate tax rate while at the same time reducing K Street loopholes. As a principal this is something to be aimed for and can be termed pro-market not pro-business. Stop the subsidies for oil, gas and ethanol and level the playing field.

Sure, it was cool, Amy. I am sure those devastated by tornadoes were glued to their televisions, their spirits lifted by the sight.

Oh. Wait. Maybe not.

Well, those losing their homes to massive flooding are sure happy to tune in to his campaign speeches, right? I will bet they, along with those losing their homes to wildfires, are just thrilled to pieces to see how calm and unruffled he is- almost like he is not paying any attention at all!

And the unemployed- almost 15 million of them- they must derive a true sense of joy at seeing him enjoy himself! Think of the vicarious thrills they get!

And the financial markets- well, they are getting a lot of his attention. He keeps visiting, even invites the movers and shakers to the White House- to beg them for money. When they ask about the debt crisis, he assures them that Biden is on it. Well, hr did- until that collapsed. Now, he assures us and them that he is on it- in between campaign junkets, that is. Got to keep those priorities straight!

Yeah, Amy, America loves Obama. All those polls coming out show it- and those are just polls of adults. 40-odd percent approval!

Wait until the likely voter polls come out!

Wait until November 2012!

Then, we will really show the love!

one thing missing from your plan is doing anything to actually help "human people". It is all corporate this and business that.

Your side just doesn't get it. The idea is to invigorate economic growth which translates into increased prosperity for ALL Americans. A pro growth policy is VERY human oriented, it provides the jobs that allow the folks to earn the dollars they need to spend. Your side wants to accomplish that by redistributing incomes from the haves to those who have less. The more enlightened folks on my side want to grow the economic pie bigger for EVERYONE. Sorry you jusy can't see that.

Oh, and as Alan points ouit I specifically mentioned eliminating deductions along with reducing the corporate tax rate. That makes all the difference in the world. Either you're getting sloppy in your old age, or just can't deviate from your narrative.

Alan:

It is almost like these same businesses didn't just use lots of unethical and illegal practices to destroy our economy. According to Bill, businesses are the victims of this mess, not the creators of it.

That is a world view I cannot endorse.

And now you want to tell me that these same folks will not do the same thing if I just cut the tax rate for them? They are IGNORING the current tax rate Alan. That is completely bogus. The truth is, it doesn't matter what the tax rate is, as long as these folks OWN Congress and the Supreme Court, they know that there is NO CHECK on their power and they are going to do whatever the hell they want.

And you know it.

Bill:

Can you please explain to me why these pro growth policies did not work for President George W. Bush? We did all of this stuff, and now we have a collapsed housing market, collapsed job market, and fragile Wall Street.

Please explain to me why you thing doing the same thing again will work this time?

P.S. I am fine with it, but you may want to be careful . . . folks don't like "personal attacks" around here, mmmmkay?

And now you want to tell me that these same folks will not do the same thing if I just cut the tax rate for them? They are IGNORING the current tax rate Alan. That is completely bogus. The truth is, it doesn't matter what the tax rate is, as long as these folks OWN Congress and the Supreme Court, they know that there is NO CHECK on their power and they are going to do whatever the hell they want.

Hey this Administration helped create this mess. You think GE is not taking advantage of the $7500 per car tax write off they get for buying the Volt? There's a nice bit of taxpayer largess. GM can claim they're selling this lemon, GE buys them and then writes off half the cost (depreciation as well) as a tax deduction. So instead of complaining about corporations that exploit the tax code why don't we just remove the loopholes?

Either you're getting sloppy in your old age, or just can't deviate from your narrative.

You have to understand that this is part of the tree-house gang, the ones who pledge their allegiance of their undying love to Obama daily. Any policy, ideas, or personal mention of Obama that disagrees with Obama will be attacked by this unholy alliance of Obama supporters.

Obama could spend the entire press conference today strangling puppies, and the tree house gang would comment that we had too many dogs anyway.

Alan:

Sorry . . . not this time . . . this crap had EXPLODED before President Obama even announced his candidacy, mmmmkay?

I need you to address the fact that the policies Bill is advocating did not work. So why will they magically start working now? See, that is the problem . . . when asked a direct question about a specific policy . . . we get . . . Obama is crappy too! . . . fine . . . but the question is what is a better POLICY? These POLICIES don't work, no matter WHO is implementing them. And yet, we continue to waste precious time pretending they do.

Why is that?

P.S. You ask why don't WE just remove the loopholes? The answer is because the corporations that OWN Congress don't want them removed!

First, it isn't the administration ignoring deductions, it is the other side. Second, not all deductions are bad. Those with one home and one home mortgage are the middle class both upper and lower so their deduction on the interest and property taxes makes sense. Those with multiple homes and multiple mortages should only be able to deduct for one. There are probably many deductions that could and should be eliminated but it depends on what they are. Should parents be able to deduct for their children? Should people be able to deduct the cost of child care? Should they deduct the cost of private school? It is not a black and white issue. Targeted elimination of deductions makes sense but these days, the GOP targets the middle class and poor with every proposal they make. I'm all for making the tax code fairer but the price of doing so should not be paid by those who can least afford it. Ridding the tax code of corporate welfare loopholes would be a step forward but the GOPTP refuses to consider the idea.

It is almost like these same businesses didn't just use lots of unethical and illegal practices to destroy our economy. According to Bill, businesses are the victims of this mess, not the creators of it.

There's plently of blame to go around, a FACT the left consistently ignores. How about shining the white hot spotlight on HUD, Fannie, Freddie, Barney Frank for their contributions to national housing policy that made it ever easier for folks to buy homes -- even when they couldn't asfford them. Oh wait, a couple of NYT reporters have done just that recently.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/06/24/how_the_democrats_nearly_destroyed_the_economy_110339-2.html

Bill:

There is plenty of blame to go around. You can factor all of that in, and it still doesn't 'splain how redoing all the same policies that just failed are going to magically work this time. I mean the fact that you typed "drill baby drill" is just freaking breathtaking. Seriously.

Pointing fingers at other screw ups just doesn't cut it . . . we need solutions . . . not corporate fairy tales.

I need you to address the fact that the policies Bill is advocating did not work. So why will they magically start working now? See, that is the problem . . . when asked a direct question about a specific policy . . . we get . . . Obama is crappy too! . . .

Straw Man argument Nash. I don't know if I agree with all of Bill's policies as some are pretty vague, however, I do think its time to reform the tax code for both individuals and businesses. That is why I said that the Administration seems to be missing this opportunity as both sides seem ready to make a deal (from what I have heard through reporting).

And yes this Administration did add to the complexity and "loopholes" in the tax code as they implemented deductions that would aid "green" jobs and enterprises.

Yep Alan, if it wasn't for those green jobs deductions, we would all be on easy street.

Good grief.

we need solutions . . . not corporate fairy tales

I posted a list of prospective solutions, but you revert to your demeaning corporate fairy tale meme. Hence is the gulf between us, and it will likely ever be thus.

Bill,

It is disappointing to know that you are content to continue to implement failed policies over and over again. I thought you were smarter than that.

It is fine if you think that President Obama's strategies suck. But what you have just demonstrated is that you do not have any alternatives to offer.

This confirms the reality of the situation - there are no good choices.

Thanks for reminding me why I should have put you on ignore with the other non-reality based flame throwers here. (Helps with scrolling . . . and I can read if needed.)

Nashville out.

Well Bill, there you go. For your efforts of explanation, you get disrespected. I told you that you'd get no intelligent conversation, at least not from the NF.

nojo,

Please do not speak for the tornado victims in my state, m'kay? and can you tell me if Cantor released those FEMA funds?

PS. Bill, these "low levels of confidence",...are they any relation to the "uncertainty"? You know if the tax cut isn't re-upped? Extortion by any other name would smell just as crappy.

Sounds like a bunch of Republican Re-treads; no longer Made in the USA; but rather imported on a wing and a prayer - (sic, of destruction).

Bill, Fairfax, VA - 'Drill, Baby, Drill"???

Are you kidding me?

For someone who professes to know about high finance, that is laughable at WORST.

Have you forgotten that with any drilling done in America, the fruits of that drilling goes on the GLOBAL market, where speculators and world market demand can set the price?

How does that help AMERICANS in AMERICA?

I see... It DOESN'T.

You can go back to sleep now, Bill.

Carry On.

And those doing the drilling are employed, IN AMERICA. Meaning they pay taxes, to AMERICA.

And the oil companies pay royalties TO AMERICA.

And, when the global supply of oil goes up, it reduces prices for everybody, including AMERICA.

It's like shooting fish in a barrel.

Clara not sure if the funds have been released but according to this the Republican controlled House Appropriations Committee proposed doubling the disaster fund next year to $3.65 billion.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2011-05-26-FEMA-disaster-relief-funds_n.htm

It's like shooting fish in a barrel.

Thanks for jumping in, no joe. I'm not sure I could have stopped laughing long enough to lift the veils of ignorance from that man's eyes.

You are very welcome, Bill, but I have no hope of lifting those veils myself.

There are those who read this board, however, and do not post. Letting that kind of statement stand unchallenged is not fair to them.

After all, we cannot just let the most loony of the loony tunes do all the work for us, now, can we?

Yeah . . . that whole BP oil leak situation was just not such a big deal . . . and the fact that there isn't enough oil to meet our needs . . . technicality. Short term talking points ahead of long term reality is the way . . . full steam ahead .

Jody:

This Debt Ceiling discussion is a joke. The GOP/TP has no intention of any serious compromises here. They went an all or none meeting which means this issue is dead in the water and they are putting the whole country in harms way.

Who will be one of the big lossers in this - Hello Wall Street - and we will not bail you out this time - Go ask the Koch Brothers for a loan.

US Navy. As the date gets closer, no doubt Boehner and McConnell will be called for a "secret" meeting of Wall Street and business where they will be told to knock it off and "just do it"!

Jody:

I am already hearing rumblings of some concern from Wall Street, one article I heard the other day on BBC is that Wall Street is claiming the the GOP/TP is deliberating creating the uncertainty in the market and Wall Street does not like it.

This is what happens when your agenda is all about you and nobody else. Instead of attacking the problems in this country these guys are on some religious based ideology on destroying the Health Care Rights of Women.

Still can not understand how any women who has any self respect would vote for these guys. Makes no sense unless they think going back into servitude is a good idea.

If the GOPTP was serious about debt reduction, they would be willing to close tax loopholes, raise taxes and require those raised taxes only be used to pay down the debt. To continue to insist that cutting spending is the answer without increasing revenues is complete stupidity.

All for it Jody. While we're using this new revenue to pay down the old debt what should we do about the new debt that's accumulating at a rate of around 4B per day? Should we raise taxes to pay for that too? Tell you what, you cut spending by 4B a day and I'll agree to revenue increases to pay off the current debt. Now if we do that before August 2nd then there will be no need to raise the debt limit.

Alan, NJ

All for it Jody. While we're using this new revenue to pay down the old debt what should we do about the new debt that's accumulating at a rate of around 4B per day? Should we raise taxes to pay for that too? Tell you what, you cut spending by 4B a day and I'll agree to revenue increases to pay off the current debt. Now if we do that before August 2nd then there will be no need to raise the debt limit.

The main reason that there is a deficit is the Bush tax cuts. It kind of stands to reason that eliminating them is the only way to significantly decrease the deficit without drastic cuts in Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Unfortunately, the Republicans real reason for insisting on spending cuts only is that they want to destroy Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. They've been itching to get rid of them ever since they were enacted. The Republicans don't give a damn about the deficit. They believe what Dick Cheney said: "Ronald Reagan taught us that deficits don't matter."

@Houston!

OK. I'm only going to do this once.

The Bush tax cuts account for around 400B a year. (70B for the top 2%).

The DEFICIT is 1.3T.

The DEBT is 14T.

Where are you going to find the other 900B for this year?

Where are you going to find additional funds to start paying down the debt?

The President is not telling the truth when he states that "We don't have to change Medicare if people like me pay a little more".

I am not a believer that deficits don't matter and never have been.

So, Houston!, what additional tax increases are you for as you seem completely unwilling to consider cuts. BTW DOD is around 700B so even if you completely eliminate the Army, Navy and Air Force you're still a couple of hundred billion short.

Houston: You are correct.

ECONOMIC DOWNTURN AND BUSH POLICIES CONTINUE

TO DRIVE LARGE PROJECTED DEFICITS

http://www.cbpp.org/files/5-10-11bud.pdf

Tax Cuts, War Costs Do Lasting Harm to Budget Outlook

“Some commentators blame major legislation adopted in 2008-2010 — the stimulus bill and other recovery measures and the financial rescues — for today’s record deficits. Yet those costs pale next to other policies enacted since 2001 that have swollen the deficit. Those other policies may be less conspicuous now, because many were enacted some years ago and they have long since been absorbed into CBO’s and other organizations’ budget projections”.

“Just two policies dating from the Bush Administration — tax cuts and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan — accounted for over $500 billion of the deficit in 2009 and will account for $7 trillion in deficits in 2009 through 2019, including the associated debt-service costs. [7] By 2019, we estimate that these two policies will account for almost half — nearly $10 trillion — of the $20 trillion in debt that will be owed under current policies.[8] (The Medicare prescription drug benefit enacted in 2003 also will substantially increase deficits and debt, but we are unable to quantify these impacts due to data limitations.) These impacts easily dwarf the stimulus and financial rescues, which will account for less than $2 trillion (less than 10 percent) of the debt at that time. Furthermore, unlike those temporary costs, these inherited policies (especially the tax cuts and the drug benefit) do not fade away as the economy recovers”.

“Without the economic downturn and the fiscal policies of the previous Administration, the budget would be roughly in balance over the next decade. That would have put the nation on a much sounder footing to address the demographic challenges and the cost pressures in health care that darken the long-run fiscal outlook.[9]”

This is what the GOP/TP keeps denying and then turning around and trying to blame President Obama. The facts as outlined in this detailed report are that the previous administration put us in the toilet and no matter who was elected President he/she would be faced with many years of reconstruction. It took 8 years to get into this mess and no president, Republican or Democrat, can reverse the damage in 2 plus years. Especially if you take into consideration that the GOP/TP for the last 2 plus years have done everything in their power to try and make President Obama fail. They have stalled over 400 Bills in the Senate with outright objections (blocks) or filibusters demanding 60 votes. They (GOP/TP) have opposed virtually every Bill that has anything to do with creating jobs and/or helping Small Businesses. Go look up their record of virtually 100% “Obstructionism” on legislation that would have moved this country forward, like the $50 Billion Dollar infrastructure bill for example.

And to compound the problem, the GOP/TP is proposing the same Agenda today as this one above that got us into this mess to begin with. The GOP/TP has no new ideas; just the same old same old just repackaged, but with the same failed programs. Just look at the “Ryan Bill”, T-Paw’s proposal which is even worse and the new Bachmann initiative that is worse than the other two. None of them address the cost driving issues in this country. None of them have any plans to create jobs and stimulate the economy, in fact they all do just the opposite. And these are being presented as “Fiscally Responsible” Bills” that will answer all our problems when they add anywhere from $5.5 Trillion to almost $8 Trillion to the deficit/debt in the next decade while giving the Millionaires & Billionaires record tax cuts. In addition these “bogus” spending cut /economic bills destroy most of the Social Programs that benefit the Middle Class and Low Income Families, like the destruction of Pell Grants for education, Medical Research, Food and Product Safety etc etc etc etc.

What these have in common is the promotion of the GOP/TP agenda that “Spending Cuts” and Tax Cuts for the richest 2% are Americas answer to all our problems. They are not. Not any of these address the real problems we are facing.

Alan, thanks for attempting to explain, but it will not work.

These are people who believe that if they earn $40,000 a year, but spend $60,000 a year, their debt is the fault of their employers, who do not pay them enough.

Today, we have proof that media attention can, actually, stop some ridiculous spending before the money is gone- thanks to the spotlight of attention, the idiotic "secret shopper" program got shutdown before it was implemented.

Unfortunately, we are in the position of finding out about the rest of the nonsensical spending AFTER the money is gone. Shrimps on treadmills come to mind.

Bush and the GOP also failed to pay for the two wars started; they failed to pay for Medicare Rx plan. They failed to pay for anything they passed and the deficit and debt we have today reflects the GOP failure to responsibly govern. Bush and the GOP took budget surpluses that would have paid down, if not eliminated, the National Debt and in one year created a massive deficit. Place blame where it belong and yet we still here the same conservative talking points--it's somebody elses fault, not theirs.

Personally, the Bush tax cuts should expire on everyone except those living at or below the poverty line. The trouble is that Voo Doo economics has forced a large segment of Americans into near poverty existance. Bachmann's idea for creating jobs is to eliminate the minimum wage. Yeah, sure, that will be a real boost to the economy--more people making even less money than it takes to survive; more people working two perhaps three jobs just to make ends meet.

Alan, NJ

@Houston!

OK. I'm only going to do this once.

The Bush tax cuts account for around 400B a year. (70B for the top 2%).

The DEFICIT is 1.3T.

The DEBT is 14T.

Where are you going to find the other 900B for this year?

Where are you going to find additional funds to start paying down the debt?

You forgot some other important contributors to the deficit besides Bush's tax cuts such as Bush's wars. The revenue shortfall due to the Bush Recession are the second most important factors.

The President is not telling the truth when he states that "We don't have to change Medicare if people like me pay a little more".

I'll take his word over the word of the party that spawned a Senator who asserted that a lie he told "was not intended as a factual statement."

BTW: I'm not against spending cuts that are reasonable. I'm just against the cuts that would turn the US into a third-world country, which is what the Republicans seem to be proposing.

You forgot some other important contributors to the deficit besides Bush's tax cuts such as Bush's wars. The revenue shortfall due to the Bush Recession are the second most important factors.

I notice you edited out the part of my post where I explained that completely eliminating the DOD would only net 700B and you would still have a deficit (and by extension still be adding to the debt). As to the shortfall caused by the Bush recession, the Obama expansion does not seem to have made up the difference and he has only spent around 1T (stimulus, tax deductions and a further expansion of unemployment benefits), trying to achieve it. What's next a 2T effort?

Personally, the Bush tax cuts should expire on everyone except those living at or below the poverty line.

Send your check to the IRS today. (See hypocrisy thread above)

Alan, NJ

I notice you edited out the part of my post where I explained that completely eliminating the DOD would only net 700B and you would still have a deficit (and by extension still be adding to the debt). As to the shortfall caused by the Bush recession, the Obama expansion does not seem to have made up the difference and he has only spent around 1T (stimulus, tax deductions and a further expansion of unemployment benefits), trying to achieve it. What's next a 2T effort?

Nice of you to admit there WAS in fact an Obama expansion, which led to the end of the Bush Recession 6 months into his term., although we will still experiencing the aftermath for several more years. If the economy recovers completely, the deficit could be addressed with increased taxes and and the cost savings in the Affordable Care Act the Repubs want to repeal. The US spends almost as much on defense as the rest of the world combined, so significant cuts there could probably made without endangering national security -- unless the rest of the world decides to declare war on us all at once.

Of course, I am no expert, so I would refer you to USN's post #4.7 - which you seem to have missed.

Jody - Great post. Couldn't have said it better.

That law already has produce farmers having difficulty finding migrant workers to harvest their products because they are unwilling to step foot in Georgia.

I read an article last week on a Georgia paper's web site that said some of the crops were already rotting in the ground, even before the law comes into effect because the migrant workers are beginning to leave. This is what happens when government becomes an idiocracy (government by idiots).

DaNoid:

The failed ideology of the far right is starting to lose momentum. The people are waking up to these "snake oil salesmen". They are starting to realize they have been sold a bill of goods.

They want jobs and a stable economy. They do not want Kings, Uterus Police, Religious Fanatics, Power Brokers, etc.

Just good paying Jobs and a Stable Economy and the chance for the American Dream. Instead the GOP/TP is showing them a path to "Servitude" and "Despair".

So Noid, what's your point? That Mr. Bridges knowingly breaks the law every day? Guess he's just another corrupt Republican, eh?

Navy, Indeed people are waking up. Two thirds of the country feel the President is taking it in the wrong direction.

White Collar Auto

So Noid, what's your point? That Mr. Bridges knowingly breaks the law every day? Guess he's just another corrupt Republican, eh?

Ever drive over the speed limit? Ever change lanes without using your turn signal? That's illegal, too, but people do that every day INCLUDING people who get hysterical about someone who trims hedges for a living without a green card.

Houston, I love it when you guys equate driving violations with Illegal Immigration. Apples and Apples, eh?

In fact, I did drive over the speed limit once. The police pulled me over and I was fined for breaking the law and they told me if I didn't pay the fine I would go to jail! Imagine that..

You would think that a Nation that can put a man on the moon, send a space craft to Mars, create all the modern marvels of technology could put heir heads together and fix immigration.

Get those who are here illegally into the (A) system (whatever every that is) to become legal. If they do not want to go the get legal route then they can just get. For those that do want a path to becoming a citizen we should promote that. For those that do not we should deport them.

I cannot believe that intelligent (that may be a stretch) people cannot figure out a way to do this.

Here is the Law, here is how you become a citizen. Do you want to stay? Yes or No. If yes then this is what you must do and this is how long you got to do it. If you do not then you go back.

I have no problem with immigrants coming to this country but they must do it legally and they must abide by our laws, not the ones they left behind which means they need to learn the language as well. My grandfather brought the family over from Italy in the very early 1900's (about 1911). He became a citizen and fought in WWI won a Purple Heart and is resting in Arlington and we have had a family member serving this country every generation since then.

Somebody, I do not care who, put a plan together and just do it and stop the politics. If they want to stay here is what you have to do. If not, that is OK too but you cannot stay here for the long term.

These people are a resource that we should be using not abusing.

White Collar Auto

Houston, I love it when you guys equate driving violations with Illegal Immigration. Apples and Apples, eh?

Personally, I would assume that making illegal lane changes is a crime with potentially more serious consequences than trimming hedges illegally.

In fact, I did drive over the speed limit once. The police pulled me over and I was fined for breaking the law and they told me if I didn't pay the fine I would go to jail! Imagine that..

Fine. Then make illegal aliens pay a fine and then make them legal residents as long as they don't commit any crimes like the one you committed.

Couldn't agree more, Nash. The "uncertainty" narrative was phony from day one. Modern Conservatism has no consistency of belief or principle, it's merely a giant PR campaign to sell policies benefiting the wealthy elites at the expense of everyone else.

Bringing their "A" game; The press corps, in the interest of promoting a dialogue have been limited to the following types of questions;

"what are you doing for the 4th of July weekend?

"Mesquite or charcoal?"

"Hot dogs, hamburgers, or both?"

"Do you have any safety tips for the kids?'

"Why are the republicans trying to destroy America despite your valiant efforts to save her?"

"What has been your greatest success so far?"

"if Michelle Bachmann was a tree, what kind of nut would it bear?"

"How do you manage to stay in such great shape with your busy schedule"

"Why won't we just leave you alone and let you do your job?"

Modern Conservatism has no consistency of belief or principle, it's merely a giant PR campaign to sell policies benefiting the wealthy elites at the expense of everyone else.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

So to you everyone who doesn't share your beliefs (because that is what they are) is an idiot being duped? Well, I'm sure that that's a great place to begin a dialogue and influence hearts and minds...

What is your opinion of folks who see you and your beliefs that way?

dangerfield:

At least those questions are REALITY based! :o)

P.S. I think you meant the second post for someone else.

Nash:

Very true. Heard a piece from BBC that some of the Wall Street big wigs are starting to get annoyed with the GOP/TP Party and a few are starting to claim that it is the GOP/TP that is deliberately creating an environment of uncertainty to push their own agenda which is now starting to conflict with Wall Street.

This is what happens when you OVERREACH!!!

Dangerfield

So to you everyone who doesn't share your beliefs (because that is what they are) is an idiot being duped? Well, I'm sure that that's a great place to begin a dialogue and influence hearts and minds..

There he goes again, distorting what someone says beyond recognition. John said nothing of the sort. That's why it's impossible to have a dialogue with people like Dangerfield.

"if Michele Bachmann was a tree, what kind of nut would it bear?"

That's actually pretty funny!

David:

Ditto.

Great posts again today. I look for them every day. Thank you.

David Walker, thank you for a heartflet tribute to the passing of your friend.

the rigth wing extremists who want to wreck the economy in order to make him a one-term president.

That's precisely what it's all about Houston!

The extent to which they will go to achieve this is, limitless... *shakes head*

The last budget showdown, the President SEEMED conciliatory and the Republicans were patting themselves on the back for 'getting' what they thought was $38 BILLION in cuts. When the dust settled, it was 'only' $352 MILLION.

The GOP got punked.

The GOP/Tea Party looked STUPID high-fiving amongst themselves.

Now, in this round, the GOP is standing firm with their demands, and in this game of chicken, they are detemined not to blink.

It is an interesting game, no doubt.

Let's see what the President has up his sleeve this time.

Pietro:

The last budget showdown, the President SEEMED conciliatory and the Republicans were patting themselves on the back for 'getting' what they thought was $38 BILLION in cuts. When the dust settled, it was 'only' $352 MILLION.

Good point. I guess Obama's negotiating tactics paid off in that case. But I'm still disappointed that he went along with extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. I still think what he should have done was to let all those tax cuts expire for both the middle class, then introduce a bill to reinstate the middle class cuts only, and then see if the Republicans would really have enough nerve to vote against tax cuts for the middle class. Sometimes a more confrontational approach can be better, as Bill Clinton showed with his showdown with Newt Gingrich in the '90s.

Amen to that, Houston. Most countries do not have a debt ceiling! Only in America.

Good point. I guess Obama's negotiating tactics paid off in that case. But I'm still disappointed that he went along with extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. I still think what he should have done was to let all those tax cuts expire for both the middle class, then introduce a bill to reinstate the middle class cuts only, and then see if the Republicans would really have enough nerve to vote against tax cuts for the middle class.

Houston - I can see your point, BUT in the case of extending the tax cuts, this was the tradeoff for people who were out of work to get another 13 months of unemployment benefits, which the Republicans were holding hostage.

I think that the President made the right decision.

Why?

I think it was because the President could see that he was not going to get ANYTHING from the new (at the time) House, so trying to force the issue was a waste of time and effort. With the terribly bad hand he had to play, he was able to get SOMETHING out of the deal. What he got was the unemployment benefits for the unemployed and a NEW HAND TO PLAY. He also probably calculated that another 2 years of pain with the tax cuts would not be abated, no matter what he was to do, because the House was run by Republicans.

That is what you call making lemonade from lemons.

If the President was to take your tack, Houston, that bill would have failed and there would have been no benefit from that bill. You have to remember that the President knows that Americans have notoriously short attention spans, and if he was to 'spar' with the Republicans then, nobody would remember it.

I can prove my point by reminding you that the $38 BILION in 'cuts' was actually $352 MILLION. Why is it that everyone always remembers the $38 BILLION, thinking that the GOP/TP actually won that round when they got their azzes handed to them by the President?

The GOP/TP is doing what their corporate masters are asking them to do - eliminate the middle class. It will take US - the electorate - to get up enough will and courage to STOP this from happening.

By the way, if we are talking budget, where has the President and Democrats been on the budget in 2010 and 2011. Seems to me as I remember, they didn't pass a budget at all. You actually have to introduce and pass a budget to be wrong or right on it. The Democrats have been totally financially irresponsible. Just as with the budget, the debt, Social Security, Medicare you have a right to disagree with the Republicans. But where are the Democratic solutions? You want to tell us we are wrong but have no answer but raise taxes. If you taxed everyone over the income of $250,000 at a 100% rate. Actually confiscate all of their income, you would still have a $600 billion deficit. Of course, that would work a couple of weeks until the rich stopped working at all. You can't really do anything about the budget deficit without drastic budget cuts and doing something about entitlements.

Today Senator Lieberman said the trustees of Medicare said the program would go bankrupt in 11 years. But he also said that Medicare would start seeing it's first financial difficulties in 2016 unless nothing is done. Now Lieberman is not one of what you call crazy republicans. Last time I looked he still was in the Democratic caucus. So to do nothing as Democrats want just puts Medicare on a course to go away completely.

Ummm, Ray? Republicans filibustered the budget both years...ring a bell?

Ray, Leiberman votes with the GOP more then half the time. He is not a good example of a democrat.

Houston I wish I read what you posted days ago. I'm reposting something I posted on another board. If the president just says he will pay the bills no matter what the GOP/TP does there is one more branch consider, the Supreme Court. They might have time to counter and say the president may not usurp the power of congress in this area. He would almost certainly leave himself open for impeachment proceedings if he mishandles this. Here is the solution that I feel would deal with the five conservative justices as well.

I believe every elected GOP, and Tea Party offical, and Judge on the Supreme Court appointed by GOP presidents, to be far beyond treason, they are in open rebellion against the United States. As such President Obama is within his rights to declare Martial law if need be and and remove these rebels from office. Everytime the Democrats have come half way the GOP demanded more. The GOP in the senate filibustered every bill in the previous session of congress.

The GOP and Tea Party want to drag the country over the over the cliff. They are in willful dereliction of the oath they took to preserve and protect the constitution. Their oath to Grover Norquist not to raise taxes is in direct conflict with their oath to protect and defend the Constitution. They openly lied about their agenda to get elected. An elected official cannot serve two masters. They were elected to serve us, not the Uber rich.

I sent a variation of what I posted here, to Barack Obama via the white house site, there are grounds to remove them from office by force, in my opinion. I expect to be hammered because of this post. I don't care.

I don't know if the white house will act on my suggestion. Such actions will not be easy and could get very messy if mishandled. Russia had a similar situation in the 90s when tank had to fire on a hard line legislative body that was hell bent on resurrecting the Soviet Union.

Even if Obama considers this he risks a possible civil war under the best of circumstances. He needs to consider all the ramifications if he does act.

Look again, most of Wall Street voted for and contributed to Obama in 2008. I am talking the executives of Goldman Sachs, Citicorp, AMEX, Chase, and Bank of America among a long list. They aren't standing in line to contribute the same amount this time which has the President's people upset.

Every Democrat complain about the Tea Party but I haven't seen very many big limos standing in line at those Tea Party rallies. Seems to me they are just middle class people. But I don't see many middle class people at those fund raisers in Boston, Miami, Washington, NY, or LA that cost $35,000 per plate. So you can talk about parties of rich and poor but I don't pay attention to what they say. I pay attention to what they do. It seems like their is a big price tag for access to this President. The President of the middle class and poor. Yah, right.

Nice conspiracy theory but you left out the international Jews and Bildabergers.

Ray W.

Nice conspiracy theory [stupid accusation of antisemitism deleted].

If it's a conspiracy, it's an open one. Republican Senate leader Mitch McConnell said that his "number one priority" was making Obama a one-term president. The Republicans destructive actions of over the past two years show that the good Senator should be taken at his word.

Exactly, all those Republican candidates want to make Obama a one term president. That is what the opposition party does. They don't have to try to be destructive. Obama has taken a Bush recession and turned it into the Obama depression. If they don't pass a debt ceiling increase, it doesn't mean the default of the US government . Obama can only spend what he takes in. Therefore programs must be cut. If senior citizens Social Security and Medicare don't get paid, that will be a CHOICE Obama makes. Will he value green energy, the EPA, the 80% increase in lawyer in the Justice Dept. over Social Sec, Medicare, and military pay. But he will have to make the choices in front of the American voter. The Republicans have already made an offer of a 1 to to debt ceiling increases to budget cuts. So if Obama rejects this he has made a decision in favor of continued out of control spending. Time to balance the budget before it is too late.

Ray W.

Exactly, all those Republican candidates want to make Obama a one term president. That is what the opposition party does. They don't have to try to be destructive.

It is not the business of a United States Senator to make a president of the opposing party a one-termer. That's the job of the party campaign committees. The only way McConnell has of contributing to Obama's defeat is to block laws that will improve the economy or protect consumers. And that is exactly what he's done for the past two years.

Obama has taken a Bush recession and turned it into the Obama depression. If they don't pass a debt ceiling increase, it doesn't mean the default of the US government .

You don't have a clue what you're blathering about. The recession officially ended 6 months after Obama took office, when the GDP ceased contracting and started expanding. The unemployment rate continued to go up thanks to the mess the Republicans made of the economy and thanks to the fact that corporations are sitting on the huge profits they made under Obama rather than hiring new employees. But unemployment does not the define a recession.

The unemployment rate in the private sector has been 9.6 to 10 % for the last 2-1/2 years. The unemployment rate for the government sector has been 4.2% over the same period. Those aren't Republican numbers, those are number from the Dept. of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics. During this time the GDP growth in the private sector has averaged 1.8%. Anything below 2% in considered recession. The President and Democrats along with Democratic economist may have called the recession over with but the numbers just don't bear that out. GDP growth in the second quarter of 2011 has been at 1.7% in the private sector. Just to give a comparison, the growth rate in the private sector during the Great Depression was 1.5%. The only thing that came out of recession was the government sector. Now that the stimulus money is gone, the government sector is coming in line with the private sector

Why are there so many financial firsts? Because no other party in total control has ever spent at this level. They have "maxed out" the credit card multiple times and thrown a tantrum to get more. When Bush took office the national debt was at $8.2 trillion. When he left office it was at $10.6 trillion after 8 years and two wars. Now after 2-1/2 years of Obama and Democratic rule, our national debt is at almost $14.5 trillion and expected to be over $16 trillion by the end of the first Obama term. Then if anyone disagree they are whiners. You can run all the political rhetoric you want but those are the fact. If kept in office for another 4 years, Obama would double our national debt spending almost 5 times what Bush did. Some fault goes to Bush but 75% of the fault goes to the spending practices of Obama and the Democrats. Now Chuck Schumer wants another $600 billion in stimulus. Talk about a fools errand. Even if you get the tax increases you want. They wouldn't even account for 9% of the deficits the Democrats are running up now. The only answer is drastic cuts in spending. All not passed a debt ceiling increase would do is force an immediate balancing of the budget. How is that fiscally irresponsible?

Great post irene...it's hard to do good parody but you nailed it.