Took mine out quite a while ago too, AM. Bought Gold. I'm thinking that this isn't going to be very pretty in the long run.

There's a hole in my bucket, Dear Liza, Dear Liza.......

I have taken a similar strategy White Collar... but am buyin silver (undervalued compared to gold!). I get both the real thing but primarily invest in an ETF (SLV)

WCA: AM. Bought Gold

Good plan.

Now make sure you don't hold any Greek bonds, and your set.

As I've said before, I have been steadily moving my stocks and stock mutual funds to non-US, non-European areas since the Republicans became Dems by passing Medicare Part D. China, India, Brazil, and smaller emerging market countries are where the stock market money will be made in the 21st century. Gold and silver are great if you really believe there will be a long term global economic meltdown, but, as a long term investment over the last 20-30 years they haven't done very well.

I'm with you Joe, the gold is short term, say to around November 2012, then I'll start looking at the markets again.

Gold and lead. Been out of stocks for a long while now. And damn gold is rocking.

So Drive By - headed to Arizona this weekend for the big ugly. Standard operating policy for last year or so is to buy a shiny new firearm each trip. Last trip I got the coolest little .22 pistol.

BUt looking at the going's on in Greece, seeing the totally awesome budget Cali just passed, and being ever mindful of folks like Greg in Detroit that say anarchy is coming cause them damn rich "just keep getting richer," I'm thinking I need to get either an AK or an AR. You know home defence and all.

What you think Drive? I'm leaning AK-47, cause they are cheap as dirt, and unbreakable. Plus the ammo is a little cheaper. But Man the ARs have all the cool accessories.

It's been silver for me. It's the poor man's gold. Can buy it in smaller chunks and if the bottom does fall out of the economy, I have something that's barterable.

Get this line from the article: The balanced-budget amendment faces an uphill battle, because it would need a two-thirds majority for passage, as Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) indicated on the Senate floor this morning.

Orrin is saying the president will veto a balanced budget amendment. Why doesn't this suprise me? Here we have a president that believes living out of our means is acceptable. Obama seems to be hooked on stupid, or is it something more devious? How do you liberals answer that? Is it irresponsibility he shows, or do you liberals actually support a president that won't accept a balanced budget? You really think it's good to continue to supply money to programs, even if it means our financial instability?

Just curious, Brian ~

When Bush, a republican president, had control of both houses of congress between 2001 and 2006, how many votes did they take on a balanced budget amendment?

And how many balanced budget amendments did Ronald Reagan introduce during the eight years while he was president? Heck, while we're at it, how many balanced budgets did Reagan PROPOSE? I already know the answer to this one, by the way. Or how about Bush 41? Did Newt Gingrich ever introduce such an amendment while he was Speaker of the House? I don't recall that, either.

The relevance of this, of course, is that you're accusing President Obama of BELIEVING in living outside our means. That's a pretty serious charge. Apparently, however, that also applied to Bush 43, and to all those members of the current Congress who were in Congress during Bush's administration, to Reagan, to Bush 41, and to Newt Gingrich and all the republican members of Congress during Bill Clinton's administration.

Apparently, they were hooked on stupid, too. Or maybe hooked on lobbyists and special interests would be more likely.

So, what's the moral? I'm sure you can guess. It has something to do with glass houses.

"The irony, however, is that a substantial portion of the debt and deficits are the Bush tax cuts, two unfunded wars, and Medicare Part D."

That needs to be front and center on the economic debate and commercials for the 2012 elections. How much Bush is responsible for the majority of our 14 trillion debt even after he left office because of his wars which Obama is trying to clean up and end also his Tax cuts for the rich and Medicare Part D. All Bush policies. All Republican spending sprees, not Democratic. I repeat NOT DEMOCRATIC spending sprees but Republican spending sprees. McConnell, Ryan, Boehner, these men are all lying to you America. They will get into office and rape our government. Taking our taxes and giving them to their rich buddies the bankers and the industrialized war machine instead of benefits for the elderly, the vets, the disabled and our children. Get rid of the scourge in our government. Vote 2012.Vote anything except Republican.

That needs to be front and center on the economic debate and commercials for the 2012 elections. How much Bush is responsible for the majority of our 14 trillion debt even after he left office because of his wars which Obama is trying to clean up and end also his Tax cuts for the rich and Medicare Part D. All Bush policies.

Go for it. These would be the same tax cuts that Obama extended? The same Drug Program that Obama expanded? The same Afghanistan war that Obama escalated?

Knock yourself out!

Bush was stupid and what he did was bad. That is no excuse to repeat the same.

AnaB - given that this stuff is bad, why is Obama engaging in exactly the same thing? Wars, and tax cuts?

By the way I do so like the "taking our taxes and giving them to their rich buddies.."

Perhaps you can explain a little? Who is in control now? Who is taking, and what is being taken?

Let's hear it AnaB, surely [can I call you that] mean something specific?

AnaBanana- you mean like THIS kind of taking our tax money and giving it to their "rich" buddies?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2011/06/26/obama039s_factory_visits_raise_questions_258185.html

Thanks for backing up what we on the right have been saying all along. There is more corruption in that stimulousmprogram than Tea Pot Dome.

Anna Molly, I believe if you will look back in history, there have been balanced budget amendments inacted. Have any of them worked? Not that I can remember.

I'm not asking Obama to create a balanced budget amendment, but, shouldn't he sign onto it? Considering the weight of the national debt, shouldn't something be done about it? Or is it your contention, because Bush didn't do it, Obama shouldn't do it either? I'll ask an even more pointed question: When should the government do something about balancing the budget? A very wise person once told me that the time for action is now. We can't do anything about the past but actions can be put in place now to steer the boat in the right direction.

I wasn't a Bush supporter when it came to financial matters. He was not a fiscal conservative, so don't think by throwing Bush at me effects my opinion of what should be done now. I've been saying the government spends way too much money since Reagan.

It appears as though you are taking the side that nothing needs to be done. Tell me I am wrong about this. There are no glass houses. Wrong is wrong. Our government is wasteful, and has been for some time, but when does it stop? Does it stop when we lose our economy? Resetting is not a pleasant thing.

Since Obama is the current sitting president... do you want me to go back and say that Bush should sign on now to a balanced budget? Kinda hard to do, isn't it? You didn't know I existed when Bush was president so you can't say how much I spoke out about the national debt on forums such as these. I spoke out then, and I will speak out now. Unfortunately for you, Obama happens to be in the white house so he's the focus now. It's not up to you who I speak out against... just like it's not up to me who you speak out against. Right now I choose to speak out against this president that thinks balancing the budget isn't necessary.

Anna Molly

Just curious, Brian ~

When Bush, a republican president, had control of both houses of congress between 2001 and 2006, how many votes did they take on a balanced budget amendment?

Of course they didn't control the Senate for the majority of time between 2001 and 2003.

When the 107th Congress commenced on January 3, 2001, the Senate was evenly divided—that is, there were 50 Democrats and 50 Republicans. Outgoing Vice PresidentAl Gore acted in his constitutional capacity as ex officioPresident of the Senate, and used his tie-breaking vote to give the Democrats the majority in that chamber. For the next two weeks, Daschle served as Senate Majority Leader. Then, upon the commencement of the Bush administration on January 20, 2001, Dick Cheney became President of the Senate, thereby returning Democrats to the minority in that body; Daschle reverted to the position of Senate Minority Leader. However, on June 6, 2001, Senator Jim Jeffords of Vermont announced in that he was leaving the Senate Republican caucus to become an independent and to caucus with Democrats;^[15] this once again returned control of the body to the Democrats and Daschle again became Majority Leader.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Daschle

Amy,

Do you have any comments on California? The way I look at it California is a Democrat/Progressives Dream. I can tell you as an Independent, its more like a nightmare.

As far as the stimulus package the only thing it has accomplished was to put off the inevitable. Over two years of tax increase, and not only did we get nothing from it, they want more.

LOL! Same old left-wing rhetoric! They love to cry it out loud until you ask them to explain why the messiah is doing the SAME things!

AB: That needs to be front and center on the economic debate and commercials for the 2012 elections. How much Bush is responsible for the majority of our 14 trillion . . . .

Do you think the voters are ready for another election blaming Bush? Certainly the hard core Lefties will enjoy it, but what about the other 95% of the electorate? Going out on a limb here and thinking that people look for their leaders to take responsibility and ownership of the problems in the country and not pass them off to someone else.

Also, that $14 trillion dollar debt will be around $16 trillion by election day, about $5.5 trillion more than when Obama came to office, and equal to what Bush deficit spent in 8 years, while Obama will have accomplished the same in 4 years.

"Alan, NJ

That needs to be front and center on the economic debate and commercials for the 2012 elections. How much Bush is responsible for the majority of our 14 trillion debt even after he left office because of his wars which Obama is trying to clean up and end also his Tax cuts for the rich and Medicare Part D. All Bush policies.

Go for it. These would be the same tax cuts that Obama extended?"

Yes. The are the same tax cuts that the Republicans held the country hostage over . . . . and the same tax cuts Republicans demanded get passed or else they would kick 9/11 responders to the curb and continue to destroy several other things (like the economy recovery) -and leave those heroes hanging and helpless. Just because currently elected Republicans act like terrorists in their form of "negotiating" - it doesn't mean we simply forget what they really do. Actions are loud.

"The irony, however, is that a substantial portion of the debt and deficits are the Bush tax cuts, two unfunded wars, and Medicare Part D."

That needs to be front and center on the economic debate and commercials for the 2012 elections.

______________________________________

AnaB: Could you please explain to me why the Dems did absolutely NOTHING about any of these items you are blaming GWB for in 2009 when thay had an overwhelming House majority, a filibuster-proof 60 Senate votes and Barry in the White House?? They could have repealed the tax cuts, ended the wars and repealed Part D and yet they chose to do NOTHING. Sounds to me you are blaming the wrong people for all the red ink.

Brianb:

Of course they didn't control the Senate for the majority of time between 2001 and 2003.

Ah. That explains it. And for the next four years, they were so busy funding Bush's phony war and not funding Medicare Part D that they had no time to devote to balancing the budget.

NOW I get it, and thanks for explaining it to me.

But when you get a minute, maybe you could tell me what happened to the rest of the history in my post, and how this fits in with your accusation on that other thread that liberals never respond to your oh-so-pithy challenges.

The point here, which you completely fail to grasp, is that YOU accused President Obama of actually BELIEVING in not balancing the budget, as if that were something so evil and horrible and unique that it alone would disqualify him, not only from office, but from the human race.

And the answer to that is, simply, that you haven't proven any such thing. In fact, EVERY president has done the same thing.

These other balanced budget amendments that you're talking about were presumably state legislation, correct? And you ask me if they've worked? Too ironic. You were the one ranting about it, not me. I'm NOT in favor of a balanced budget amendment. That's where YOU began.

Why don't we start over, okay. Take a position and actually defend it, rather than shifting your argument to me when you no longer like where your argument is going.

Brianb:

A very wise person once told me that the time for action is now.

Seems to me that this ball is in John Boehner's court. Let him propose it, and THEN we'll worry about whether President Obama would be willing to sign it.

You just never know, do you? He might surprise you and do it.

Spanky,

What you think Drive? I'm leaning AK-47, cause they are cheap as dirt, and unbreakable. Plus the ammo is a little cheaper. But Man the ARs have all the cool accessories.

Last I checked AKMs and ARs were illegal in Cali. Your not porpusing to break the law are you? What would you Lawyer or Accountant say about putting that in writing? Just wondering.

That's really funny Devie. I was just at the shooting range yesterday looking at a really nice AR-15. Rock River.

Hey maybe you ought to report them. San DDiego Indoor Gun Range.

Go ahead. I'm sure they'd love to know. :)

Hey Spanky, I really don't care if you own a bazooka or any other fire arm for that matter. I f you think owning a private arsenal is what makes you feel safe or heart race then have at. I was taught that if you need more than six shots you are in serious trouble. I for one believe a 12 gauge with double ought buck will do just nicely.

Why don't you learn to laugh at yourself a little. Life is to short to take any of the snarky comments made here to heart.

Not sure where you got your info but according to this, states with Republican governors has the largest increase in employment in May. States with the largest decreases in employment were split between 3 states with Democratic governors and 2 with Republicans. I don't think the answer is quite that black and white but somewhere in the gray area.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/laus.nr0.htm

Amy B-

What I find appalling is the fierceness with which Republicans are fighting the Presidenton every program, every policy, every front.

Where were these people during the Bush era when they ruined our country with their trickle down economics and lax regulations? All those tax cuts and no new jobs created, Yet they want us to believe if we just let them do this same stupid stuff again, the jobs will be created!

Are they serious?

ksw62118

The article I read examined the correlation between spending cuts and unemployment on a state by state level from the beginning of the recession in 2007 to December 2010. But I see what you mean about the unemployment rates in May 2011.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/06/27/255010/chart-states-cut-most-spending-jobs/

it's best to ignore Bev, the corrupt Chitown organizer with her biased 'cut and paste' jobs... lol!

Republican States all recognize that job creation in THE PRIVATE SECTOR is the best way to increase revenue, reduce budget deficits, and of course lower the unemployment rate which in turn lowers governmement handouts etc, etc.

Obama and the democratic states are doing the opposite. Fund Goverment and ignore the private sector! This 'plan' has not reduced unemployment as Obama's stimulous packages promised but it has dramatically increased the deficit!! "Where has the money gone???"

This whole mess would be laughable if it wasn't such a serious matter! I think I'll buy gold and silver too!

Bev- You really, need to stop visiting those cracker jack bullsh!t right wing lying websites. All they do is delude you.

Another great Bevism.....best part was you followed it up with a cut and paste from ThinkProgress. You are priceless Bev, I just wish I could understand what in the world you are talking about.

Bev. is hopeless, god knows I have tried, but it is what it is.

Amy, dearest, do your self a favor and branch out a little from ThinkProgress. Seriously.

Amy we here in Cali have not slashed anything. So, how it looking to you? You think Cali is doing great? It is a progressive paradise. Not even ThinkProgress can dispute that it is totally controlled by democrats.

Funny thing is none of you want to recognize that we are your future. That is so sad, doomed to continue repeating terrible mistakes.

So Amy, when this turns to Greece, which side of the stun bombs will you be on?

Bev LOL you are priceless. The link I provided was from the US Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics(as in government website). Who would have known they were a "right wing lying website" ?

I read an article that pointed out states with Republican governors who slashed state spending ended up losing more jobs, while states with Democratic governors, who made more moderate cuts, had lower overall unemployment rates. Slashing public workers from state payrolls also affects private sector jobs, it turns out.

You want to post the link? Meanwhile check out what is happening in Connecticut. Democratic governor raises taxes to save union jobs but asks that they take less. He gets slapped by the unions. Pink Slips today.

www.businessinsider.com/connecticut-unions-look-to-reverse-vote-as-governor-readies-thousands-of-layoffs-2011-6

Why do the left on this board persist in the belief that tax increases will solve long term structural budget issues?

Was Texas mentioned in the think progress piece, Amy? Cause, according to BLS, they have had 2% job GROWTH, no losses.

And I am pretty sure they are a "red" state.

Alan, to answer your question-

For the same reason they believe the stimulus created three million jobs here, when all the evidence points to the fact that it created jobs in China.

As an aside- watching this press conference, apparently "corporate jets" are the new "car in the ditch".

Just as lame, too.

Shiela - do you really have to question why the republicans are going after Obama with a vengence? Is your vision so narrow that you never see what Obama has done to the republicans? Before 2010, Obama said that the republicans were going to sit in the back of the bus. Not only was his statement racist, it was totally immature. The republicans have decided that Obama must go... and they will do their level best to prove to the American public that he is incapable of doing the job. Obama is doing most of that by himself, but the republicans will NOT help him get re-elected. Sorry dear, but that's the way politics works.

The only way to get rid of the Obama policies is to make him leave the White House... and that means he will have an uphill battle in 2012. Don't think he will garner the same support from the people as last time. Now that we've had a taste of Obamaworld, a lot of people are yakking in the streets.

It seems like Bev likes calling the government websites cracker jack right wing Bull$h*t websites! This made my day! If nothing else happens the rest of the day, I will hearld this as the stupidest remark of the month! ROFL at Bev... you are a trip! Now Bev, you can tuck your tail between your legs, go run, hide and live the rest of your day embarassed.

Another classic [and frankly aren't they all] Bevism.

Keep them coming Bev.

BEVUSM ALERT!!!! BEVISM ALERT!!!!! BEVISM ALERT!!!!!

Beverly in Chicago

ksw62118

Not sure where you got your info but according to this, states with Republican governors has the largest increase in employment in May

Well, I know where you got your stup-tas-tical numbers. You really, need to stop visiting those cracker jack bullsh!t right wing lying websites. All they do is delude you.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (a gub'ment department/site) is a "CRACKER JACK BULLSH!T RIGHT WING LYING WEBSITE."

and THERE IT IS!..... YEAH! Another wonderful BEVISM!

It NEVER ceases to amaze me how she continues to come up with them!

Bill T from USA

it's best to ignore Bev, the corrupt Chitown organizer with her biased 'cut and paste' jobs... lol!

Republican States all recognize that job creation in THE PRIVATE SECTOR is the best way to increase revenue, reduce budget deficits, and of course lower the unemployment rate which in turn lowers governmement handouts etc, etc.

That's why the private sector is taking land grab s on the people's assets that would benefit the Koch Brother's and other multi millionaire corps who don't play by the rules.

The Koch brothers own Koch Industries, the largest privately held company in the U.S. with significant coal interests in Wisconsin

What about those Wisconsin power plants; huh? The real deal is that it would directly benefit a Koch Industries company that supplies coal to Wisconsin power plants.

http://www.unions.org/home/union-blog/2011/06/09/french-water-company-problems-highlight-what-happens-under-privatization/

Newly elected Republican Governor Rick Snyder's new budget bill slashes aid to local governments and many towns. The financial managers will have a broad range of powers over local governments.

Rather than create jobs, this takes away even more rights and resources from Michiganders and instead gives an unprecedented amount of power into those connected to the governor.

For example Rick scott in Florida

He wants drug testing for welfare recipients.

Gov. Rick Scott has 62 million of his own dollars, a controlling stake, invested in a chain of walk-in clinics called Solantic Corp. that perform drug testing would not be used since he turned it over to his wife.

Shortly before he was inaugurated, Scott’s lawyers met with attorneys at the Florida Commission on Ethics. Subsequently, they moved his Solantic holdings into a revocable trust in his wife’s name, making her the controlling investor in the privately held company. No public records were created from the ethics meeting.

http://blog.norml.org/2011/06/07/florida-governor-rick-scott-to-the-states-poor-i-want-your-urine/

The ACLU said the study found the drug testing program would cost more to run than the state could possibly save by eliminating drug users on welfare.

Look at Sunbiz.org >Look up a business name> inquire by name> type in Solantic > search > Solantic Corporation > scroll down until you see Officer/Director Detail >Richard L. Scott Title Director. Hey, that's not his wife as the owner!!!!

Yup, that's right it's

Richard L. Scott

What you righties cant is called greed not business; and it reeks lies and of corruption. These multimillionaires use religion wack -o-doodle issues to benefit off the backs of the people and to garner votes.

Keep listening to the duplicitous talking heads on the right. Give me a freakin break; you people can't say squat

Beverly in Chicago Comment collapsed by the community.

You are a bunch of cowards ands right tools who refuse to see you are being pis**ed on. SO you pertinent info that could help you.

ksw62118

Not sure where you got your info but according to this, states with Republican governors has the largest increase in employment in May

Well, I know where you got your stup-tas-tical numbers. You really, need to stop visiting those cracker jack bullsh!t right wing lying websites. All they do is delude you.

These right wing websites pull bullsh!t numbers out their butts.

GOP Blew Up Debt Negotiations To Protect Tax Breaks For People Making $500,000 Or More

There’s also evidence that Republicans planned the walk-out weeks in advance to pressure Democrats and improve Speaker John Boehner’s (R-OH) negotiating position. In short, at no point have Republicans been negotiating in good faith or honestly trying to broker a deal. They’re more interested in “striking a Tea Party pose” and using the massive debt they created as an excuse to enact their radical political agenda.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/06/24/253721/gop-blew-up-debt-negotiations-to-protect-tax-breaks-for-people-making-500000-or-more/

For instance: That Perry has a stellar record on job creation is simply not true.

Texas has by far the largest number of employees working at or below the federal minimum wage ($7.25 per hour in 2010) compared to any state, according to a BLS report. In 2010, about 550,000 Texans were working at or below minimum wage, or about 9.5 percent of all workers paid by the hour in the state. Texas tied with Mississippi for the greatest percentage of minimum wage workers…From 2007 to 2010, the number of minimum wage workers in Texas rose from 221,000 to 550,000, an increase of nearly 150 percent.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/06/16/246892/perry-minumum-wage-jobs/

Stimulus-Critic Rick Perry Only Able To Balance His State's Budget Because Of Stimulus

... of the loudest critics of the legislation was Gov. Rick Perry... (R-TX). At the time, Perry said rejecting the money... with taxpayer dollars

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2010/05/26/173292/perry-stimulus-only/

=============================================

Now, isn't it funny th only way they created jobs was with government money. That includes Michell Batwoman who is sucking off the teets of the government when she and her husband had Bachman & Associates Clinic Took $167,000,00 in MEDICARE, more than Michele Bachman first reported. And Michelle Bachman continues receiving FARM SUBSIDIES. Your site is Hypocritical, LIARS, & THIEVES.

Amy, Repeating misleading and false information only serves the liberal mob mentality.

While you're at it you might as well repeat your claim that Romney inherited all of his money from his Dad!

Amy,

More accurately ...... a lie cannot be repeated enough.

The costs of Bush's wars $760 billion in 8 YEARS ...... and Obama overspends by twice that amount THIS YEAR ALONE!

Oh yea, Bush's averaged annual spending on the wars was $95 billion. Obama's average spending on the wars is $160 billion.

Bush tax cuts?

In 2007, revenue under Bush was 18.5% of GDP - higher than the average for the last 70 years.

How does above average revenue add to the debt?

Anyway, keep repeating the lie for the Obama re-election cause. And btw - some dead German guy named Joe G. would be so proud.

How about this article where it shows that Eric Cantor stands to PROFIT Mightily if the US actually defaults on it's debt?

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

Really nice huh?? Shows where he is coming from, I wonder how many other Repubs and TPers are on that same profit from disaster bandwagon!!

Why thank you for highlight just how stupid Obama must be Amy.

Let's assume what you say is true. So tell me, why did Obama go and get us in War #3? Total cost to us of Libya so far Amy?

And Bush's tax rates expired in 12/10. Who was the president then Amy? Bush was long gone. SO why, if they were so bad did your guy sign the exact same ones into law?

Amy that is straight up stupid. Unless you can explain why Obama did what he did?

Amy do please support your comment. I would just absolutely love to hear from you. Or will you ignore and continue to spout this crap day after day?

Of course you will.

Spanky, lemme see, just WHO was it that blackmailed the President with absolutely DEMANDING the keeping of Bush's tax breaks in exchange for keeping the Unemployment Extensions funded so that millions of people did not face immediate eviction from housing and default on all their bills and possible starvation?? The Repubs blackmailed the President into accepting an extension on the tax breaks for their billionaire buddies that actually caused the economic mess we are in so that the President could extend help to those people who were harmed most by the financial thuggery to begin with.

The Repub's blackmailing America to keep tax rates low on those that are harming America the most by dodging taxes, refusing to hire and outsourcing labor just to pad their bottom lines while a the same time sitting on trillions of dollars in CASH is totally outrageous. They are demanding cuts to programs that the neediest of us depend on for life itself while giving massive breaks to those who do not need nor deserve them.

Those of you who are supporting the Repubs in their skullduggery are supporting a group that is committing sedition and treason by attacking and holding hostage the average American in order to make sure that the richest 2% and the Corporations profit above and beyond all reason.

Ah, B. Honest, back with more of the "Democrats are worthless, powerless, and incapable of doing anything/Republicans rule the world but suck" syndrome, eh?

But hey, because you asked - Obama got unemployment extended then. What was the rate? What is it now? Huh, that sucks, right B.Honest?

So just what kind of gun did the republicans have aimed at Obama as he signed the Obama tax cuts into law?

Blackmail? Really? Yeah, too bad Obama couldn't just take a stand against those mean Republicans. At the time how many dems were in the senate and house? Wow, that is kind of surprisimg. right?

Amy - your comment has been shot to pieces. Do you think so little of yourself that you just run away?

Perhaps you ought ot think about your comments before you post them? Either stand up for your self or just stop.

Wait, no don't do that. Carry on. You are highlighting the silliness of your positions by acknowledging that you are wrong.

BAJI 214: Admissions by Silence:

You may treat the silence of the party as an admission that the statement was true only if you believe:

1. the party that remained silent was aware of the statement;

2. he or she could have denied the statement and did not;

3. that he or she would have denied the statement is he or she thought it was false.

That is the Claifornia jury instruction, i.e. THE LAW.

Last chance to dance Amy. Come on girl, stand up for yourself. You can do it.

Spanky, twist it any way you want. But B Honest is right. It WAS blackmail.

Just like the debt ceiling discusiion is blackmail by the Republicans.

Playing holier-than-thou is disingenuous. Perhaps you have forgotten the Republican pledge to make Obama fail no matter what. The country be damned...

Spanky, this is a public discussion forum, not a court of law. Get over yourself.

Totally disingenuous Spanky, with the Repubs TOTALLY blocking everything in the Senate with their Fake Filibuster Rule 22 did not allow the Dems to advance the Unemployment bill by themselves. Just like the other OVER 400 bills that would have created jobs, regulated lenders and helped put an end to the financial thuggery that the Banking and Wall Street sectors have been committing.

Why were you not complaining when Bush more than doubled the National Debt all the while declaring that Deficits Do Not Matter?? Can you say Hypocrisy??

A large part of the present deficit actually comes from spending on programs that the Repubs put into place without funding. Can you say Hypocrisy??

The Repubs blocked MANY bills that would have created jobs for Americans and then ran on the platform of providing jobs, yet have not put forth a single bill that would do so. Can you say Hypocrisy??

The Repubs had and have a gun pointed at the heads of our Nation's neediest, most of whom were put there by the Repub's own programs and intransigence, holding us all hostage to their demand to not raise the taxes or cut loopholes and tax giveaways for the very richest of us, those who are Too-Obscenely-Rich-To-Ever-Fail crowd. Those that signed on to Grover Norquist's Anti-Tax Pledge are committing sedition and treason against the United States of America on behalf of the 2% of the populace that controls OVER half of all wealth in this Nation...and you support them?? Can you say Hypocrisy??

See there, I KNEW you could!

miked-332794

I did make a mistake in claiming Romney inherited millions from his Dad. Truthfully, I was thinking of Donald Trump, that "if I can be a billionaire, you can too!" fake. Trump inherited millions from his real estate mogul Dad.

Mitt Romney's father was only CEO of American motors and governor of Michigan. Romney went to work for Bain Company out of Harvard Business School and eventually formed Bain Capital, a private equity firm, which makes him billions by investing in such things as Burlington Coat Factory, Burger King and Staples.

Still not Thomas Edison

Spanky, how many of the liberals come on here, spew their junk, get challenged and you near nothing from them until the next day, spewing the same junk? It's a day in, day out progression of stupid. It's like they come to the board with the same, worn out statements, never read the challenges because if they did, you'd think they would get the message that their statements were false. Maybe they do read the challenges but are totally incapable of having anything penetrate their opinions. It is rare that a liberal will ever come back on a true challenge. They have nothing to back up their opinions and their egos would be hurt if they ever accepted another viewpoint. Of course the standard reply is... "It's all Bush's fault!"

B. Honest-

The same fake filibuster rule that Harry Reid and the Democratic Senate majority made no effort to eliminate when they had the opportunity at the beginning of the current session?

The same fake filibuster rule that Reid and the Senate Democrats want in place when they likely become the Senate minority in Jan. 2013?

That filibuster rule?

Can YOU say hypocrisy, B. Honest?

Hey fielden my man, why do you suppose the laws are what they are? Think about it. And of course you certainly not dispute that our girl Amy has admitted the issues.

You know kinda like B.Honest is conceeding the point that dems are powerless and spineless. "Oh no, those mean republicans are forcing me to sign laws" Really, that your president? Strong, proud and in control, right? Oh NO!./

Brianb - I was actually hoping Amy's friend GingerBread Momma would step up. Sadly, the only "defending" she appears capable of is in a secret chat room filled with like minded Libbies.

That, and of course as previously established, I am Ginger Bread's daddy.

Funny part is they get this crap off of ThinkProgess, yet apply no thought of their own to any of it.

Doens't sound like "Progress" to me.

Amy:

Mitt Romney's father was only CEO of American motors and governor of Michigan. Romney went to work for Bain Company out of Harvard Business School and eventually formed Bain Capital, a private equity firm, which makes him billions by investing in such things as Burlington Coat Factory, Burger King and Staples.

Don't despair, Amy, or let these turkeys get you down. From everything I've heard, Romney made all that money by doing what venture capitalists do, they pillage the companies they acquire and slash jobs. His "real-life" experience in "job creation," including his experience as governor of Massachusetts, where he ranked 47 out of 50 in job creation, appears to be in negative numbers.

http://dailycaller.com/2011/06/27/democrats-rip-romney-on-job-creation/

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/ad_mitt_mistakes_jRmd2LHaPIb0bbNn1ZkgaJ

However, the former private equity firm chief's fortune -- which has funded his political ambitions from the Massachusetts statehouse to his unsuccessful run for the White House in 2008 -- was made on the backs of companies that ultimately collapsed, putting thousands of ordinary Americans out on the street. That truth if it becomes widely known could become costly to Romney, who, while making the media rounds recently, told CNN's Piers Morgan that "People in America want to know who can get 15 million people back to work," implying he was that person ....

While I have not investigated all of Romney's Bain investments and there may be cases where he made money and improved businesses, there's little question he made a fortune from businesses he helped destroy.

Before you attack my sources, please note, if you will, that this last article is straight from Rupert Murdoch's NY Post.

Brianb:

Spanky, how many of the liberals come on here, spew their junk, get challenged and you near nothing from them until the next day, spewing the same junk? It's a day in, day out progression of stupid. It's like they come to the board with the same, worn out statements, never read the challenges because if they did, you'd think they would get the message that their statements were false. Maybe they do read the challenges but are totally incapable of having anything penetrate their opinions. It is rare that a liberal will ever come back on a true challenge. They have nothing to back up their opinions and their egos would be hurt if they ever accepted another viewpoint. Of course the standard reply is... "It's all Bush's fault!"

You having a rough day, Big Man? I know you can't be talking to me because that's not OUR experience, now is it?

Pretty much the other way around, as I see it.

You Republicans/conservatives are a trip.

You're looking right into a mirror but can't see yourselves.

This cannot be repeated enough:

The irony, however, is that a substantial portion of the debt and deficits are the Bush tax cuts, two unfunded wars, and Medicare Part D.

_____________________________________

Amy: Could you please explain to me why the Dems did absolutely NOTHING about any of these items you are blaming GWB for in 2009 when thay had an overwhelming House majority, a filibuster-proof 60 Senate votes and Barry in the White House?? They could have repealed the tax cuts, ended the wars and repealed Part D and yet they chose to do NOTHING. Sounds to me you are blaming the wrong people for all the red ink.

daryl: Regardless of your spin to explain away the Dems incompetence on these issues, the simple fact is that neither Dem controlled house of Congress even tried, or made the slightest effort in 2009 to "fix" what they are trying to blame GWB for. The red ink is on the Dems hands.

ksw62118

Albeit, a government website ; but what you didn't interpret is those jobs were a result of the stimulus and mostly minimum wage. Which means you perpetuated the right wing BIG LIE-- Obama has not created jobs.

Single Stimulus Program That GOP Wanted To Eliminate Has Created Hundreds Of Thousands Of Jobs
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2010/07/27/173418/gop-tanf-cut/

Did the Stimulus Create Jobs?
Yes, the stimulus legislation increased employment, despite false Republican claims to the contrary.

September 27, 2010

http://www.factcheck.org/2010/09/did-the-stimulus-create-jobs/

Since you lean right ksw, I'm assuming your touting is a right wing hypocrisy. You might want to look at my justifaction for your spinning the facts.

For example...

Perry is a stimulus hypocrite who loudly criticized federal recovery money but used it to balance his state’s budget .

Despite having the worst uninsured rate in the country, Perry claims that Texas has “the best health care in the country.

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/06/10/241830/top-10-thing-texas-gov-rick-perry/

You need to look at the jobs created by republicans; how much they pay and what kinds of benefits they offer.

thanks daryl-2183015 and Anna Molly

Joe - I would hardly call passing HCR1 doing nothing. The healthcare reform bill includes provisions the CBO says will reduce the deficit by $210 billion over the first ten years.

Me either.

As the debt commission pointed out...we can't tax our way out, we can't cut our way out, and we can't grow our way out of this problem. Only a combination of all three will be effective, and you won't get the third without the first two.

So...

Simple.

Adopt the debt commission Plan.

MB: Simple. Adopt the debt commission Plan

Lets see how many times Obama references the Debt Commission report during his speech.

Dangerfield...

I'm in agreement with Senator Coburn. This hole is way to deep for spending cuts alone. But we need to be careful because the effect of any spending cuts or tax increases will be exacerbated by the current state of the economy.

So Js1

Was that a yes or a no?

MB- Your guy looks pretty good on this issue, and stands to look even better as we get down to brass tacks...

JS1 and MB...

That's the thing...politics being what it is, the first side to try to tackle the debt ends up paying a huge political price. I believe it was Sen. McConnell who said that the other day and he is spot on. Unfortunately, people don't want their taxes raised but they don't want their programs cut either and that's a problem. I just don't see this being solved politically. It takes something like a debt commission outside of our elected officials to give us a plan that elected officials would never come up with due to its political ramifications. I wish the President and the Congress would have taken the recommendations of the debt commission more seriously.

df: On a mathematical level, certainly higher taxes would bring in more revenue to Washington DC, at least in the short term. But what guarantees that that money is put towards the deficit? We see the Liberals here every day talking about "good causes", and their "humanity". What stops Congress and the President from spending that money when they declare some kind of emergency or want to spend on something they deem "humanitarian"?

You answer those questions, and make those guarntees, then you may have something.

Frank "Grimey" Grimes: I just don't see this being solved politically.

And unfortunately, you're probably correct.

If there isn't a political solution, there will be an economic solution. Just like we see in Greece. For Greece, they no longer have any political choices. They no longer set their own agenda, others do that for them. But Greece can be bailed out. So who bails out the US? And on what terms?

Can anyone imagine what the stimulative effect to the economy of a bipartisan, long-range agreement on the debt crisis would be?

That's probably all we'll be able to do MB...imagine...

Well gang we here in the great state of Cali did what you suggest - we raised revenue and cut spending.

As you can see, it didn't work here. Now why Dangerfield do you think it will work there?

See, they are real good at the raising part. It is the cutting part they really, really suck at. Let's face it, these are the folks that have been happily borrowing $.42 of every dollar spent for a long time.

If we do not raise the ceiling they have to actually live within their revenue. They don't get that extra $.42. Until they are forced to do so, they will never do it.

Old dogs, new tricks.

So Spanky, you think Coburn is wrong, not me, and you are a Grover Nordquist absolutist to boot?...and you're against raising the debt ceiling too?

That's an "old dog with no tricks" IMO...and that dog just won't hunt...

Gotta, cut, gotta increase revenues, and gotta grow...3 legs or we all fall down...:)

Lyn, EVERYBODY already knows what he is going to say and what does that have to do with being a Patriot?

Lyn, since Obama is incapable of speaking without the aid of a teleprompter that is programmed by his handlers.... many know his speeches before he gets a chance to read them outloud in his speech!

Pride,

Can you tell me how many Presidents since Truman have not used a teleprompter?

Hi Lyn,

They the Republicans are more like poop-poop heads.

I would love for someone to explain why California is in the dumpster after raising taxes and make cuts.

Anyone?

What is wrong with President Obama reading a speech he wrote from a teleprompter?

MB: The votes in Congress for raising taxes simply aren't there...and President Obama knows it.

MB, what you say about Congress, for both the Dems and the GOP, not looking to raise taxes is true. There is not even close to a majority in either house of Congress that would pass one. But as far as Obama "knowing it", that'x doubtful. I don't think he's spent enough time with Congress to understand that no taxes will be raised, at least not at this time. Obama hasn't done his homework on this one if he thinks the Congress, and the nation, are ready for hundreds of billions of tax hikes. Certainly some of the socialists in the Democratic party will endorse tax hikes, but I doubt that's where Obama wants to be identified as being.

JoAnna -- I am calling you out on this one. Who are the socialists in the Democratic party? Please name them and the evidence you have that this is so. It is impossible to be both. Bernie Saunders is a self-described socialist and he is not a member of either the Democratic or Republican parties.

So both of you honestly think that we can close yearly deficits that will be 1 trillion plus for the foreseeable future with only cuts? We don't need any more revenue in your opinions?

Really, Mixed Bag? That is not realistic. Unfortunately in Obama fashion he will cave and give up his supposed socialist ideals about a fair taxation system. The code words to look for is tax reform and cuts to wasteful spending. Obama will use those words he will not utter a peep about raising taxes. Especially will not mention anything about the increase on the wealthy. They will continue to get their tax cuts extended and extended. I might have voted for a republican.

We will talk after the President's speech.

There goes Bag again doing his GOP/TP victory dance. Their chant, "yea we've tanked the economy we win". And America loses.

Is this really what America wants for it's self, to let the GOP/TP bring the country down just so they can claim victory? I personally don't think so.

Who are the socialists in the Democratic party

Bernie Sanders self identifies as one, and he does caucus with the Democrats. Birds of a feather.

Mixed Bag and Johanna - The problem with the two of you is that your rose colored glasses of cuts are the only way to prosperity are way too dark and you're in danger of falling off that cliff that you can't see. The reason that we're here in the first place with these looming deficits are the two Bush wars, two Bush tax cuts and a Medicare Part D program that refuses to allow the government to bargain for lower rates. Now given that we know what the causers are for the deficits and debt the plain and simple truth to this situation is that 1) The Bush Tax Cuts MUST be repealed, completely. 2) Defense spending must be cut and 3) The government must change the Medicare Part D program to allow for negotiated rates. Now you may not like these solutions and you may scream; TAX INCREASES, TAX INCREASES but the plain reality of this situation is that the Republicans got us into this mess with their tax cutting orthodoxy and their deficits don't matter mantra so now the Republicans are just going to have to take their bitter medicine and admit that their governing philosophy is a failure and then sit down and shut up. Sorry to be so blunt but the two of you are sorry individuals indeed.

Not good enough, JoAnna. You smear politicians by using "socialists (plural) in the Democratic party." Bernie Saunders is not a Democrat. Can you name other names and evidence? Or are you really all about the smears?

Mark-

Gosh, haven't you been listening better than that?

I favor President Obama immediately embracing the long-term Plan to impact the debt crisis offered by his debt commission, which addresses both spending cuts and revenue increases. I've said that over and over.

The President should team up with Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) and Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) (both signatories to the debt commission Plan) and begin, with Coburn's help, to at least attempt to garner the bipartisan votes to pass the Plan in its entirety. I don't know whether the votes are there, but I know they'll never be there unless the President acts, and acts forcefully.

This is no contradiction with the above comment which refers to the passage of a bill raising the debt ceiling within the next month...there are not enough votes in Congress at present for any tax increases as a part of any such agreement on the debt ceiling.

If the debt commission long-range Plan were implemented, it should include triggers for the tax increases and changes to the tax code to kick in at a time when the economy is growing at an agreed-upon rate.

Bear in mind, Mark, that the Fed has lowered interest rates to virtually zero. It is ending its quantitative easing plan, QE2, at the end of the month. The Fed's stimulative toolbox is pretty much empty. There will not be another stimulus bill...there's simply no money.

The biggest stimulus that President Obama could apply to the economy at present would be a bipartisan agreement that shows he's serious about addressing the nation's debt.

Can he get such an agreement on the debt commission Plan?

He'll never know unless he tries.

Meantime...we fade.

laurie: Mixed Bag and Johanna - The problem with the two of you is that your rose colored glasses of cuts are the only way to prosperity are way too dark and you're in danger of falling off that cliff that you can't see.

Well what's the Lefts plan? Listening to the President right now, and he's still talking about removing subsidies for "Corporate jets" and "Cutting waste". The man is clueless.

He talks about a "balanced approach" so he can continue his massive deficit spending. The man has not gotten the message - The government spends too much.

Massive spending cuts now! But that alone won't do it, we also need job creation! Remember the "shovel ready' jobs Obama failed to produce with mini stimulous II and III?

Look to some of the Republican states.... Texas for one comes to mind! For the most part they don't have high unemployment or high deficits! Something must be working! Hello democrats, hello liberals!.... is anyone awake? Socialism only looks good on paper!

Johanna - You never address the question, you talk around the subject with your pre-disposed propoganda that you feed youself to make you feel better. The president just told you exactly what needs to be done. The fact that you can't see the forest for the trees is your issue not everyone elses. Just like you can't name socialists among the Democrats in the Senate you can't really defend your position except to just repeat what you have already said over and over again. You're just not answering the questions that are posed to you. If you can't then stop repeating yourself. You're wasting your time and ours.

Mike - job creating bills have been repeatedly stopped in Congress by Republicans. The president said that bills have been introduced and Republicans stop them dead in their tracks. Republicans don't want there to be any jobs bills created so that they can turn around and say; "see this administration has not created any jobs". It's not by accident that the Republicans haven't introduced any jobs bills of their own. They are not interested in creating jobs. That's not their concern. Protecting their base, the rich and corporations is their one and only concern and that's blatantly obvious.

miked: Massive spending cuts now! But that alone won't do it, we also need job creation! Remember the "shovel ready' jobs Obama failed to produce with mini stimulous II and III?

Yes, that's all true. We've been told by Obama/Democrats that ObamaCare will reduce health care costs and create jobs. It hasn't. We've been told the $800 billion stimulus would create jobs. It hasn't. We were told by Pelosi and the Democrats that unemployment payments/extensions would stimulate the economy. It hasn't.

And now Obama is telling us raising taxes is the answer. It isn't.

Missed the speech, but really - it's raising taxes now?

Seems a mite inconsistent with his tax cuts last December.

He really is a blank screen. Too bad.

Johanna - More misstatements. First the Health Care Legislation doesn't take effect until 2014. It hasn't been implemented yet. The structures are being put in place but it's not set to actually come to fruition until 2014. The stimulus DID create and/or save jobs. Remember when the president took office, we were losing jobs at a rate of 725,000 a month. The stimulus stemmed that flow of lost jobs and has started to create jobs. The problem was the stimulus wasn't big enough to actually create a larger amount of jobs therefore job creation has been anemic. Unemployment payments do stimulate the economy because the unemployed immediately spend that money in the economy. If you take that money out of the enconomy, you will slow economic activity and lower demand which in turn will cause employers to either lay off workers or not hire additional help. It's very sad how misinformed and totally ignorant you are. Just keep you talking points though.....it's easy to just keep saying the same thing over and over again without actually having to think about what you're saying.

So, Laurie- did the pork laden omnibus spending bill of 2009 add to the debt? How about almost a trillion dollars in stimulus spending- that created jobs, okay- in China?

How about the "kinetic military action" in Libya? That cost any money?

Obama wants revenue increased? Fine. How about cutting the Volt subsidy? Then GE will actually have to pay taxes on their profit. How about getting back the stimulus finds from companies that used them to build or expand factories in China? Start with the $39 million given to Cree Industries. They got those funds in 2009- and used them to open a plant In China in 2010.

How about getting out of Boeing's way, and letting them open that new plant. Right now, that plant is idle, and will be a great tax write off. So, rather than getting tax revenue from one thousand newly employed people, to say nothing of the tax on the profits from the plant, the tax write off will cost money- all because Obama needs to keep his unions in line.

None of Obama's economic plans have worked- there is no reason to believe his deficit reduction plans will work any better.

Mixed Bag,

There seems to be a bit of difference in your post 7.1 and 7.8. In the first you state there is not apossibility for tax increases in the latter you say that he should try to push the Debt commission plan (more balanced approach). I tend to like the 7.8 post better. The first threw me off because we have both spoken about something that resembled the DC plan.

I did watch and Obama did better then I thought he would. He is not clueless and indifferent about the problem and handled the questions about the debt ceiling well. I think he put to rest the idea that he needs to lead more, when he said he has been on the ball on this. They (Congressional leaders) need to do their job they need to show up.

Like I said the other day, Congress has more vacation time then my middle schooler and he completes his work on time, unlike those guys.

In my opinion, perhaps you will take it with a grain of salt due to our difference in politics, I think the Democrats have come to the table willing to give some, the same can not be said of the GOP.

Yellowdog,

So True.

Miked - Look to some of the Republican states.... Texas for one comes to mind! For the most part they don't have high unemployment or high deficits!

Miked - You do know that unemployment in Texas is over 8% right compared to 9.1% nationally. You do know that some areas like the border counties and cities of Harlingen, Mcallen are pushing close to 14%.

Deficits - You do know that the current 2011 budget ran nearly $3 billion in the whole so the conservative legislatures and governor allowed to use our rainy day fund to balance 2011. You do know that projections for 2012 and 2013 where nearly $25 billion dollars. So in response, Texas cut the budget to schools by nearly $4 billion dollars. With every statewide office the governorship the huge political majorities the GOP can claim all of this.

___________________

In 2012 -13 for the first time in decades, the Legislature will significantly reduce funding for public schools Thousands of teachers will lose their jobs, and some schools may close….

The dirty secret of this budget is that it doesn’t pay for itself. The two year spending plan only covers about 18 months of state operations….Lawmakers are hoping and praying the economy improves. Failing that, the poor saps who show up for the 83^rd Legislature in 2013 will have to pass a massive emergency spending plan. The Legislature is engaged in deficit spending.

From Rueters – Corrie MacLaggan

Texas lawmakers approve bill to cut school funding (article discusses why Texas is in this predicament guess what lack of taxes)

Mark-

The first post (7.1) refers to tax increases being part of the current talks to raise the debt ceiling...a short-term problem.

The second post (7.8) is about a long-term agreement, along the lines of the Plan produced by President Obama's debt commission, to address the debt crisis going forward.

Read both carefully, and in order, and the context of both comments should be clear.

Disagree on your last comment...if the President had embraced the Plan of the debt commission last December, we might not be where we are now.. Had he exerted leadership then, he might have had more leverage over the opposition now.

He did not...and here we are.

Fighting over the debt ceiling.

Yellow Dog - unless and until they are all willing to give up $.42 of every dollar spent that they don't have we are Greece.

Again, all you have to do is look to Cali. Terminally boned. Three years ago they said - just need a temporary tax increase and all will be good. Flash forward to today. Bigger deficit. So tell me, anyone, just what did all that "extra" tax revenue go to?

It was a giant waste. Cali loses 3.5 business every day.

Boned. And it's contagious, get some!

Spanky - I can't speak to the situation in California as I am not aware of all of the facts/conditions. I think the extra money could have been targeted to help reduce some of your deficits. At the same time, social services, education things like that should have been kept at the same level, because I believe that education and caring for each other is important - I'm sappy like that.

With those tax increases they could have planned some reasonable cuts that everyone could live with so that the problems wouldn't reoccur. In Texas the previous comptroller warned our governor not to lower property taxes for school funding and predicted that a special business tax would not be sufficient to address the states needs and make up for it. The governor didn't listen and in 2011 had to raid the rainy day fund. Now with the latest 2 year budget he plans to only fund 18 months out of 24 so he didn't learn.

Didn't hear all the Presidents news conference, but he referenced the Debt Commission once, but not it's policies/recommendations, just someone that was on it.

Obama did reference "Corporate jets" numerous times in his news conference. Seems he was very critical of the subsidies for those jets and he wants to eliminate those subsidies. Apparently these are the very same subsidies Obama's 2009 Reinvestment and Recovery Act bestowed on those very same jets.

"Included in the $800 billion economic stimulus bill signed by President Obama in February are incentives to buy new aircraft in 2009. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act allows for the return of bonus depreciation on new aircraft purchases. New, factory-manufactured aircraft purchased and placed in service between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2009 will be eligible for the 50% bonus depreciation."

Source: http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/news/economic-stimulus-bill-accelerated-depreciation-on-aircraft.html

Yeah, by all means we need to keep that credit flowing. You know, so we can barrow more. Of course that will increase the debt Kate, and make all that bad stuff you talk about even worse.

Sounds terrific. Lte's just totally screw our kids, their kids and so on.

Right Kate. No need to do anything hard now, we can just kick that can right down the road.

. . . . . then we may need a world court to intervene..

Sweetie, there won't be any "world court" intervening. Do you see a "world court" intervening in Greece? Nope. Who is intervening? Greece's creditors. And they are setting the terms of the intervention. And by the looks of things on the TV news, the Greek people don't look very happy about it.

And if they need to, the same people that are intervening in Greece will be intervene here in the US. Our creditors.

So Spanky you've got a dilemma on your hands, do you screw your kids and grand kids, or do you screw yourself, your parents and grandparents? Not much of a choice is it Spanky.

Why does the media not call the GOP/TP out on their balanced budget spin. They have no plan to balance the budget, that's just a buzz word they like to use just like the many others the media falls for every day. They have no plan, and the media won't ask them what their plan is, they just let them skate by with the buzz word we'll balance the budget and the media takes that as a plan.

To bad we don't have real journalist as we did in the past, who are willing to make politicians actually answer questions instead of giving buzz words.

Mo, were you paying attention in the 90's when REPUBLICANS actually did balance the budget and were paying down our debt?

While YOU on the left give Clinton credit for that, he actually REFUSED to sign a budget bill that actually called for the government to have a balanced budget, and he SHUT DOWN the Federal government rather than sign that bill.

Something that YOU on the left actually attacked Republicans for by the way.

Cheryl, how many Republicans voted for the tax increases in 1993 that paved the way for a balance budget? 0? Maybe 1?

Al, and how many Republicans voted for SPENDING CUTS in the 90's that actually BALANCED the budget?

And how many Democrats voted for NEW commissions, new panels, new regulations, new taxes, new EVERYTHING that is costing us hundreds of billions of dollars?

We have a 1.5 TRILLION dollar spending deficit, JUST THIS YEAR because Democrats went STUPID on government spending.

Don't you think that just MAYBE the government does NOT need to be spending 3.7 TRILLION dollars on their budget, in just ONE year? Especially since NO DEMOCRAT has put forth a budget of ANY KIND in over two years, but instead has spent trillions of dollars on "continuing resolutions", and have voted down EVERY budget put forth by Republicans in that time?

"Show me a poor person and I'll show you a person who, odds are, put themselves in that position".

Spoken like a true teaGAG.

"The only difference between Democrats and Republicans is that Democrats allow the poor to be corrupt too."-Oscar Levant.

Cheryl,

You need some serious help.

No Job1, I just need to be able to KEEP what I EARN instead of having you tell me where it should go.

I need to be able to know that my children will get and EDUCATION, not an indoctrination of how wonderful homosexuality is, how wonderful teen sex is, how wonderful getting an abortion without my knowledge is, and how great it is to be able to get a condom at 11 years old is, while denying me the right to actually keep my children from being taught this garbage. I need to be able to have my children to be educated on how to write with some kind of literacy instead of some "learn-by-phonics" garbage.

I need my children to understand that it is THEIR responsibility on how they live their lives instead of having people like YOU tell them. I need my children to want to be SUCCESSFUL instead of teaching them how to get their "entitlements" without ever doing a single thing in their lives to actually EARN anything.

YOU are the one that needs help, because YOU think the government is the answer to everything, while WE actually think it is on US to go out and WORK for what we want, without the government taking it away from us to pay for some "social justice" garbage.

wow cheryl: did ya hear the one about the.... These damn democrates...

speaking of etitlements and welfare: and now it turns out Bachmann's hubby is receiving money from medicaid.

As the campaign rages on and you hear Bachmann talk about failed economic reform from Obama and how she was against the stimulus plan and she claims the money was mis-spent. Called it a "Failed Plan" and how she is so against "PORK" but then turns right around and request "PORK" stimulus money for her district from the same "Failed" and Mis-Spent stimulus plan she voted against. Oh but wait it gets better, she also was a recipient of over $250,000.00 of federal money for her family farm by the very "Entitlement" programs she is soooo apposed to. Hypocrite! Enjoy the read below...

http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/1209/Antisocialist_Bachmann_got_250k_in_federal_farm_subsidies.html

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2610293/posts

kind of the same thing for Perry should he decide to run. He in his campaign for re-election for Texas governor said he would NOT be taking any of Obama's stimulus money. Over the next two years we saw more new schools being built and highways all on stimulus money. Once the money ran out however he cut the education funding in Texas by $4 Billion, oh and when you hear everyone talk about Perry's job creation here in Texas don't be fooled a bit, the largest land based natural gas reserve was discovered under at least 17 counties here in Texas, The Barnett Shale (I even got royalties from them), the natural gas industry created 100,000 jobs in the last few years. Plus, California companies are moving operations to Texas for the cheap labor cost, lower cost of living and no state taxes. All Perry had to do was figure out how to get his cut and now he gets a bunch of credit for a gift he was handed by God. When I hear folks like Newt say we need to follow Rick Perry's plan for job creation I just laugh, they are idiots...

I think you are nothing more than a racist and homophobe bigot. That explains your crazy talk.

Robert, her husband's (and his partners') CLINIC received money from MedicAid, or weren't you paying attention? And since MedicAid BARELY, if at all pays for the medical care that patients receive, that would mean that the CLINIC is doing something that YOU on the left actually want them to do. Actually SERVING and PROVIDING medical care to the poor. But oh wait, his name is Bachmann, so we must automatically condemn them for actually taking insurance money, right?

And since she is ONLY a part owner in the farm, and since SHE did not request that subsidy, what the hell is your problem with that? Is she not entitled to the money's that the farm receives? Oh wait, she actually invested her OWN money in the farm so that automatically should prevent her from receiving anything. She should only get "entitlements" for doing NOTHING, right? Isn't that the liberal agenda? Sit on your a$$ and wait for that "entitlement" check that you've done absolutely NOTHING your entire life to earn, other than vote Democrat of course.

I'm sure that you probably condemn her for receiving a monthly stipend to actually FEED her 23 foster kids too, right?

How disgusting of Bachmann to actually receive money for something that she will receive NO MONEY for if she actually had her way!!!!

And for you to post two LIBERAL links is the usual ignorant garbage that we've come to expect from you guys here.

Why don't you do some damn research before you come in with your twisted trash instead of living on left wing sites looking for stupidity to "post" for us all?

Why don't you do some damn research before you come in with your twisted trash instead of living on left wing sites looking for stupidity to "post" for us all?

yeah, twisted trash, all be it true but twisted. And do some research? I can bombard you with true research but it seems you are only interested in opinions and talking trash not facts.. Republican welfare for the rich is OK but not to help people? Did you or any of your conservative friends that you know get Unemployment in this last republican recession? Any get help with medicaid because they lost their job, maybe their home? Hum???

Yeah, Bachmanns Husbands office got money from Medicaid for "Training" Our medical office has to pay for "Training" from medicaid if we are going to see medicaid patients, how does one get the inside scoop on how to actually get paid for we have to pay for?

Bachmann's family farm that got the subsidies, yeah she IS Part owner! Enough said, she takes "entitlement" money for it, if she is so opposed she should not take it. That was easy.

Oh, Cheryl, not a liberal so when you want to call people names and act so rude be accurate please.

Okay Obama, you heard the NATION.

Now, to paraphrase, get off of your a$$ and start doing something for the nation instead of your personal interest groups and "social justice" agendas. Get off of your a$$ and do something about cutting the deficit in half like you promised during your campaign instead of DOUBLING it like you current budget plans do. Get off of your a$$ and do something about jobs, like you promised to do in THREE state of the union addresses.

Get off your a$$ and do SOMETHING, period.

President Obama has done more good for this country in two and a half years than Mr. Bush did 8 years. That is a fact you can check for yourself.

Is it true that under the House leadership of John Boehner, that the House now works a week, then off a week, works a week, then off a week and so on?

Talk about a do nothing Congress. Especially during these tough times.

Glad to see the usual suspects (GOP supporters) don't expect much from the GOP. They never do. It's why we're in the position we're in. They don't like to work. They don't like to act responsibly. They don't like to do anything except protecting the rich.

How nice.

Obama has done more to DESTROY this country in two years than Bush EVER did, even when he had his last two years having Democrats shoving spending bill after spending bill down our throats.

And Pat....WHO exactly has put NO budget forward for OVER two years now? Oh wait, that would be the Democrats. WHO exactly has voted DOWN every single budget put forward by Republicans for the past two years with NO negotiations at all? Oh wait, that would be the Democrats? WHO has LOST over 2.5 million jobs, in just two years while he was President, while giving THREE state of the union addresses that said "jobs are my number one priority"? Oh wait, that would be Obama. WHO spent 830 BILLION dollars claiming that it would create 2...2.5...3...oh never mind..."millions" of jobs, and actually created a few hundred thousand at a cost of OVER a half million dollars per job? Oh wait, that would be Democrats.

WHO LIED to this nation about the cost of ObamaCare, while STEALING a half a Trillion dollars from MediCare to pay for it? Oh wait, that would be EVERY single bribe taking corrupt Democrat out there that lied to this ENTIRE nation about how it would "save" over 400 Billion dollars on the deficit, while the CBO just said it's going to COST at least 1.13 Trillion dollars (not counting of course the half trillion dollars that seniors lost on their MediCare insurance).

You support corruption, bribery, lies, theft and turn a blind eye to it, and then come out with ignorant lies about how the House does their business?

Yep, a true liberal. Doesn't give a damn about the lies and corruption from Pelosi, Reid, Obama, and all of his "own" party, and makes up lies about the people that you want to attack.

Cheryl,

Again, you have no facts to back up anything you say. Your opinion is not a fact.

The President still polled higher than Congress.

Very strange that your AGENDA is one based on IGNORANCE and BLIND LOYALTY to a group of people that are acting in a manner that is blatant TREASON by pushing an agenda that is destroying our Nation.

Cheryl, maybe go to FOX news so they can tell you what to think and how to believe...

B. Honest, that was very well said, thank you!

A balanced budget would destroy our nation? Job creation would destroy our nation? The government NOT spending almost 4 TRILLION dollars a year on waste filled, corrupt, and useless programs would destroy our nation? People having what they EARNED in their own pockets to pay for the double gas prices, high food prices, and high prices on everything else would destroy our nation?

Are you that lost in Liberaland that you actually think that? How did we last over 200 years WITHOUT the programs that people like you support? How did we last over 200 years with people actually WORKING for a living? How did we last over 200 years without 1.5 Trillion dollar annual deficits?

How did we last over 200 years without the government being the answer to EVERYTHING?

Cheryl

spend 4 Trillion a year, where did that come from? double gas prices, since when? Corrupt useless programs, which one's? So in your world we should just take all the poor, sick elderly out and shoot them, right? That way you get to keep all of your money, right?

Cheryl,

Would you at least be for letting the government set up some camps for the poor to stay in once all of their programs are cut? Maybe feed them once a day? Or, is that too much of a socialist program?

Cheryl so when you reach 65 you are NOT going to accept SS checks or welfare right?

Cheryl, So do you make over$250,000.00 a year? Get real. Are you one of those suckers who are falling for the GOTP line of BS? We pay into those entitlements you and your Tea Bag Pals are so willing to give up. Wow! Just Wow! Time to wake up!

Tax, Baby, Tax. You had better get used to it.

You get paid well and live in a nice house. Congratulations. Based upon the numbers you provided, if you live to be 80 plus, there is a high probability you will get more back from the government than you have put in. I think you are right -- transfering that much taxpayer money to you is not spending the money wisely. You win.

Agreed AZ, But I doubt SS/Medicaid/Medicare would be self funding even after all that....

Hard Decsions? Are you joking? Obama's poor decsions are what is extending the recession. Spending 2 years on that ridiculous healthcare bill that just expanded entitlements and did nothing to lower healthcare costs. Then signing that ridiculous Frank/Dodd bill into law adding further uncertainty into the lending business. Obama made the tough descion to buy the UAW a car company by hosing the bond holders and investors who funded GM for decades. Soldier find a way to fund SS/Medicare/Medicade by giving back benifits that match what people pay in. The current ponzi scheme isnt working.......

Not sure why name calling is needed. The post by Democratic soldier was accurate and it is easy to prove if you seek information not affirmation. President G W Bush will be taken care of by history, which will prove him to have been a disaster on all fronts. On the economic front, it takes true incompetence to take the surplus provided by President Clinton and turn it into a 1.5 trillion dollar/yr deficit (Bush's last budget) and create ZERO jobs in the process.

Soldier, I don't waste my time or keystrokes responding to people like UAW, or Gregor, in repeated posts. I put them on ignore right away. They are not worth my time or keystrokes.