Say it ain't so - even the dems have abandoned raising taxes.

And you remember who signed that great law last December, ensuring that the tax rates did not go up - Obama, king of the dems.

It's a go. Now let's see what Reid and Mr. Don't call my bluff does.

Straight out of the mouths of the party of male, stale & pale:

When MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell confronted him on the absurdity of trying to lower the borrowing limit on money Congress has already spent, Broun insisted that government has to act like a person who is “overextended” would:

BROUN: The thing is, when someone is overextended and broke they don’t continue paying for expensive automobiles. They sell the expensive automobiles and buy a cheaper one. They don’t continue paying for country club dues, they drop out of the country club.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/07/27/280903/rep-broun-trivializes-massive-spending-cuts-its-just-like-having-to-drop-out-of-a-country-club/

If this isn't an indication of SINCERELY out of touch these tea baggers are with every day Americans, I don't know what is!

Country club dues? WTF???

Meanwhile, back on planet Earth...

Most Americans are struggling to keep a roof over their head & food on the table for their families...

Go sit down Broun!

Feisty,

You bag on this guy, but he is right, you make the necessary cuts. I guess because he drives an expensive car or belongs to a country club he's a bad guy.

What's wrong with working hard to get nice things, you should try it.

Get ready, Harry...

There's going to be a message in your in-box.

It's looking more & more like this is how it's gonna go:

By the Power Vested in Me, I President Barrack Hussein Obama, hereby invoke the Articles in the 14th Amendment, to Protect the The United States of America from Defaulting on Money owed by Previous Congresses!

Sue me:

Sincerely Barrack Hussein Obama!

The ball is in Your Court now Justice Kennedy, make amends for your Bush is Annoited Vote!

Theres America's email Mixed!

I'm sure you're correct, Rick.

It's gonna be the 14th Amendment.

Just like with Libya...right?

"Days...not weeks?"

Glad that's over.

Get ready, Harry... There's going to be a message in your in-box.

Harry and Barack have already said it's not going anywhere. Is there anything the Obama and the Democrats do support? It's not like time isn't running out or anything. Maybe Harry could put his little bill to a vote, just to see where his party stands on the entire issue.

Rick,Ky

It's looking more & more like this is how it's gonna go:

By the Power Vested in Me, I President Barrack Hussein Obama, hereby invoke the Articles in the 14th Amendment, to Protect the The United States of America from Defaulting on Money owed by Previous Congresses!

Sue me:

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Jul 27, 7:27 PM EDT

Hope for debt deal, despite disputes, veto threat

The White House rejected one proposed way out of the crisis.

Democratic Rep. Jim Clyburn suggested the president unilaterally raise the debt limit, citing a clause in the 14th Amendment to the Constitution that says the validity of the nation's public debt "shall not be questioned."

Obama said several days ago he had consulted with White House lawyers on that point and they were unenthusiastic about the idea.

At the White House, Carney was dismissive of the suggestion. "There are no off-ramps. There is no way around this. There is no escape," he said."

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_DEBT_SHOWDOWN?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-07-27-18-35-02

"Is there anything Obama and the Democrats do support?"

You mean...

Like a Plan?

Darn, JoAnna...

You sound just like Chuck Todd!

Mixed Bag,

Did you hear anything about the Libya non-war was budgeted at $820 million and now Rep. McKeon Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee said it will probably be closer to $1 billion costing $100 million per month through Sept.

By the Power Vested in Me, I President Barrack Hussein Obama, hereby invoke the Articles in the 14th Amendment, to Protect the The United States of America from Defaulting on Money owed by Previous Congresses!

Hiya Rick!

What I'm reading & hearing is there is a 'ground-swell' for this option...

We shall see...

News flash:

Both Republicans and Democrats moved closer towards raising the Debt Ceiling to remedy America's financial predicament.

In other news, Blood alcohol levels will be raised to solve drunk driving!

It's all b.s.

There's a war in Libya? Does the President know?

Spanky: remember who signed that great law last December

Stop it, Spanky. He declined to end existing legislation with a gun to his head to protect unemployment benefits. You know that.

JoAnna: Is there anything the Obama and the Democrats do support?

Stop it, JoAnna. The Democrats have bent over backwards. To the extent that the current proposal is exactly what the Republicans started out with.

Fielden said: The Democrats have bent over backwards. To the extent that the current proposal is exactly what the Republicans started out with.

Um... the democrats have bent over backwards? When was that? Maybe we all missed it but I haven't seen one thing other than Reid's proposal come out of anywhere. It's all been the republicans and the house that keeps on sending things up and having them get voted down or threatened with veto corleone's all over the place. Just what HAVE the democrats offered other than raising taxes? That's their only solution.. raise taxes... we don't get enough money to spend... we want more. If we can't have it, we'll max out the credit cards...

Maybe the fed will slip em a few hundred billion under the table, eh?

It's all been the republicans and the house that keeps on sending things up and having them get voted down or threatened with veto corleone's all over the place.

Yes, but Republicans keep sending up the SAME intractable thing -- no revenue increases. It's just not realistic, especially given the nature of the debt and how we got into this mess.

For the past decade, we've starved the beast as far as reasonably practicable. So much, in fact, that we have precipitated our own crisis. Now it's time to give the beast an intravenous glucose drip.

Ask yourself this question -- at what other time in history have we had such a looming disaster, even though at other times in history we have done great things, like wars and Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid and other social programs. Remember the Great Society? Done at the same time that we were fighting in Vietnam. But we didn't have this kind of crisis. So what's the difference? It's not more spending. It's lower tax rates.

Tax Cuts: The B.S. and the Facts

By Larry Beinhart, AlterNet. Posted November 11, 2008.

That tax cuts stimulate the economy is taken as a matter of faith, but the brute facts suggest otherwise.

The Myth

Do tax cuts stimulate the economy?
Yes. Tax cuts allow people to keep more of their own money. Therefore, they have more to invest and spend into the economy, and they have more money to start business and create jobs, therefore also helping to stimulate the economy. -- Yahoo Answers
I think when people take a look back at this moment in our economic history, they'll r ecognize tax cuts work. They have made a difference. -- George W. Bush

The Realities
The brute facts are these:

• • Large income tax cuts are followed by a bubble and then a crash.
  • High income taxes correlate with economic growth.
  • Income tax increases are followed by economic growth.
  • Moderate income tax cuts are followed by a flat economy.
  • All of this is especially true as applied to the top tax rates, the amount paid on income that exceeds the highest bracket.

The Three Great Tax Cuts: Boom, Bubble, Crash

1. Hoover
During World War I, the top marginal tax rate went up to 73 percent -- not the highest ever, but pretty high.
In 1922, a series of rate cuts began. Down to 56 percent, 46 percent, and finally, in 1925, it went down to 25 percent.
The stock market took off. There was a boom. But the boom was a bubble.
It was followed by the Great Crash of 1929.
There were bank failures and the Great Depression.

2. Reagan
From Franklin Roosevelt's second term all the way through to Jimmy Carter -- from 1936 until 1982 -- the top rate was in the 70 to 92 percent range.
Then along came Reagan in 1981. In 1982, he cut that down to 50 percent.
The economy went into "the worst recession since the Great Depression."
His supporters argued that it was all Carter's fault and that the new policies would take time to work. The tax cuts stayed in place. In 1987, there was another round of tax cuts. They took the top rate down to 38.5 percent. It would stimulate the economy!
There was a boom. But it was a bubble.
Then, in October 1987, there was a crash -- the worst since '29. It was called Black Monday.
Much of the bubble money had gone into -- ohmigod! -- real estate.
Suddenly there were bank failures! More than during the Great Depression. There was a Savings & Loan crisis! There had to be a bailout.

3. Bush II
George Bush came into office with the healthiest, post powerful economy in American history.
He immediately cut taxes. The top marginal rate went down from 39 percent to 35 percent. He also cut capital gains taxes and inheritance taxes. A recession immediately ensued. But he persisted.
Eventually, the economy began to grow.
Employment didn't grow very much. Median income went down. The stock market was pretty flat. But the financial sector -- and only the sector -- grew.
Which should have made it obvious to someone, that it was … a bubble.
There was a crash.
Bank failures. A bailout.
The three worst economic disasters in American history follow the exact same pattern: tax cuts, boom, bubble, crash.

High Taxes Correlate with Strong Economic Growth
The four periods of greatest economic growth in American history, by pretty much any measure, are:

• • World War II (1941-45): top tax rate varied from 88 to 94 percent
  • Post-war under Truman and Eisenhower: top rate bounced around from 81 to 92 per cent
  • Clinton years: Clinton raised Bush's top rate of 31 percent to 37 percent and then to 39 percent
  • First two Roosevelt administrations (1933-40). When Roosevelt came into office, Hoover had already raised the tax rate in 1932 from 25 percent to 63 percent. Roosevelt raised it again in 1936 to 79 percent.

A lot of ink, sweat and ranting have gone into proving that the New Deal did not end the Great Depression. Nonetheless, the economy grew 58 percent from the time Roosevelt came into office and when the United States entered the war.
Some of that anti-New Deal rhetoric also claims that the recovery began under Hoover. Perhaps, but to say so is also to say that it began with tax hikes.
Likewise, many right-wing critics insist that the Clinton boom actually started under Bush the First. It is necessary to remember that Bush the First also raised taxes (from 28 percent to 31 percent) and was soundly thrashed by the conservatives for doing so. Stephen Moore of the Cato Institute called it "The Crime of the Century" and explained at length how it had brought ruin to America.

Tax Increases Are Followed by Economic Growth
Three of the four high-growth periods cited above followed significant tax hikes.
The fourth, the Truman-Eisenhower years, began with a top tax rate of 91 percent -- it couldn't get much higher.

Moderate Tax Increases Are Followed by Flat Growth
John F. Kennedy is generally credited with starting the tax cut craze.
He proposed it, but, as with all his ideas, it was Lyndon Johnson who actually got it enacted. The top rate was cut from 91 percent to 77 percent, then to 70 percent, on all income over $200,000 for a single person and over $400,000 for a married couple.
That's where it stayed, through Nixon, Ford and Carter.
The Dow Jones average was pretty much the same when that period ended as when it began. Median personal income stayed roughly the same.
These are the brute facts.
I call them that because there20doesn't appear to be any theory to explain them.
A noted conservative (a sane one, not William Kristol) recently wrote to me in a private e-mail exchange on this subject:
"I am unaware of any (or many) respectable economists (maybe I've missed some) who have suggested that higher taxes have proved to be a formula for better economic growth."
Actually, I am too.
Even now, in the midst of the Bush disaster, I constantly see and hear tax cuts, particularly at the top, described as "pro-growth." So I went and looked at the numbers -- tax rates, tax cuts and tax hikes -- and placed them alongside job growth, the Dow Jones, growth in the GDP and median income.
The brute facts say the opposite of the myth.
The belief in tax cuts is a subset of the belief in Free Markets, with a capital F & M, which is a theological belief.
How do we distinguish a theological idea from a scientific (or rational) one?
According to Karl Popper, the great thinkers in the philosophy of science, a scientific idea has to be capable of being refuted. There has to be some theoretical test that could come out the wrong way, which would then say the theory is wrong.
On that basis, Popper rejected Marxism and Freudianism, along with religious theology, because no matter how many times they didn't work, there was20always some explanation that said that the theory was right and if you just looked at the facts in some other way; you could make up some story that said your theory was still right.
The quintessence of theological thinking goes like this. The preacher says, "The world will end next Saturday night! The Bible says it must be so." Everyone in the congregation wakes up safe and sound on Sunday morning. They head off to church and believe whatever he says in that sermon, too.
In science, we come up with a hypothesis. Then we set up an experiment. We see what happens.
Economics is complex. It takes place in the real world where many factors are at play and we can't control for them all. Still, none of the major tax cuts since 1913 have led to significant, sustained growth. Two them were followed by instant recessions (Reagan and Bush), and three of them, when they were sustained, were followed by bubbles which were then followed by the three worst crashes and sets of bank failures in modern times.
It's time to throw out the theory, accept the facts, and come up with new ideas.

.

The more intractable thing would be any short-term plan that would still cause a downgrade of our credit rating, cause continued uncertainty to the markets, and force another fight and stalemate in only a few months time. If the GOP/TP sincerely want significant cuts with no tax increases, they would have accepted Reid's gift wrapped with a bow.

Once again... This is the story of King Solomon. The Democrats are willing to give the GOP/TP everything they want in order to save the nation, and the GOP/TP want to cut the nation in half and destroy it rather than compromise. It is clear who truly loves our country and who does not.

What we need is a list of all the freshmen in the House who are part of the Tea Party caucus. Where is the free press watchdog when you need 'em? We need to post the list of these traitors every day until the 2012 election.

BTW, did folks see the stats on the number of bills originated in the House? Pelosi was around 304 in her first term, and Boehner around 12. That's not a typo people.

Anna - I'm getting really tired of the democrats telling me I'm not paying enough in taxes. This is exactly what they are doing. Me, and everyone around me, those above me on the financial scale, etc, democrats want a bigger piece of me and what I earn. I'm sorry, I've had enough of it.

It's been like this all my life with democrats and taxes. How do you think the tax rates climbed so high, or as you intimated... in those golden days before the Bush tax cuts. I'm taxed on just about everything. I feel like I'm living in Sweet Haven and Wimpy is asking if he can have a burger today if he pays on Tuesday. The government is an overbloated, fat, gregarious monster that continues to gobble up this country bite by bite.

When revenues fall, the government needs to shrink... they haven't and THAT's the problem.

I don't know Mixed, maybe we could fish bin-laden outta Mediterranian & see what he hasta say!

Wanted dead or alive:

Obama chose

D

E

A

D

!

Anna - I'm getting really tired of the democrats telling me I'm not paying enough in taxes.

That's patently ridiculous and a total strawman argument. I never said anything like that, unless I also said that I don't pay enough in taxes. Because I pay taxes, too, Brian. The difference is that it is not my primary goal in life to whine about it.

Read GOPx's post, Brian, and learn something. If you don't, you're condemned to repeat the same mistakes. And thereby condemning the rest of us.

I don't want a bigger piece of you, any more than I want you to have a bigger piece of me. But as a society, I want strong schools, a clean environment, security, good fire protection, decent roads, emergency fire and rescue services, public libraries, assistance for those who need a safety net because there, but for the grace of God, go all of us -- what would Jesus do and all that goes with it -- high quality medical care and a secure, comfortable retirement FOR WHICH I HAVE ALREADY PAID.

Those things, which are the things that make a society great, have been robbed by unjustified and unfunded wars, unjustified tax cuts that have created ZERO net jobs, and other extravagant things promoted primarily by Republicans. That, in combination with the Wall Street debacle, is what has brought us to this. Wall Street has robbed us twice, in fact, both coming and going.

It's time to give it back, Brian. And frankly, I'm tired of listening to the selfish tell me how to spend MY money, which is essentially what YOU are trying to do. It's my money, too, Brian, and you have no right to dictate to me, any more than I have a right to dictate to you. Stop the wars NOW and give the money back. Stop subsidizing oil companies and giving tax breaks to corporations. Rescind the Bush tax cuts and replenish the Social Security Trust Fund, which was robbed to pay for those cuts. That's what I want.

And it's every bit as valid as what you want.

Don't like it? Then compromise.

Experienced Republican, John McCain spoke on the floor saying those (specifically freshman in the House) who think they can delay the debt ceiling in an attempt to amend the constitution are "bizzaro."

And those who claim the Dems eat their own -- Who's afraid of a radical challenger in their own Party? The Tea Party is to Republicans what the Green Party has been to Democrats, but without fear for the Democrats. And at least candidates like Ralph Nader ran as the Green Party, or others like Bernie Sanders who run as Independents--they don't challenge Democrats in their own primaries under the guise of being Democrats. Every single Tea Party candidate ran as a Republican. If they don't have the courage to run as Libertarian they should take a hike.

The fear-mongering from the far-right to the establishment right-wing in the Republican Party is indeed "bizzaro." Republicans, grow some b***s, and grow 'em now. Stand up to the astonishing recklessness in your Party and start governing. You are sucking the oxygen out of the air that is needed to address real problems with real solutions. If you don't do it, the voters will.

they don't challenge Democrats in their own primaries under the guise of being Democrats.

Good point. We recently saw that here, as you know. Cowardly, to say the least. And then they turn around and pretend to be noble. And there are people who buy this. That's what kills me.

AM -- Right, the only time was the GOP/TP running fake Democrats against real Democrats to force a Democratic primary in Wisconsin!

That's patently ridiculous and a total strawman argument. Why is it a strawmans argument. It's extremely valid. The democrats have been the major influence in raising taxes ever since my grandfather was a child. I've heard the tales from him as I grew up. I never said anything like that, unless I also said that I don't pay enough in taxes. Because I pay taxes, too, Brian. The difference is that it is not my primary goal in life to whine about it. I'm not whining about it Anna. Take a look at the big picture. How much does the government waste? How many billions does the government give away to foreign governments and people living on the dole. I know all about welfare and the purpose of it... but I also know people that have been on it all their lives with no reason to ever get off it because it's handed to them. I'm not complaining about that. What I am complaining about is that government never governs themselves. It's all one big pot for them to take from at their will with no regard for the last cookie. If you can't see it then you just aren't looking.

Read GOPx's post, Brian, and learn something. If you don't, you're condemned to repeat the same mistakes. And thereby condemning the rest of us.

I don't want a bigger piece of you, any more than I want you to have a bigger piece of me. I never suggested this was the case. But as a society, I want strong schools, a clean environment, security, good fire protection, decent roads, emergency fire and rescue services, public libraries, assistance for those who need a safety net because there, but for the grace of God, go all of us -- what would Jesus do and all that goes with it -- high quality medical care and a secure, comfortable retirement FOR WHICH I HAVE ALREADY PAID. The government should govern, not become a welfare agency. Most of what you stated are local issues anyway. The FEDERAL government is assigned to do two things according to the Constitution... Protect the citizens and provide for the common welfare. Providing for the common welfare does not mean giving people money. It does not mean creating useless programs that drain the treasury to help a few people here, or a few people there. It does not mean governing every aspect of our lives from cradle to grave, providing health insurance or forcing us to pay for it. The founding fathers would be rolling over in their graves if they saw Washington today with it's huge umbrella over this nation.

Those things, which are the things that make a society great, have been robbed by unjustified and unfunded wars, unjustified tax cuts that have created ZERO net jobs, and other extravagant things promoted primarily by Republicans. That, in combination with the Wall Street debacle, is what has brought us to this. Wall Street has robbed us twice, in fact, both coming and going. You are prostelizing your ideology Anna. These things are NOT what the discussion is about although you will disagree with me. You have an uncanny way of tying these ideological topics into the discussion about why the government spends way too much money. Most liberals want to blame it all on the wars. These same liberals have no knowledge of what the wars actually cost in dollars when you compare those same dollars to the defense budget. Just because you disagree with the fact we went to war 10 years ago doesn't scalp the actual costs of the wars when compared to what was being spent on military defense anyway. The budget crisis is NOT about war spending. It IS about the mismanagement of our national treasury. There is no central control and in fact, I would put my next 10 paychecks on a bet saying the numbers coming out of Washington are pure orange Jell-o. This is something they will never tell us, nor do we have actual means of finding out.

It's time to give it back, Brian. And frankly, I'm tired of listening to the selfish tell me how to spend MY money, which is essentially what YOU are trying to do. Anna - I have never once told you how to spend YOUR money. I don't know where you'd even get such an idea. If you want to donate your entire paycheck to the government for them to waste, please, please, by my guest. It's my money, too, Brian, and you have no right to dictate to me, any more than I have a right to dictate to you. Stop the wars NOW and give the money back. Stop subsidizing oil companies and giving tax breaks to corporations. Rescind the Bush tax cuts and replenish the Social Security Trust Fund, which was robbed to pay for those cuts. That's what I want. Maybe it's what you want Anna, but look back over the last 5 years... who was in control? It wasn't the republicans... Your democrats had every opportunity to do exactly what you want, but they didn't. Maybe you should blame them. You can't tell me with 3 tiered government control, they couldn't have done exactly what you want? Maybe it's not what the democrats in office wanted... most certainly it's not what they wanted or they would have found a way to do it. Why is it your only mantra to blame Republicans for the things you didn't get that you wanted?

And it's every bit as valid as what you want.

Don't like it? Then compromise. Maybe you should rethink your position and take a look at the big picture. Government waste, goverment corruption, government fraud unchecked... it's not only in the republicans hands that these things lie. Being one-sided jades your perspective. Think about it.

It's extremely valid. The democrats have been the major influence in raising taxes ever since my grandfather was a child. I've heard the tales from him as I grew up.

LoL Aren't you the least bit curious about what I may have heard from MY grandparents? It would be every bit as valid, or invalid, perhaps, as it would merely reflect their biases, just as what your grandfather told you no doubt reflected his.

The founding fathers would be rolling over in their graves if they saw Washington today with it's huge umbrella over this nation.

So what? They're not here right now.

Anna - I have never once told you how to spend YOUR money.

Pay attention, Brian. If you support unchecked defense spending and tax subsidies for oil companies and the Chamber of Commerce, and you expect me to pay taxes for that, while you also support defunding Planned Parenthood and NPR, and cutting education and Medicare and Medicaid, then tell me exactly how you are NOT essentially telling me how to spend MY money. It absolutely IS about war spending; don't be ridiculous. Ignoring that is the EXACT same mistake that Bush and Congress made.

It's so funny to me that you can't see the flipside of your own complaint.

Maybe it's what you want Anna, but look back over the last 5 years... who was in control? It wasn't the republicans...

You mean George W. Bush was a closet Democrat? Who knew? Don't misunderstand me. I'm no apologist for the President, and I'm not saying that Congress is perfect. Far from it. But Congress didn't act alone, and it's not only the past 5 years that figure into this. Maybe you can get others to buy that kind of diversion, but it doesn't work with me.

You are prostelizing your ideology Anna.

LoL This is exactly what an authoritarian says when someone disagrees with them. I suppose you think you're NOT proselytizing your own ideology. Then what would you call this?

It's been like this all my life with democrats and taxes. How do you think the tax rates climbed so high, or as you intimated... in those golden days before the Bush tax cuts. I'm taxed on just about everything. I feel like I'm living in Sweet Haven and Wimpy is asking if he can have a burger today if he pays on Tuesday. The government is an overbloated, fat, gregarious monster that continues to gobble up this country bite by bite.

That's not how I happen to see things. And your viewpoint is absolutely no more valid than mine, except in your mind. You just don't countenance the possibility that you might not always be right. Just like the Republicans in Congress refuse to even consider a solution that involves revenue increases.

But if you REALLY read GOPx's post, you'll see that you might very well, be wrong. And the consequences if you ARE wrong are going to be catastrophic.

Being one-sided jades your perspective. Think about it.

LoL Review your own words quoted immediately above. I've thought about it, and I think I'm not either the one-sided one or the jaded one. Good night, Brian.

Anna - I guess I'll give it one more attempt.

It's extremely valid. The democrats have been the major influence in raising taxes ever since my grandfather was a child. I've heard the tales from him as I grew up.

LoL Aren't you the least bit curious about what I may have heard from MY grandparents? It would be every bit as valid, or invalid, perhaps, as it would merely reflect their biases, just as what your grandfather told you no doubt reflected his. So we have differing but personally validated opinions about what our grandparents said... but that doesn't change the fact that I've witnessed democrats wanting to raise taxes many times over.

The founding fathers would be rolling over in their graves if they saw Washington today with it's huge umbrella over this nation.

So what? They're not here right now. So that means you don't agree with what they wrote in the Constitution? That totally invalidates the struggle and the fight they put up so our Republic could be free? After all, they aren't here anymore... so let's trash the documents that formed this country... and let's live with huge opressive government.... I guess that's the democratic way, eh?

Anna - I have never once told you how to spend YOUR money.

Pay attention, Brian. If you support unchecked defense spending and tax subsidies for oil companies and the Chamber of Commerce, and you expect me to pay taxes for that, while you also support defunding Planned Parenthood and NPR, and cutting education and Medicare and Medicaid, then tell me exactly how you are NOT essentially telling me how to spend MY money. It absolutely IS about war spending; don't be ridiculous. Ignoring that is the EXACT same mistake that Bush and Congress made.

It's so funny to me that you can't see the flipside of your own complaint. Anna, are you naive? The democrats haven't controlled spending on any of this. They haven't stopped oil subsidies or any such thing. These are things that you blame on the republicans, but your very own democrats do the same exact thing. Tell me again that Obama isn't in the pocket of GE. The very things you blame the republicans for, the democrats are doing too. Why are you in denial about this? The democrats could have stopped the wars at any time they wanted... Your faithful leaders are letting YOU down... There is no flipside to my own complaint because I don't support the Republicans... Until you know the cost of the wars as compared to the cost of national defense, you can't say anyone is making a mistake. It is your assumption the wars have taken us down, but you don't know the facts.

Maybe it's what you want Anna, but look back over the last 5 years... who was in control? It wasn't the republicans...

You mean George W. Bush was a closet Democrat? Who knew? Don't misunderstand me. I'm no apologist for the President, and I'm not saying that Congress is perfect. Far from it. But Congress didn't act alone, and it's not only the past 5 years that figure into this. Maybe you can get others to buy that kind of diversion, but it doesn't work with me. There's no diversion. The very things you complain about, have not altered any. I say 5 years because Bush was the only republican amongst 2 other governing bodies of democrats that actually had more control over spending than the president did. And not to beat a dead horse, but what the hell, he can't feel it anyway... The democrats could have stopped the wars at any time they wanted after 06. Why didn't they? Harry Reid himself said we lost in Iraq. Don't you remember?

You are prostelizing your ideology Anna.

LoL This is exactly what an authoritarian says when someone disagrees with them. I suppose you think you're NOT proselytizing your own ideology. Then what would you call this? I call it, calling you out on your ideology when you add all the ancillary elements to try to place blame on only one side without seeing or admitting the faults of your side. I thought you would have been able to figure that one out. Instead, your argument is to backpeddle into an untrue comparison. Each and every example you stated in the prior post was your ideology speaking and you were doing your level best in trying to squelch my point with ideology. If facts were to be told, you would have to admit your beloved democrats hold just as much fault as you blame the republicans for. You chose the route of speaking ideology instead of coming to grips with equal blame.

It's been like this all my life with democrats and taxes. How do you think the tax rates climbed so high, or as you intimated... in those golden days before the Bush tax cuts. I'm taxed on just about everything. I feel like I'm living in Sweet Haven and Wimpy is asking if he can have a burger today if he pays on Tuesday. The government is an overbloated, fat, gregarious monster that continues to gobble up this country bite by bite.

That's not how I happen to see things. And your viewpoint is absolutely no more valid than mine, except in your mind. You just don't countenance the possibility that you might not always be right. Just like the Republicans in Congress refuse to even consider a solution that involves revenue increases. Anna - are you aware that every thing you buy from apples to zippers is taxed by the federal government in one way or the other? It's built into the price you pay across the register. The cost of any product has hidden taxes built in. The federal government gets their fair share by every person that makes purchases. I'm not even touching on the income tax, and the 200 or more taxes we pay to the federal government in our daily living. Take a look at your cell bill. There are federal taxes attached to it. How many millions of Americans pay for a cell phone. We don't consider this a type of revenue to the government... why? It is. Your home phone, your cable bill, your gasoline, your propane for your barbeque grill. There's taxes on water, electricity, oil changes, tires, even the air you pay to go in the tires has federal taxes associated with it. I'm sorry, but when is enough enough? Who is getting all this revenue that you say the federal government is falling short on? We pay and pay and pay, but for some reason you don't think we pay enough. I say all this because anytime someone brings up the Obama tax cuts for the rich, I certainly don't mind not paying more to a wasteful government. You may have a different opinion. Your world is full of trust for the federal government. My world says someone there isn't accounting for all the money flowing in on a daily basis.

But if you REALLY read GOPx's post, you'll see that you might very well, be wrong. And the consequences if you ARE wrong are going to be catastrophic. Since I have no way of controlling what the blockheads in Washington do, or won't do, it won't matter if I am wrong or right. They are going to do what they want to do, no matter what you think about it, or I. The time has come and gone to make corrections to the economy. They have done everything they can to pass blame on the other side and we will suffer the consequences for their incompetence... and both sides are extremely incompetent. All I know is, both sides, republican and democrat, share equal blame for their handling of the national treasury... It's not one sided as you want to claim. This has been my point all along. The propensity for democrats to blame republicans as acting alone in this situation is over. Democrats, by their actions have created as much trouble for us as anyone.

Being one-sided jades your perspective. Think about it.

LoL Review your own words quoted immediately above. I've thought about it, and I think I'm not either the one-sided one or the jaded one. Good night, Brian. As much as you don't want to admit it Anna, your comments in these posts state something else. Seeing only one side of this issue only reinforces the depth of jading. I clearly see both sides and I see an equal share of blame. I've not taken up for the republicans as you have tried to blame them as the sole proprieters of the impending economic turmoil.

Anna - I guess I'll give it one more attempt.

Why bother, sir? I'm obviously beyond redemption. My only comment is that, I did not now, nor have I ever claimed that the blame is one-sided. Too bad you didn't know me before, but I've been as vocal as anyone for the past 20 years in criticizing Congress, no matter which party was in control. What we blame them for may sometimes be opposite things, given our different underlying philosophies, but you can't question my credentials about that. About that, in fact, I said this:

Don't misunderstand me. I'm no apologist for the President, and I'm not saying that Congress is perfect. Far from it. But Congress didn't act alone, and it's not only the past 5 years that figure into this.

I would expect you to ignore it, of course, because to acknowledge that I'm no lover of Congress and often question the President makes a mockery of every stereotype your grandfather instilled in you about democrats, and you would have to admit that we are not all the same. Ideologues never will.

Oh, and there's this:

So that means you don't agree with what they wrote in the Constitution?

That isn't what I said, and is a red herring, which is why I ignored it in the first place. But I certainly might disagree with your interpretation of what they wrote in light of modern circumstances. By the way, I don't necessarily agree with all of it, even as it was originally written. The 3/5 rule, for example, seems a bit problematic to me. They were men, not gods, Brian. Even they saw fit to correct themselves immediately, through the adoption of the Bill of Rights, which are, after all, amendments. Based solely on that, it seems fairly likely they might have found other things that needed a little tweaking as we went along. Like, perhaps, that women voting thing.

You reiterate your belief that I'm one sided and jaded, and then try to distinguish yourself from me by stating, e.g.:

and both sides are extremely incompetent.

And yet nowhere in ANY of your posts do you utter one word of criticism of Republicans specifically. All of your criticism is leveled at Democrats, and by extension at me, through your pejorative words "your beloved democrats." This is utterly unfair, especially since the stereotypes you utter are not really what I think, and if you ever cared to take the time, you would find that I harbor far fewer of those lock-step biases than many out here -- but only if you will set aside your stereotypes and open up your own eyes to see.

You say you see an "equal share of blame," and yet, even after all this, you still refuse to acknowledge the possibility of an "equally" balanced solution. In short, you are still "my way or the highway."

Until that changes, I see this as utterly fruitless, much the same way that what is going on in Washington right now is utterly fruitless, if the goal is to actually solve problems.

And we might very well differ as to whether that is the actual goal of anyone in Washington.

Anna - It was a discussion. How is one person going to get to know another unless certain goading is attempted. You've done your fair share of the goading as well. It's a tet-a-tet. I realize that for the most part, out of all the left leaning personages on FR, you are more centrist than the rest. You've known me just long enough to realize that I speak in extremes. Do you actually think I am extreme? I'm not. I've been blogging since the days of dial up. I've learned a few lessons along the way in debate. Pushing limits is one of them. The art of exaggeration includes taking your expressions to the edge of the limits to give the other person something to chew on. I do it all the time. After all, this form of communication should never be taken that serious. It is entertainment wouldn't you agree?

Here is my real position on the debt ceiling issue - The republicans exasperated the debt starting after Carter. Reagan, although he was many good things, wasn't as fiscally responsible as he should have been. When you consider the House and Senate were democratic majority, he was up against odds trying to implement his programs. I do remember him vetoing several bills and budgets were always DOA. Bush 1... ::shrug:: what can I say? I didn't like him and he didn't do anything to send warm fuzzies across the land. To me, he was sort of a president that never was... Nothing notable other than winning back Kuait from Iraq... At least Bush Sr. had the good sense to let the military run the operations. In and out... made it quick. Clinton - 8 years of pretty much nothing. Things were semi-peaceful, economy chugged along, debt grew at a modest rate. Those were the years I raised my 2 daughters. Bush Jr. comes along, 911 happens and the country goes crazy. The real division between the left and right manifested during W's years although it had been brewing since the days of Nixon. Clinton was payback for Nixon by the republicans... believe it or not. The left tried to brew it even further by threats to go after Bush for the war in Iraq... They never acted on it because I believe, it would have torn us further apart and they knew it. OK.. I realize I'm being a little wordy...

W grew the debt but it took 8 years to do what Obama has done in 3. How do I view this? Interest. The rate of interest is exponential. We never pay down the principle and keep adding to the debt number. There's no balance. I believe we are taxed enough in the ways I mentioned in the earlier post. The government doesn't forecast their spending accurately and oftentimes exaggerates their future revenue... how else would we have gotten so deep in debt? It's a total government problem that no one seems to get a handle on. Our government is just way too big. There's no adjustment when times are lean over when times are fat. When lots of revenue is coming in, they don't set it aside or pay down debt... That's just plain wrong. Their theory has been... let's build a bridge to nowhere... let's invest in a bullet train, one that will surely fail because who's going to ride it? Florida turned down the bullet train because it made no sense. How about creating real jobs? They can do it. All they need to do is look towards the area of greatest need... our infrastructure. The interstate needs major revisions to it. Our power grid is falling apart. That would put many road crews back to work along with linesmen, technicians and engineers. Those would be shovel ready jobs if properly planned and made sense along the way.

Now Anna, I hope you understand that I am not a right wing radical. Conservative, right of center. Dislike emotional and irrational liberal ideology but I know you aren't irrational. You just have some strange beliefs :-)

Awesome Noid - you found Obama's plan.

Other than the unicorns what else does it got? Fairy dust and pots of gold?

[Other than the unicorns what else does it got? Fairy dust and pots of gold?]

Nope, doesn't need any of your Borax, my little Leprechaun. But he does have The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and I'll be able to hear the heads explode from here.

[BOEHNER OVERHEARD LEAVING CAPITOL: “I DIDN’T SIGN UP FOR GOING MANO-A-MANO WITH
THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.”]

Well Johnnie Boy, if you didn't take your cue from the Tea Party...besides, you have to have balls to be a man, right? I mean, with the crying and all...maybe it's hormones?

Balls in Boehner's court, and it seems he's gonna need 'em. Boehner failed the Tea Party, and he's as good as gone. That over-sized novelty gavel he couldn't wait to get his grubby little hands on comes with a price, huh Schpanky...

Now, back to your regularly scheduled box of Lucky Charms...

Wow only 900 Billion compared to the 4 Trillion in Obamas plan

The frightening thing is this, these tea bagging idiots will be hailing this as a BIG victory in their column!

Time to bust out the Dramamine... lol

Gee Feisty, what a thought filled, intelligent, tolerant comment.

Of course no one has actually seen this "plan" from Obama that all of you are talking about, since there ISN'T ONE.

Gee Feisty, what a thought filled, intelligent, tolerant comment.

Swilling the mouthwash again eh Cheryl?

You're hilarious! ;o)

Cheryl,

[Of course no one has actually seen this "plan" from Obama that all of you are talking about, since there ISN'T ONE.}

What part of "It's not Obama's job to come up with a plan" don't you seem to grasp?

What part of "It's not Obama's job to come up with a plan" don't you seem to grasp?

Wait for it Mickey! Chery (the bench warmer)l is only starting to get wound up...

It get's much better... LMAO!

[Wait for it Mickey! Chery (the bench warmer)l is only starting to get wound up...

It get's much better... LMAO!]

Yes, I know...she has me on ignore...I wonder why... 8-/

suddenly the messiah has nothing to say....not that he ever did. All platitudes. All the time.

Any and all proposals so far are a joke and of course the FR dullards demonstrate they understand nothing but party hackery and lust of the great narcissist's crotch.

"HEY CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN! WE'RE ONLY GOING TO PUT YOU ON THE HOOK FOR 7 TRILLION MORE INSTEAD OF 10! don't you feel special?"

Riiight, because all the conservative posts are so enlightening. I won't name names, but my guess is quite a few are rather young, in their 20s maybe 30s at most. It's good you are involved, and have opted for a forum other than FOX, but the lack of gravitas shows guys. You might consider spending less time with proliferate posting. As they say, it's hard to learn if you're always talking.

Mark in SoCal

Extend potential default until February 2012? Why do today what you can put off 'till tomorrow.

Or better yet, do what Obama wants, and put it off until after the 2012 election.

That's right totas....put it off until AFTER the election so that no one remembers that Obama is the most borrowing, taxing, deficit spending President in HISTORY.

I'm sure that everyone on the left thinks is just wonderful to borrow Trillions more dollars (and the interest that goes with it) so that we can spend even MORE money that we don't have.

thetotas: Or better yet, do what Obama wants, and put it off until after the 2012 election.

Nope. Sorry. If the government is burning through that much money that fast, they need to be held accountable and demonstrate to the country just why they spend so much.

Obama is the most borrowing, taxing, deficit spending President in HISTORY.

Cheryl:

Tax and spend republicans are far worse. Repubs have racked up more deficits than any party. Eighty-Five percent of our current debt is from the signatures of just three presidents: Reagan and the two Bushes.

And: "A DEFICIT IS MERELY A COWARD'S WAY OF RAISING TAXES"

So there ya' go shuggah.

As I understand it the ceiling we are talking about here is in regards to payment of previously accrued debt. These bills are due and payable and space must be accommodated for them. As such it seems utterly irrelevant at this point who the responsible party was for abusing the credit card. The present administration - by that I mean the president, senators, and congressmen; the lot of 'em - is responsible to the people of the United States to take ownership of and come up with a workable solution to this debt. I think some reasonable proposals have been put forth, but the closer we get to the deadline the more the blame game takes precedence over cooperation and moving forward (if such a dynamic ever existed......) and fractious party politics completely take over.

Just going to make it worse by putting it off.

Mark, very reasonable post and I agree with you there are actually some valid points of view on both sides; I just wish they would do a clean debt ceiling bill and then do their jobs and make the cuts and the taxes that will be necessary to put this country back on the right path. The stress and pressure of doing this or we crash and burn is making everything worse. One more raising of the debt ceiling won't kill us. Not doing the hard work--in a bipartisan way (like responsible adults) just might.

Agreed, Sueb1.

GOPisn'textinct said: Tax and spend republicans are far worse. Repubs have racked up more deficits than any party. Eighty-Five percent of our current debt is from the signatures of just three presidents: Reagan and the two Bushes.

If it wouldn't be so sad, the word delusional might be in order. Some libbies just pull numbers out of their lower orifice to make absurd points that carry no weight, have no substance nor offer anything of value. Laying 85% of the current debt on 3 republican presidents is about right according to la la libbies. Even though there was an 8 year democrat president with a republican controlled congress for half of his 8 years... unrecognized that said congress held the purse strings tightly and even obtained a surplus.

What do we have now... 5 years of democrat controlled house and senate.. 2 years of complete control by the democrats and we are facing the toughest economic times in my lifetime.

And a libbie wants to blame it all on the republicans.. when Obama himself and this democratic run congress wracked up over 32% of all the debt we've had to date. The libbie wants to say the republicans did it... Can anyone say outright lie? Why do you lie GOP? Yes, I am calling you a liar. Do the math... if you know how.

Brianb-999431

Educate yourself sweetcakes.

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

....and I've forgotten more math than you know, sonny.

GOP has to use crutches to formulate his knowledge base. He relys on other libbies to tell him what to think. GOP can't use a calculator to look at the numbers he has to be told what to look at and how to view them. GOP definitely has a learning disability...

Here GOP, I'll do it in the simplest terms so even my 8 year old grandaughter could understand it.

Current debt = $14.3 Trillion dollars

Debt before Obama showed up = $10.79 Trillion dollars

Difference = $3.51 Trillion dollars.

Here's the real tricky part GOP... it involves some actual division.

3.51/10.79 = 32%

Since you've forgotten more math than I have, maybe you forgot how to do a simple ratio. Maybe I should explain it to you...

Sonny! LOL.. now that's a real joke... You have no idea who I am, where I've been... what I know... and you try to diminish me...

I can tell you this... your emotional outbursts definitely tell me you are a true bleeding heart liberal, lacking in the common sense to blow your own nose... making you nothing but a snot-nosed arrogant blip. A think he knows everything, does nothing wrong, crying baby... has to rely on others to tell him how to think and what liberal line to take at any given moment...

Try to keep up GOP... they aren't extinct... they are there purposefully to get under your skin, annoy you and turn your day into hateful moments of mediocrity.

Mark, you're absolutely correct the debt ceiling is about PAST debt, not FUTURE spending.

Therefore it IS relevant who used the credit card and piled up all that PAST debt, and it was during the Bush/Cheney administration. Therefore it is hypocritical of the Teabaggers to demand that the current Democratic president and senate take the heat for their anarchist agenda and pass their draconian Duck, Dodge and Destroy amendment to the constitution. Or take the heat for the unnecessary crisis of the debt ceiling, or worse a default.

I'm sick of holier-than-thou BS from a bunch of freshman amateurs in the House, and also disgusted by the populist bait-and-switch tactics of GOP/TP governors that is typical of movements such as Nazism. Sieg heil to the Reich-wing.

Any comment on this post?

Easterneagle

READ THIS AMERICA YOU THINK WE HAVE A DEBT PROBLEM?? YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW BIG!!

Bernie Sanders of Vermont is CREDIBLE and one of the few honest politicians left in government.

Government Accountability Office) audit of the Federal Reserve was carried out in the past few months due to the Ron Paul, Alan Grayson Amendment to the Dodd-Frank bill, which passed last year. Jim DeMint, a Republican Senator, and Bernie Sanders, an independent Senator, led the charge for a Federal Reserve audit in the Senate, but watered down the original language of the house bill (HR1207), so that a complete audit would not be carried out. Ben Bernanke (pictured to the left), Alan Greenspan, and various other bankers vehemently opposed the audit and lied to Congress about the effects an audit would have on markets. Nevertheless, the results of the first audit in the Federal Reserve’s nearly 100 year history were posted on Senator Sander’s webpage earlier this morning. What was revealed in the audit was startling: $16,000,000,000,000.00 (TRILLION) had been secretly given out to US banks and corporations and foreign banks everywhere from France to Scotland. From the period between December 2007 and June 2010, the Federal Reserve had secretly bailed out many of the world’s banks, corporations, and governments. The Federal Reserve likes to refer to these secret bailouts as an all-inclusive loan program, but virtually none of the money has been returned and it was loaned out at 0% interest. Why the Federal Reserve had never been public about this or even informed the United States Congress about the $16 trillion dollar bailout is obvious —the American public would have been outraged to find out that the Federal Reserve bailed out foreign banks while Americans were struggling to find jobs. To place $16 trillion into perspective, remember that GDP of the United States is only $14.12 trillion. The entire national debt of the United States government spanning its 200+ year history is “only” $14.5 trillion. The budget that is being debated so heavily in Congress and the Senate is “only” $3.5 trillion. Take all of the outrage and debate over the $1.5 trillion deficit into consideration, and swallow this Red pill: There was no debate about whether $16,000,000,000,000 would be given to failing banks and failing corporations around the world. In late 2008, the TARP Bailout bill was passed and loans of $800 billion were given to failing banks and companies. That was a blatant lie considering the fact that Goldman Sachs alone received 814 billion dollars. As is turns out, the Federal Reserve donated $2.5 trillion to Citigroup, while Morgan Stanley received $2.04 trillion. The Royal Bank of Scotland and Deutsche Bank, a German bank, split about a trillion and numerous other banks received hefty chunks of the $16 trillion.

“This is a clear case of socialism for the rich and rugged, you’re-on-your-own individualism for everyone else.” – Bernie Sanders(I-VT)

When you have conservative Republican stalwarts like Jim DeMint(R-SC) and Ron Paul(R-TX) as well as self identified Democratic socialists like Bernie Sanders all fighting against the Federal Reserve, you know that it is no longer an issue of Right versus Left. When you have every single member of the Republican Party in Congress and progressive Congressmen like Dennis Kucinich sponsoring a bill to audit the Federal Reserve, you realize that the Federal Reserve is an entity onto itself, which has no oversight and no accountability. Americans should be swelled with anger and outrage at the abysmal state of affairs when an unelected group of bankers can create money out of thin air and give it out to megabanks and supercorporations like Halloween candy. If the Federal Reserve and the bankers who control it believe that they can continue to devalue the savings of Americans and continue to destroy the US economy, they will have to face the realization that their trillion dollar printing presses can be stopped with five dollars worth of bullets. [Regardless of whether this money is fiat money (money printed with nothing of value to back it), if it is a currency forced on society and the world, with enforcement by the Fed, IRS, the U.S. military, et al, --which it is-- the acts of the Federal Reserve are, in essence, the transfer of greater wealth to the rich insider banks and corporations, while the rest of the world grows poorer, and as the value of this funny money grows less and less in purchasing power. These insider banks, etc., then, exchange this funny money for gold and silver, the real wealth of the world, which, then, reinflates the world with more and more devaluing federal reserve notes. This, then, creates hyper-inflation, increasing the cost of all resources and commodities, while gold and silver climb to never-seen-before levels of value. This is how the Federal Reserve insiders steal the wealth of the world and why the rich get richer while the poor get poorer. It's the world's largest Ponzi scheme! The Federal Reserve is nothing but a front for a small group of families who run a very large and successful white collar criminal Ponzi scheme. This criminal institution should be seized by the U.S. Treasury department and all assets frozen, and returned to the coffers of the U.S. Treasury in order to settle the U.S. debt and help begin to balance the U.S. deficit. All banks (listed below) should be forced to return the money received by the Federal Reserve. All families in ownership of the Fed and their agents should be located, caught, tried and jailed for grand larceny and treason against the people of the U.S.A. All government agents who protect and help facilitate this criminal organization should be fired from the positions and similarly tried and jailed for grand larceny and treason. Meanwhile, Congress should return our country to its original monetary system (Lincoln greenbacks backed by precious metals) and, again, do its duty to regulate the coining of the currency of America as per the U.S. Constitution.] The list of institutions that received the most money from the Federal Reserve can be found on page 131 of the GAO Audit and are as follows.. Citigroup: $2.5 trillion ($2,500,000,000,000) Morgan Stanley: $2.04 trillion ($2,040,000,000,000) Merrill Lynch: $1.949 trillion ($1,949,000,000,000) Bank of America: $1.344 trillion ($1,344,000,000,000) Barclays PLC (United Kingdom): $868 billion ($868,000,000,000) Bear Sterns: $853 billion ($853,000,000,000) Goldman Sachs: $814 billion ($814,000,000,000) Royal Bank of Scotland (UK): $541 billion ($541,000,000,000) JP Morgan Chase: $391 billion ($391,000,000,000) Deutsche Bank (Germany): $354 billion ($354,000,000,000) UBS (Switzerland): $287 billion ($287,000,000,000) Credit Suisse (Switzerland): $262 billion ($262,000,000,000) Lehman Brothers: $183 billion ($183,000,000,000) Bank of Scotland (United Kingdom): $181 billion ($181,000,000,000) BNP Paribas (France): $175 billion ($175,000,000,000)

Eeeeeeeasy, TruePatriot.........

I read a lot of stuff on this board that is nonsense and most of it I can overlook but when the comparisons between those with whom one disagrees and Nazis are made that is where I draw the line. I don't care how much anyone hates the "Tea Party" any comparison between 2011 USA and 1930s Germany is just patently absurd, utter balderdash in a historical context.

OK, pet pieve aired. And, I care not for the "Tea Party." I think they have thrown a disproportionately large monkey wrench into the gears and created some temporary havoc but will not endure.

Our system of government undergoes constant turnover of personnel and variations in ideology. Therefore, in order to be effective I believe current administrations must accept as their own both the progress and problems of those whom they follow. Bush and Cheney are gone and for the sake of this argument I am not interested what they did or did not do. President Obama, Speaker Boehner, and all in current government must accept the responsibility for how things are now. How things are now is a direct result of how things were conducted in the past. A truly astute and responsible politician takes that which he (or she) inherits from previous administrations as part of the package of office and formulates policy accordingly. The blame game is childish and unproductive.

This is why I believe it is irrelevant who misused the credit card. Bugger what the shrill "Tea Party" mouthpieces say. Senators and congressmen of integrity need to accept responsibility and stand up for what is best for the country.

Actually Job1 if you would check the FACTS, you'd find that initially the new tax RATES actually lowered unemployment and brought in RECORD income taxes because of the amount of people that were working.

It's only because you been told by your propoganda leaders that you actually don't like the income tax RATES.

I saw that report. Something like 2.8 Billion increased revenue accredited to the tax cuts over 10 years. Only problem the tax cuts cost us 2.7 Trillion dollars over 10 years.

Sorry Cheryl,

I checked the facts and see that you are incorrect.

Gee Sue and who do the Democrats want to please? Unions, illegals, and generational welfare frauds. A really fine upstanding group of people.

How much money does the government have to spend on corrupt waste filled programs before you on the left are happy anyway?

Cheryl, the democrats are not angels by any means; but, they care about the elderly, the disabled and yes (horrors!) the poor. Not all of these people are slackers....Why exactly would it be so terrible for the rich to pay a little more to help out here?

By the way, to call me 'on the left' is funny. I was a lifelong republican and only left the party when I realized that George Bush lied to us about the reasons to go into Iraq

Where do you get that they "care" for the elderly, the disabled Sue? They STOLE 500 Billion dollars from MediCare to pay for ObamaCare. They took money from people that have paid inbto their entire lives! And their "justification"? Why the half trillion could be made up for by "cutting fraud, waste, and abuse". Of course there's no actual plan to do that, but it sure sounded good didn't it?

And while MediCare and Social Security are going broke and needs to be ADJUSTED, you listen to the Democrats that want to do NOTHING about it. And what happens when it goes broke Sue? Who's going to suffer for that? Why the "elderly, and disabled and poor" that you say the Democrats care so much for.

And as for the "poor". In Los Angeles a "poor" person makes over $50,000 a year in welfare, food stamps, housing and energy payments, health care, and any and every other "entitlement" program you can think of. And it's like that NATIONWIDE. Isn't it great the the "poor" make AT LEAST twice the official poverty level of $22,350 for a family of four in this country. Isn't it great to see a "poor" person walking around with their IPhone, knowing that they'll be driving home in that nice SUV and watching that HDLED television with their HD satellite system? While the people that actually get to pay for all that are cutting back on things as simple as getting gas, just so they can afford their house payments?

And don't say "that's not true", because I live right next door to one of these thieves, with her on welfare, and two daughters on welfare, and the boyfriends that work living there, but of course not marrying them because then the welfare stops.

Why don't you go take a look at what the "rich" pay before you complain? The so called "rich" that you and everyone else on the left like to demonize so much (that would be ANYONE making over $200,000 a year) pay 35% Federal taxes, and in California pay 11% for everything above $30,000. That doesn't count the city and county taxes, property taxes, phone taxes, utility taxes, sales taxes, business license and taxes, and every other fee that you on the left feel they should pay their "fair" share of. And in the end, you don't actually care anyway, do you? After all, they're "rich". Of course the majority of the "rich" that you whine about actually provide the JOBS to people AFTER they pay all those taxes, and have to pay the insurance costs for those people too.

And I'm sure that all those "rich" people that you talk about sure do want to hire more people when they know they have to pay higher taxes, right?

Oh, and by the way. If you believe the lies about how "Bush lied", then you also have to believe that Democrats that DEMANDED we invade Iraq lied, the United Nations inspectors lied, the United Nations lied, and nearly every nation on EARTH lied, since they ALL said there were WMDs.

You were NO "life long Republican". You are either out and out LYING or you were just a RINO looking for an excuse.

I guess all the lies from Obama don't mean anything to you though, right? Like how he was going to cut the deficit in HALF, and instead has added 5 TRILLION dollars to it? How you could keep your insurance, and it turns out ONLY if your insurance meets the "Secretary's" standard of what's "acceptable". Or how "transparent" everything was going to be, as doors were locked and bills written in secret. Tell me how "life long" you were Sue.

Cheryl

1. That 500 million was taken from the now deceased Florida Medicare Advantage plan which cost way more than regular medicare and gave no more benefits than regular medicare. Regular medicare was not reduced.

2. Move out of California.

3. You are simply wrong, many people are poor and are not welfare cheats or loafers. There are many working poor in this country.

4. The rich -- the top 400 in this country make more than the rest of us put together. It will not hurt them to pay more.

Wow, Cheryl, you have attitude. I was a lifelong republican, I don't really care if you believe me or not. But I voted for Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush 1 and Bush 2. And what democrats demanded that we invade Iraq?

Medicare Advantage is nothing but Corporate welfare.

The so called "rich" that you and everyone else on the left like to demonize so much

Cheryl honey:

Most rich people would sell you and/or your kids for medical experiments, or into sex slavery if they felt they could get two nickels for it. Furthermore, they would sleep fine that night. Most of those repub pukes have no capacity for remorse, and are borderline sociopaths.

GOPisextinct -

I take umbrage! I work closely with the very rich, and know for a fact I am worth at least four nickels on the sex slave market!!

GOPie - How exactly do you ever expect to have any credibility with lines like this:

'GOPie - Most rich people would sell you and/or your kids for medical experiments, or into sex slavery if they felt they could get two nickels for it'

Now tell me, yes or no, do you actually believe that?

Now tell me, yes or no, do you actually believe that?

WCA,

Yes.

There are some who will / would: Ken Lay, Ivan Boesky, Jack Welch, Tom Delay, Jack Abrahamoff, Bernie Madoff, Bob Eaton,...

You know the names.

Wow. Just wow.

White Collar Auto

Wow. Just wow.

Right WCA. I'm sure you are just traumatized by that remark. Your poor little impressionable heart is just in shock.

Poor baby.

You know this how GOP? Kwame is rich or he was when he stole 8 million from you, didn't he kill a hooker in his mansion? I'm sure only Republicans think that way though.

I watched how faux helped bush lie us to this war.

Being against the war I was watching the weapons inspector report. He talked about all the places that had checked. That he felt the inspections were going good. He was asked about one site and he said they had not been able to get in there. I felt good that we had a chance to avoid war.

Well that night on faux the only thing you heard was the one 10 seconds soundbite about the location he did not get into and not one word about the rest of the report. Then the talking heads came in and started using the fear questions like just how bad could it get with the WMD's that he has and is hiding and on and on. I would have been scared to death had I not watched the full report earlier.

The censored news they fed you is the stuff you are spouting here today Cheryl.

Well Me First, since you started your post with "Being against the war" I think you didn't need to pursue further.

Post the link what you are talking about? In your expert opinion Me First, what is considered a WMD? Give me some examples.

Yea, Sue, I'm throwing the BS flag too. You cry about Iraq, but nothing about Libya. Just under the UN sanctions warrant what Bush did. Did you complain the years Clinton had a "no fly" zone over iraq for years? If you were a "Republican" you would had. Just saying..........

White Collar Auto,

I agree with you, Wow. Just wow.

Maybe Boehner will pull a rabbit out of his hat at the last minute.

Didn't you hear Tom?

The rabbit died a slow agonizing death when Boehner (in a drunken stupor) SAT ON IT!

*flashback to Christopher killing Adrienna's dog on the Soprano's* lol

Tom. Tell us all what Obama's pulling out of his hat besides B.S. and lies. And Reid with his sudden, "my plan cuts spending by billions" that he pulled out of his butt and waves in your face and you sit there and smile and tell everyone how wonderful is smells.

And of course there's Feisty again, with her oh so "intelligent" comments that show how everyone on the left is so tolerant, open, and truthful.

How's it going Ms. John Wilkes Booth? Since you are so good at preaching hate and violence towards anyone that disagrees with the "party line", just like he did, the name is PERFECT for you.

[Maybe Boehner will pull a rabbit out of his hat at the last minute.]

That's not his hat that he pulling that rabbit out of!

Gopisextinct--- As Walter Cronkite would say "And that's the way it is"

Amen Brother.

GOP is extinct--very funny; but, we you mean to say we have 2,386.5 years more of this?!?!?!?! Aaarghhh!!!!!!!

Yup Sueb1:

That's my "conservative" estimate,.......(pun intended)

BWAHAHAHA!! I kill myself!

Thanks Tom. I am a fan of yours on this blog site.

Back at ya.

I'm up for that...just let my dad get out first. He is working on it.

Post the link GOP. How many people left Michigan? But I'm hearing it's getting better there, why is that? Something change there?

Post the link GOP.

Sure dude. Here yar'. Glad you asked. I think all but 2 of the top 10 are Red states.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/galleries/2011/04/04/state-finances.html

Michigan IS doing a lot better, mostly because we have already purged most of our jobs. The autos lost some 600,000 jobs from 2000 - 2010, 400,000 of those in Michigan.

Lotta' pain. This country got socked by NAFTA, and Michigan is where NAFTA's testicles were located. We took the brunt of it.

Now the autos are back hiring like a raped ape. Some 96,000 jobs forecast for this year and next in Michigan. I know Chrysler is crowded as hell again. Sux finding a parking spot in the morn at its World HQ complex in Auburn Hills. They're building a giant wind farm in the thumb from Granholm's efforts.

Detroit is building light rail up Woodward, Whole Foods is opening a store, in Detroit, in Midtown District. "Eds and Meds" complex is happening around Wayne State, a land grab is in progress there, shops, restaurants and galleries are opening, a cruise passenger terminal opened downtown to handle Great Lakes cruises. Cruises are booked solid with foreign tourists. Quicken Loans is moving downtown, casinos are humming, Comerica Park and Ford Field rock the town on weekends.

Just a partial list. The neighborhoods still suck, but the mayor is incentivizing people to move downtown. We'll see how that works. Even "Jollyoldsoul' or "white collar auto" lives down there.

Detroit has been "coming back" since 1955, so we'll see how this incarnation goes.

Michigan was the only state to lose people in the last census.

Yup Detroit is decayed due to Democratic policies alright.

Just like other Democratically-controlled cities. Renoun crap holes like Seattle, San Francisco, New York, San Antonio, Atlanta, Chicago.

If they're such crap holes,....how come everybody wants to live in em'? Oh,....and Vancouver, B.C.,...not American, but still Liberal controlled.

I'd actually love to see the president take a stand like that! It would be worth the fight afterwards!

You're being silly Sueb1,.....I like that in a girl. ;o)

These guys are eventually going to go away....they are so extreme. Just so sad that in the meantime, they are getting the chance to destroy our country. They are so delusional, they were on the news today claiming that the congressional lines were jammed because they called on the American people to call in. Reminds me of the Left Behind series when the antichrist totally makes people believe the opposite of what really happens.