That may be old gal, but we now know neither American, nor the world was ready or can handle someone as unqualified and unprepared as Obama.

I saw the earlier article that Obama is going to "stay the course."

What course is that. He clearly had no plan on the economy, and worse the only thing he knows how to do is make conducting business harder.

He has even admitted this fact by announcing he will cut back regulations. So why were those regulation enacted in the first place?

Just ridiculous. But hey, I for one anxiously await his now totally awesome jobs plan. What would it have been like for those n the titanic to know before hand they we approaching the ice berg and were about to sink?

Guess we get to find out. Should be fun.

Perry is another flash cowboy..loyalty is not his strong suit....cowboy boots for the lift and a liar for the cause..His empowerment only!

This is why he will not be elected: http://www.politicususa.com/en/big-government-obama-reagan

"Read my lips, no new Texans."

http://www.npr.org/2011/08/24/139781021/the-evangelicals-engaged-in-spiritual-warfare

"An emerging Christian movement that seeks to take dominion over politics, business and culture in preparation for the end times and the return of Jesus, is becoming more of a presence in American politics. The leaders are considered apostles and prophets, gifted by God for this role."

This is the group backing Rick Perry.

For some insight in to his mindset, check out this interview by Terry Gross with Rachel Tabachnick.

Oh, so we are to look at the groups BACKING a candidate, eh?

Huh, I seem to recall some pretty interesting groups backing, and now supporting Obama.

Please keep raising this point. It will highlight the issues and will be applied to all, including the incumbent.

Give me a break, you judged President Obama on his paper he wrote in grade school. President Obama was judged on everyone he ever talked to.

Bring it on for Perry now, his backers the army of god makes Rev. Wright look like a Sunday school teacher.

@Spanky -

Wow... you just have time to read the headlines don't you? The regulations that Obama is cutting back on go to an announcment he made some time ago directing all agencies to review their existing sets of regulations and remove the ones' that make no sense ( I'm para-phrasing here but you can look up the article yourself on the Post or CNN )

Its not regualtions that his administration put in place: its a review to see what old laws and regulations no longer make sense.

YOu would think that ALL administrations should perform such a review and cleasing to streamline the processes, but Team Obama can't get a break even when what they do makes sense.

Its raining on the East Coast today - probably Obamas fault there too huh?

Too much credit, me reading the headlines.

You would think he have done this, if the regs make no sense, well before.

But let's face it - he is in the regulation creating business, not the other way around. These particular regs will cuts costs by a small amount compare to the huge increase in regs his admin had created.

But to the actual point Pablo -what has he done to bolster the economy? How is it possible that even to this day he has no actual plan? The economy has been in the tank since before he took office, so it can't be a surprise.

I dislike Washington. I think it's a seedy place."

Good than why don't you stay down in the "Heart of Texas".

"Read my lips, no new Texans."

LMAO! Thanks, I needed that.

devie: your welcome, it wasn't mine originally, but I can't attribute it. I just find it hillarious.

Perry's execrable record is going to make him eat his words. In particular, his pay-for-play method of "governing" Texas, his system of stocking government posts with "reliable" cronies, his manipulation of the state budget using stimulus funds, and his assaults on the state's public infrastructure (including shool staff) all reek of the crony capitalism of the G.W. Bush regime. The U.S. is now learning the details of that wretched failure of a presidency, and paying far too dearly for it, to wish any possibility of a repeat.

The man's character is fundamentally flawed. He's ripe pickings for Grover Norquist and the K Street Project gang, which may pour out rivers of cash to support his race.

By playing the country buffoon, which Perry most definitely is not, he's also supplying the opposition with scads of material to use against him.

Should Perry actually succeed in winning the nomination, it is likely to become a very, very nasty race. And there's a genuine risk of inflaming some partisans beyond control.

The Republican candidates may look different, but inside they're all the same - hypocrites and outright liars.

So Perry says Washington is crazy, but he's going to spend millions upon millions of dollars to take up residence there.

He's floated the secession idea, after all Texas once was an independent country, doncha know, but he wants to lead the federal government that picks on Texas.

Government isn't the solution, it's the problem he tells us. Yet, it's at the government trough where Perry has made his living for almost three decades - long enough to make himself a millionaire.

You just have to shake your head and wonder how anyone can take these people seriously.

Perry brings nothing new to the table that Michele Bachmann didn't already offer. In fact, Bachmann is still the alpha male, first against Pawlenty and now Perry (who's a little light in the boots).

Yes, Pablo, there's some Texan-size shooting from the lips around here.

DAVID WALKER-----Hypocrites and outright liars! Just the repubs? The guy I voted for (and have been regretting ever since) said this in July of 2008: Bush (not President Bush) was irresponsible and unpatriotic for raising our debt by 4 trillion in 8 years. Does Mr. Obama feel the same about himself? 4 trillion in just 3.5 years. Mr. Obama the King hypocrisy.

Hillary 2012

time4truth:

President Obama was right. Bush and the Republican Congress were irresponsible. They took a balanced budget, borrowed trillions to finance two wars, prescription drugs and a couple of tax cuts. When Bush took office, CBO projected a ZERO debt by the end of the first decade of this century.

Look where we are. This monstrous recession was not caused by President Obama. It was caused by Bush et al.

Lastly, show me where President Obama EVER called George Bush unpatriotic. EVER!

I'm not defending Bush don't like him didn't vote for him. He spent like a fool, but Obama is doing the same thing but I feel even worse. I voted for Obama but not again.

There is video of Obama while campaigning(I believe in Iowa) back in July of 2008, saying Bush was UNPATRIOTIC for raising the debt by 4 trillion in just 8 years all I want to know is Obama unpatriotic for raising the debt by 4 trillion in just 3.5 years? If you want to know the truth when Bush raised the the debt by 4 trillion we were only 38% of GDP public debt but now we are at 70% of GDP. I know everything is Bush's fault and Obama is perfect but let's not go in to 2012 completly blind. Obama is a failure as far as fixing the economy.

Maybe you don't see that as hypocritical but I do.

David, you forgot to mention the little Clinton internet bubble recession and 9/11 that Bush had to come out from under and which he did. Now I am not a Bush fan and he certainly was a mediocre president at best but this isnt a monstrous recession in comparison to say the recession that Reagan was able to come out from under. You do remember losing our manufacturing base right? 20% interest rates, unemployment far higher than we have now (at least whats reported by Obama). He has had 3 years of his policies and as reported today, the new CBO forecast for the end of the fiscal year on September 30 doesnt paint a pretty picture. Obama keeps stating a retrenchment of government spending but its 141 billion higher than last year with a deficit of 1.3 trillion and thats with tax revenue up 190 billion. Defense spending is only up 14 billion with all the additional spending going to your favorite social programs. All you progressives including Anna Molly constantly screaming about how horrible us fiscal conservatives are for wanting to make poor grandma walk 3 miles both ways to for the soup kitchen is getting somewhat old now. The increases in these programs are all triple digits over the last 10 years lets get real ok?

David Walker Are you a CPA in Illinois?

time4truth:

No, I'm a POLWHW in Kansas. That's a Pissed-Off Liberal Who Hates Waste. I never said President Obama was perfect. Indeed, I have never hesitated to criticize the man when I disagreed. That said, Bush deserves no quarter. His policies were/are disastrous. They will haunt us for years to come.

Kirk:

You are so far off the mark, I don't know where to begin. The 9/11 incident had very little impact on the Bush Presidency except to the extent that it was a good time to go shopping. (Bush's advice, in case you've forgotten.) It was also a fabulous opportunity to enrich the U.S. military-industrial complex at the expense of the national debt. Oh yeah, it was the excuse for just about every disastrous policy implemented by him and his Republican-controlled Congress. You do recall that he NEVER vetoed one single spending bill. NOT ONE.

As far as a recession, frankly I don't care what the economists say, we are in a transition period unlike anything before in the history of this country. Of course unemployment is up. Consumer spending is down. Consumer spending has for many years been the mainstay of the economy. Fuel prices - a component in virtually everything we buy - have gone up and there is no longer any doubt that a substantial portion of that increase comes at the hands of Goldman-Sachs and their speculation. That's their "thank you" for bailing the bastards out. (While you're busy touting Reagan, you might want to check your history and note his machinations with the unemployment rate.) This is a new world. Bush didn't understand that. All the guy and his cronies understood was making the rich richer. President Obama is far more attuned to change than Bush ever was. The increased spending you want to hang on him was necessitated by Bush and Republican wild-ass spending.

Tell me Kirk, what are my favorite social programs? Tell me what it is that makes me a progressive! If you are going to hang your hat on labels that you define.....we have nothing to discuss.

David, I have no idea if you are a progressive or what labels but I continue to see a ton of them on this blog and assumptions and conclusions based on those labels that are not based on any reality. I definitely am not off the mark not even close. I had to lay off 10% of the people working for me after 9/11 and we suffered a 20% drop in profit and that combined with the bursting the internet bubble, was a pretty significant recession. I am not a Bush fan so dont lump me in but your views of his disastrous policies are exactly how I feel about Obama and his cronies Pelosi and Reid. At least Bush was able to bring economic and job growth out of the recession. Trust me I am obviously much older than you and I lived through the Carter recession and it was much more painful on the middle class because of the loss of our manufacturing base. This recession is tougher across the board. By the way Bush's buddies didnt get any richer than Clinton's buddies and his policies and I am a Clinton fan. They both created an environment that benefited the wealthy.

Your comment that Obama's increased spending is necessitated by Bush's wild ass spending makes no sense and my guess is that you know that. His spending has gone up 900 billion a year and the stimulus is over. We can debate the benefits of government spending but spending bad after more bad makes no sense.

Kirk: you know how the more damage is done to something, the more it costs to fix it? Well, the economy works the same way.

Ash, based on what evidence and damage are you talking about? Do you have some historical analysis where you can show that lets say after the internet bubble burst and the resulting recession, there was economic damage right? Explain to me how that works in terms of government spending and fixing the economy? Given that we have 3 years of unprecended growth in government spending and wild ass deficits for the foreseeable future and the economy going backwards, whatever that fix you were referring to isnt working.

David Walker - Lastly, show me where President Obama EVER called George Bush unpatriotic. EVER!

David - here is your proof that Obama called Bush unpatriotic. (and in a way, he is now calling himself unpatriotic.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUaF5spn6fg

Kirk, some of that "unprecedented government spending" you're whining about is the only thing that STOPPED the economic free-fall this country was in. Any really effective solution to the problem as it stands now would be pointless to suggest, as it would never make it past the current Congress. Long story short, the stimulus did not go far enough, because anything more would have been filibustered.

The original stimulus plan had a fillibuster proof senate so dont blame it on the GOP. The unprecedented spending is for fiscal 2011 ending in september and it doesnt include the stimulus so it includes gigantic increases in entitlement programs. Remember I am not talking about the deficit so the spending doesnt include tax cuts to revenue I am purely talking about government spending. Based on the per job cost of the old stimulus plan, even if you doubled the cost, it would still have been cheaper to write a check to every man, woman, child in this country than have a stimulus. Finally, do you have some evidence of historical times in which government spending via entitlement programs and this type of stimulus repaired the damage? Given the past 20 year history here in Illinois as a guinea pig, would you say that type of stimulus and large government spending has worked well? What about California or any other high tax, high government spending state would you say that those economies were fixed? What about the past? I am not sure what you are advocating.

California? You mean that state whose constitution makes it effectively impossible to raise taxes?

It's not a difficult concept. You put more money in the hands of the poor and middle-class via "entitlement" programs. Ergo, they have more money to spend on things. Ergo, demand for those things increases. Demand drives job creation. More jobs means more people with money to spend, ergo demand increases further, continuing the cycle. (As a side bonus, the rich people who own the businesses make more money too!) If the cycle continues for long enough without anybody screwing with it, the economy recovers, fewer people are dependent upon the entitlement programs, and ultimately the deficit turns into a surplus.

Ash, California has one of the highest tax burdens in the country. Their progressive tax rates on all business are astronomical. Yes its hard to raise property tax rates but not other taxes. Why bother having jobs then, we might as well just print money, increase entitlements and hand out checks to everyone and if you want to work you can but why because the government can just hand you money. I fully support a safety net but what you are referring to is a socialist type Swedish type government. Is that what you are talking about? You dont think there is personal responsibility and accountability anywhere in our system that the government should just write checks? Demand is only one small part of business and I think you understand its not that simplistic. The keysnian approach to economics as you are suggesting has never worked and its always a blend of approaches. Spending is out of whack right now which doesnt mean we dont need to reform the tax code and revenue side too.

If demand isn't the fundamental economic driver of job creation, then what is? Please tell me you don't subscribe to the fantasy of supply-side economics, wherein giving business owners even more money somehow magically motivates them to make unnecessary hires out of the goodness of their hearts.

time4truth:

John, Tucson supplied me with the link to the quote. You are quite correct. I sure wish you weren't.

David, you do realize that clip was from a 2008 campaign speech?

Cynthia's Point:

Yes, I do, but that doesn't change the fact that he said it, not does it diminish my support for him. It was a very unfortunate remark.

Paying your bills is not unpatriotic. On the other hand, deliberately destroying the economy and putting this nation in two wars......THAT is unpatriotic.

Ash, its not a matter of supply side versus demand as the real answer is not that simplistic. Are you telling me that research and innovation have nothing to do with job creation. There was no demand for personal computers until some one created it and put it up for sale. Yes you have to have demand but you also have to create the demand via marketing, research, innovation and you have to invest to be competitive and create productivity and efficiency in the system. Its not as easy as giving people a check and say ok the economy is better.

Of course innovation is an important factor in bringing new industries to market. But how can you legislate innovation into existence? Certainly not by making rich people richer.

Ash, I am not advocating that and I am not arguing with you over your demand comments pointing out that its more than that. You can easily legislate innovation and research. You put more money in the hands of the guy who owns 10 dunkin donuts and he will invest and build number 11. You give GM more money to sell cars cheaper and more efficiently than Toyota and they will compete better, create more models that will sell more and hire more people. Its not enough to say put money in a consumer's hands and he will buy a GM car. That applies across the board for all businesses. If you saying that if you take more money out of an ultra wealthy person's pocket like Buffet I am not going to argue with you as that wont impact the market but there arent enough people like him

First of all, it's bizarre to characterize the building of an 11th Dunkin Donuts as either "innovation" or "research". It's an increase of production, period.

Secondly, if there is enough of a market to justify an 11th Dunkin Donuts, the guy will build it anyway (taking out a loan if necessary) because it makes good business sense to do so and he stands to make more money off of it. If he's successful enough to count as one of the people I'm advocating NOT giving money to, then he is already sitting on a healthy pile of profits to invest in the new store.

As for giving more money to GM (as an example of a typical corporation), left to their own devices, they're going to use it to do one thing: enrich the people in control. They will not pass the benefit on to the customer (or the employees) unless there is no other choice. Corporations have proven this time and time again.

Ash, thats really not how it works. Innovation, research, investment new products, new locations are all part of the same story creating supply that might or might now create demand for your products. I grew up in a very small town and my parents owned the local Hallmark store. I worked there as a kid and helped them with the business as an adult. They now have 3. It doesnt just get built and it is about making good business sense but not 100% about whether there is enough market there. Most times the market is the same and moves up with inflation and your just trying to take market share from someone else. But the decision to open up new stores depends on how much net after tax AND REINVESTMENT my parents have in order to put the equity plus loan into a new store. If you raise the tax rate or any of the various business expenses, it definitely impacts your ability to open the next store. I assume your only going to tax the Buffets or what is your definition of advocating for rich?

As for corporation, left to their own devices you are 100% wrong. I have worked for 2 fortune 500 corporations and there is no doubt that there are some bad executives but thats the exception plus virtually all of them make the big money via stock options. In order for the stock price to go up, they need to reinvest cash sitting on their balance sheet making 1% into new investments making more than that so their options are worth more. They arent in it to pass it on to their customers as why should they as they are in it for making profit for their shareholders. Customers dont have to buy it if its too expensive. There are always bad apples but lets not throw them all out because of a couple.

Kirk, thank you for sharing your business background; it makes it easier to understand where your supply-side leanings probably come from.

"They arent in it to pass it on to their customers as why should they as they are in it for making profit for their shareholders."

Exactly. And all that money that goes into the shareholders' pockets does NOTHING to help the economy.

Arent the shareholders the same ones that get the money that create the demand? You do know that public companies are owned over 90% by institutions and these institutions that own the shares are almost all endowments (public and private universities), the biggest are pension funds generally unions by the way including both private and government sector unions. The california unions pensions are gigantic owners of public companies so it goes into their pensions and lastly 401k accounts via mutual funds. So it goes to enrich the middle class and workers of all income levels.

By the way they are leanings and nothing is an absolute.

"Arent the shareholders the same ones that get the money that create the demand?"

I'm not sure what this question is asking. Are the shareholders who get the money the same ones who create the demand? No, they generally are not. Money that is tied up in stock shares is not available for spending on goods and services.

And in case it wasn't clear, I said "leanings" because it seemed more polite than "bias".

I will admit its a bias rather than leaning. We are all products to some extent of our personal experiences having spent my entire life with small business issues and for some time within a large corporation. I understand biases arent absolute but not sure everyone feels the same.

Just to be clear, I am also in favor of helping out small businesses (by which I mean businesses whose market justifies them growing faster than their financial situation allows). You might be interested to know that the current administration is in the process of reviewing hundreds of federal business regulations for reform, to make it easier for small businesses to compete.

Funny thing is Obama is saying essentially the same thing - he is now running against Washington and blaming congress.

Of course the rub there is his party controls 2/3s.

And really Obama ran against it too, or have you forgotten now that he is Washington.

"Most transparent Pres. EVAH!"

President Obama is running against the do-nothing Tea Party Republicans, which is entirely different, altogether.

Mornin Feisty,

That has been my question all along......why do the Teapublicans fight so hard to be at the helm of the Federal Government that they hate so much?....maybe they have the position of Bachmann, 'know your enemy'......get in there and destroy it!

As for Slick Rick......maybe he has thoughts of moving the nations capitol to Austin!....part of the job creation scheme for Texas!......lol

Morning back at ya chilled!

why do the Teapublicans fight so hard to be at the helm of the Federal Government that they hate so much

Do you hear the same *crickets* I do? lol

The only reason I can think of is, it's the ONLY way they can ram their radical social issues down our throats...

I mean, what else have they done since regaining control of the house in January 2010?

Devie - You Tube election 2.0.

Everything he said as a candidate is on record. You Tube was created in 2005. His own words are going to kill him.

Like: raising the debt by $4 trillion is unpatriotic. Seems ironic, no?

Yup, they have an agenda for the government to control any uppity woman who dares to think and decide for herself.....control who you choose to marry, etc..(there's that samll government they speak about).

But mostly, Teapublicans, want that great (part-time) job with great power, salaries, and benefits!

Sorry - Dirp101, not Devie.

Devie has the fixation on D-1 kickers.

It might be that they love the country, and the Constitution, that liberals are so determined to undermine.

Whether or not the Libya invasion is successful, there is no question it was an unConstitutional action.

The health insurance mandate is unconstitutional.

It might interest you to know that a Permanent Federal income tax was found unConstitutional on no less than five separate occasions. Why we have it now is that Wilson convinced the congress to add it to the Constitution. While that is water over the dam, it is, still, an informative bit of history.

Why are those in the TEA Party so against the idea of raising taxes to fix the national debt?

It's been done before- twice in recent memory. Reagan went along with the Bradley bill, which adjusted deductions to income levels- that extra revenue was to go to deficit reduction.

It did not.

Bush 41 went along with a democratic congress' demands for tax hikes to reduce the debt.

Not only was the deficit not reduced, the country was plunged into a recession.

Now, why on earth would anyone believe that raising taxes at this time would be a good idea- or, if extra revenue was to mAterialize, it would go to reduce the debt?

New claims for unemployment climbed AGAIN today- home sales fell again this month- GDP is shrinking.

Obama has no clue whatsoever how to fix any of it. His latest flail is to try to get the government to help people refinance their mortgages at lower rates. He seems not to understand that the reason those folks have not done so is because they owe too much on their mortgages. What is he going to do- mail out checks to get them the 80% equity they need to qualify to refinance?

Perry obviously knows how to run a state that encourages business to locate and hire there. Obama not only does not have any answers, he does not understand the questions.

Obama relied on a failed economic model to jumpstart the economy, and it worked the way it always does- raised the debt, raised inflation, and failed to stimulate job growth.

He still has not figured out that it will fail every time, because of its inherent flaws.

You intend to vote for him again? Good for you. You and the other people in the 26% who approve of his handling of the economy.

The rest of us are weighing our options, and will vote for the Republican nominee.

Obama shelved in 2012.

Yes I intend to vote for Obama again.

What are my choices. Perry and his army of god to lead us to the rapture and on the way killing social security or maybe Richey Rich Romney with his magic underwear to protect the rich from fair taxes with his corporations are people too or Bachmann with her my opinions outweight facts and history who also voted to end social security.

I know republicans have been trying to destroy education in America to build up their voter base. The republicans know who votes for them and it is not the educated.

Man I wish I had magic underwear.

Oh well, it's not the underwear that's important, it's what is inside.

[that's my gift to all - a softball. No have at it. :)]

AF - Yes I intend to vote for Obama again

So you're okay with the countries 9%+ unemployment, 1.3% GDP, 24 million unemployed/under-employed, 1 in 5 children living in poverty, and 1 in 7 Americans on food stamps. Because Obama doesn't seem to have a plan to correct any of those problems. So with Obama's [lack] of results, you're ready to stand there, pump your fist and chant "4 more years!" ?

The country won't survive "4 more years" of Obama.

ABO - 2012

Can someone explain it to me?

Sure can Feisty. The only way to rip us of and make sure we take the blame for it is to be in control of our Government. See when the GOP nearly bankrupted us and left the til empty, they blame it on the next guy who would have to clean it up. Then when you attempt to fix the problem they blame you for their mess. Sound familar?

Devie has the fixation on D-1 kickers.

Not actually just Tea Bags. Besides the guy was a kicker from second rate BYU.

Then when you attempt to fix the problem they blame you for their mess. Sound familar?

Sure does devie! Thanks!

Feisty - I heard him say that he's going to Washington to make sure that Washington stays as far away from you (I guess he means people) as possible. He's just an big bag of hot Texas air. He'll never be elected president because his positions are way too extreme. All the Democrats will have to do is re-air that creepy film footage of him leaning down and telling that little boy about how down in Texas we teach both creationism and evolution.......with that sugary southern drawl......

Joanna, I am tired of the unemployment and the bad economy and sure wish the republicans would quit blocking and filibustering any bill that has a chance to make a difference.

You think that the liberals don't see what is going on. Let's all develop stupidity and blame President Obama for what the republicans are doing.

Not going to happen, sorry.

Obama 2012 if you love America

American 1st: Yes I intend to vote for Obama again. What are my choices?

Wow, that's awesome. Can you fit that on a bumper sticker?

DEVIE The repubs blame us, we blame Bush,neither EVER blames themselves. So what makes YOU so smart to know who is right and wrong? I don't like President Bush spent money like a fool, but I'm not stupid enough to think President Obama spending money at far greater rate is any better. That would be so damn hypocritical and naive. I can't be the only liberal who thinks we made a grave mistake. I like President Obama...alot. I have things in common with him.I'm from Chicago,I'm a lib (not as far left),I have a black father and white mother. I wanted him to suceed but I don't feel he is.

AF - Joanna, I am tired of the unemployment and the bad economy and sure wish the republicans would quit blocking and filibustering any bill that has a chance to make a difference.

You can be as tired as you want AF, but three bills that did pass, the 2009 Reinvestment and Recovery Act, The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and Obama's Bank Reform Act, are making a difference for the job market and economy each and every day, and not in a good way.

Which one of the Obama/Democrats schemes that did not get signed into law was going to put this country over the top, Cap and Trade?

Much better to make our planet uninhabitable for our grand-kids.

The debt won't matter if there is no air to breath and clean water to drink.

Obama 2012

JAS1: could you kindly explain, in detail, how any of the laws passed in the 2009 or 2010 have hurt the economy ? Particularly since they have, for the most part, not yet become effective and many parts of them won't become effective until next year or later.

with that sugary southern drawl......

Bush Lite! ;o)

time4truth: you understand how the more damage has been done to something, the more it costs to fix it, right?

Well, that's true of the economy as well. It doesn't just magically get better on its own.

It will be fun to watch Perry defend how he wanted to secede from the Union all thewhile he was picking our pockets of some of that hated STIMULUS money.

What a hoot!

Imagine him as the GOP nominee in a debate with Barack Obama and BHO pulls out the letter from Perry beggin' for money from Washington.

He is pimpin' those preachers and he wishes to pimp America.

Hysterical!

Get out the laugh tracks!

OMG!

[The country won't survive "4 more years" of Obama.]

...OMG!!! The sky is FALLING!!! Run, you dip@!$%#...RUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!

What a freaking farce you are...ABO...seems you and Little Dude have something in common...stealing someone else's lines...hmmm...right "counselor"?

Definitely all hat no cattle. Except the ones he rustled, and that's a hangin' offense.

Oh, that cinches it! He's got my vote now. Thanks for reminding me what a great president he would make, Pat!

Chris, I guess that makes you fascist uneducated homophobe?

Oh, Patty, you say the sweetest things! That must be that liberal love I keep hearing so much about!

Pat - you were obviously captain of the debate team.

Man you ability to persuasively argue a point is just astounding.

So let me break this down and use some words and phrasing that you will understand: "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me."

So in the future Pat, try to sound a little less desperate, k?

And here we have the 2 resident "geniuses" from the the banana republican party: The Spankster and Greedy (not a biz owner) both who couldn't tell the difference between and income statement and balance sheet commenting on running a biz. Ever notice how they never get to specifics in their posts?

Critical thinking Skills? NOT!!!

Already Torpedo? So early in the am to be this gumpy.

And here I was hoping you'd have a better day today. Oh well, there is always tomorrow.

And heck - I bet you do find Pat's post both specific and having merit. Also tasteful, right big guy?

Good ol spankster..can always depend on you to obfuscate deflect and re frame..Now repeat after me...obfuscate deflect and reframe, obfuscate deflect and reframe, obfuscate deflect and reframe.

I'll pass Torpedo.

But perhaps you ought to shut the computer down for a spell and talk a walk outside. Might lift you spirits?

Or we can discuss the merits of Pat's post. Your call, my man.

Good ol spankster..can always depend on you to obfuscate deflect and re frame..

Straight from the turdblossom's manifesto!

TACTICS FOR EFFECTIVE CONSERVATIVE BLOGGING By Karl Rove:

Dirty blogging trick #8 -

Confuse Challenge the Liberal position with questions, always questions. The
questions need not be relevant. The goal is to knock the Liberal poster off their game, and seize control of the narrative. Once you have control you can direct the narrative to where you want it to go, which is always away from letting the Liberal make their point. Conversely, do not respond to their leading questions

Dirty trick #9 -

Intimidate Taunt the Liberals & Monitor other posts for vulnerabilities you can exploit

Hi Pat, let me introduce myself...I'm a "total a$$hole".

Good one Feisty : "confuse the liberal position."

I knda think it's confusing enough all on its own.

But I do so love Dirty Trick #9. Certainly no one here would ever accuse you of using that one. No way.

They're all confused, Spanky.

Obama was supposed to cool the globe, stop the seas from rising, assure peace and prosperity, bring all factions together singing campfire songs, Alice, dice, whip and purée.

Instead, he exacerbated just about every single problem this country had when he took office.

New AP poll put today. Obama gets his worst ever numbers in that poll.

http://surveys.ap.org/data/GfK/AP-GfK%20Poll%20Aug%202011%20FINAL%20Topline_ObamaEconomy.pdf

Now, when you look at his upside down overall job approval numbers, it's pretty important to know two things-

One is that his strong disapproval is almost double his strong approval number, and

Two is that Roper counts those who "don't know" as approving. It's a pretty odd way of doing things, but Roper is Roper. Everybody else counts them as "no opinion", and leaves them out altogether.

AP also finds the "winter of discontent" right here in August among Democrats- not surprising, since they have so many democrats in their surveys, and will, right up to the time they split them into adults/ likely voters, which won't happen until next year. In October sometime.

All in all, things are not looking so good for the Big O.

the goal is to knock the Liberal poster off their game, and seize control of the narrative

Come'on - Liberal posters don't have any game. Unless cut-and-paste is a game.

Wait, conservatives are now using Alinsky's Rules for Radicals?

When did that happen?

Come'on - Liberal posters don't have any game. Unless cut-and-paste is a game.

Hey JAS1 where's your little rump kiss Ben? He sure likes to cut and paste. No you are right. You right wing nuts never do that. Why give out any supporting facts? That would just confuse the issue.

BTW nice cut and paste.

Wait, conservatives are now using Alinsky's Rules for Radicals?

When your fearless leaders stole a copy from your local public library (just before they cut it's funding).

Saw the results of a poll this morning that showed something like 31% of the people think the horrible economy is Obama’s fault. 51% think it’s GWB’s fault. Now I know why those on the right keep hollering about Dems and Obama ‘blaming Bush’. Sorry, kids, but if the shoe fits….

Say- look here, more excerpts from the official Karl Rove play-book:

“TACTICS FOR EFFECTIVE CONSERVATIVE BLOGGING By Karl Rove Engage Demand an elaborate, time-consuming comparison / analysis between your position and theirs. Entangle Insist that the Liberal put their posts in their own words That will consume the most time and effort for the Liberal poster. They will be unable to spread numerous points on numerous blogs if you have them occupied. Allowing a Liberal to post a web link is too quick and efficient for them. Tie them up. We are going for delay of game here. Demoralize Dismiss their narrative as rubbish immediately. Do not even read it. Once the Liberal goes through the trouble to research, gather, collate, compose and write their narrative your job is to discredit it. Make it obvious you tossed their labor-intensive narrative aside like garbage. This will have the effect of demoralizing the Liberal poster. It will make them unwilling to expend the effort again, and for us, that is a net win. Attack Attack the source. Any Liberal website or information source must be marginalized, trivialized and discounted. Let the blogosphere know that Truthout.org., thinkprogress.org, the nation and moveon.org are Liberal rubbish propaganda. Discredit Liberal sources of information whenever possible.”

More later…..but does anyone see some of our more prolific posters in any of this? (especially that first line, eh, ‘counselor’?)

Of course you do! (like the cut and paste, JAS? Good- gonna see more....watch this space.

Thanks for the back-up Buzz...

Keep em comin...

The turdblossom's manifesto has been revealed! lol

You're welcome, Red- And I, too, intend to 'cut and paste' it into these pages and elsewhere. So what if a few hacks hate the practice of 'cut-and- paste'? If it gets this dishonest game plan out there for all to see, so be it.

If it gets this dishonest game plan out there for all to see, so be it.

Listening to them screech is worth the price of admission! ;o)

Um, we are supposed to think you got that from some source? think progress, right? It's not something you mental midgets made up in the treehouse over the last couple days?

Here's your problem- anyone who has read the Rules For Radicals recognizes them- attributing Alinsky's work to Rove is not merely childish, it's ludicrous.

Second, no political site with a first year law student interning there would print this, as it would bring a lawsuit down on them from the Alinsky estate so fast it would make their heads spin. It's called plagiarism, and in a court of law, it would be devastating to the defendant. Like, enough to put them out of business, so, you might actually want to check with the moderators- since you guys have such close, personal relationships with the powers that be, you could be exposing them to legal action. I'm no lawyer- so, ask them to check up on it.

Last, you guys are really getting desperate. This is up there with your idiotic April Fool's day bit.

At least there was a juvenile excuse for that. This? It's just pathetic.

JAS1 judging by your post, cut and paste, is your game also. Sorry I just enjoyed the irony of the post.

Please stop lumping everyone who has liberal ideas into the same category as the people above who like to take cheap shots at everyone. I have liberal beliefs in some areas (abortion/gay marriage) and conservative ideas in other areas (raising taxes/entitlement reform).

The biggest issue personally with the coming election is I don't believe our country can handle 4 more years of Obama but can not get behind one of the republican candidates because I would like to see one closer to the middle that would be able to work with Congress. Probably what will happen is the Republicans win the WH but lose the house and then the country is screwed for another 4 years.

P.S. Being independent is not being wishy washy, which you called me on another vine. I prefer to be called open minded. Kind of buying a house or car, you don't go looking already knowing what you want to buy. You look do your research, find the best deal, and buy the one that you like.

Um, we are supposed to think you got that from some source?

http://www.webster.edu/medialiteracy/journal/FINALKARLROVE.pdf

For once in your miserable existence would you THINK before you stuff those bunny slippers in your BIG mouth?

I notice the desperation from you & smiff with your thinly veiled references to the PRIVATE information you stole... lol

Wow, really? You see I took a Radical in America class. And I have actually read the "Rules for Radicals". I can only name ONE Presidential nominee that ran on demonizing his predeccesor. This person also had speeches that according to SOC Clinton "left people thinking that the clouds would open and the angels would start singing". This person also spent a whole lot of time pointing fingers at "fat cats" all while collecting those "fat cat" donations.

His name: Barack Obama

The Obama admins use of these 'Rules' has been clear from day one. You can blame Karl Rove or the 92 people Obama tried to blame during the debt ceiling negotiation. I think it will be about as successful. Most people are smart enough (although not here obviously) to recognize a STRAWMAN when they see it. The Indies got their eyes opened and they ARE NOT coming back.

Buzzy Bear: Saw the results of a poll this morning that showed something like 31% of the people think the horrible economy is Obama’s fault. 51% think it’s GWB’s fault.

Ohh, this just in, GW isn't running next year.

Gonn'a be a tough slog for Obama during the debates, blaming Bush for the problems he said he'd fix, but made worse instead. Bad optics for sure.

LOL CYBER BULLY
You and your lil tree house friends LEFT THE SITE OPEN AND DIDN'T MARK IT PRIVATE

DUHHHH Thank you for displaying the average intelligence of Obama supporters. You leave a site open and then claim stuff was stolen ROFL.

Oh and I love the link to a liberal think tank lol. Regurgitating the "Rules for Radicals" and claiming it's all Karl Rove is beyind desperate, it borders on insane.

Anyone who has actually read the tome of Alinksky knows it. And claiming it's Rove, as NJNB points out, is in fact plagarism. I hope this person from Webster has a decent lawyer. By all means, keep cutting pasting and posting, it's guaranteed to get some attention from the people at the Alinsky Foundation. And this guy, like the guy from the Lancet study, will have to disown it pretty quick.

Here's a list of the recent STRAWMAN employed by Obama and his hacks:

GWB

Dick Cheney

Karl Rove

Tea Party

Koch Brothers

Citizens United

John Boehner

Paul Ryan

Eric Cantor

Grover Norquist

AND NEW THIS WEEK: Karl Rove

I think you guys are running out of people to blame.

OOOPS I forgot Clarence Thomas, cause we all know liberals love minorities who doesn't march lock step in the rest of the herd.

And since YOU CHOOSE to go there:

According to Alinsky, the organizer — especially a paid organizer from outside — must first overcome suspicion and establish credibility. Next the organizer must begin the task of agitating: rubbing resentments, fanning hostilities, and searching out controversy. This is necessary to get people to participate. An organizer has to attack apathy and disturb the prevailing patterns of complacent community life where people have simply come to accept a situation. Alinsky would say, "The first step in community organization is community disorganization."

Sort of explains why everything is a "crisis" and "unprecedented" doesn't it???

LIAR LIAR Feisty on fIre (again) but once a liar always a liar.

What you posted DOES NOT EXIST from any actual "news site" just media matters lol. Try and google the title..nothing. add Karl Rove and then you get media matters. LMAO what a dope

Any Liberal website or information source must be marginalized, trivialized and discounted. Let the blogosphere know that Truthout.org., thinkprogress.org, the nation and moveon.org are Liberal rubbish propaganda. Discredit Liberal sources of information whenever possible

You're out of practice...

What you posted DOES NOT EXIST from any actual "news site" just media matters lol.

I goggles the title- nothing like it popped up in the search.

As I suspected- the treehouse kids are at it again.

I goggles the title- nothing like it popped up in the search.

Maybe if you googled it instead of goggles it - you might of located it! lol

Regardless, I provided you a direct link - just because you couldn't goggle it doesn't mean it doesn't exist!

"Ohh, this just in, GW isn't running next year."

Ohh, this just in, Hurricane Katrina isn't brewing again this year. SO- by that logic, the mess in New Orleans is now 100% cleaned up and things are back to normal. Epic logic failure.

Your turn.

The link worked just fine for me, Feisty. Thanks!

As for NJNB, she must have anything factual set to ignore...

LOL But it doesn't. And SINCE FOOTNOTES HAVEN'T BEEN USED IN ACADEMIA SINCE THE EARLY 80's - You are a LIAR. So tell us, where did this REALLY come from???

And since most people when they use links try to use a 'neutral' source, AGAIN you a LIAR.

But hey, I don't expect any better. Although I would think that the moderators and Mark CTO would have made better choices in their "friends". LOL sad.

Feilden, try READING this time. NJNB said they googled it. I DID TOO and IT DOES NOT EXIST. The title comes with ZERO - not even the supposed "original" source shows as a result. Not the link, google the title!!!

I posit that the Treehouse friends had some fun with Adobe. Again Academia moved to the MLA format in the 80's. So this, with all it's footnotes, it c!ap.

Reading comprehension is key.

Uh, Feisty WRONG AGAIN.

If this were a REAL document, posted from a college, those results would turn up in google. See the internet is a wonderful tool FOR DEBUNKING.

So who's 1970's thesis on radicals did you steal?

When are you going to get it through your thick skulls that LYING and hoping no one will actually check or verify your work does happen? And that in posting bs you are belittling your own argument?

Annnndddd One of the authors is an actress in Kansas (hmmm who posts from KC?) the other was on TLC's "What Not To Wear"

So, let's see what happens when I contact said Prof tomorrow, this ought to be fun. Ready to issue your retractions yet????

Feisty once again is exposed as the radical leftist liar that she is.

Her link actually proves Her to be the liar-the whole paper is the OPINIONS of the leftist writers, not quotes from Rove.

I goggles the title- nothing like it popped up in the search.

Maybe if you googled it instead of goggles it - you might of located it! lol

Jesus! Do we have to do everything for you lazy asses?

Try goggling Karl Rove playbook will ya?

There's a plethora of information on him and his dirty tactics....

So, let's see what happens when I contact said Prof tomorrow, this ought to be fun

Let's hope it's more effective then your pitiful attempt to get me banned! LMAO!

Yes Excellent idea Pat. You have continued to further convince me that electing Perry is the right move. We get a leaeder in the White House, and New York will potentially take their crayons and run like the Democrats in Wisconsin! HAHA Have a nice day! It is a nice rainy day in seedy Washington DC.

Perry gets my vote.

I wouldn't count my chickens, Pat.

Obama is upside down in NY- and NJ.

If Pataki gets in, and is chosen as VP, kiss NY goodbye, Obama.

And NJ.

And Pennsy. And Florida, Indiana, Ohio, . . .

Perry gets my vote if NY will leave the union. Can you take California with you as well?

Yeah, that's just what I'd do. Kick two of the biggest economic engines out of my country.

"What a maroon."

Bugs Bunny

(Emphasis added)

xx

idependent4ever, i need to get a grasp on this independent idea. With the huge ideaological differences between parties, from social to economic to enviromental, how could someone swing between voting for the two major parties and not compromise some principles?

NoJo and Chris in Cranbury hope you are both battening down the hatches. I am on LBI waiting to here if we have to evacuate.Stay safe

I'd love to see you liberals leave and form your own little marxist nation.

Frank I have to pick which principles mean the most to me and equate them to a candidate. My question is how can you find a candidate who follows ALL of your principles? I will vote for the candidate that is the closest to my principles but most likely not all of them.

The huge idealogical differences in the two parties is what makes are government such crap right now. Most of them are so far on the fringe I don't want to vote for anybody. As of right now I would say that I would vote for Obama because he is closer to more of my principles (barely mind you) than any of the GOP candidates because they are so extreme. Being extreme I think deters Independents from voting for them.

Polls say he could not be elected in Texas again...But I do thank him for pointing out how low the field is on the right side! Water seeks its own level and Lake Travis is almost dry!

Well here is a special shout out to Billy Bob's, Perry is just another Half-Wit Red Neck Cowboy, and anyone who supports him is not the brightest bulb in the package. Come on, stop dumbing down America.

Also, come to my nice Progressive City and we will give old Perry the boot.

@Reagan:

Pol's have said that every time he has ran. The man is a winner point blank. He has not been beaten yet. Thank you for enlightening Texans about the polling.

I used to work with a really smart guy from Texas. His comment was "we may talk slow but we don't think slow'.... I wouldn't lump all cowboys together.

Job, I think you give Perry too much credit. I don't think he is as smart as a half-wit.

Anyone who would write a book (probably ghost written) saying how he wants to get rid of social security and just a few days ago was pushing his book. All the sudden he wants you to believe his 9 month old book is ancient history.

I didn't mean I was going to get rid of social security, I just meant the govenment should get rid of social security. See totally different meanings.

Americans First - It's going to be so much fun watching Perry squirm in the debates trying to get out from under his "social security and medicare are unconstitutional mantra" and "ponzi scheme" declaration. That issue right there is what will keep him out of the White House. All the rest is just icing on his bon voyage party cake back to Texas.

laurie-

Why? the fact that he actually understands and supports the limits on govt mandated by the Constitution is EXACTLY why this libertarian is supporting him.

Greedy, Billy Bob's is in Ft. Worth. Giley's is in Houston. Just FYI.

http://www.alternet.org/news/152166/how_rick_perry_created_his_state%27s_%2427_billion_budget_crisis

Larry, this is why Perry is not who you think he is. Vote for him at your own peril. I live in Texas and know better than to vote for him.

Sorry, that should be Gilley's.

Mav-3674058

Looks like you and I know Perry well enough. I hate what he has done to us in Texas and cannot imagine him doing it to the country. Poverty for all middle class and poor!

Hey - anyone else come to First Read to read articles by Yglesias or others from other websites?

Makes you wonder - are the libbie cut and pasters not able to navigate the big nasty web on their own, or are they just compelled to try to force feed.

Really is mighty rude to our host journalists, who post their own work.

Or maybe us conservatives should just ram our own articles down their throats. Each of us could cut and paste a huge article from some right wing cite, which would render this board unusable, and likely slow down or crash it altogether.

What do you thingk Mav, so good to you?

Nice work Mav!

Turdblossom dirty blogging trick #4:

Once the Liberal goes through the trouble to research, gather, collate, compose and write their narrative your job is to discredit it. Make it obvious you tossed their labor-intensive narrative aside like garbage.

This will have the effect of demoralizing the Liberal poster. It will make them unwilling to expend
the effort again, and for us, that is a net win. Attack Attack the source.

Any Liberal website or information source must be marginalized, trivialized and
discounted.

Not gonna work on this liberal poster - not NOW - not EVUH

Aww, Mav, you didn't need to list any more reasons for me to want to vote for Perry. Pat had me at "kill all the gays" above.

Terrific post, Mav. Rick Perry as President would be the equivalent of hammering the final nails in America's coffin. Democrats are far from perfect but at least they understand economics and believe in the Constitution, including its amendments. The far right's anti-government and anti-Constitution beliefs cannot possibly help American democracy thrive, their ideas would strangle it.

#9 about WWII is a weak and false argument, repeated by nearly every conservative candidate, about what ended the depression. It was massive Federal Government deficit spending on the war effort that provided the money to the private businesses to build the weapons needed. Without Federal Government money, it would not have happened. Had FDR stuck to his deficit stimulative spending agenda prior to the war instead of listening to the GOP's "cut spending" ideas, the Great Depression would have ended much sooner. WWII would then have been icing on the cake.

Feisty, Turdblossom's plan won't work for this liberal poster either!!

Chris Cranberry, may you and Perry have a happy life together, you deserve each other.

To quote an Iowa Republican fair goer after listening to Rick Perry, "America's not ready for another flag-waving Texan"!

SO Fiesty... You have been supposedly reading Carl Rove recently. Did ya learn anything. Aparrently, not much rubbed off on ya. :-)

I live in Illinois I'll take Texas' unemployment rate. Florida's too.Indiana also. These are states that have enticed Illinois companies to move there.

Thanks, Jody! But don't you worry none there, young missy! The entire world will be "happy together" once

RICK PERRY IS ELECTED PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, THE GREATEST GODDAMNED COUNTRY ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH!!!

Or he'll shoot 'em. WOO-HOO!!!

Chris, Cranbury, NJ:

Or he'll shoot 'em. WOO-HOO!!!

Truly: lol.... gotta chuckle at the yosemite sam cartoons popping up allover.

Chris, this is great.

RICK PERRY IS ELECTED PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, THE GREATEST GODDAMNED COUNTRY ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH!!!

Or he'll shoot 'em. WOO-HOO!!!

So Robert tell us how you view the fact that California is a libbie paradise.

When Brown was elected we were #2 in new businesses created. Just a few months later we are a rockin' #50.

I am also sure you have seen the job numbers in Illinios since they raised taxes?

So, what's this about poverty? You do know the unemployment rate in Cali?

Spanky

oh, yeah Texas unemployment is just 3.5% behind Cali. Yeah Jobs are coming here, we have no state tax, our average salary here is $14.61 per hour and Dick Perry will throw tax breaks at anybody that comes. Yeah we have jobs and one of the highest levels of poverty, uninsured in the country, our education ranks 47th among state support, our graduation rate is barely 66%, highest in teen pregnancy and repeat teen pregnancy. But yeah we have some jobs, we have added 471,000 workers to the work force and 127,000 new jobs, that does not balance. All of these "jobs" and yet our unemployment rate continues to go up! Yeah so has our population and jobs cannot keep up

Hell there are so many jobs here you can come here and if you want to support your family here you can get two or three of the jobs!

Cali has one of the most strict building codes and environmental codes in the country, Texas has very few, we can boast about one of the most polluted states in the country! We welcome businesses to come and build without restriction on pollution..

The new slogan for Perry reads;

Vote Perry.

In Your Guts You Know He Is Nuts.

Robert:

Feel free to move......There are 49 other states to choose from. If you dislike Texas so much, quit your minimum wage job and move. We will see how quick you get a job, matter of fact move to Cali.

Don't worry. You will not be missed.

So which would you rather have Mav - no job or a low paying job?

Cause see, ain't no one coming here. And gosh, that is funny, cause it is a progressive paradise and all.

How about your state Job1, it blue as well?

14.61 an hour, on average?

That's not too bad, actually. Considering your price of living index is LOOOOOW...let's see here, little bit of calculator action and...hrm...

4/5's as much. 80%. If I make 100K in San Diego, I could make 80K in Austin and still live just as well.

Or, let's reverse that. I make 14.61 in Austin...that's like 18.25 in San Diego. Which is LIVABLE.

I don't mind you arguing pollutants, etc. But quit making my party sound like nitwits.

Texas is doing a great job creating jobs and I'm a bit jealous of your state successes. At least use factual information and reasonable arguments.

And look here! Dallas is 69% of san diego! 14.61 in Dallas is a shade of 21 in San Diego.

You're lucky there's a CoC or I'd seriously be calling you some unpleasant things right now.

Good work, but numbers and calculations are not the libbies' game.

They just get all glassy eyed.

Besides, We pay too much to live here, but I will be heading out to La Laina's on Mission Beach for happy hour today.

Hard to beat that, although no state income tax would be sweet.

Ouch.

I'm a democrat, my man :D

But just because someone is a republican doesn't mean they're intrinsically wrong.

The difference between the very well educated (who tend democrat) and the uneducated (who also tend democrat)

hey teknishan, yeah 14.61 is an ok average and cost of living low??? Where is that? Sales and Property Taxes here in Texas are huge. That salary is enough for 26% of Texans to not have health insurance, 25% of all kids live in poverty, homeless shelters to capacity, education in the bottom of the national list. Can you imagine, 14.61 average when there are so many health workers, doctors, oil people, Tech jobs, gas workers, there is a huge low middle class is why the average is so low.

And about me wanting "factual information and reasonable arguments, all of the facts are available, I have posted them before but the list is long and if you really want the list I will get it together, I just hate when the page long post go up in these forums. Perry has been my governor for 10 years and I have kept up, as much as I was against W Bush for President he was actually a good governor here, Perry is a wannabe.

We have added 126,000 jobs yet the workforce has grown to 417,000, you do the math!

IntheMiddle, TX

Not the state I hate it's the used car salesman that drove Texas to the brink

Google a cost of living calculator.

Then knock it up against the San Diego metro, or any costal city really.

Your sales tax < Our sales tax.

Your property tax < our property tax.

But the bottom line of this is, your state isn't suffering the bleed other states are. Sometimes the policies which enable that aren't received well by certain individuals, especially those impacted, but you need to step back and look at the overall picture. And the overall picture is saying Texas is doing great at this moment.

You eat. You have internet access. And healthcare, I'm a fan of the ACA which should help with that. But if you're average around 30K/year in salary, any lack of healthcare is because you just don't want one. You could go to several websites, price, and buy personal healthcare if not offered via your employer.

I think this is much ado about nothing.

Now if you were hungry, and unable to access the internet, and losing your house...sure. I'd jump on the 'this must be changed!!!' bandwagon. But right now? No, I just don't see it. Complaning because your governor is republican and you don't like some specific policies, isn't really scoring points. It's just illustrating a very me-first attitude.

Democrats are the party of problem-solving. When did that change?

Few look at problems and innovate solutions, most just want to cut in on government aid. Ask not what your country can do for you, but how you can strengthen it (I didn't want to plagiarize).

teknishan. You better redo your math on that income. $14.61 x 40 hr = $584.40 x 52 wks= $30,388.80. And don't forget that $14.61 is the AVERAGE hourly wage.

Personal purchase of health care insurance is about $1000 a month for one person; you can buy cheaper but you don't have complete coverage. So out of that $30,000 income, subtract at least $12,000 a year for insurance. If you have a family, you're looking at $18,000 for insurance.

No wonder Rick Perry sounds good to some.

tek

yeah, I had to work out in Huntington Beach and LA for about a year, I know how much higher it cost just to eat and exist in CA, I could not believe buying groceries and this was before the recession started, I hear now where I stayed is like a ghost town just like what happens here when the oil and gas jobs bubble pops. I just hear Perry blow his own horn about the great economy Texas has, it is better than about half of the country but not this empire of gold and silver paved streets he acts like it is. That's it, that's my point..

Spanky: don't know what state you live in (denial ?... lol) but I do live in Illinois. Funny thing about the tax rate increases, the Governor & Legislature said before the election that they would be doing them. Most of the people in Illinois just got tired of the politicians continually kicking the can down the road, so they voted for the Governor & the tax increases. Most politicians just lie and say that tax increases are not needed, a balanced budget can be done with just spending cuts.

Funny thing is, income tax rates aren't the only thing which attract a business to a location. If they were, Nevada, which has no corporate or personal income tax, would have a lower unemployment rate.

Funny thing about the tax rate increases, the Governor & Legislature said before the election that they would be doing them

Quinn ran on them & still beat Brady!

I lived in San Diego for 21 years. The price of housing and land was high compared to where I am today but the property taxes were actually cheaper in CA. Housing and land in IA is not cheap any more. The price of fresh fruits and vegetables in CA was much lower than in the midwest, particularly in the winter. The price of food in general in CA and IA were comparable.

So. 30K/year was right on, Jody?

Thanks for double-checking for me.

Now, let's see here...1,000/month for healthcare is far more than I payed while consulting. I payed 250/month through Aetna (Aetna.com). Full coverage, family plan.

My bottom line is, 14.61 is a lot more of an AVERAGE than most states make right now. Neither high nor low.

14.61 with the Texas COLA allows for a decent standard of living.

Feisty I can't believe you would bring up Quinn. OUR state is in REALLY BAD shape. At this rate we will NEVER EVER have a balanced budget. The first thing Quinn did when he took office gave his people raises...in this f'n economy?

Robert your education and poverty numbers are skewed a bit. Those numbers are brought way down by the amount of undocumented immigrants in Texas.(one of the highest in the country).

Feisty I can't believe you would bring up Quinn

All I'm saying is - he campaigned on tax increases & WON even in the year of the tea baggers!

It will be several years before the impact of the increase is felt. Since Illionois had one of the worst credit ratings of any state, and the largest unfunded pension obligation, the effect may just be to put Illinois at equlibrium with other states. The interesting thing will be to see what happens when the recovery eventually turns to growth and some of the states that decided to go for draconian cuts to state programs no longer have a public infrastructure to support business growth.

Feisty Point taken teaparty isn't much of a contender though.

Feisty Point taken teaparty isn't much of a contender though.

Agreed - I was hoping Giannulious (sp?) would of won the Senate & let Brady take the Governor spot!

Giannulious lost because his family owned a bank which gave the mob loans. Hard to run away from the fact that you were the treasurer of your family's bank. Even in Illinois the corruption can only go so far.

It also helps that Kirk is not a total TeaBagger idiot. Brady, on the other hand, couldn't defeat Quinn who ran on a platform which included raising taxes. I think the people of Illinois just rewarded him for having the guts to be honest. After Ryan and Blago having an honest politician was so refreshing the people were just amazed and had to reelect him.

I hope one of the current politicians comes out and says "ok, I plan to cut xyz and it will cost 1million jobs, so the unemployment rate will go up." OR, "I want to do xyz. Now it all depends on if you have my party or the other party in Congress. If you have them, I probably can't do sh#t, but I'll try. If my party is in charge, I still cant do sh#t, but it will look like I can."

Hat, cattle, accomplishments.

This from Jody, a staunch Obama support.

I just can't decide if it's super funny or very sad and pathetic.

Well atleast the blinders have come off everyone else. The emperor has no clothes.

Is is it cattle Jody?

I wonder how many people who will have health coverage despite pre-existing conditions consider HCR an "absolute debacle"? I wonder how many parents whose children between 22-26 now have coverage consider it an "absolute debacle"?

Talk about all hat and no cattle what about Frederica Wilson?? All mouth and no brains plus that ridiculous hat!!!

You mean like the "positive" that found that fully ten percent of businesses are going to drop their employee coverage whn it is implemented, and twenty percent think they will?

So much for "if you like your coverage, you can keep it".

Do I need to mention that none of those companies have any plans to give the employees compensating wage adjustments? No? How remiss of me.

It's like this- if you own a business, and healthcare coverage for your employees costs $100,000 per year, but, if you drop it, the government fine will be $30,000 for two years- it's a no-brainer.

Kind of like Obama.

Well said, The Democrat Soldier. It isn't President Obama who is the hindrance, it is the GOPTP House, and the Senate Filibuster rule. Just ridding the Senate of the filibuster would remove a giant hindrance that created the dysfunction in that legislative body.

Uh no. You keep forgetting 2010. I didn't see Dems win that many seats. They kinda lost a bunch. I guess that's ok. Obama had two years of a super majority to pass those said "brilliant plans" turns out most of them weren't so brilliant.

NOW repeat after me: HEALTHCARE WAS NOT MORE IMPORTANT THAN JOBS OR THE ECONOMY. HEALTHCARE WAS NOT MORE IMPORTANT THAN JOBS OR THE ECONOMY. HEALTHCARE WAS NOT MORE IMPORTANT THAN JOBS OR THE ECONOMY.

And when he LOOSES in 12, you can refer to the above.

Obama tried jobs and the economy. He was blocked by the GOP/TP.

While Obama was busy running the country, the GOP/TP managed to convince the lower-than-usual percentage of the country that voted in 2010 that the GOP/TP could do better.

Looking at what has happened since then, the GOP/TP hasn't done any of what they promised. They HAVE continued to block government, vote NO, strip away individual rights and programs.

What is it about being healthy that so terrifies the GOP/TP?

halo3v: there was never a filibuster-proof majority. If there had been, some actual useful legislation might have gotten passed.

Unfortunately Ash, there was. The Dems had 60 in the Senate, until Kennedy died, and then we got the numbskull, Scott Brown. I can promise you he will not get re-elected in Mass. in 2012. The only other promise I will make for 2012 is if Snowe (R-Maine) is unseated in the primary by a Tea Partier, then her seat will turn Dem as well.

The majority would only have been filibuster-proof if every single Democrat was present at the same time and voted in lock-step. How many times did that happen?

Gotta hand that one to Nelson, Landrieu, and Lincoln, who constantly voted against the party.

Exactly, Brent. So people need to stop harping about this supposedly unassailable supermajority "the Democrats" had.

I would prefer to have a real super majority (veto proof) Senate and House. That would even make the Pres. think before vetoing. Unfortunately, at this point, that too is just a pipe dream. Sadly, I think Manchin would kill that if given the chance. Is he to be considered a DINO? Hmmm......

good post, well tjought out. Most will not know what "Panic" is though

Beyond,

Couldn't agree more...It's funny (which it really isn't) that Republicans want the ACA to be repealed, yet...the alternative is far worse. I can't possible understand it...because it hurts our freedoms? Really...People are flippin dying out there because of our current system....nice Christian nation we are.

Disclaimer - I am not a Christian.

BTW: to all you TeaPublicans, lets have a nightmare and dream you gain control of the House, Senate and Whitehouse. You repeal the ACA... do you go into every senior citizens bank account and take back the $250.00 which was part of the act ? Do you force grandma & grandpa to pay back the 50% reduction in perscription drug costs ?

TeaPublicans now also want to put out a new tax, only on the poor and middle class. They are calling for a national sales tax. They can't make up their minds on taxes, unless they can find a way to tax the poor and middle class without affecting the wealthy.

Well said, Beyond Democrat. Herbert Hoover and the GOP cut spending and the result was a recession became the Great Depression. It was massive deficit Government spending done by FDR before WWII and massive Government deficit spending to fund WWII that lifted us from Depression.

We now watch the Herbert Hoover Juniors in the form of the GOPTP demanding spending cuts and deficit reduction; the result is already obvious. The economy was on the road to recovery until Jan 2011, when the GOP won control of the House and brought it to a screeching halt. The subsequent layoffs of public service employers--teachers, fire fighters, police officers, county clerks--took money from the economy which slowed demand and now we see the private sector growth slowing. Oh, sure let's elect more republicans so we can guarantee that 2nd Great Depression, GOPTP style.

over-simplification.

There was no country doing well. In the world. No market for buyers of any of our manufactured products, combined with over-extension in the housing market, combined with a newly formed federal reserve setting a terrible monetary policy of not making banks lend to small businesses, combined with a huge bubble (stock market was on a bubble, just like it is now. If a company outstanding shares are more than 8x it's yearly revenue, your are sitting on some high-octane explosive stock) = the great depression.

You can't just point and say 'hoover did it!'. Nor can you point and say 'Banks did it!'.

Also. It was the fact that the rest of the world was outright flattened, and we weren't, that got us out of the depression. IF WW2 had ended and no country's infrastructure had been destroyed, we never would've gotten out.

Markets need buyers. That's the bottom line.

Lend Lease and WWII more than ended the Great Depression. We might not have boomed the way we did after WWII if Europe was not flattened, but then maybe we would have. The purpose of the Marshall Plan was to help get Europe moving again. And when Europe's markets improved, the 50s and 60s just became fatter for us.

And, no, Hoover did not cause the depression. He was a good man, in fact. But his "in the long run" strategy of waiting on the invisible hand did nothing to eliminate the panic that everyone felt in the 1930's. What can the Republican strategy of lowering taxes do when we already have a very low rate of taxation on incomes exceeding $200,000 (with relation to the rest of the world). I know you may say lower the corporate income taxes and remove the loopholes. That might stimulate a little. But I think GE and some other corporations prefer the loopholes we already have.

The bottom line is that the conservative philosophy offers little or nothing for very bad economic times.

That we can agree on.

But I don't think Keynesian economics is doing too well either. I think the classical Tax and Spend approach is much more feasible, and actually would favor a complete overhaul of all fair-trade deals and the reinvocation of protectionism similar to what Germany currently conducts.

Hi Sarge,

I think the main issue with his HCR is that, just like most people hate about the ACA is that the residents of his State are required to purchase health care aka individual mandate.

Hi Dennis, since hearing from you. How is everything in Ohio? I believe you are right it is about the requirement to purchase health care (individual mandate). However, I was more interested in seeing if it had any effect on what doctors you could see, what type of treatment was received, did it control cost of medical expenses, and generally what was in the bill that people liked or disliked.

Have a good day and take care.

Earlier this year, Vermont took President Obama's HCR offer to heart--if states could provide a better alternative plan of coverage, they would receive a waiver. Vermont threw out all private insurance companies and passed State-run, single payer health care. It will take a couple of years to get it fully functional but three cheers to Vermont.

Sarge,

I thought that 95% of all payments to Doctors, hospitals and for medical supplies were provided by either insurance companies or the Federal Government or payments set by Federal law.

One factor driving up the cost of medical treatment is the uninsured. Since hospital emergency rooms can not refuse to treat medical emergenies, they have to take everyone. Those who don't have insurance either pay cash or don't pay at all. The majority of the uninsured it is the latter. The cost of an emergency room visit for a non-emergency type treatment is higher than a similar treatment at a doctors office. Also, all costs which are not recovered with payment are passed on to those who do have insurance in the form of higher charges to insurance companies which get passed on as higher premiums.

The ACA in requiring all persons have coverage is taking those realities and putting them into the legislation.

JODY, do you know if Vermont has an individual mandate ? I would bet that it does.

Yes, what people fail to realize is that the new pro-patient rules for health insurance companies would not work without an individual mandate. Also, that dirp101 is 100% correct about emergency rooms and the uninsured, which is why universal coverage (especially for preventative care, which is far cheaper than emergency care and reduces the need for it) should lower health care costs overall.

Yup !!!!

Really, you are in favor removing all care for the elderly, poor, disabled. You are in favor of industry writing its own rules with regard to caring for the environement, food safety, worker safety. You truly believe that it is Christian to denigrate and demonize US citizens ?

Well if that is chritianity, I'd rather not be a christian. However, that is not the type of attitude and positions Christ taught.

Official title = Christian Taliban (goodbye science, goodbye truth!!)

Yeah Village, the only reasonable person they have is Huntsman, and he isn't going to make the cut, in the conservative purity test. Pretty sad, when a party has to have a purity test to see if they are electable in a primary, only to find that they aren't electable in the general elections. It seems the Repubs need a "do-over" for virtually the whole party.