Your grandchilren thank you for the giant debt turd you are dumping on them. You better hope you don't need them to take care of you in your old age.

They are going to have a giant debt turd (which by the way I like that term way better than the deficit, I think from here on out it should be referred to as the "Giant Debt Turd") no matter what, I would rather they have roads and airports, than just more Bently's for hedge fund managers. I doubt that I will live long enough to become a burden on them.

So True Forrest,

Tax the rich and spend baby spend.

"What a difference a month makes."

Luke - You can say that again!

Luke - You can say that again!

:o)

The real story is hostage taking and union busting are not so popular after all.

Hey, Forrest-

Wait 'til the young figure out what we've done to them.

Hopefully, we'll both be gone before that happens, eh Grump?

It's not going to be pretty.

Young people looking for jobs or trying to afford college already know how pitiful the Teapublicans are. Heck, they're not even sure if the bridge will be there to drive to work if they do get a job.

Ahhhh - Yoda Gump has spoken! ROFL!

It is a damn shame MB we owe them better than this, we had it better than this, shame on us, all of us.

Don't get me started on that Yoda Brianb I let that crazy kid use the car and he brought it back on empty, damn teenagers.

Hey Mixed Bag the future generations may be cursing us all as they strap on their SPF protective clothing and affix their oxygen back packs for the morning. Or not....

___

Ahh Yoda Grump has spoken

Yoda to Luke Russert Skywalker - Difficult to see the future. Constantly in motion it is.

Hey Forrest - did you write that first post in a high squeeky voice that is a little curled? I want you to know you break me up! That by far was the funniest post of the day. If they gave gold stars instead of green stars, yours would be all shiny!

As you know I am ALL for spending on infrastructure... it's a win/win. I'd support a Tea Party member if he voted for spending on infrastructure in his district... even though they claim to want to bring the deficit under control. It's not personal... its business!

BTW - I did just give you your green star. It was on 4 and I clicked it to 5.

The President needs to use the bully pulpit on this at a time when people might be listening.

This whole game of extending temporarily is just a big game of chicken -- let's see who blinks first. What they're probably trying to do is put these two agencies in a position where, to avoid a shut-down right before the election, the President will have to agree to destroy the collective bargaining rights of the agency's employees and contract employees.

This is not about fiscal austerity. This is about destroying unions. And the President, if he really means what he said on Labor Day, needs to bang the drum harder here.

So true that this is utterly wasteful spending. Why are we extending the FAA and highways anyway? They're both going to be completely obsolete when nuclear powered flying cars come along in 2015. But our children won't be able to afford them because of the massive debt we're saddling them with, all for the insane goal of providing the country and economy with a viable transportation infrastructure. Seriously, with the internet who needs to drive or fly anywhere anymore? And its not like corporations or small businesses ever have to ship anything. Stupid government, trying to live up to its obligations.

Thanks Brianb, my old man used to tell me "keep it up wise ass and someday you will be the funniest bum in the park won't you"

And to think you did it with a single line of text. Good job!

Shoot this has been a lot of fun today, but I have to go to work tonight, so maybe I'll see some of you folks later if your up late.

"Or not..."

I'm betting against "not", Mark.

They'll resent us boomers, and they should.

The boomer's "today' will be paid for by the "tomorrows" of those who follow.

Don't believe it?

Look at the number of workers who'll be paying for each Social Security beneficiary (like me) in the near future.

Then, look at the number of workers paying the benefits of each Social Security retiree when the program was implemented in the 1930's.

The left is lying to everyone.

You want to save Social Security and Medicare?

At least be honest about what'll be required...and, from WHO...to accomplish that.

Frankly...

If I were much younger...I'd be pissed.

And...

Leave every dime you can to your daughter, AM.

'Cause she and her family will almost certainly be hard-pressed.

Wow, I guess keeping the people working and the air planes flying IS more important than busting up the Delta Union. Good thing it only cost the flying public a few million.

When the temporary measure was initially put in place, did any Airlines lower their base rates to reflect the taxes being back in place, or did they just tack on the additional taxes, "blame the government " and, as usual, pocket the additional cash?

Happy now, "baggers" and "Me Firsters"?

Speaking of "Me Firsters" old Mr. Bill was in RARE form this morning! lol

He didn't have that extra helping of broccoli last night... ;o)

Tax BABY Tax!

drive-by-instigator...

I might ask the left-wing loons that same question. Are you happy now?

Your inept president has failed to lead this country back from the economic woes we face and an '18-year high poverty rate' is the result!

Thank you Mr. President!

I find it ironic that you loons refer to the conservatives as "Me Firsters".

Especially considering that you are the ones pushing to spend so many trillions of (borrowed) dollars today... to satisfy YOUR current needs... all the while sacrificing your children's, children's, children's future to pay for it.

Who are the REAL Me-Firsters?

"Who are the REAL Me-Firsters?"

Don't look any further than in to their gated communities.

You know - The top 2% that have benefited from the 'trickle down'.

Need to tell your children's children's children where the money went?

"Poverty rate hits 18-year high as median income falls"

Happy now, "baggers" and "Me Firsters"?

Because if we confiscated all the wealth from the top 2% and redistributed it to all that are below the poverty line it would lift how many out of poverty for how long?

or

We can borrow a Gazillion dollars and give everyone a job for 5 years and see what happens.

For someone who is SickOfTheBickering, you sure bicker alot!

Oh... My Bad!

I did not realize that being successful makes you a 'Me Firster'. (Ignore the fact that those people living in the 'gated' communities are in fact paying MOST of the taxes in this country. And give more to charity than the rest of you 'takers' could ever hope to give.)

I thought being a 'Me Firster' had more to do with instant gratification rather than long-term investment.

Guess I was wrong. Silly ME!

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

I know Amy.... Isn't it IRONIC!

Obama's dilemma: Either raise taxes, or just spend more money the country doesn't have.

Obama chooses both!

Obama 2012 - Someone else in 2013

If you make a million dollars a year the percentage you spend on food and housing is by far less than someone who struggles to make ends meet. After you have paid your taxes which are at historic lows and all your other expenses, what is left if you make a million dollars per year? Apparently not enough for the right-wingers. But you can't discuss fixing the economy when the rich want to get richer and they think those who aren't rich are just plain lazy.

Tom,Yreka: After you have paid your taxes which are at historic lows and all your other expenses what is left if you make a million dollars per year?

The top 20% of earners pay nearly 70% of the taxes. How much more do you want them to pay?

Source: http://money.cnn.com/2009/04/15/pf/taxes/who_pays_most_least/

It must be the democrats don't know how to make money. Maybe they don't understand that it doesn't grow on trees. My grandpa taught me that when I was a little boy. The lesson stuck. Now that these democrats have come of age, they think anyone that has money grew it in their backyards on those money trees they thought existed. Democrats think it's their God given right to go after anyone that has more than they do.

They cry and lament... the rich don't pay their fair share... The rich have too much so the government MUST take it. The rich are evil people because they won't give me any. They justify it by saying the rich don't have the same in equitable expenses than I do... therefore we MUST socialize to rape and pillage their earnings. It's not fair I tell ya.. it's just not fair! - so the lament continues.

JoAnnaSmith1

Tom,Yreka: After you have paid your taxes which are at historic lows and all your other expenses what is left if you make a million dollars per year?

The top 20% of earners pay nearly 70% of the taxes. How much more do you want them to pay?

JAS1

They want them to pay ALL OF IT! Until they have no more to give... then we can all be poor together!

(Lazy bums! That was for you Tom! ;-)

Ain't it funny how there seems to be a direct correlation between corporate profits and the poverty rate?

And is there anyone who really thinks this is just an accident?

Tom, Yreka:

If you make a million dollars a year the percentage you spend on food and housing is by far less than someone who struggles to make ends meet.

Exactly.

And if you take that same million dollars, and give jobs to 20 people at $50,000 per year, they will buy refrigerators, cars, food, Blue-Ray DVD players, clothes, and a whole host of other stuff, creating that singularly illusive commodity that Republicans like to tell us is necessary to stimulate the economy ... demand.

But if you make a million dollars a year, most likely, you'd really prefer to keep it rather than pay more taxes on it, and ironically, rather than paying taxes, you are willing to spend your money on campaign contributions for those politicians who are willing to help you do just that.

And there are plenty of them.

JAS1 -
"The top 20% of earners pay nearly 70% of the taxes. How much more do you want them to pay?

The top 20% control 84% of the wealth. The bottom 40% have .02% of the wealth.

http://www.faculty.fairfield.edu/faculty/hodgson/courses/so11/stratification/income&wealth.htm

How much do you think they should pay?

(The top 1% control 34% of the wealth)

Anna - do you support taking the million from the person that makes that much? Wouldn't that be called stealing? It's not as if opportunities like this aren't available to democrats... or is it just the democrats that are told no to those types of positions. Also do you believe there aren't ANY rich democrats?

A 91% tax rate on income over 5 million would be fair.

No matter the party affiliation.

Sorry Dennis, You cannot pin this on the Republicans. Did you not read the article? This was the

22nd temporary extension for the FAA and 8th for the highway funds.

Sounds as though this has been going on for a LONG time. Longer than you have had the current scapegoat that you libbies are using!

Clearly, SOTB, you have not been following the 22 extensions or you would know that is all about a Republican requirement that union votes must count no-shows as a NO vote. This would be no different than a proposition for a property tax increase but any registered voter that didn't bother showing up at the poll is counted as a no vote -- truly un-America.

You know, I think Rachel Maddow actually got through to Mr. Mica in their last meeting.

A clean bill - Impressive, Ms. Maddow!

Clearly, Dennis, you did not get my point that IF the democrats wanted this resolved... they surely could have come to some compromise at some time within the last 22 extensions!

IT TAKES TWO TO COMPROMISE and while you may point at the Republicans... I point the same way at the Democrats who have also made no progress toward an end!

BTW Dennis... If I were there I would accept a default of NO for all non-voting members... then I would word all votes such that a no help achieve my goal... (sounds like a democratic tactic doesn't it... Why didn't you think of that?)

I got your point SOTB –
your point is the Republican way (no more unions) or go pound dirt.

Slounds to me like Dennis just doesn't believe in creative thinking. There's more than one way to skin a cat Dennis. Seems that SOTB's response showed some jazzy thought... but leave it to you to always blame the republicans for anything the democrats can't come up with on their own.

Dennis, Good afternoon and how are you today? I agree that there should be no more temporary funding bills. There needs to be a clean bill for the FAA and highway funding. Both parties are some what to blame because both are looking out for their core supporters. Let's leave the law alone and quit worrying about what does or does not count as a vote for or against a union. BTW, I guess you think the "card check" voting is o.k. where one has to vote in the open in front of a union representative thereby showing exactly how they voted. I believe that is un-American.

SOTB: It takes two to compromise.

Exactly the point, SOTB.

Look back over the last two years and see how many times the Republicans in Congress have obstructed the vote, refused to vote, chosen to do the opposite. That's not compromise.

Plus, they have stated that it is their sole intent to make this President fail. That's beyond not compromising, that's approaching treason.

Hi Sarge, I'm doing well and hope you are also,

Actually I don’t believe in card check. Voting in unions
should be no different than in elections – private and personal.

@fielden...

I hate to tell you my friend, but the people that have been saying NO since November 2010 are the Democrats.

House Republicans have presented MANY bills, budgets, you name it... and all have died a slow death on the Senate floor.

No. You can try to blame the Republicans for the stagnation that has occurred in Washington but the truth is that BOTH parties are to blame. So really... lets be fair and say that. OK?

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

And actually... they did NOT say that it was their intent to see him fail... they said it was their intent to see that he was a one-term president. There is a BIG difference there. Think about it. They could ensure that he does not get voted back in by doing what the country needs... not what the president wants.

And then w bush can be put in a position of leadership to destroy the rest of corrupt America. After all that revolution w bush, who would be left? Maybe it is true... liberals want this country to go back to plowsharing and living with kerosene lamps.

I guess one benefit of that would be the lack of the internet where we have to hear the liberals bitching so much about the republicans.