He's sure focused on jobs.

Is this the new Koch Zero?

Ha that's great Richard, Koch Zero.

Yes, and it's spreading like a virus -- Joe the Plumber, Palin the Hockey Mom, Turner the Cable Guy, where will it end? As for Ed Koch, of course he is free to help spread the virus, but there's a price to pay. My guess is Mr. Ed is about to be "defriended" as it were.

Get behind this Grover folks, not that other Grover.

And don't forget how well Ross Perot did too, or for that matter Sarah Palin. The vetting process has become more difficult because of FAUX Noise and Hate Radio. Crazies like Sharron Angle can use friendly outlets exclusively, while others like Scott Brown allow no interviews at all. We need to preserve the free press watch dog role in our democracy (excuse me, "Republic"--yes I know) and get out ahead of these elections and expose these wackos, incompetents, and property of Big Business for what that they are.

Perry has the attitude and swagger to win the Republican nomination. His biggest challenge there is winning over the party establishment figures who don't like him, but they hate Romney too. He doesn't have to make sense; if he did that would probably just hurt his standing.

In the general election, it likely won't be about the Republican candidate. It'll be a referendum on Obama and the general state of the economy. Given the state of the economy, it should be nearly impossible for Obama to win, regardless of who he faces or whether the unemployment rate is actually his fault.

The White House is hoping that Perry wins the nomination because Obama's only shot at winning re-election, aside from a miraculous economic surge over the next year, is to make the election be about the Republican party, Republicans in congress and an extreme Republican presidential candidate. He needs voters to hate the Republicans more than they hate him (and polls show that they already do, so that's one hurdle down for them), and to be afraid of a Republican president being even worse. That'll be more challenging, given that Perry is not a Congressman and can run as a Washington outsider. They'll need every word of oppo research they can muster, and there's more out there on Perry than there is on Romney.

Personally, I don't see much difference between them. What major policy differences are there? Either one will sell out all Americans to the highest bidder.

Jim -- You lost me at ACORN (you do know the organization no longer exists though exonerated of any wrong doing don't you?). Some people love fame, power, and money. Perry goes wherever those things are, whether aligning with Al Gore or with Dubya. Perry has NO true convictions whatsoever.

Low-information voters and the leaders, haunting.

TP, we all know Acorn as it existed in 2008 is no more..... lol. Read Jim Silver's entire piece....

As stated, ACORN was exonerated. James O'Keefe, on the other hand, is the real scandal in the story. And if there's any voter fraud going on it's been the GOP in California -- Young Political Majors, in Indiana with the Secretary of State charged with three counts of felony... James O'Keefe also was sued. If you Google ACHO you'll find websites about the End Times. Even so, if ACORN didn't do anything wrong, and has a new name, why does that matter?

The right-wing conspiracy theories, Birthers, nontroversies from buses to Solyndra, are why conservatives lack any credibility---and their leaders like Michele Bachmann who try to scare people about preventing cancer--are why the GOP/TP is unfit to govern.

They have proved beyond a shadow of a doubt they are unfit to govern, house republicans have done nothing since elected but screw the USA's credit rating and named some buildings. Their pay should be cut and their benefits eliminated just as they prescribe for all other government employees

Obama is in crisis mode and knows if his current jobs bill fails to pass, his chances of repeating (God Forbid!) will fail as well! I don't think he has a chance one way or another, but we can't let down our guard!

I saw a very slick commercial last night regarding this bill.... the libbies are pulling out all of their tricks on this one! I wonder who paid for the spot?

Geez sally it is not a trick people need jobs, and if they don't pass it, politically it will be better for Obama, republicans will not be able to claim it did not work. People will be reminded once again that the republican controlled Congress is impotent, they have no solutions, and all they can do is name buildings, for their $176,000 a year Cadillac health care benefits, full retirement for five years service tax payer paid for government jobs. Republicans can pass the bill and maybe that helps Obama win or they can kill the bill and insure that he wins. They are right in the middle of that classic rock and a hard place.

radical left-wing groups would be eligible for up to $15 billion in federal funding

Maybe... and we voter feel that is MUCH, MUCH better than giving big oil, corporations and the wealthy that 15 billion to add to their own coffers already filled with what they have taken from American citizens over the past ten years.

PASS THE BILL....

Gee Forest, obama's track record on job creation is fairly dismal isn't it? Almost $800million for shovel ready jobs in qe2, yet even Barry himself admits nary a job was created.... The unions got some of the money no doubt, but where'd the rest of it go?

no taxes, remove drilling moratorium, close loopholes allowing Barry's buddies like GE to move entire divisions to China w/o consequences.... etc. That's how you create jobs, not more spending bills.

but where'd the rest of it go?

To people like Governor Perry so they could balance their state budgets and reward their "good political supporters."

Any more questions?

Gee Bill you do know how our government works don't you, we have a president not a king. Obama don't let corporations or prevent corporations from doing anything, US law allows that and you do know that the president does not pass any laws right. If you do not like any of the laws currently in place you should implore the currently republican controlled congress to change them, they are the only ones who can the president can not it has something to do with that constitution thingy. If by unions getting some of the money you are referring to GM and Chrysler, you must realize that millions of jobs were saved, all kinds of jobs that depend on the American auto industry, lots of white collar jobs as well. It pains me to say it but I will bet you that unionized jobs were the smallest percentage of the jobs saved overall. As for as no taxes creating jobs where are the jobs because taxes are at an all time low, and have been there for quite some time and many corporations paid no taxes at all, so why aren't they hiring like crazy. Your theory's are full of some great big holes Bill, and most importantly I hope whoever you vote for in the next election you realize your are not electing a king, we will be electing a president, and he will not be able to one damn thing if Congress does not pass it into law. That whole constitution thing was about not having any more kings, right Bill.

Redacting Obamacare would be the biggest boost to Job Creation! Replacing Obama in 2012 is imperative!

Yes as soon as it is redacted millions of unemployed people will reach into their pockets and TA DA they will find cash that was not there before the redaction. Customers create jobs Miked what does Obama care have to do with customers walking in the front door.

Gee Bill you do know how our government works don't you, we have a president not a king. Obama don't let corporations or prevent corporations from doing anything, US law allows that and you do know that the president does not pass any laws right.

Forrest, your posts are nothing but retreads....

First of all obama would like very much to be King, not President.... he's an A Class narcissist. Thankfully that will never happen!

Second of all Obama's first two years both the House and Senate were controlled by Democrats. In 2010 the House went Republican and the last 12 months was spent fighting obama's debt ceiling increase time and effort wasted on a temporary bandaid that did nothing for the economy!

Next year's elections will be another step in correcting the damage done in 08, 09, and 10. Yes Bush can share part of the blame for the economy but like the analogy he drove us into the ditch and Obama took us over the cliff.

Republicans seem to think only the rich should have health care. Then cheer the death of someone without health care.

Replacing Obama is only imperative to those that voted against him the first time. The rest of us are quite happy to have him again. At least he hasn't signed a pledge to Norquist to add him in destroying America.

Never raising taxes is their plan to destroy America. If it takes from the working poor and middle class, they are more than glad to raise their taxes.

After more than 10 years of tax cuts and now with the high unemployment and more people in poverty than in 42 years. Just what happened to all those tax cuts jobs? If tax cuts are as good as the republicans say, shouldn't our country already be humming along.

The stimulus did more in two years than the tax cuts have done in 10. But then the stimulus helped the people and the tax cuts mainly were for the rich.

Yeah bill my post about how government works is a re-tread, because it has worked that way a long time, the constitution has been around a while now and nothing has changed, policy is written by Congress not the president. Your right about about the first two years having more democrats in the house, but care to tell us how many times the republicans in the senate filibustered. Your wishful thinking about some new president having all the answers is what it is, wishful thinking. He will only be able to do what Congress allows and nothing more. Republicans have exactly two solutions for every problem cut taxes for the wealthiest of the wealthy and cut regulations. You think that will solve the unemployment problem, you think if we elect a new president US corporations will shut down their overseas operations and bring those jobs here or do you think we would need some regulations to force them to. They left in droves when Bush was president, you think they will come back for some new republican president. You think republicans have it in them to regulate corporations, (don't give me your tired old tax thing they don't pay any taxes now) and force them to operate in the US and pay taxes, or do you just wish and hope they might. CEO's are not paid to do what is best for America, they are paid to make as much profit as they possibly can and to pay as little tax on that profit as is possible by law. We give them multi-million dollars bonuses and praise them when they do that. We don't give them bonuses for being good corporate citizens of the US, we give them bonuses to squeeze out every drop of profit possible in every way possible. Do you think republicans have it in them to close the loopholes and regulate their foreign operations. I don't. You got anything for us other than wishful thinking Bill? Do the republicans got anything other than tax cuts and deregulation for us Bill? If they don't can you please explain how those two things will solve our problems because they have not yet, so I am interested why you think they suddenly will just because the nameplate on the desk in the oval office has changed.

I am going to ask you Miked the same question how will repeal of Obama care as you call it create jobs, please explain, am I supposed to believe just because you say it will be so. Will it fix the housing crisis as well, will it bring jobs back from overseas, please Miked tell me how this will work, explain to me how it is going to put 14 million people back to work and create customers for the small businessman. If you can't then it is just more wishful thinking like Bill's.

forrest - a minor point to be sure, but congress consists of both the senate and house of representatives. Of which the right only controls the house and both the senate and house must agree on any bill submitted to the prez. after all, definitions are important when attempting to communicate.

Another fine point in the job bill discusion as well as the debt ceiling debacle was the ease of use that both sides are bandying about concerning tax cuts, tax increases and tax reform (eliminating loopholes and deductions). While all three terms affect revenues they all really mean something different. Unfortunately, the press, politicians and voters all seem to interchange their meanings.

Actually forrest both miked and bills arguments have merit as does yours. The commonality lies within the context of confidence, certainty and risk exposure. Government regs can have a big impact on the decisions that companies make about expansion and the regs on obamacare haven't all been written yet. As I understand it the financial and wall street reform regs are also not completely written yet. Remember, what the legislature writes as a bill doesn't mean that its intent will be the same as what the regulators write it up as.

As for tax cuts for the wealthy? How so? The right seems to be saying "no tax increases or no new tax increases". Again a question of definition. Perhaps obama needs to start saying that the 98 %er tax cuts needs to be repealed to pay for the jobs bill. By your argument boehner should support it if he is only interested in the wealthy. I am thinking that boehners response to obama would still be "no tax increases"

From a political standing this latest job stimulas is really nothing but political theatre. Infrastructure jobs are not like turning on a switch and the jobs are there. Roads and bridges may be the quickest in creating a small number of jobs but depends on each states DOT plans. School remodeling/building would have the biggest job building numbers because of the diversity of trades involved, but the approval process can be daunting and time consuming.

The payroll tax cuts and FICA cuts are probably the quickest way to create consumer demand, but the caveat here lies in how consumer confidence level will apply their $1500 average windfall in 2012.

extending unemployment bennies. Whatever is obama going to do about the 99ers now already rolled of the rolls?

So that's it Bill that is it all you got for me, you won't explain it to me and help me understand, it will work because you say it will work, it will work just because Obama won't be president. Everything stays the same but the name tag on the desk in oval office and all our problems start to disappear. Can we fool the economy and get things going sooner if we put a fictitious name tag on the desk in the oval office, will that work? Please Bill explain it to me I want to do the right thing, I want to vote for the right guy even if it is a republican this is too important for partisanship but you got to explain why I should vote for a republican when all the candidates just say they only thing they will do is more of the two things that have never worked yet, and as a matter of fact are making things worse (9,400 people to lost their jobs in Texas, because they don't have money to pay them). If all you got is "Obama puts the economy in a bad mood" I will stick with the democrats.

forrest...

(9,400 people to lost their jobs in Texas, because they don't have money to pay them).

makes sense to me, other than incompetance, don't most people loss employment because the boss can't meet payroll with them on board?

yo, Forest, there's a reason Obama is more popular in China than here.... he's created more jobs over there!

@ American First of all Bill and Mikes argument has no merit whatsoever, they did not make an argument they only made a statement, you made an honest attempt at an explanation or argument, and I honestly appreciate that. In the end aside from talk about how people perceive the meanings of the words tax cuts or tax increases you basically agree with me that Boehner will not allow the house to raise revenue and then your right the other half of Congress the senate becomes moot. Problem is however you want to describe it I want more revenue raised, we need revenue, anything short of that does not work for me.

As for the jobs bill it is not the bill I would have designed (I'll spare you the details of my jobs bill but let me say mine would have no tax cuts of any kind in it) but it is a step in the right direction, and just because it may be difficult to implement quickly is not a good enough reason for me to not do it at all. These guys make plenty they can shake their ass and do the work they are paid to do, I can't think of anything that slows things down more than their 20 weeks of vacation each year. Because it may be difficult and time consuming and may not provide instantaneous results is more of a reason to hurry up and get going than a reason not to do anything. Every good thing I have in life was difficult (Mrs. Grump), time consuming (my kids) and did not happen overnight (my career), slacking just don't get it in my book.

Lastly the 9400 jobs in Texas I was refering to were all government jobs because they don't have the tax revenue, turns out they have not had it for awhile, turns out they were using federal stimulus money to provide state services in Texas.

Thank you for your very articulate and level response in making your case American, I hope you have a nice weekend.

Some people love fame, power, and money. Perry goes wherever those things are, whether aligning with Al Gore or with Dubya. Perry has NO true convictions whatsoever.

Low-information voters and their leaders, haunting.

forrest - thanks for your responce, the point I wanted to make was that while bill and miked may have not presented an articulate responce to your standards, where they were heading was discernable just as yours was.

Of course the tech boom had nothing to do with any budget surplus, now did it craig?

At least our national debt only increased by about $1.1 trillion under clinton. Nice to have the internet to look up historical government data.

You are right about personal bias, etc. The thing is, it is hard to predict, with certainty, the future based only on opinions. Good thing mathematical projections based on estimated population growth and actuarial tables provides much more clarity and a smaller range of predictability.

I do like your comment though...

If you want to balame someone look in the mirror and start there.

We all bought into it, L, R or independent.

And of course taxing corporations and a 38% tax rate instead of a 15% tax rate on the mega wealthy did not have anything to do with it either, now did it American.

Johnnie - has already been banned 6 times in the past for excessive spamming!

DON'T FEED THE TROLLS! ;o)

President Obama is a "thug?" like I suppose Mother Theresa is a thug. Just check out video of Teabaggers in action if you want to see thugs. WTF, how do people come up with this crap?

No current republican candidate comes within 10 points of Obama in a head to head match up, the only republican that beats him in these polls is a "Generic republican" So when do we get to see and hear Mr. Generic or is it Ms. Generic. Hey here you go Generic/Synthetic 2012 now that's the ticket!

Not good at predicting political futures, I thought clinton would edge out obama in 2008. Looks like we all have to wait until mid 2012 to see who falls by the wayside and who doesn't.

Watched washington week this morning and I seem to recall them mention that the 2012 presidential campaign was going to be a nasty one.

Hell it already is, and it will get worse once the democrats start campaigning.

O'bama has been campaigning for 3 years

Hasn't Mitt Romney been campaigning for three years as well? I know that this story is about Rick Perry, and I as a native Texan would never vote for this fraudulent liar. He can preach and pray but that is his "pretense" just to pander to the EXTREME Right.

fayse - The potus has traditionally had the advantage in re-elections. Overt and frequent campaigning by the potus on off years rather than attending to the business at hand of his office is not a good thing.

Challengers not in public office can always campaign to their hearts content. Challengers currently in an office have to also balance their campaigning with their political responsibilities.

BTW - a potus has more far reaching demands placed on him than any other incumbant politician.

With statements like that I'm surprised he even got a 2.2 GPA.

According to the transcripts from Texas A&M Perry was a solid C-D student, he failed his major. He is trying hard to convince his base that he is the Next Ronald Regan but judging from the"deer in the headlights" look on his face during the debates, I think that it won't be long before the other Candidates will tear him apart. Not all Texans like him, and many of us would love to see him out of his $10,000 per Month, rented Mansion however, I can say with compassion for the rest of the US, I hope that this imbicile never gets near the White House.

Anyone who doesn't believe in evolution would never get my vote. Perry's just another member of the "flat earth society" crowd.

Those scientists out there could make a LOT more money doing fake studies for Big Oil than struggling to get measly NSF grants. The right-wing conspiracy theories are mind bending they are so stupid. And with a 2.2 grade point average, "The Flat Earth Society" won't even accept Perry.

What's really sad is how so many really smart, qualified Americans are out of work, while losers like Perry are making the big bucks and living the good life. This is what is truly wrong with our country, and the Teapublicans talk about "exceptionalism" -- WTF?