Are corporations hiring? Are they paying their fair share?

If a company is making $millions/billions in profit by employing the least possible number of workers, do you think they'll be motivated to increase and hire more workers? (NO)

This is why we have no choice but to INSIST on equal revenues from those among us who earn the most, in order to balance our budget, put cash into the Treasury and recover from this recession.

Corporations use shelters, tax credits and subsidies to pay less taxes, find ways to accumulate American profits while offshoring and receive Billions in tax benefits from the IRS at the same time. In the mid-1950's corporations paid 30% of all federal revenue. This quarter in 2011, they paid 6.6%. Burman, scholar at the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center said, "...in our system, there are corporations that view their tax departments as a profit center".

88% of income gains in 2009 went to corporate profits, while only 1% went to wages. That same year, U.S. GDP went down to minus 8.9% and we lost almost 8 million jobs by the time President Obama was sworn in. Now, in 2011 we can no longer pretend that our Big Corporations are creating jobs. Corporations are not creating jobs. They have been letting people go.

From 2000 to 2007 the US lost 1 in 5 jobs. The Bush tax cuts were in effect yet 3.5 million jobs were lost. "Between May 1999 and May 2009, employment in the private sector only rose by 1.1%, by far the lowest 10-year increase in the post-depression period." (businessweek.com, below)

Today, the effective tax rates for corporation are at their lowest in 60 years. Meanwhile it is estimated that corporations are sitting on $3Trillion, and making the most profits ever in our history. Will we stand by and assist the wealthiest elite ever in the world to become infinitely more rich?

This favored few is actively organizing to squeeze whatever is left in the system to put in their pockets, while the other 98% struggle with declining living standards and quality of life. We need them to pay their fair share. No more hedge fund managers making $50million getting away with paying less effective tax than their secretary, cleaner or child's teacher. Let's have no more of that.

The wealthy few that are scheming to privatize our country and position themselves to control our government are not creating jobs. Those on the right who speak on their behalf have not acted to create jobs. They voted against 4 jobs bills this year.

GOP elected officials have demonstrated zero vision for 98% of Americans. What they have done is push to cut our safety nets, defund regulation reform, defund affordable health reform, fire public employees to the tune of 600,000.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/obamas-tax-plan-is-common-sense-not-class-warfare/2011/09/19/gIQA5N2sfK_story.html?wpisrc=nl_opinions
Maddow Show, Sep 23/11
http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/economicsunbound/archives/2009/06/a_lost_decade_f.html
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/30/the-wageless-profitable-recovery/

It's not class warfare Amy, it's upper class welfare.

Relax...your checks are in the mail...

It is worse now than when the President entered office

Well, look around at the obstructionist tea-party House of Representatives, the Republican fillibusterers blocking the Senate, the "hostage takers" Boehner, Cantor and McConnell, and the obstinate right-wing idiots who refuse to allow President Obama to lead us out of the quagmire we were lead into between 2001 and 2009 by opposing everything the President attempts to accomplish, then you begin to see and understand why you can make that statement.

Let us keep things in perspective, advance the truth, and place the blame where it belongs in Nov. 2012.

DO NOT FORGET!

Mr Stupid:

Republicans are doing exactly what they were sent there to do. The people complaining didn't vote for them so of course you will see them as obstructionist. If they were to pass everything Obama through at them, all will be voted out of office by the PEOPLE WHO VOTE FOR THEM.

Democrats had a fillibuster-proof majority for 9 months. What did they do besides jam healthcare through. They could have passed everything at that time but they didn't. Whose fault is that.

that is the truth........

Have to differ with you IntheMiddle:

They were sent to Washington D.C. to legislate.

That does NOT necessarily mean they should "pass everything Obama" sends to them, but they DO have the obligation to improve, enhhance, modify and/or amend and pass SOMETHING other than a new name for a public building; something beneficial to this nation.

What you posted above is what "they" are trying to sell to American voters, and IT IS NOT CORRECT, nor good for America.

and I pray to God that they don't let us down. If the mooch whiners have their way, we will all be poor, dependent slaves to the lear jet liberal elites. How do you feel about moochelle snubbing her nose at her "people" by sporting 45k worth of diamonds with her elitist husband. She really is one of the "regular people" isn't she. Wake up Americans, we have a charlatan "leader" who is out for the low lifes and underachievers. Those of use who succeeded in life and aren't the right color are screwed.

JamesDouglasMorrison, you forgot to mention Newt's half million dollar account at Tiffany's and Romney's multimillion dollar ocean front remodeling

Scott, what you're saying is a lie !!!

Look at the charts: http://www.nationofchange.org/three-charts-email-your-right-wing-brother-law-1314715523

Bush increased spending by 88%, and Obama, just 7.2%. Look at where the deficit is going, ...DOWN !

I find it interesting Scott that we have to pay for disaster relief and we didn't have to pay for the Bush tax cuts.

Mr. Stupid:

There are just as many Americans that believe the total opposite of what you posted. Like I said you would not understand because you did not vote Republican.

Stopping Obama is beneficial to this nation in the eyes of at least 45% of the people. Republicans do not have to win over Democrats. All they need are a few so-called independents.

45% see the glass half empty, 45% see the glass half full, 10% just see a glass and wonders what is within.

It is your perrogative to "believe the total opposite" of my contention.

However, I am compelled to give you another consideration of YOUR position of your elected officials primary responsiblility:

"Every succeeding legislature possesses the same jurisdiction and power with respect to [public interests] as its predecessors. The latter have the same power of repeal and modification which the former had of enactment, neither more nor less. All occupy, in this respect, a footing of perfect equality. This must necessarily be so in the nature of things. It is vital to the public welfare that each one should be able at all times to do whatever the varying circumstances and present exigencies touching the subject involved may require. A different result would be fraught with evil.

Newton v. Commissioners, 100 U.S. 548, 559 (1879).

Politically, all this teabag deficit-mongering is a weapon on mass distraction. But constitutionally, it's a farce. RNC sales pitches only.

Why are the leftists in this country so divisive? You guys are going to get your rear ends kicked in the next election. President Obama is the worst thing this country has seen. He was "the one" that was going to bring us all together? Pure BS! Now he's saying that republicans don't like gay soldiers? Who wrote the DADT legislation? The democrats did! Who signed it into law? A democrat President! Who did all they could to stop the Civil Rights Act? Democrats! The left only has lies to try and further their agenda. Most Americans are not that stupid and are fed up with the lies. And we are finding out just how ethical our President is. How much of our tax dollars is he giving away to donors? Did you hear that the California Democrat Party is on the list of those who will get money back from the bankruptcy of Solyndra? Not the US taxpayers though. Keep it up libs and you will see yourselves out of power because of your total abuse of power. That includes our devisive president Obama.

Mr. Stupid - Why don't you go back and get some quotes from Mr. Byrds filibuster speech since you want to go back as far as 1879? Maybe grab some quotes from Al Gore Sr. while you're at it.

Sounds to me like you are stricken with a sever case of RNC denial JH. JMO

Eric---- Give me what you are smoking, I wont call you names or question your intelligence but I question where you get your info. Do a little research the economy, unemployment, debt , deficit.

JH--Most people have no idea what you are talking about. Most people believe the dems are the champions of civil rights. Same ones who think Seperation of Church and State is in the constitution.

time4truth

Most people are starting to see the truth. This administration has done more good for the conservative movement in this country than they will ever realize.

Mr. Stupid - We KNOW you suffer from DNC denial. You better start believing the truth or you will be one unhappy person.

JH--You are probably right and I'm not a repub/conservative. I'm not a socialist either.I don't care for Obama I always wanted Hillary For President. Maybe not the best choice ever but I'm sure she would have been better than Obama.

Hillary 2012

Stupid:

You bring up an OPINION from 1879??????? Man this is 2011, these are different times and about 20 generations later......lol

Keep it movin' You are definately playing urself'

time4truth

I will agree with you. Hillary would have been far better. I would not have voted for her but the dems could have run anyone last time and won. We were bombarded with negatives about Bush and Republicans starting in 2000. The country was sick of the bickering. I don't think there are many Americans that are happy with what we ended up with. It has been a terrible experiment. Another interesting point, the first "birther" was a Hillary supporter. Philip J. Berg, a democrat former attorney general for Pennsylvania filed a lawsuit in a district court in 2008 to have Obama removed from the campaighn because he wasn't born in the U.S. And the left actually turned it around to say that people on the right were the birthers. I can't believe a word I hear from the progressive/liberals anymore. They are good at their lies but with more sources for the facts they are really going to take a beating at the polls. Could that be why they continue to demonize FOX and at the same time worship MSNBC?

ITM:

[Democrats had a fillibuster-proof majority for 9 months.]

...it was about six months...but let's take a look at that "super-majority" anyway, shall we?

January 3, 2009 - 111th Congress sworn in. 55 Democrats, 41
Republicans, 2 Independents, 2 vacant.

January 15, 2009 - Roland Burris sworn in to Barack Obama's seat.
56 Democrats, 41 Republicans, 2 Independents, 2 vacant.

April 30, 2009 – Arlen Specter changes parties. 57 Democrats, 40
Republicans, 2 Independents, 1 vacant.

July 7, 2009 – Al Franken seated. 58 Democrats, 40 Republicans, 2
Independents. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THE DEMOCRATS HAD A SHOT AT A
60-VOTE MAJORITY.

August 25, 2009 – Teddy Kennedy dies. Kennedy had missed 97% of
the votes in 2009 and over 90% in the last half of 2008. 57 Democrats, 40
Republicans, 2 Independents, 1 vacant.

September 25, 2009 – Paul Kirk appointed to Teddy Kennedy's seat.
58 Democrats, 40 Republicans, 2 Independents.THIS IS THE SECOND TIME
THE DEMOCRATS HAD A SHOT AT A 60-VOTE MAJORITY.

February 4, 2010 – Scott Brown sworn in to replace Paul Kirk. 57
Democrats, 41 Republicans, 2 Independents.

June 28, 2010 – Robert Byrd dies. Byrd had missed over 90% of the
votes in 2010 and almost 50% in 2009 due to illness. 56 Democrats, 41
Republicans, 2 Independents, 1 vacant.

November 29, 2010 - Mark Kirk sworn in to replace Roland Burris.
56 Democrats, 42 Republicans, 2 Independents.

FACT: The "Democrat super-majority" was a myth, or
rather, a GOP political spin to hide their actions.

FACT: The GOP used every roadblock, filibuster, and secret hold
they could think of so that EVERY bill had to have a 60-vote margin to pass.

So that "Huge, overwhelming super-majority," It existed only for a total of 6 months AND only during two periods when Teddy Kennedy and/or Robert Byrd were unable to vote AND required them to get the votes of every Democrat plus BOTH independents.

While we are most certainly entitled to our own opinions, we are most certainly NOT entitled to our own facts.

"ideological pushback" at a time of national crisis.” -- That's a kind word for it. I have other words, but will keep it clean.

In accordance with the social contract, taxation without representation, and the right of liberty and the pursuit of happiness, it is government's responsibility to: 1) reciprocate by using tax dollars to improve the lives of tax payers; 2) to provide Rule of Law, which includes regulations to protect citizens; 3) to provide fairness not only in taxation but in access to resources and opportunities, etc.

When people say "level playing field" or "sharing in sacrifice" this is what they mean, making a society in which everyone contributes what they can and everyone benefits from the system.

I like the "paying it forward" comments by Elizabeth Warren, who points out that corporations could not be successful without the roads we all pay for, without the educated employees we all pay for, without the protection from military, police, and fire departments, we all pay for. As she says, people don't get rich by themselves, and they need to "pay it forward."

But when you have fear and rampant propaganda and selfishness, these concepts are hard to convey. That's why the president is out there, being a warrior for the middle class. The "stark choice" is the Teapublican race to the bottom and an American Nightmare, or the Democrat tide that lifts all boats and restoring the American Dream. Obama/Biden - 2012!

Mickey NY

I get so tired of that lame talking point you spew. Let me ask you something, if the Democrats were so unable to get anything done with the MAJORITY that they did have, where the hell were they when they actually had a much larger MINORITY when George Bush was doing such terrible things to the country? Oh, they were sleeping on the job? Why didn't they stop the things they later claimed were so terrible?

True Patriot - It is a fact that a lot of Americans don't pay any federal taxes. I don't want them using the roads the rest of us paid for. I think they should pay us back for the education we gave them because they evidently didn't take advantage of it. I'll go ahead and not complain about them using our fire departments and letting the military protect them. Elizabeth Warren is just another bleeding heart liberal who says some pretty stupid things. You have to admit that the rich pay a far bigger percentage for all the roads, educated employees, military, police, and fire departments. Just how much more should they pay? And I wonder how high that tide is lifting John Kerry's foreign made yacht that he moored in another state to avoid his own states taxes? You lefties are funny. Except with your fear and propaganda crap.

1/20/2013 - the end of an error

m-ic-key you mouse brained twit. Roads are payed for by gasoline tax. u think super rich care if it cost 1 or 2 benjimans to fill the tank on their bently? it the middle that fill their tank n dont have any left to spend on the rich mans goods, therefore all the economic woes. as in the 90's, rich paid more-still got richer. get a clue traitor to ur own class

You bring up an OPINION from 1879??????? Man this is 2011, these are different times and about 20 generations later......lol

Keep it movin' You are definately playing urself'

That explains alot about you.

We must assume you feel the same way about the United States Constitution which has been around since 1787.

unless any of them support YOUR current positions...

JH -- Most of the revenue for roads comes from sales tax on gas (or so we've been told). Nonetheless, you'll note I say folks contribute what they can, and personally I'd like to see all tax deductions go away and everyone pay income tax at a progressive tax rate, and on ALL their income such as capital gains and dividends.

Democrats enjoyed a filibuster-proof super majority for about nine months. When Democrats are the MINORITY, they understand they are the MINORITY and therefore do not dictate "my way or the highway" legislation via perversion of our constitutional democracy. Even when Dems have a majority, they are much more likely to compromise--there are still some Blue Dogs who vote with Republicans--where are the GOP/TPers who vote with Dems? No, what we see is non-stop uncompromising obstructionism from conservatives.

If you don't like current economic conditions, it's because we are still operating under Bush era policies of "trickle-down" tax cuts for the rich and corporations plus spending for wars. If you don't like the current gridlock and Do Nothing Congress, look to Teapublicans, especially in the House.

It's also clear you're an anti-intellectualism conservative who disses experts in preference for what? You're own analysis? Viral Emails? College drop-outs like Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity? WorldNetDaily and the Birther BS? Puleeze. Teapublicans can only wish they had folks in the Party with any merit and life's achievements.

dave-3733710:

First off: Duh...huh? WTF are you babbling about...

Second: Whatever it is you are babbling about, I seem to have struck a nerve...

Not as stupid as yo uthink Well, look around at the obstructionist tea-party House of Representatives, the Republican fillibusterers blocking the Senate,

I have to differ with you, yes, you are as stupid as I think...

Hey dead:

I suppose from your post that you want to re-write history and now claim that McConnell did NOT brag that "we got 98% of what we wanted..." by holding the debt ceiling hostage and extorting actions from the Senate and President Obama.

Or maybe you do not call such behavior obstructionist.

Either way, who is truly stupid by this augument? Denial of the facts is stupid dontcha know.

Pen - I already think that obama has defined his position. Obviously, the right is still defining theirs. Not really a bad thing as the rights final positioning won't be totally defined until the republican national convention ends.

BTW - Why worry? We already know who you want to vote for.

Vote out the Tea Party in 2012 !!! Vote out anyone that won't compromise !!!

I am. I am voting out Obama.

more humor from eric...verbally and publicly threatening to veto any legislation not in line with what obama wants is not compromise.

John

Obamacare, obama economics, obama foreign policies all bad but doesn't this speak volume about GOP/TP that up until now you cannot find a reasonable candidate that can defeat Obama? This surely points to one thing.....GOP/TP got no clue what so ever. You guys are lost in the wilderness.

I'm amazed that the libbies continue to be in denial about what Obama really says in these 'fund raisers' and why there's no hard questions about his record?

President Obama has become a veritable Pinocchio by stretching the truth on a regular basis.

1. Americans want higher taxes: During the debate over raising the debt ceiling, President Obama said that 80% of Americans support including higher taxes as part of the deal. But a Rasmussen poll taken the same week showed that only 34% believe a tax hike should be included in a debt-ceiling agreement.

2. Mother denied health insurance: During his presidential campaign, Obama said that his mother died of cancer after being denied coverage for a preexisting condition. He used her image in a campaign ad, repeated the claim in debates, and used the same rhetoric as President when he tried to sell ObamaCare to the American people. But a new book by New York Times reporter Janny Scott says that Obama’s mother, Ann Dunham, had health insurance through her employer and was only denied disability insurance.

3. Tax restraint for middle and lower class: Obama pledged during his campaign and throughout his presidency not to raise taxes on families making less than $250,000. But ObamaCare’s individual mandate will hit many under the $250,000 mark. (Obama’s own Justice Department said the mandate was a tax, not a penalty, when it argued its constitutionality.) Not to mention a higher federal cigarette tax and countless other “fees” in the health care law that hit the middle and lower class.

4. Shovel-ready jobs: When Obama was selling his $787 billion stimulus package, he consistently bragged about how shovel-ready construction jobs would be funded across the nation. Even the President later admitted that was a lie, when he told the New York Times: “There’s no such thing as shovel-ready projects.”

5. Keep your doctor: President Obama repeatedly pledged that under his health care measure, Americans would be able to keep their doctors. However, with rising costs, many employers will dump their health care plans and force workers into the state health care exchanges (unless you belong to one of the unions getting ObamaCare waivers.) A survey by McKinsey & Company​ found that more than 30% of companies will discontinue coverage for their workers.

6. No lobbyists: During the 2008 presidential campaign, Obama said: “We have the chance to tell all those corporate lobbyists that the days of them setting the agenda in Washington are over. … I don't take a dime of their money, and when I am President, they won't find a job in my White House.” At least a dozen former lobbyists got top jobs in his administration at the beginning of his presidency, according to Politico, and National Public Radio reported the Obama administration was granting waivers to lobbyists to circumvent the ban.

7. Foreign money in campaigns: During his 2010 State of the Union address, and again during the 2010 midterm elections, Obama railed against foreign money influencing U.S. elections. The only problem was that there was no evidence to support the charge or, as Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, in the State of the Union audience, silently mouthed, “Not true.”

8. Arizona immigration law: During the battle over Arizona’s immigration law, President Obama said: “Now suddenly if you don’t have your papers and you took your kid out to get ice cream, you can be harassed, that’s something that could potentially happen.” Uh, actually, Mr. President, it couldn’t. The law would allow law enforcement officials to inquire about immigration status only when there is suspicion of a crime being committed.

9. Transparency: Obama pledged that transparency would be a top priority, but his administration refused to grant one-third of the Freedom of Information Act requests, according to an AP​ analysis. He also was dishonest about transparency when he said that health-care negotiations would be televised on C-SPAN and that he would wait five days to sign a bill so people would have a chance to read it online.

10. Constitutional oath: During his January 2009 inauguration, Barack Obama pledged to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States,” yet he has consistently ignored the 10th Amendment giving powers not enumerated in the Constitution to the states. Exhibit No. 1: ObamaCare.

pen - in a real world, obamanomics and obama care will define how we move forward.

Obama foriegn policy is another matter when it comes to what Americas operational goals in this field will be.

I only have two problems with our foriegn policy, consistant philosophy and the blindness of the obama rabid followers who fail to see that the bush2 and obama policies are nearly identical. Yet bush2 is reviled and obama praised, go figure.

Gee whiz pen, no one knows who will run against the democratic nominee in 2012. Yep pen, if the left has its way, we all will be lost in the wilderness of runaway debt and burdensome taxes on everyone across the board.

... we all will be lost in the wilderness of runaway debt...

Like we were 2001-2009, the last time we allowed a REPULICAN ADMINISTRATION.

The Rightwing has proven to us what will happen if we have a Republican President: we will be taken from a balanced national budget to a "wilderness of runaway debt" - and you actually want us voters to allow you BACK IN THE WHITE HOUSE SO YOU CAN DO IT SOME MORE????

I don't think so, thanks!

I only have two problems with our foriegn policy, consistant philosophy and the blindness of the obama rabid followers who fail to see that the bush2 and obama policies are nearly identical. Yet bush2 is reviled and obama praised, go figure.

American 205 - We probably will never see eye to eye on the debt and so called burdensome taxes you claim Obama is trying to levy, nor the idea of a balanced approach.

So....

While I can't condone the use of your adjectives to describe Obama supporters, I think your analysis on foreign policy is spot on. Obama is being pretty consistant with Bush/Cheney on many issues. In fact at times even Liz Cheney has praised Obama's actions regarding the Afganistan buildup.

Case in point - Escalation in Afganistan (twice), the use of high altitude drone attacks, continuation of the patriot act, support for military tribunals, non interference while allies countries continue rendition practices. A GOP President would have been reviled and angrily condemned for these actions. How would a GOP POTUS led foray into Libya have played? A bit of hypocrisy from the left?

The funny thing is that despite all of his shifts toward neo-conservative policy some in the GOP still angrily see him as an appeaser. Case in point his policies concerning the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. He is criticized by the right, despite the fact that he vows to veto the PA attempt to form a state without Israeli negotiations. Despite all of the build ups and elimination of Al Queda operatives they say he is weak on Terror. A lot of hypocrisy on the right.

Steve, you are just a fountain of talking points.

Americans want increased taxes on the wealthy by a 2 to 1 margin: http://www.businessinsider.com/americans-want-higher-taxes-on-wealthy-no-entitlement-reform-in-super-committee-deal-2011-8

On Obama's mother: "I will never forget my own mother, as she fought cancer in her final months, having to worry about whether her insurance would refuse to pay for her treatment." Your quote is not what Obama said.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/14/ann-dunham-book-health-insurance_n_898192.html

The health care law establishes a tax cut for the middle class and lower insurance rates through exchanges. Nice try Scott.

I could go on and on.....................

ROTFLMAO eric, human nature says that when given a choice, humans will always want someone else to pay.

When I go to fill up with gas and someone offers to fill up my tank at no charge I am going to refuse? Naturally, I may ask why or where the cash came from, but probably would take the free gas.

About those exchances and tax cuts you mention, aren't they more in line with a government subsidy to create? You know something that additional taxes and fees have to be collected elswhere?

Greeting yellowdog, we will only never agree on that I should vote for obama or that you shouldn't.

I don't consider taxation to be burdensome within the context of wisely spending the revenues collected, and understanding that exogenous events such as wars, natural disasters and recessions are likely to create more spending than incoming revenues. That is to be expected.

However, taxes become not so much burdensome, as irresponsible when they become promoted as letting a small group of people being targeted to make up for deficits that mathematically can't be balanced by that small group. Even if that group does have a larger source of discretionary income.

Last fall, dennis of columbus and I had much the same discussion regarding the bush tax cuts. Then as now I have no problems with letting them expire across the board since An estimated revenue growth of $3.5 trillion over ten years is far greater than the small number of $800 billion by just eliminating the cuts for the top 2%.

Our main differences lay with doing spending cuts first or raising taxes. His was tax first, mine was cut first. My view is one based on history, politicians look at revenue increases as a signal to create more ways to spend and usually to spend far more than that being taken in. Up until 2009 this could be veiwed as the standard policy of either the left or right. Didn't cheney coin the phrase of "deficits don't matter"?

Perhaps I am too skeptical on obamas or any politicians rhetoric of balance, fair, shared or even affordable when they target one group over another. Yes, I am still for getting our spending under control first before increasing taxes. but I also recognize the inevitabilty of needing increased revenues either by broadening the tax base with loophole elimination or letting a recovering/growing economy naturally increase revenue.

Sorry, rabid is what came to mind when comparing the vitriol expressed against bush2 and the strong support for obamas foreign policies.

BTW, thanks for the engaging discussion and I still think that if obama wins re-election he will go after the 98% of those tax cuts to fund more spending, rather than pay down our debt. Perhaps another day, we can discourse on our own views on Americas future. Our differences lie only on how we veiw obamas leadership and agenda. Past discussions with you says that we are in close agreement on most other topics despite ideologic disagreement on how best to go forward.

My parents raised my siblings and myself on the basic premise of all being equally treated, none of us received preferential treatment that couldn't easily be justified and understood by us all and It is past time for tax reform.

american 205 - I've noted and approved of your idea to let the tax cuts expire after 2012. All of them. Should be easy for this do nothing Congress. I was for that approach back in December of 2010. All of them expiring. Oh well.

We can and sometimes do agree on things. Can't discuss things today in detail. However, It appears as if the country will be cutting first with the super commission recommendations/mandates coming out by Thanksgiving. Then with the Obama tax cuts expiring after 2012 we could get your revenue increases. See cuts first and then tax increases. Win, win.

You are right the small tax hikes on the 2%, or reduction of oil company tax cuts will not solve the problem, but it is a start. A portion of those monies could be gathered and assigned to deficit reduction right away and not just for additional spending. (shrugging my shoulders on how they do that)

he has failed to do anything positive for the country in the three years he has been in office.

1) President Obama bailed out the auto companies when they were on the precipice of laying off thousands of workers. Now, for the first time since 2004 all three American Automobile companies are profitable.

2)What do you call signing a healthcare reform bill that reduces the federal deficit by $130 billion in the first ten years and covers 95% of Americans with health insurance. Universal healthcare was a goal Richard Nixon pursued and every developed country in the world provides its citizens. Under Obama, America has finally addressed our dysfunctional health care system.

3) Killed Osama bin Laden. The Republicans love to cast this President as "weak" and "dithering," but the reality is, under his watch the mastermind of 9/11 is dead, America's arch enemy, Qaddify, is on the run, troops have left Iraq and the world sees us, once again, as the good guys.

4) More illegal immigrants have been deported in Obama's two and a half years than were sent home in George W. Bush's eight years. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

And bottom line Amy, regardless of the right-wing spin and rhetorical talking points/critisisms, is that with President Obama this nation is 1000% better off than we were for the eight years preceding him.

Honestly Kinkk - did you truly prefer what occured under the Bush administration and have a desire to return to THAT???

Amy

KingKK is one of the very good reason why GOP/TP can't come up with a credible candidate to contest 2012 election with the President. GOP/TP followers are as worse as their leaders.

It's obvious the tea people GOP republicans want to return to the President Cheney/Bush era, where they can give more welfare to the rich.

"a desire to return to THAT???"

You mean a return to a Triple A credit worthiness, unemployment of 5%, and economic growth....

Who the hell would want that?

Amy,

The Car Company's are not outsourcing, you can not begin to understand the numbers on Healthcare (Just read the CBO report, you will be dissapointed), He had to Kill Bin Laden and the deportation is a result of two Bush policies that grew the border patrol and ICE agents by 200%. Follow your Messiah all the way to failure after failure.

Amy

The Auto bailout plan was put in place by.......drum roll.......that's right your favorite.... George W. Bush. Second the promised savings from Obamacare are no where to be found, let alone all those jobs it was supposed to create. And Obamacare is still something the overwhelming majority of voters want repealed. Not to mention that it will likely be found to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. Third, so what about bin Laden, congratulations on getting rid of the guy. Job well done. But that is not doing any thing to stop the fiscal debt and deficit hole Obama keeps pushing us into deeper and deeper. No end in sight, Who needs bin Laden with Obama at the helm?

Rob in ma-3189632

You mean the Clinton era? Yeah, I wouldn't mind returning to those days, too bad Bush spent the surplus Clinton left us.

MRWSR.

So funny how you claim Obama has followed Bush's policies, then turn around and call Obama a failure.

The emergency bailout of General Motors and Chrysler announced by President Bush on Friday gives the companies a few months to get their businesses in order, but hands off to President-elect Barack Obama the difficult political task of ruling on their future.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/20/business/20auto.html

not as stupid - Will the american voters really believe that they are better off than they were with bush2? Obama promoted "hope and change" but yet unemployment is still expected to be in the 9% range next nov 2012 and still with about 24 million American workers being reported as unemployed or underemployed. With little demand from consumers as they continue to de- leverage themselves from the debt they gave themselves up to 2007-2008, think they are going to say obama delivered what he said?

Forget about obama and company successfully trying to blame the right for obstructionism or "NO". It has largely been left wing policies passed into law so far and with the senate in 2011 essentially keeping any house passed bills tabled and away from debate.

Amyb - What you mention are hardly selling points for a POTUS saying he will keep a laser focus on the economy and then ignoring it. Will obamacare really reduce our budget by $13 billion a year? Medicare advantage was one feature touted as being targeted for elimination to help fund obamacare, yet it is still here and even growing in usage by seniors.. Fraud and waste was another area for cuts, yet common sense tells us that fraud and waste when eliminated in one place only means that it will pop up somewhere else.

As for the bin laden assasination, that is definitly a two edged sword. Do Americans really want to have a potus publicly declare he authorized the assasination of a person in a sovreign ally nation? BTW- I don't miss bin laden, but I do suspect that if the American helicopter hadn't of crashed we wouldn't have heard from obama that he authorized the mission. An event probably not to be revealed until the 22nd century. But shlt does happen.

You tea people GOP republicans are really funny KingK. First you railed against the auto bailout saying it didn't work and President Obama was a socialist for doing it. Now that, that talking point didn't work and the bailout actually saved the auto industry you're trying to claim it was President Cheney/Bush who put the bailout into place. You tea people GOP republicans are like your candidates for President, you're all over the place and trying to revise history again, you're throwing everything against the wall to see what sticks.

Do Americans really want to have a potus publicly declare he authorized the assasination of a person in a sovreign ally nation?

Well that is in effect EXACTLY what W did with Saddam, illegally, without world support and only for personal family reasons. At least with Bin Laden President Obama was (like with the Afghan wars) simply finishing up and completing what his predecessor has already imposed upon America but left muddled up and un-finished.

Spin, spin, spin those RNC talking points; they are becoming great entertainment.

you railed against the auto bailout saying it didn't work and President Obama was a socialist for doing it. Now that, that talking point didn't work and the bailout actually saved the auto industry you're trying to claim it was President Cheney/Bush who put the bailout into place.

Remember: If you don't lie, you don't have to remember anything. [Mark Twain]

Amy,

Did not claim he is following any Bush policy. Just the facts, you want to give obama praise for the car companies when they are outsourcing. On a law that is going to be ruled unconstitutional. The list goes on and on. Failed president, Failed agenda on every level.

Failed president, Failed agenda

Interesting Mr;

and what do you call the eight years before Obama? Was that previous eight years successful in your view? How do they compare in your opion?

Would really like to know - trying to understand.

"You mean the Clinton era? Yeah, I wouldn't mind returning to those days, too bad Bush spent the surplus Clinton left us."

Bush spent.....so you had a problem with Bush's spending but Obama's is okay?

For the record - I think Bush spent TOO MUCH and I think Obama has spent WAY WAY WAY WAY WAY TOO MUCH!

not as stupid - no support from the world for iraq? No support from the UN when asked, yes, but plenty of support from the arab world to use their lands for jumping off points or other nations committing troops for invasion, or even congressional support from both sides of the aisle. Nice to see you adhere to conspiracy theories. You seem to forget that it was the iraq government that tried and executed saddam.

So tell us, if the helecopter hadn't of crashed do you think obama would have still said he authorised the mission and assasination?

Ron paul made an observation about pulling out troops in iraq and afganistan when asked for a timeline. His response was basically that as POTUS and CinC of the military such actions could be made immediately

Yes not as stupid, you do like to spin, tell us do you have trouble walking in a straight line after spinning so much?

About that auto bailout. Ford managed without bailout funds, GM and chrysler still filed for bankruptcy and Gm still owes the taxpayers big time. The only positive thing that can really be said about it and avoiding liberal hindsight excuses is that risk management essentially said that it was the right thing to do at that time.

As for the bush2 years that boat essentially docked in 2007 with the congressional democrat majority. Obama and company took over recovery in mid 2009 and with their infinite stupidity changed focus from immediate economic recovery to long term programs not helping our immediate economic recovery.

BTW Obama is POTUS now and he said he was up to the task.

Rob in ma-3189632

George W. Bush put two wars on a credit card and lowered taxes at the same time, meaning less revenue to pay for his military actions...where did he think that 4 trillion was coming from...and you call yourselves "fiscal conservatives?" What does that even mean any more? Paul Ryan is wined and dined with $350 dollar bottles of fine wine, while telling 80 year old women to go out and find a health insurance company that will accept their vouchers. Republicans say: belt tightening for you, and more pork for me.

PS President Obama spent money to keep us out of another Depression. A Depression caused by a lack of financial oversight thanks to Republican Libertarian views, which have prevailed for the last decade.

Mo

Please don't lie. Show me any post of mine that said the auto bailout bailout didn't work? That remains to be seen!!! Cash for clunkers, on the other hand, was a failure.

KingK, you're a tea people GOP republican aren't you? If so you fall in line just like the rest of them, you support their talking points, which is the auto bailout didn't work. I agree it remains to be seen, but if President Obama remains in office they will survive, on the other hand if a Tea people GOP republican is elected they will probably fail. So when you don't have anything to say you just try to distract with cash for clunkers.

Mo

This says it all

National debt = $17 trillion and climbing at a record setting pace under Barack Obama's record setting deficit spending, which he had no intention of letting up on until the TEA Party and Repubs forced him to do it, and he is still fighting to continue more massicve deficit spending and debt creation.

Here is the readers digest version for you. Obama equals national bankruptcy

Rob, who do you support? and why?

still undecided at this point but leaning toward Romney at the moment.

He did a pretty good job in hopelessly liberal state.

Good answer Rob. but seeing as how none of your candidates are worth supporting it was an easy answer. We all know you're going to hold your nose and vote for one of them.

"but seeing as how none of your candidates are worth supporting"

Those are your words not mine. I would support any one of the current candidates should they be nominated. Particularly, when they are running against the WORST PRESIDENT ever.

I would cast a vote for Jimmy Carter before Obama.

Oh great Rob...

We will look for the "Bachmann for President" sign in your yard!

Of course, that also shows us how much credibility to give your posts on here....

crazy!

Not AS Stupid---You can HONESTLY say Obama is doing a good job?Show me. Show me maybe I'll vote for him again. I can't find "The Good Stuff". Help me see the light.

Hillary 2012

You can HONESTLY say Obama is doing a good job?

ABSOLUTELY... comparatively speaking; after what we had to endure between 2001 and 2009, President Obama is a flaming GENIUS and doing so much correctly.

LEONA-2986819

Translation : Socialism vs. Capitalism?

I don't know about you but this economy for ages has and will always be capitalism/socialism. The right can keep denying it but that's the reality.

The fact is that we've always been both socialist and capitalist. This has never changed.

Correct Toasty--and there are those in the TPGOP who want us to become christofascist!

If LEONA and the tea people GOP republicans would recognize reality as it is, instead of how they want it to be they'd be a lot happier.

Scott it's easy to claim you've read something you haven't even seen. Chances are if you'd have actually read the bill you would have had more to comment on than the lie, President Obama has over spent 300 percent more than any other President. It's easy to make up these lies and type them on a blog, it's much harder when you're debating face to face.

I know this is a waste of space because Scott won't respond, but if you've read the entire bill, enlighten us on what exactly is in the bill. How much is tax relief, how much is infrastructure spending, how much is aid to the states? Questioning minds want to know.

Scott - old school political thinking was summarized by dick cheney quite well, "defiicits don't matter". Didn't matter whether one was democrat or republican.

The tea party shook up the US political world starting in 2009, that said that deficits do matter. Whether the tea party ever becomes a more viable political presence really won't matter, as the right is changing their outlook into saying that "deficits do matter"

The left, however, still carries forward with the old school political thought of cheney. The blocked FEMA disaster aid bill by the liberal left is an illustration that the left still carries the torch of "dificits don't matter" vs the right wanting to take the balanced approach of cut some discretionary spending elsewhere and also borrow. The right is proposing what, half the funds ($1.5 billion?) in the appropriations come from a discretionary program. $1.5 billion is a rounding error in the realm of government spending.

If the left can't find a $1.5 billion cut to help pay for disaster relief, what does it say about the "super commission" in coming up with a $1.5 trillion cut over 10 years?

On the lighter side, I imagine that obama will chastise the right and suggest that the wealthy and corporations give "just a little more"! earlier this yaer I spent time in western Ioaw preparing for flooding from the missouri river. Cargill out of blair, nebraska voluntarily filled and distributed tens if not hundreds of thousands of sandbags to surrounding communities

Yep, the left wants to live in the past and the right wants to move forward.

Mo the answer man. lmao! Why do you use a strawman argument about facts when you can't give them yourself? Isn't obamas job bill online?

I was just asking Scott to give us some facts about the bill he claims to have read. I'll admit I haven't read it and don't plan to, and by what Scott posted I don't believe he has either. But due stand behind your fellow trolls american, even though you don'e have a clue what you're talking about.

.......smarter, more executive experience, record of success, has a backbone, a unifier, not warmonger, believes in not spending more than we have, believes in border security, does not hate capitalism, won't apologize to our enemies and won't talk down to blacks.

"Time to take off your bedroom slippers"

This president can't be more insulting....

What a disgrace!

Rob in ma---

I couldn't agree more I was OFFENDED. What the hell is this let's get out and march , when has that ever created jobs? I know as a minority I'am in the minoritiy. No matter the color of my skin I AM ALWAYS AN AMERICAN.

Always Blaming Bush as a means to defend Obama doesn't say much for Obama. I was told The smartest MAN Ever was going to fix what the stupidest man ever, broke. I'm not seing It.

Hillary 2012

No Rob, to be totally honest it took the Supreme Court with the citizens united decision so corporate america could buy elections, and they bought the politicians that would continue to give them corporate welfare.

calling Obama a socialist just shows how ideology driven you are. A socialist would never have private for profit insurance companies as the cornerstone of health insurance. A socialist would have nationalized and not recapitalized private for profit banks.

You TP and Republicans have no idea how one sided you are. You are totally seperated from reality.

"A socialist would have nationalized and not recapitalized private for profit banks."

PAXIL - Please reread my post I said he was an INCOMPETENT Socialist.

No Rob, to be totally honest it took the Supreme Court with the citizens united decision so corporate america could buy elections, and they bought the politicians that would continue to give them corporate welfare.

Wow - that's a good one.....let's blame the supreme court. That's why Obama got a shellacking.

Holy Smokes.....blame blame blame blame. You gotta have something better than that!

Pray tell Mo, and who is it that is taking advantage of that Supreme Court decision, you guessed it Obama supporters.

Pro-Obama 'super PAC' to host event after speech

President Obama speaks at a campaign fundraiser at the Aragon Entertainment… (Scott Olson / Pool Photo)

September 08, 2011|By Matea Gold

A meeting of the top fundraisers for President Obama’s 2012 reelection campaign kicks off tonight in Chicago with a speech-watching party at Obama’s headquarters. Right afterward, the national finance committee members have been invited to another event – a reception hosted by Bill Burton and Sean Sweeney, two former White House aides who formedan independent “super PAC” to support Obama’s reelection.

The term socialist in referring to the President is just the plain old dumb folks speaking the same talking points that the nut jobs such as Glenn, Rush, Sarah and Shawn throw out there every week day.

You folks should get off of the crazy train.

I am not sure how lower they could have gone when the health debates were going and they had Obama as a witch doctor or just the crazyiness of their hysteria during the town hall meetings. They have been unreasonable and mis informed from day one.

The entire Republican side from cheering about the uninsured campaign manager for R Paul who died, to the gay soldier. This from the party that reveres the sanctity of life? Amazing

KingK:

if you look at Obama's deficit and say if the Bush policies were not in effect do you know what the deficit would have been- check out the math.

In the middle of a economic meltdown you can do what the Republicans propose- cut more government spending on top of decreases in business and consumer spending(I wonder how that would work- why look at the UK today- since the conservatives announced their agenda the economy SHRUNK) or you try and stimulate the economy.

You guys are so ideology driven but you never look and analyze the facts

You know why anyone would "boo" a homosexual soldier?

Because he or she jumped out there and DECLARED his or her homosexuality, that's why.

We don't NEED to know who's a homosexual or heterosexual serving in our military.

And we don't NEED people ensuring the they get "attention" for their sexual choices. The military is NOT a social experiment. You want to "declare" to everyone that you're a homosexual, then go to San Francisco. Otherwise keep your mouth shut and DO YOUR DUTY to the military and this nation that you volunteered to do.

What we NEED is for people to keep their mouths shut about their sexual choices because it has NOTHING to do with defending this nation and fighting our enemies.

if you respect the sanctity of human life then respect all of it. The DADT ban was just lifted that's why he came out- he is entitled to. Almost every other developed country lifted the ban on gays serving decades ago without any apparent insurrection occurring within the military.

Look, the world has changed and you cant put the genie back in the bottle. Accept it and move on.The 1950's are over

What we NEED is for people to keep their mouths shut...]

Ladies and gentlemen, just another fine example of a Public Service Announcement from the "moral, Constitution loving right" in a vain attempt to trample another American's First Amendment rights.

Way to go, Cheryl..."Don't Tread On Me...Let Me Tread On Thee!"

I don't agree with booing the soldier, but I also don't agree with homosexuals announcing their perverse life styles as if we should celebrate it.

Larry- just for the record I am married for 39 plus years have married kids of my own, etc etc

you do appear a little judgemental Larry- "perverse" etc. The point they are making is they just want to live their life as they see fit. Whatever they do behind bedroom doors is their choice just as what you and I do behind ours is our right

Saying that the military is not a social experiment shows your lack of knowledge about the military. The military has always been the engine of social change. The military was the first to integrate the races during the second world war, two whole decades before we did it as a nation. Go back to school and learn some facts. Or you could join the military and see how much you learn in the military history classes that are taught in basic training.

I enlisted and spent 5 years serving my country (1966-1970)and have earned the right to speak on military issues.

there is not one national acadamy of science that has refuted the contention that the actions of man is significantly contributing to climate change. If it is a scam you would think someone somewhere in the world would come forward.

Climate has changed in the past but the rate of change this time is much quicker then before and the cause for the sudden increase is CO2 which is attributable to man.

Climate change says area's that are dry will become drier, those wet will become wetter.

So expect more forest fires in Texas, AZ, California and more flooding, hurricanes, and weird weather(tornadoes) in the future.

Look if the only area that was in contention was climate change maybe I could respect your viewpoint. But it is anything scientific- from vaccinations to evolution. Your side appears anti intellectual.

The green these "greeny's" are talking about is MONEY, not "green energy".

I need a paxil

don't you worshippers of the false gods of AGW and evolution ever tire of your lies?

how is he talking class warfare. You guys love talking points but please explain how and why asking for a 3% tax increase on those making 1 million or more dollars can be construed as class warfare.

TP and Republicans- ideologically pure but fact deprived

If it is class warfare then so be it. Obama is a warrior for the middle class. Someone has to be, because it sure as Hell is not the GOP. Not just no, but HELL NO!

He's a warrior for his own self serving needs. Because a 3% tax increase on millionaires will not come close to solving the problem. A government living within its means will.

Obama proposed cutting $3t over the next 10 years. Republicans decided that was too much and they rejected it.

you people are the ones who want to change america into the seperated states of america where the rich get richer and poor get poorer. Social Security, Medicare, medicaid - thats american. Helping out the less fortunate - thats american. Giving up a little more because you have alot and can afford to so - thats american. The income inequality is worse than that of Yemen, is that the USA you want??? Because if you support the GOP and vote them in, the income inequality will only grow.

Drew it is not the govenments job to provide for anybody. Your view is your view, your vote is your vote. But you don't have to spew your hate to prove anything.

Dont be so sensitive, its not about hate or being nice. Grow up. Its about the direction this country is going and you are ignorant of the direction your leaders are taking it. Tell me how the GOP is going to help the middle class? How is the GOP helping the lower class? How is the GOP helping anybody but the coorporations and the wealthy!?

Your view of how govt free economy and workplace is simply as unrealistic as the idea of a working communist society. The billions in proftis DONT trickle down (case and point, Koch oil profits increase by 25 billion dollars, yet they lay 13000 workers) and the govt needs to be there to protect the workers and keep the balance in society from tipping to far in favor of the wealthy. The income inequality is higher than ever and we need to turn it around.

Drew you grow up sir, not going to get into this with you. You are going to stay with your views no matter what I say. My point was we both have the right to have seperate views, you just can't do it without insult or belittle. I am a Middle class tax payer and tea party member. This is not right by all your accounts.

Its about the direction this country is going

The direction needs to be back to a limited government under the US Constitution. Any thing else is wrong. If you libs want all of this "social justice" crap, then go get it done in your state, not the federal government. At least if it is done at the state level, those that disagree can move to another state. When it is done at the federal goverrnment level, those that disagree have no where to move to.

Dreww,

The income inequality is higher than ever and we need to turn it around

Where do you and the left get the idea that you are due someone else's money. You sir are pushing a socialist agenda, you will never get any of my money, you don't deserve an ounce on anyones weath.

sonmanvb, your first mistake is thinking that you know what the founding fathers wanted from the fed govt. There are many opinions they exhibited that give favor to your side and mine. The Constitution was written as a result of fear of a monarchy rising and an overpowerful govt controlling the citizens without representation. To pervert the reasons behind the wording of the COnstitution and to exaggerate it to back your opinion that there shouldnt be a federal govt is wrong. In todays global industrial world, the federal govt needs to play a key role to protect the working class from the wealthy who seek profit solely, not the good of the nation.

MRWSR - so you okay with the fact that the top 1% hold 34% of the nations income while the bottom 80% have 15% of the nations income???

I am and every day I work my ass off to get into their class. Surround yourself with successful people and not mediocre whiners and you can rise up too.

The Constitution was written as a result of fear of a monarchy rising and an overpowerful govt controlling the citizens without representation

And what do you think we have now?

your opinion that there shouldnt be a federal govt

Please point out in my comment where I said there should not be a federal government. Don't put words in my post that are not there. I want the government back to it's 18 Enumerated Powers as out lined in the constitution. If there is something that is not in the 18 Enumerated Powers, then get an amendment.

your first mistake is thinking that you know what the founding fathers wanted from the fed govt

That would be YOUR mistake, thinking I don't know what the founders intended. I studied it at the Heritage foundation. Maybe you should read the federalist and anti-federallist papers. I would also suggest you do a lot of reading on Thomas Jefferson.

I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.

All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.

The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.

Drew, not going to debate this with you, you see it as them stealing from you. They have earned it and pay the majorty of taxes. I bet you get a check back every year. You need to write these mean, evil rich people a thank you letter for your check. And no I don't have a problem with it, tell George Soros you want your cut.

MRWSR this has nothign to do with me or any person wanting money from you. I want to live in a country where its easy for kids to go to college beacuse they can get cheap loans like myself. I for one come from a middle class family and would have had to go to much worse school if it had not been for govt subsidized loans. What you dont get is that poor ppl dont like being poor and dont like taking money from the govt. You think they enjoy living paycheck to paycheck (or if its even welfare check to welfare check)? The fact of the matter is rich people dont create jobs... demand does. And when the income disparity becomes so great, the wealthy sit on their funds or invest in businesses (oh wait no matter how much you invest in a business it eventually will fail if there isnt demand for that good or service). So if you want to promote an america that is "everyone for themselves" then go ahead, but im going to continue to fight for the idea that we all can help each other out and should, especially those who have already achieved so much and have secured a good future for their families and themselves.

I think this debate where having is just a direct reflection of the deep ideaological divide this country is undergoing.

DREW --According to the IRS top 1% makes 22% of the INCOME yet pays 41% of the taxes. Not very equitable.

Also according to the IRS there are 1470 millionaires paying 29% in taxes. 1400 millionaires paying 2% due to loop holes( a good reason for tax reform not tax hikes)People making 50,000-70,00 are paying around 15%, 20,000-30,000 paying 5.7% in taxes

Almost 48% of wage earners pay NO taxes at all and many of these get money from the government so it actually adds to the deficit.

So get your facts straight and tell the Whole story not just a small amount to fabricate the truth.

No matter what side of the aisle you are on it's tax reform we need NOT TAX HIKES. I pay my tax trust me I pay my fair share not like the 48% who just keep on sucking off the gov. tit.

they pay nothing in income tax because there TOO POOR TO EVEN make it into the bottom tax bracket! AND YOU want to take MORE from them!!!? HEY poor people, you make less than 40,000 a year but where gunna raise taxes on you rather than they guy making 100 million!! WELCOME TO THE GOP AMERICA

Drew,

You miss the objective here. You can not, ever, madate wealth. I have lived paycheck to paycheck, I worked my way through college, never took a dime., and won't. I will wash dishes and do it proudly if it keeps food on the table. You sir are for an entitlement state, I this country is not divided as you think on this subject and you will see come next november, it is the people who are morally convicted to care for the poor and afflicted. The gov. can not madate moral's or your social justice. Move to China and live in utopia.

,

Drew ---You are the cream of the crop for talking point not facts. Even people making 40,000 a year can pay SOME TAXES in some areas of the country 40,000 a year isn't ven the poverty level do some research. I bet the people making 40,000 a year can afford cigarettes,beer,cable t.v., XBOX, etc. you know I'm right but you wont admit it. People BELOW the poverty line SHOULD get a hand up NOT a hand out. I'M NOT a repub/conservative GOP person.I'm a center left person who like ALMOST everything the dems support,I CAN"T support a President who hands out MORE than we take in. I want an AMERICA that thrives for ALL WELCOME TO A REAL AMERICA the one our forefathers wanted not one you think it should be.

Eric the "gdp" zer0bama is great apologist?