I love the way our President makes the republiCons look stupid.

I find it ironic the USA can liberate other countries in the name of democracy. Yet we can't stop police brutality here.

Supposedly, Gaddiffi is dead, watch the right and FOX'S Propaganda machine begin the criticism 3...2...1...

One thing I will say is the Libyans are waving Americans flags; a sign of goodwill. they in the Middle East didn't do that when the cowboy Bush started wars. Neither did the cowboy capture anyone. Our President takes care of business. Bush can never say this.

http://29.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lkjsa0vvlq1qzu2tdo1_400.gif

Speaking of attitudes

What's up with the dippy Republican Minority Senate Leader Mitch McConnell?

Biden Using Scare Tactics to Sell Jobs Plan. Biden Evokes Sexual, Violent Imagery Again in Push for $447B Jobs Bill.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/10/19/biden-evokes-sexual-violent-imagery-again-in-push-for-447-jobs-bill/?test=latestnews
=====================================================================

Putting firefighters and police back to work is not a scare tactic by Vice President Biden. We need protection and firefighters and police need jobs.The GOP should know that.

If the GOP must be afraid of anything , it should of the deadly wild animals law in Ohio where the guy killed himself and released deadly animals to the neighbor hood.

On Wednesday, the Humane Society of the United States criticized Gov. John Kasich for allowing a statewide ban on the buying and selling of exotic pets to expire in April. The organization urged the state to immediately issue emergency restrictions.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/19/terry-thompson-muskingum-county-animal-farm_n_1019641.html
==============================================================================

The tea b----- governors are worried about regulations like this? Please, give me a break. Just think if they were no police to shoot those deadly animals many lives could have been taken. Just like taking a gun in a tavern is a stupid law.

Pass the JOBS Bill

Obama/ biden 2012

Watching MSNBC this morning and it appears that Khaddafy is either captured or dead. Again our President is taking the War on Terrorism to the home front. He has completed the mission to take out OBL that the Bush Administration had totally screwed up and failed to do, he has being knocking off terrorist king pins left and right and now he may be able to add Khaddafy to his trophy case as well.

Mr. President – Job will done.

While away from the board these past two months in my new job the more things change the more they stay the same. President Obama is still the only one trying to create good paying jobs and stimulate the economy. The TP/GOP “Obstructionists” are still trying to destroy the “Middle Class” and reward the top 2%.

While President Obama is trying to create jobs for teachers, fire fighters, law enforcement, infrastructure repair and maintenance the TP/GOP is still promoting ”DRACONIAN” spending cuts that will cost jobs, not create them. They are still proposing record tax cuts to the richest 2%. They are still trying to repeal regulations that bailed us out from the greatest recession since the great depression while giving the richest 2% a huge tax cut and let us not forget that they are ramping up their vicious attacks on the reproductive rights of all women.

People there is still not a Jobs Bill on the table from the TP/GOP nor anything that will stimulate the economy. Just more cuts to Social Safety Nets and more money for the 2% and Big Business increasing the record economic divide to new record levels. They are still trying to destroy Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

The new gaggle of TP/GOP Presidential Candidates is a joke on America. The front runner is still only in 20% bracket telling us they all suck. Bachmann has been handed her hat and exit stage left. Romney and Perry are basically two liars and frauds. They cannot defend nor prove any of their rhetoric on how they created jobs, stimulated anything. Their records as I have been saying all year have been exposed to the American people for the lies and fraud they are and they are dead in the water come 2012.

The “impotent” right wing radicals are still lost and have no intention of creating jobs or stimulating the economy – period. They continue to offer nothing for 98% of the American people other than their support of Wall Street over Main Street, Big Business over Small Business and the 2% over the 98%.

President Obama in 2012 and I think we are going to see a lot of right wing radicals bite the dust.

"Bush: I've Made No Mistakes Since 9/11"

www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0414-01.htm

"Obama: All The Choices We've Made Have Been The Right Ones"

www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/10/19/obama_all_the_choices_weve_made_have_been_the_right_ones.html

Tell me again how these two clowns are different?

Obama in 2012.

I heard where the ‘Occupy Iowa’ folks are going to march on the Obama campaign headquarters, having already done so on Wells Fargo in Des Moines.

Seems these folks are a little more ‘equal-opportunity’ oriented than, say, the ‘tea-bags-stapled-to-your-bonnet’ folks. They seem willing to examine more than just one side of all this.

Hey, how about that Kaddafi guy? Is it just me, or do there seem to be less bad guys around since, say, 2008??

Lockerbie, baby.

"By the time Obama realizes this isn't the midterm election campaign, it could be too late. The 12-member supercommittee that has until Nov. 23 to complete a debt deal remains mired in disagreement, and the president will have no choice but to get his hands dirty once more. Deadlock on the panel would ripple through global markets as a symbol of America's decline and the failure of Obama's leadership.

One of those super-smart advisers of his who helped get him into this mess should tell Obama it's time to get off the bus and do his job."

-A.B. Stoddard, The Hill, 10/19/11-

Fool Fuel, Mouth Mush, Goon Gas; it's what runs the right-wing propaganda machine. Here's the latest hollow talking point that's gained currency from the vacuous lackeys of the rich and the filthy rich: "skin in the game". Everybody has to have skin in the game.

Having skin in the game, of course, means paying taxes. It depends on who is spewing the nonsense, but somewhere between 47% and 51% of lazy, welfare-grubbing, hippie, dirty Democrats, liberals, progressives, and lefties, pay no income tax. That this is demonstrably false is irrelevant to the right wing. Say something long, loud, and often; it becomes fact for the low-intelligence crowd.

Consider the rabid Pro-lifers, you know the "we love the unborn until they're born" crowd. Obviously these people cherish their children, they tell us so. Yet, while they call for skin in the game, their children use parks, schools, roads, sidewalks, all kinds of good stuff, and never pay a penny. Well, yeah, but their parents are paying for this. Really? The parents are getting tax money back in the form of child-care credits, exemptions, and a lovely fecundity entitlement. Where's that skin in the game?

Iconic behavior? Consider Congressman Joe Walsh (R - Deadbeat Dad). Damned if he's going to let the nation's lazy, loafing, welfare-entitlement crowd pile debt on his kids and grandkids. Walsh is all about action. He will starve his kids before they have to suffer the indignity of debt. He's doing it, right now.

Perhaps it's a bit uncomfortable, but what do we do about a child who is born with a medical condition that precludes gainful employment - say, Spina bifida? Suppose this child survives its parents; no insurance, no job, no parental support. Get ready to cheer, right-wingers. We can strap this person to an electrified fence. Since he has carelessly refused to purchase health insurance, we can just let him die. Shoulda had some skin in the game.

What of the aged and infirm? These cretins don't pay taxes, and if they've been drawing Social Security for more than 15 years, they've collected far in excess of what they contributed. Thieves! Thieves, I tell ya! No skin in the game. They're stealing from me.

The truth? We all pay taxes. Anyone who buys a product or service is paying income tax. It may not be direct, but the seller's income tax is included in the price of what you bought. So it goes along the entire chain. We ALL pay taxes. We ALL have skin in the game.

The divide between the right-wing crazies and everyone else is starkly clear and almost terrifying. If you can't see stark-raving mad lunatics in the likes of Joe Walsh, Herman Cain, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Sharron Angle, Bill O'Reilly, Karl Rove, Grover Norquist and their money-grubbing, insanely greedy patrons.......vote G.O.P. That's suicide by Republican, plain and simple.

This coming election is truly about the survival of this nation. Democrats and Independents, your survival depends on your vote. The ballot box is the strongest weapon you have, and even as I write, Republicans are trying to take that weapon. Fight like your freedom depends on it. It does.

"Tell me again how these two clowns are different?"

Well, let's see: One is a democrat, black, and was correct. Howzzat? (as if we missed this same goofy post yesterday....)

Another foreign-policy success for Obama?

What's with the question mark First Read? Of course it's a foreign-policy success, unless you think ridding the world of a hated dictator and source of state-sponsered terrorism is a failure.

???????????????????????????????????????????????

Welcome back Navy!!

Say what you will about OWS, it has FINALLY turned the conversation toward the creation of jobs. Ironic that the consistent #1 concern of Americans for YEARS has been an afterthought in the heated rhetoric of the Conservative Movement. They moved aggressively and successfully to make the conversation about their chosen topic, debt, at the expense of the economy and the lives of average Americans.

Now it's back to employment, where it should be. Where we were making headway until the Tea Party take over of the House. Where we need to be if we're to recover from the Great Recession.

I hope the stories about Kaddafi are true. On the other hand, what WILL conservatives do without a bogeyman?

Iran?

If you listen carefully, you can already hear the drumbeats.

And this makes it all the more imperative that we re-elect President Obama.

No one seems to know what to do about the economy, but he does seem to have this foreign policy thing nailed.

And after that fracas the other night among the Republicans, Vladimir Putin is no doubt licking his chops, again.

Yay! Navy is back! Gosh, have we ever missed you! Stick around, won't you?

Howzzat? (as if we missed this same goofy post yesterday....)

You know they're out of ammo - when they resort to reruns! lol

@Navy - Welcome back my fellow shipmate!

You Know Mark and Domenico, you guys are just great.

You won't touch Solyndra, Fast and Furious or any of the other number of scandals surrounding this administration, because you claim you are just "Political Reporters, (Other than skirting the Boiler Room question with"Maybe we should ask Pete Williams")

But NATO gets Khaddafi and you guys have it up here minutes after it is reported.

So guys, which way is it? Political Reporters or CHeer leaders?

Having skin in the game, of course, means paying taxes. It depends on who is spewing the nonsense, but somewhere between 47% and 51% of lazy, welfare-grubbing, hippie, dirty Democrats, liberals, progressives, and lefties, pay no income tax. That this is demonstrably false is irrelevant to the right wing.

By definition this is true that 47% do not pay Federal Income Tax. However, instead of bickering about a talking point why is this not used to push for tax reform that includes Income Tax and Payroll tax? It is obvious that the payroll taxes are not being used for purposes they were intended as they are spent by the government in the same way as any other revenues. So lets end the sham and abolish payroll taxes and restructure income taxes, and deductions, so that everyone has some skin in the game. And lets stop pretending that this restructuring can be revenue neutral. We are going to have to pay more in taxes and get less from the government. So stop pretending that Medicare can be maintained in it's present form with minor changes.

Shout out to the poster yesterday who suggested that the Earned Income Credit should be paid to low-income workers who DON'T have children they can't afford.

Welcome back on board, Navy! Though others have kept up with the heavy lifting, I've been missing you!

"But NATO gets Khaddafi and you guys have it up here minutes after it is reported.

So guys, which way is it? Political Reporters or CHeer leaders?"

Typical rightie. "every silver lining has a cloud".

Feisty Redhead Roselle, Il.

Tell me again how our President is soft on taking care terrorists & dictators at a fraction of the cost of what his predecessor spent...?

Good Morning Red

Our President takes care of business. Georgie Boy can never say this...

http://29.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lkjsa0vvlq1qzu2tdo1_400.gif

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTgl9fQB7KyqsvRa8raKp7Wf6OnseBhFLXv3gSPJR8Ba2aPpylQJQ

Oh, and WCA- how many on that Pan Am flight die because of 'Solyndra'??

See a difference in magnitude of importance here? You don't?

But of course.

Fund raising figures are in and it seems that Barack Inane Obama has raised more from Wall Street than all of the Republican candidates combined. In fact – hold on to your panties LWNJs on here – he has received more from Bain Capital than Gov. Mitt Romney. Can you spell HYPOCRITE Mr. Rogers? Me thinks that anyone with integrity riding around on a Canadian bus spouting class warfare would return the money from big bad Wall Street and Bain Capital. However, we are talking about a man with no integrity. You would demand no less from any Republican candidate. How about that Booty Call on the bus ROFLMAO.

You can bet your last dollar that Wall Street would not be donating to this miserable excuse for a human being if it did not know he will protect Wall Street’s interest – like he has done. THIS PRESIDENT IS SPEAKS OUT OF BOTH SIDES OF HIS MOUTH. This is like a Jim and Tammy Bakker side show. There is no reasonable or logical or ethical defense of this from the LWNJs on here. The president tries to play populist while taking big bankers money. Do the research – Democrats have taken much more money from Wall Street than Republicans.

This president feels he has to divide a nation to win an election.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-has-more-cash-from-financial-sector-than-gop-hopefuls-combined-data-show/2011/10/18/gIQAX4rAyL_story.html

Obama still flush with cash from financial sector despite frosty relations

“Despite frosty relations with the titans of Wall Street, President Obama has still managed to raise far more money this year from the financial and banking sector than Mitt Romney or any other Republican presidential candidate, according to new fundraising data.”

Hedge Funds??????? If he keeps that money, Obama is below a snake’s belly.

“As a result, Obama has brought in more money from employees of banks, hedge funds and other financial service companies than all of the GOP candidates combined, according to a Washington Post analysis of contribution data.”

If you LWNJs on here do not demand he gives back Bain Capital money – who according to you makes money on the backs and misery of others – you have no right to draw your next breath.

“Obama’s fundraising advantage is clear in the case of Bain Capital, the Boston-based private-equity firm that was co-founded by Romney, and where the Republican made his fortune. But Obama has outdone Romney on his own turf, collecting $76,600 from Bain Capital employees through September — and he needed only three donors to do it.”

America can only hope this will be the case if this country is to survive. Trying to spread lies – like the LWNJs on here – is no way to show integrity.

“Obama’s ties to Wall Street donors could complicate Democratic plans to paint Republicans as puppets of the financial industry, particularly in light of the Occupy Wall Street protests that have gone global over the past week.”

Butch Maddow got her A$$ handed back to her – much to the happiness of her partner – by trying to spin politics into the exotic animal tragedy in Ohio. Butch was trying to spread lies as facts that Gov. Kasich overturned former Gov. Strickland’s law against exotic animal farms saying is was “bad for small business.” MSNBC is bottom fishing with ignorant toads like Butch, Sharpton, Matthews, Shultz, Turk, Olbermann and Odonnell. No wonder its ratings are in the tank

Jack Hanna destroyed this Maddow lie during an interview last night. According to Jack, the state of Ohio had no way to enforce the law put in place by the Strickland administration. There was no viable location in Ohio to store all of these big cats, not just from this farm but from others in the state. The Kasich administration formed a committee (on which Jack Hanna serves) two weeks after taking over as Governor. The committee has formulated new regulations that phase out exotic pet ownership over the course of ten years while establishing sanctuaries in Ohio for these animals. In the meantime, the committee is tightening regulations on the existing "farms" in an effort to prevent abuse before they transition the animals out of their care. The new set of rules goes into effect at the end of November, which is sadly too late.... Hanna went on to say that there are several big cat breeders in the state that do valuable research that is being used for genetic diversification of rare cats, and those facilities should not be over-regulated.

This administration is fraught with fraud, lies, ineptness and lacks integrity. Now after Fast & Furious, Solyndra and Sunpower we have this. The tip of the iceberg is becoming more increasingly visible. We can’t afford four more years. Did you know that the first stimulus of $1 trillion cost the American taxpayer $278,000 for each job created under that package. What a bargain!!!!!!

http://americaswatchtower.com/2011/07/05/the-stimulus-spent-278000-for-every-job-saved-or-created/

Obama/Biden lied – the democrat party died.

NO lobbyist...oh...wait...YES!

NO earmarks...oh...wait...YES!

NO backroom deals...oh...wait...YES!

NO partisanship...oh...wait....YES!

....but then again....

YES...an ethical administration...oh...wait...NO!

YES...close Gitmo within a year....oh...wait...NO!

YES....bring the troops home right away...oh...wait...NO!

YES...immigration reform in the first year...oh...wait...NO!

YES....Transparency in government...oh...wait...NO!

YES...bills posted on the internet before voting...oh....wait...NO!

YES... shovel-ready projects...oh...wait..."there's no such thing as shovel-ready projects," - BO

Tennessee Electrified Truck Terminal Files for Bankruptcy After $400,000 Stimulus Injection

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/10/19/tennessee-electrified-truck-terminal-files-for-bankruptcy-despite-400000-in/#ixzz1bJdeH04R

DANDRIDGE, Tenn. – Just months after obtaining more than $400,000 in federal stimulus funds, TR Auto Truck Plaza off Interstate 40 sits idle.

The Tennessee Department of Transportation (TDOT) handed out the $424,000 Environmental Protection Agency stimulus grant for electrical hookups so that truckers wouldn't have to burn diesel fuel while resting. Both the state and EPA were apparently unaware that owner Rick Lewis had a history of legal and financial problems and had filed for bankruptcy.

I am quite sure that all of our right wing friends will be congratulating the President on supporting the NATO action that got rid of another terrorist.

WCA:

But NATO gets Khaddafi and you guys have it up here minutes after it is reported.

Seems to me that when the President handed control over to NATO, conservatives complained that it was only a cover for the US to continue leading the charge.

Now, when NATO finishes the job, the same folks don't want to give the President any credit for it and act like it's nothing. You've already had it explained to you why it's not nothing. I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy.

Spanky might call this "piling on." Consider it done.

Nah DBO, just pointing out the obvious to the Libs here. Since they will miss it.

The Double Standard at FR is the reason I keep coming back.

It is entertaining. I'm guessing Amy may have even shed a tear this morning for the Presidents success in a war that we weren't even a part of.

It is great to be back. Amazing how nothing has changed from the Grand Old "Obstructionist" Party.

They are still as lost and out of touch as ever. No jobs Bills, No Economic Stimulus etc. even though they campaign on it in 2010 and are still.

They are the biggest fraud tossed on the backs of Americans in History. Too bad, the used to be responsible and supporters of the Middle Class and the American Ideology. Somewhere they lost their way and aloud the power brokers and radicals brown shirts destroy their own political party.

We deserve better.

AM, the hypocrisy will be the left telling us again what a great job Obama did in Libya when for the past several months they have decried that we had nothing to do with Libya.

Besides that the point odf my first post was the hypocrisy of our hosts who claim to only report on the primaries, elections etc, when questions are asked about all the other, obvious, political stories that may effect the election.

Nah Navy. You have always been here under the guise of Backhouse.

AM, the hypocrisy will be the left telling us again what a great job Obama did in Libya when for the past several months they have decried that we had nothing to do with Libya.

So, in your opinion, WCA, did we or didn't we?

Good to see you, US Navy.

Alan, NJ, the difference is that the "choices" President Obama made have not left us mired in an unfunded and unnecessary war and mired in Afghanistan because Bush failed to finish the job and headed to Iraq where we would be greeted with "flowers" upon our arrival (which did not happen). I do not expect you to recognize the difference between Bush's choices and Obama's but how sad that you cannot. It is not about political ideology, it is not about one being a republican and one a democrat. It is about doing the right thing and making the right choices to accomplish it. Had President Bush taken this approach in Libya, I would have applauded him as well.

WCA: is reading fundamental? Mark and Domenico just did a Boiler Room question about those very things.

What bothers you most is that this is simply the right wing trying to churn the water for an issue to bring down a Democratic President as they always do. They aren't having much success. Gets old.

You may apologize to our hosts, as well as to Amy.

White Collar Auto:

Solyndra has received attention. Fast and Furious has received attention. Both are under investigation. You don't want news. You want speculation. We will get the news, when we get results of the investigation(s).

If it truly is a double standard you crave, clearly the Republican Party is for you.

US Navy Disabled Veteran - Retired

It is great to be back. Amazing how nothing has changed

Good morning Navy It's great to see you back. Nothing has changed on this board with the FOX-ITES because get the wrong information, and bring here.

Psst, they think it's gospel. I hope you enjoyed that debacle the GOP called a debate.

Clearly, the winner was President Obama.

Good to see you back Navy!

NDD go back and read my post. Yeah reading is fundemantal. I mentioned the boiler room. Geeez.

You may now apologize to me.

Anna Molly, hard to say if we did a good job, Since France, Britian and NATO led the charge.

I suppose in whatever supporting role we had, we were probably helpful.

@DW -- That has to be one of the most hypocritical statements coming out of a LWNJ's mouth on here in a while.

Then they answered your question, didn't they WCA. Apology is owed to our hosts, as well as to Amy.

WCA:

I suppose in whatever supporting role we had, we were probably helpful.

LoLoL You know better than that, and so do I.

By the way, I was never among those who said we had nothing to do with it.

So I DO get to smirk a little bit, despite whatever standard you might apply to others.

Well Am, there were plenty here who claimed we had nothing to do with it.

You and I both knew better, so yeah, just between you and me, the military did another great job.

So how do you feel about the cowboy in office?

He sure seems to be good at getting the bad guys.

Hope Libya doesn't turn into another Egypt.

White Collar Auto

I swear, Republicans aren't happy unless a war is protracted, unpopular, and costly.

I have a different definition of success: the bastard is dead, our soldiers aren't, we move on to rebuilding our own country.

Two links today for consideration. One is a fact check on the Republican Jobs bill and the other is on who is still taking in campaign funds while sitting on the Deficit Committee. In my opinion why have a committee if the rest of the Congress is already threatening to reverse any action they don't like...kind of an useless effort wouldn't you say?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/the-gops-ludicrous-claim-about-their-jobs-bill/2011/10/19/gIQAgX4GzL_blog.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supercommittee-members-raised-political-money-while-being-chosen-for-panel/2011/10/19/gIQApV0fyL_story.html

FYI -- For those that like Trump he is still thinking about a run if the wrong person wins the nomination it seems. If that is true... I wonder who he doesn't want nominated?

Well, Ray, I see your prejudices are showing today and that you miss the broader point of Rachel's discussion. I watched it and did not see the interview in the same view as you did. Governor Kasich repealed nothing, he simply allowed the temporary E.O. to expire without taking action. Asking if an extension of the E.O. would have prevented this man's recent purchases and having Mr. Hanna say it might not is hardly the picture you painted of that interview. Hate to burst your bubble but IT IS ABOUT the lack of regulation and the fact that Ohio has no laws to prevent people from buying exotic animals. Apparently, you choose to ignore that Jack Hanna also said that laws must be adopted to prevent such a thing from happening again. Mr. Hanna will be working with Kasich's administration to help craft a regulation. Kasich adopts the GOP view that all regulation is bad when this incident proves that regulations have a purpose and that is to protect the public as a whole from the private.

Ray, Your post at 1.3 could have been one sentence long.

Both political parties are being supported by WallStreet money interest.

That why the OWS took their name and a piece of park land in NYC. The unfettered financing of political campaigns by the 1% with the blessing of the SCOTUS is obscene.

Do you agree?

Amy, love it, post 1.41! Best definition I have seen!

One Billion Dollars to take out a dictator in Libya. US live lost zero!

One Trillion Dollars to take out a dictator in Iraq. US lives lost 4,000!!!

WCA:

So how do feel about the cowboy in office?

He sure seems to be good at getting the bad guys.

Well, in case you haven't detected it already, I'm a little less liberal on foreign policy than on other things. So, I tend to appreciate the job that President Obama does in that area, more than his job on the economy. He apparently is getting the right advice, except I cannot figure out why he persists in Afghanistan, unless it really IS about those hidden minerals.

Hope Libya doesn't turn into another Egypt.

Me, too. But Libya was pretty bad before, so maybe it makes not much difference.

See Amy, that's where you have me wrong.

I didn't agree that we should go into (Help Out) Libya, I think we need to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan along with all the other peripheral "wars" we have inserted ourselves into, unless we are there to stop genocide.

Why aren't we in Syria? Isn't there a bad guy there who is killing his people?

To many damn problems here at home. Time to stop trying to "Make the World Safe for Democracy"

Alan, NJ, the difference is that the "choices" President Obama made have not left us mired in an unfunded and unnecessary war and mired in Afghanistan because Bush failed to finish the job and headed to Iraq where we would be greeted with "flowers" upon our arrival (which did not happen).

Jody, you will never find me defending the Bush Administration, in particular their Iraq policy was one of the biggest mistakes ever. I still don't understand the motivations behind that adventure. What I was pointing out is how arrogant both men are in that neither will admit to making a mistake. When Bush first made his statement he was pillared by the press. Somehow Obama just skates over it with no comments from the media.

To me anybody who won't admit their mistakes is arrogant, and one of the lessons I have been taught in my career is that if you don't get something wrong how do you learn?

Other than the boiler room's look at Solyandra and scandals last time, every question they answer is about the GOP candidates. Is the field set, is there still time for Christie/Palin/Jeb/Guiliani. Soon their boiler room questions will amount to who will be the VP candidate - Christie/Palin/Jeb/ Guiliani.

I agree with Mixed Bag there is an important story out there no one is talking about.

One month from this deadline and no news from the "super committee." November 23rd is coming up fast, if those guys want to go home for Thanksgiving dinner they better start negotiating. What they decide may affect our country, our social services and social contract for decades to come. I bet there are lobbyists and big corporate interests letting those 12 members which way to vote and what they will allow to cut.

I think Obama can cut short his bus trip on the jobs bill, as I expected and posted long ago the only portion of the jobs bill that will pass are the tax cuts. Time to move on to what is going on about the super committee. If he wants to present the D vs. R choice he should be talking about what Democrats want to save and what Republicans want to cut. The "super committee and what they decree is far more important then trying to win support for a bill for tax cuts.

Welcome back Navy.

Apparently, the RWNJ's have hacked my account and removed all the "ignores" I have so meticulously assigned to them.

TYLER or whomever, I think you need to look into this. Once again a crime appears to have been committed here. What are you going to do about it?

Hmm, who knew I was so influential and important? I guess their next step will be to have me whacked. Good luck with that, you'll need it.

But I'll share a little secret with you. I know who you are and I just scroll on by. Ignoring the foaming at the mouth crowd is something I've become quite good at. You have nothing to say that I care to hear or read. You are dupes. You have been brain-washed by FOX and RUSH. I truly believe most of you are candidates for de-programming. You are not worth my time. Buh-bye.

So, happy Thursday everybody.

Glad you are back Navy, speaking solely for myself, I have missed you very much. You are an intelligent voice of reason here among the nattering nabobs of negativity. (Thank you Spiro Agnew)

Obama/Biden 2012

Ray:

In the meantime, the committee is tightening regulations on the existing "farms" in an effort to prevent abuse before they transition the animals out of their care. The new set of rules goes into effect at the end of November, which is sadly too late.... Hanna went on to say that there are several big cat breeders in the state that do valuable research that is being used for genetic diversification of rare cats, and those facilities should not be over-regulated.

....

Jody:

Kasich adopts the GOP view that all regulation is bad when this incident proves that regulations have a purpose and that is to protect the public as a whole from the private.

Ditto to what Jody said, Ray.

All you've done here is make the case for regulating the Hades out of ALL of these so-called "farms" so that only the good ones thrive -- why would the good ones resist regulation, anyway? -- so that this kind of situation doesn't occur again. Human nature being what it is, it surely will, unless regulators can prevent it.

If Hanna thinks this is somehow a case for DE-regulation, then he's just plain wrong.

Or do you think that this sort of slaughter is just the price society -- not to mention the animals -- has to pay so that idiots like the guy in this story can play?

Joe Biden for VP in 2012!.....Obama/Biden 2012!

Why aren't we in Syria? Isn't there a bad guy there who is killing his people?

Uganda was next in line.

RAY-40 etc. etc.

The reason Wall Street contributes to President Obama (if they do) is because they know what will happen to the economy of this Country if the so called Republican leaders get elected. It will be a catastrophe, not only for the Country, but for Wall Street. They know a winner when they see one and a bunch of Repug/TPotty losers when the see one.

Alan, NJ:

Uganda was next in line.

LoL One at a time, one at a time.

What conservatives fear most is that President Obama will be re-elected and take care of ALL the bogeymen before you get a chance to start another senseless, wasteful war.

What WILL the military-industrial complex do when peace suddenly breaks out?

I will be one of the first to congratulate Obama on the success in Libya of removing its leader from a person who is on ignore for many of you. Unlike many of you who go through life through the prism of viewing anything GOP or Bush must be wrong, I would support several of the GOP candidates against Obama solely for Obama's economic failures. No one is 100% wrong or 100% right which is why people like Fiesty, Navy, John A have no credibility in their posts. You have to give credit where its due and be willing to oppose those you support when its valid. They cant do that. I think Obama has done several positive things with regards to foreign policy and he certainly has improved our negative perception in many parts of Europe. But unfortunately, his failed economic policies and lack of understanding of basic economic behavior and his desire to pit various groups in this country against each other is going to bring him down. You guys spend so much time criticizing the various candidates in the debates, but none of the left leaning posters will have any impact on the election. The people who will decide this election in the electoral swing states dont even watch this stuff. The people who watch this stuff are political junkies who have made up their minds before they watch it. I am from a very small midwestern town and go back home frequently. Talk to people in these towns and you discover that the vote will come down solely to economic issues and not religion or abortion or gay rights or any other hot button social issue. At this point 1 year before the election, Obama will lose by over 100 electoral votes its a given. Do you really think that Obama is gaining traction with OWS in states like NC, Ohio, Penn, Virginia, Florida where is getting crushed at the moment? Even in the states that he normally should win, there is disillusionment because they are guinea pig states for his failed policies and they are some of the worst performing states in the union.

By the way, why no comments by the progressive group regarding the budget numbers for the year ended? I always hear them complain about tax revenue and it dropping because of the Bush tax cuts--it was up 21%. I always hear them complain that the GOP is putting people out on the street because of budget cuts, spending up 5% and welfare payments up to $900 billion with absolutely no cuts. And this with huge decreases in spending on the wars. No retractions from those wild outlandish statements?

skip, you are a voice of reason in all the insanity!

Hey Mark, Have to revise my prediction to Texas in 6 after last night.

Heard on the News last night that the Super-Comitte pretty much has it's hands tied due to time constraints at this point.

Tax reform, which I think would go a long way, is to difficult to do in sucha short time. So they say.

I would like to see them at least pull off the low hanging fruit in the tax code and show some progress.

I fear that won't happen and we are in deep trouble, though.

Anna Molly, Oddly enough I find myself, this week, on an assignment just outside of Columbus Ohiio. Hotel Mgmt came by 2 nights ago to tell us to be careful going to our cars. Lions, tigers in bears in the field across the street.

Good times, good times.

I listened to Jack Hannah and all the other Sherrifs and professionals. This is not a political story about regulation. This was a problem with what to do with the animals after they are confiscated.

Jack Hannah understood why the legislation needed to be corrected. He did not feel it was this governors fault. I would defer to him on pretty much all issues regarding wild animals, much like I defer to you and Spanky on all legal issues.

I am also going to guess, I could be wrong, that on most issues, Jack Hannah ia liberal.

Sad, yes. Stupid, yes. Political, no.

See, it's those unintended consequences that liberals never think through.

You all think you can just say, No More Wild Animals, and the problem goes away.

Sadly, it never works like that.

Another day, another scripted misrepresentation from Kirk;

I always hear them complain about tax revenue and it dropping because of the Bush tax cuts--it was up 21%.

As it's been laid out repeatedly here, the argument is that the tax cuts make revenue LOWER THAN IT WOULD OTHERWISE HAVE BEEN, not simply LOWER...although that's usually the case in the short term. Eventually the economy grows enough to make the dollar figure higher than it was to start, but the revenue continues to fall farther and farther behind needs.

We've also said all along that the best cure for revenue shortfalls would be growth in the economy. The economy IS continuing to grow (if slowly), thus the revenue figure rebuts yet another Conservative misrepresentation...that revenue shortfalls in the deepest part of a recession somehow represent a permanent future.

More proof that figures don't lie, but liars figure -- notice how Kirk uses percentages to address anything EXCEPT welfare payments? No percentage there, apparently that wouldn't bolster his spin.

Stay tuned, before long someone will post yet more writings inspired by the Gospel of Supply Side Jesus. http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/03/09/17_franken.html

Awww shucks, Ma'am.

You make my day as well Dawn, keep up the good work and give Sey a big hug from all of us here at the big dog house.

Skip, Marti, Honey, Hope and Taz

Obama/Biden 2012

Skip:

All my ignores have been deleted as well. And here I thought I got rid of the trash and it is back.

I wondered what that smell was the morning.

@Skippy -- Want to tell us again why the Jobs Bill had to be voted on in the House first????

WCA - As long as they win it. Besides I'm a liberal, hey St. Louis has 10 titles Texas doesn't have any! Time to share. Lol.

Although we probably wouldn't agree on what the supers should or shouldn't be cutting you are right time is short. My tax reform probably wouldn't look the same as your tax reform.

What WILL the military-industrial complex do when peace suddenly breaks out?

I for one would love to find out.

Geez, WCA and other right wingers yelp about us going to Libya, how dare we get involved and then yelps because the UN did what the UN is supposed to do. President Obama took the lead and convinced the UN it was the right thing to do and did so in record time. Apparently, according to the right wingers, the only good war is one where the USA does all the fighting--calling that leadership. Seems to me the problem for conservatives is stubborn pride--they can't stand the idea that the US could achieve success with the assistance of NATO and the UN, the evil UN they dislike and want to defund.

John B, you must be smart enough to know tax revenue doesnt work as perfectly as that right? For example, during the Reagan, Clinton and Bush tax cuts that spurred revenue growth by the government because the amount of income earned by taxpayers went dramatically up overcame any reduction in revenue that might have been lost because of the rate change. That is measured by the percentage of individual tax collected against income. As you know after Clinton's capital gains reduction, tax collection went up the highest its ever been as a percentage. In the current situation, the increase in revenue of 21% has to be related to something other than income growth because we know GDP is stagnant. So my guess is you are probably correct in that if measured by straight math, higher rates would have produced more revenue but what isnt known is how much GDP would have been reduced by that additional cash pulled from the overall economy.

As for social programs, its up 80% over 3 years does that satisfy you? Its the typical John B style, ignore the parts of my post that dont fit your agenda, dont give credit where its due and go after and embellish one aspect of the post to discredit the poster. And you wonder why none of the fiscal conservatives here would ever listen to you.

Welcome back Navy. I will join your shout out for any policy that promotes jobs! : )

Alan NJ -- Me too!

Jody -- Personally I felt the strategy/policy implemented in that situation was brilliant!

Jody, now I am confused.

For months the Liberals here have been saying that NATO (France and Britian) took the lead, not Obama. So which is it?

Based on the "We will be ther days not weeks" statement, I guess we haven't even been a part of this for months now?

We claim the lead if things work out well for your guy, we stay in the back when things don't go so well?

One thing about you Liberals, you sure do love your "Double Standards".

As I said earlier, our military did a great job in whatever supporting role they had in this. Probably bigger than we were led to believe.

Skip:

It appears that a number of us have had our "ignores" ignored. The feature is nice. As you correctly note, there are some posters who simply do not warrant any time. Their rants are hackneyed talking points, dogma, and all too frequently, wanton lies.

I note that my scroll feature is still operational.

John B, can you give me some color on Harry Reid's comments yesterday and the overall progressive view that we need to take the private sector more to create jobs? Harry said that the private sector is doing fine and its the government that needs stimulus help to create jobs. I also constantly read posts on here about the teachers, police and other government union jobs that are being sent to the woodshed by the GOP.

Well according the White House budget office, there were 1.875 million federal government employees in 2008 at the start of the crisis. After 3 years of the worst recession since the early 80s, Obama has hired 253,000 thousand more employees at a 13.5% increase. Its hard for me to see how we have gotten 13.5% greater benefit from the federal government over that time but thats just me. At the state and local level, he has a little more room but we are talking 49,000 job losses out of 5.089 million jobs which is less than 1% and local its 210,000 job losses out of 14.075 million workers which is 1.5%. The private sector has lost 2.5 million jobs during that time and every indication is that Obama wants to tax this group more and provide more government jobs and how has that worked out so far? How about in California, Illinois, NY where that approach to goverment has been tried for years and how are these economies doing?

Alan, NJ. Sorry I misinterpreted your comment. I do not see either comment being spoken with arrogance but rather as a stark difference between their personal views on what choices were good choices regarding the decisions made by both. It is not arrogance to think one is right, it is arrogance to think one is right and keep saying so when it is obvious to everyone else that it was not the right choice. Arrogance was a Mission Accomplished sign on a ship and here we are 10 years later.

No more time for me this AM to continue this chat, Alan.

The ignore function is for those who dont have the fortitude to back up their positions with anything but the same tired partisan sermons each day. Its the equivalent of getting picked last on the playground for sports and taking your ball and going home. My guess is the people who use ignore are the ones who advocated the banning of dodgeball from our schools. David and Navy, I realize its tough to be able to stand in the kitchen and take the heat from people with the knowledge, personal experience and debating ability to call out your BS but its your credibility at stake not mine.

Well darnit, now I don't feel "special" anymore.

I guess it's just a glitch in the system as opposed to a great right wing conspiracy. Naaaaaah, it's a right wing conspiracy alright. They just attacked us all instead of singling me out. Darn.

But, as you point out, the scroll function still works, I guess I'll have to ignore them manually for awhile.

Uh TYLER, could you restore our ignores please?

Obama/Biden 2012

My Fellow Conservatives,

This here is the Mindset of the Crazies on the Left.

skip Nicholson, Oklahoma City

Welcome back Navy.

Apparently, the RWNJ's have hacked my account and removed all the "ignores" I have so meticulously assigned to them.

TYLER or whomever, I think you need to look into this. Once again a crime appears to have been committed here. What are you going to do about it?

The mind set is that someone Hacked his Account. (does Anthony Weiner come to mind) Most Noteable he Blamed it on Conservatives. Then when he finds out it was his own People (which is always the Case with Progressives/liberals getting Screwed) They continually Blame Conservatives for what thier own Party People are doing to them The liberal/progressives Lie to them screw them over and they still continue to support them.

But hey who would have thought..

Right back at you, skip!

Two links today for consideration. One is a fact check on the Republican Jobs bill

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/the-gops-ludicrous-claim-about-their-jobs-bill/2011/10/19/gIQAgX4GzL_blog.html

I usually like the WaPo FactChecker column, it does a good job of debunking the exaggerated claims both sides make. But I do take issue with this particular column when it makes a big deal that the bill proposed by Republicans "would do little to create jobs in the near future."

Indeed, FactChecker takes particular umbrage at the fact that Republicans did not specify a timeframe over which jobs would be created. But that's not quite true as even the Times Union article cited by FactChecker makes clear:

"…the Republican senators sought to distinguish their approach from the President's, saying it would create jobs by addressing structural problems in the economy, rather than aiming for immediate job growth through government spending. 'This is a pro-growth proposal to create the environment for jobs, and that's as opposed to the short-term sweetener approach of the Obama administration that simply hasn't worked,' Portman said."

Those words pretty clearly show how the Republican approach differs from the Obama approach – and clearly states that a central feature of the Republican approach is to lay the structural groundwork for long term job creation rather than focus on the sugar-high BS of so called government created jobs that has gotten us nowhere. Furthermore, while impartial analysts may disagree with the Republican job creation claims, when FactChecker uses a loaded word like "ludicrous" to describe those claims they do more to betray their own biases than illuminate the reader.

So FactChecker gets thee Pinocchios from me.

I think the most telling part of the article refers to the Cain campaign (or lack of it.) Why is it that the leader of the month (kind of like the gas station employee of the month) has not even bothered to register in many of the primary election states and his staff quit ?

I think Herman Cain is pulling a Sarah Palin and utilizing the presidential race to sell books and make money. Nothing illegal about it, but with Herman Cain, you get what you litterally pay for.

Khaddafy's demise, as well as OBL's are fine examples of what Obama can accomplish when the republicans aren't (although they tried) obstructing him.

Amy,

I have a different definition of success: the bastard is dead, our soldiers aren't, we move on to rebuilding our own country.

I think a better measure of success is to ensure the government you replace is replaced with one friendlier to you.

So far the jury is out on Libya, and while it would be hard to get much worse, we certainly got worse in Egypt for all our support of their cause, and abandonment of our ally. So it would not surprise me if the Libya situation was worse as well.

Maybe conditions should have been built into our support and involvement. I dont know if we did or did not build in conditions for support, but it would not surprise me to find we help replace a bad dictator with a worse zealot regime.

I guess only time will tell.

ABO 2012

David Walker, what a great post. "Suicide by Republican". I love it!

Bill -- Infrastructure spending, paid for, would fit into a short term/long term plan. Repatriation is something I can agree on with a tax attached as well as tagging it for specific use. (Multi's know the current rules and laws in this area.) Since it doesn't look like the tax portion of AJA will pass this could be a good compromise. I'm all about Country first. You know that... lol.

Amy B. Portland, ME

Another foreign-policy success for Obama?

What's with the question mark First Read? Of course it's a foreign-policy success, unless you think ridding the world of a hated dictator and source of state-sponsered terrorism is a failure.

The Republicans sneered at what they call Obama's "leading from behind" approach. Funny thing, though is that Obama's smart-power approach not only got rid of the Libyan dictator without the loss of a single US soldier, but also increased the stature of the United States in the eyes of the Libyan people. Seems to have worked a lot better than the Republicans' stupid-power bombs and torture policies in Iraq, which ended up costing over 4000 American lives and made the Iraqi people hate us.

From the saber rattling at Republican presidential debates, I expect we'll get more stupid power in Iran if one of them gets elected president. One of the neocons said, when they still thought Iraq was just an easy pushover, that "real men go to Tehran". So I expect Mitt Romney would want to see US tanks rolling through that city at some point in his term to prove his masculinity. Or to update the Village People song: Macho macho man, Mitt wants to be a macho man!

Ahoy Navy:

Good to see you back.

@David Walker,

The truth? We all pay taxes. Anyone who buys a product or service is paying income tax. It may not be direct, but the seller's income tax is included in the price of what you bought. So it goes along the entire chain. We ALL pay taxes. We ALL have skin in the game.

Then why all the talk the rich should pay more? Obviously they have enough skin in the game already and need to have their taxes cut.

No matter how you slice it, you are acking more of one party that the other party is exempt. The examples you list above are being paid by all people. This includes the rich you choose to demonize and extract additional taxes out of that the previously mentioned group DOES NOT PAY. And that is the current situation. Now the plan is to INCREASE this portion of the tax code that not all pay, only the rich, and not have any increase to the already reduced portion the less than rich pay.

If you want to include all taxes in the equation, yes, technically all have skin in the game. But at this point the rich have much closer to their entire hide in the game, and you want more of it.

Your arguement does nothing to justify the current situation.

ABO 2012

sarah-3519311

Khaddafy's demise, as well as OBL's are fine examples of what Obama can accomplish when the republicans aren't (although they tried) obstructing him.

If the Republicans had the constitutional power to mess up Obama's foreign policy as easily as they can mess up his domestic policy, they would do it.

@David Walker,

The ballot box is the strongest weapon you have, and even as I write, Republicans are trying to take that weapon

What do you mean here sir? Are you referring us wanting to ensure the voters are actually eligible to vote? Because we would like ID shown so we dont end up with a bunch of dead people voting? Or illegals who should have no say as they are breaking the law being here?

I know dead people and law breakers are a major chunk of BHO's voting pool, and that ACORN will supply all the dead people he wishes, as well as a group of people incapable of remembering how many times in a day they have voted, but is asking to ensure those voting are actually eligible to vote such a big thing to ask for? After all, it is just enforcing the ideas of our Democracy.

Or is it the idea of enforcing rules of our Democracy that you are really against? I know BHO doesnt like to much to do with Democracy.

ABO 2012

David Walker, GREAT post. Thank you!

I think it's interesting that conservatives are all for everyone paying their fair share of tax, but they are against everyone paying their fair share of ACA.

And that they are for American participation in the UN LIbya effort, before they were against it, before they were for it... Or is it after they were for it?

John B, you must be smart enough to know tax revenue doesnt work as perfectly as that right?

And you must be smart enough to realize that "tax cuts pay for themselves" is a lie. Instead of coming right out and saying it you work to imply it.

As for social programs, its up 80% over 3 years

Which is exactly what would be expected as we continue struggling to recover from the Bush recession, with incomes continuing to decline and poverty continuing to increase even more rapidly than they did throughout the 2000-2007 period. Once again, this is the normal pattern for a recession. Need for social programs temporarily increases dramatically at the same time that revenues are reduced. As the recession ends revenues begin to increase. As recovery becomes more solid need for social programs declines and revenue increases accelerate.

Houston: If the Republicans had the constitutional power to mess up Obama's foreign policy as easily as they can mess up his domestic policy, they would do it.

Agreed!

Kind of makes one wonder what the President could do on the domestic front if the GOP/TP was not so intent on obstructing and making him fail, and instead focused on compromising and helping.

dsdsherm: I know dead people and law breakers are a major chunk of BHO's voting pool

Another falsehood that has been repeatedly debunked. And I note that you cite no proof.

The facts, prove you wrong. The new crop of restrictions far outweigh any problems that might have existed. Instead, the regulations are a thinly and poorly disguised attempt to restrict liberal voting blocs.

WCA:

You all think you can just say, No More Wild Animals, and the problem goes away.

Sadly, it never works like that.

Too true, but it's not because of regulation. It's because regulations weren't enforced or people ignored them.

The problem never goes away because people will always think they are above the law and behave stupidly.

If your gas is bad and your spark plugs ping, causing trouble with your carburetor, do you fix the problem by DE-regulating the gas?

That kind of thinking is what's sad.

Kirk, it's good to see you finally using some numbers in 1.72. How about a source for those numbers? I'll work with those numbers if and when I see a source.

Dennis, Columbus, Ohio

One Billion Dollars to take out a dictator in Libya. US live lost zero!

One Trillion Dollars to take out a dictator in Iraq. US lives lost 4,000!!!

Dennis, you have a habit of posting totally stupid statements.

Saddam Hussein was removed from power VERY early in the Iraq conflict. The cost of removing him was MINOR in comparison to the cost of the follow-up actions designed to assist Iraq in establishing a STABLE government. Those follow-up actions are where the REAL costs ($ and lives) came from.

NOW... Libya is in the same position that Iraq was in 10 years ago... the TRUE COST of the Libyan conflict cannot be estimated until we see a STABLE government running that country. BTW... It would be GREAT if that stable government was friendly toward us... Which... given the influences in the region is unlikely.

It seems to me that we (the USA) will be in Libya for a long time... fighting unfriendly Muslim forces just like in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Your favorite son has done nothing more than to create yet another hotbed for Muslim unrest and terrorist activity against the USA.

Remember when he was going to get us out of these wars? Remember that? What a liar!

BTW... how many of those 4,000+ US lives came on Obama's watch? Are those lost souls any less valuable than the soldiers we lost under Bush's watch? If not then your boy is just as bad as GWB but I doubt that you would admit that now would you?

Umm, SOB,

You do recall that ANY effort expended on Saddam was literally the Bush Admin barking up the WRONG tree, right?

So who is making the stupid comment? The one who thinks Saddam was OUR enemy,...or the one who quite adeptly pointed out the cost folly?

Whatever, SOB, whatever. I return you to your "Arab Spring is Bad and the status quo was Good" rant.

dsdsherm:

You dissemble much like Kirk, but I'll answer your questions...this time. I'm not going to get into one of those label-tossing, but what-if arguments that go on for hours.

First, there is a very good reason the rich should pay more. Before I get to that point, I also believe income is income. Forget this "carried interest" BS, forget dividend income and the like. Income is income and it should be taxed at the same rate, regardless of source. That said, here goes.

The reason the rich are rich is because they are at the top of the chain to which I referred. They are the prime suppliers of goods and services that are purchased. Whether it is HP or Larry Ellison, they are accumulating money based on their sales. To facilitate those sales, they hire the products of publicly financed schools, they use vast portions of infrastructure, both public and private, and the list goes on an on.

Relative to the use of private infrastructure, they will pay their supplier who must pay income tax. For direct government infrastructure they will write checks to the government. Those payments come from their customers. There is simply no avoiding the fact that both HP and Larry Ellison are simply tax collectors. Obviously they are going to pay more.....BUT that money came from their customers and in large part finances the very goods and services they provide.

There is no "technical" about it. As the folks on the right are so fond of telling us, corporations don't pay taxes. They simply collect them. You cannot have it both ways.

With respect to the voting issue, NO, you most assuredly do not know that dead people and lawbreakers are a major chunk of the President's voting pool. If you are alleging fraud, let your local Registrar know and be sure to take them proof. If you have a beef about purging voting rolls, take it to your Registrar. I note you folks are long on bitching and very short on action.

The ACORN gambit is getting very old. Fraud was alleged and was clearly demonstrated to be without foundation. Were their registration irregularities? Yes. Neither Mickey Mouse nor his friends voted.

Every party includes lawbreakers. Jack Abramoff and Duke Cunningham come to mind immediately. Were they guilty of voter fraud? I don't know, but they certainly found housing in prison.

The nonsense about massive voter fraud has been shown to include a smattering of cases that do not even approach one-tenth of one per-cent, and I challenge you to show otherwise. Please don't insult my intelligence by pretending that the move to suppress voting has any goal but to keep Democrats home. I know the demographics of voters. As I've told Kirk more than once, don't piss on my leg.

David:

There is no "technical" about it. As the folks on the right are so fond of telling us, corporations don't pay taxes. They simply collect them. You cannot have it both ways.

What conservatives fear is that the marketplace, which already has too little demand, won't let them raise prices to cover increases in corporate taxes.

What that means is either lower profits, or more people turned out of work.

We already know one of those alternatives is unacceptable, so we see where the other naturally leads.

And that's what I fear.

But it's harder to lay off workers in the current environment, where many companies are already running stripped down to bare bones.

And so we come around again to what conservatives fear most.

John B, the numbers come from todays Wall Street Journal. As for tax cuts paying for themselves, there clearly is data whether its the Laffer curve or a mix of economists but I recognize that there is a mix of economic opinions both ways. I am also not clearly bound to this dogma but believe their are nuances and a "it depends" on the underlying facts. Something you generally refuse to recognize. For example, its indisputable that Clinton's capital gains tax cut generated additional revenue greater than the cost of the tax cut itself as it definitely helped fuel the internet and stock market boom of the late 90s. I also believe that Reagans tax policy of the early 80s in which he helped fuel investment in the real estate industry with lower tax rates, accelerated depreciation and with the manufacturing industry with the investment tax credit. It did put investment cash to work and he brought rates up as the growth was getting overheated and it was becoming a boon to the wealthy. I also think that the Bush tax cuts initially created additional revenue over the loss of the initial revenue but it was shortlived and caused more harm than good as the additional spending was being used to fund wars and government spending programs that were not investment positive so overall not a good economic move. I also dont think that the Obama tax cuts in payroll taxes are doing anything but putting a small amount of disposable income into consumers who are not spending or investing but paying down debt so not working. I am not a tax cut overall supporter but feel that tax policy should be fair, simple and generally neutral. If we were to cut taxes for example now it should be for investment not to create demand as thats too temporary. It needs to be closer to Reagan and Clinton. But its false for you to state that tax cuts always dont create revenue greater than the loss from the cut itself.

As for the increase in the cost of social programs, I disagree in part. Yes they need to go up in times of recession but not as part of a permanent entitlement which is what they always become. They arent cut back as times get better and they arent designed very well causing the need for welfare reform spearheaded by Gingrich in the 90s and rolled back by Obama. You act like an 80% increase is nothing with blind trust that its appropriate. I am not going to argue that its the Bush recession the problem is there is no Obama recovery and there wont be one with the type of economic policies he endorses. How did you become successful? Did the government hold your hand?

David, because you are unwilling to give an inch isnt dissembling its called debating and providing you with different valid in many cases approaches, opinions and personal experiences. You just dont want to believe them as they dont fit your personal dogma that you are attached to at all costs. You use that tired argument of Larry Ellison or Steve Jobs that he is wealthy using government provided services such as roads, education etc without recognizing that these same people already paid for that use and access. It was the same access that you and everybody else had but with a different outcome. The wealthy do need to pay a fair share back but your failure to recognize that in absolute dollars they already pay the vast majority of revenue today. Should it be more--maybe but in the context of class warfare where you fail to recognize that their success should be praised not punished and in a system that is fair for everyone. Yes everyone pays taxes today and receive services for those taxes whether it be gas tax, excise, payroll, property for education, sales tax etc. But only the state income and federal income taxes pay for the overall government services that are not tied to usage. Where there are heavy progressive taxes like California, NY and New Jersey does it seem like that approach is working? When you create a class system do you think you get a better government? As for voter fraud, whether there is fraud or not, why are the democrats scared of voter IDs then? Its such a simple elegant solution for something that solves your concern in that if there is no fraud, then you shouldnt be concerned and its a simple solution to get an ID to vote. How many people really dont have one or cant get one? How are these same people going to get health insurance under HCR if they dont have one? It certainly shouldnt be a big deal for you guys.

and don't forget, AM, that the ever lovin' quest to maintain the margins will result in a laid off worker and (according to Cain), it will be that person's 'fault'.

Excellent, Mr. Walker, as always!

@David Walker,

I agree that income is income and should be taxed as such, and I am not the most educated on the subject so cannot argue with you accordingly, but as I understand it, some of these "Incomes" you refer to are already taxed at the corporate level prior to distribution. So in effect they are already double taxed and as an aggregate probably at a higher rate than what would be if it were only treated as income. If you wish to tax it as income , then I am fine with that as long as it is also not taxed as profit on the corporate tax side.

The people on the top of the chain are there because of what? Because they have some special genetic makeup that made them so special? Or is it because they put forth the effort and risk to become a success? Is not eveyone offered the same chances in this country? I do not see why they should pay a higher rate. they already pay higher taxes as even if they pay the same rate on a larger income, it amounts to more taxes. So what justifies taking more from them than everyone else on a percentage basis?

If it is just because they have more and they can afford it, then say so and we will agree to disagree. After all, they already pay more for the schools and such based on a percentage of a larger income.

Why do you feel the requirement for ID verification is a bad thing when voting. It is a system that can be abused (by both sides I will agree). But to reuire that you have proof of eligibility only seems to make sense to ensure all are complying with the rules. Why is this such a sticking point on the Dem side? Is it because you have a substantial pool that have no proof? Why would they have no proof or a government issued ID? It seems that voting would not be the only reason to have one, and maybe this would be a good thing for them as it would force them to get something that may be beneficial. I thought (given Obamacare and all) that forcing one to get something for their own good would be embraced by your side.

You have to pardon me as I am not nearly as educated as Kirk, and fairly new to political issues, but do find passion inthe subject. I appreciate being compared to him as I admire most all of his posts. Maybe he can answer your issues better than me, and I am willing to listen to your response, and who knows, maybe you can make me a believer.

But at this point I still do not undertand your argument. And I have no interest in your leg whatsoever.

ABO 2012

woooohooooo the "ignore" switch is working again. My lovely RWNJFZ is operational once again. Whoohoooooo.

Thanks whoever, order and sanity has been restored.

Obama/Biden 2012

dsdsherm:

Last post, buckaroo. First, and just for you Kirk. Not giving an inch is not called debating. It is called intransigence. A debate is designed for the purpose of arriving at the truth. That you admit to being unwilling to give an inch is more than enough reason to put you on ignore. Even you should be able to understand that.

Now dsdsherm:

Let's get to this income thing. The notion of the velocity of money is based on the fact that money changes hands numerous times. That you have received income does not mean the end of all transactions. Your money will be spent by you, spent by someone else, ad infinitum. Thus, it will be taxed again and again and again. Indeed, when you deposit your money, based on the notion of fractional reserves, the bank will create even more money. It is however, fiat money. Nonetheless it enters the economy and is itself spent again and again and again. I hope you can see this is hardly a simple black and white issue.

Yes indeed, corporate dividends are taxed after a fashion. The recipient of those dividends will pay a special tax on those dividends - generally around 15%. That money may be re-invested or spent in the economy and once again it will be taxed depending on how it is received. You see, it just keeps going around. Same money. New taxes.

As far as your education, the fact that you are here gives you - as it does all of us - the opportunity to expand your learning. Education is not limited to a classroom unless you decide that is to be the case. I can assure you, your economic knowledge is greater than you imagine. Right now, you merely want for the language and terms of that woeful field. Economics isn't called "The Dismal Science" for nothing.

As a matter of fact, NO, everyone does not have the same chance at succeeding in this country. It may be that all men are created equal, but after conception - creation - all bets are off. Surely you aren't going to try to tell me that you have the same opportunity to succeed as a Rockefeller, are you? There's the pristine world of theory, and there's the real world.

Can you afford to lobby for special tax treatment? Of course not. In fact, none other than Joe Scarborough has pointed out how lobbyists would come to his office, tout the wonders of the free market, and then proceed to make a case why they needed special consideration that others shouldn't have.

It is truly naive to imagine that those who profit from the system haven't received greater measure of return on that system than others. We can look at Bill Gates and say this guy truly pulled himself up by his bootstraps. Really? Check out ROM BIOS and see how he got that. Little bit of chicanery there. The Internet upon which his success is built? Check out ARPAnet. The government is there everywhere you turn. Computer software? Who needs it without a computer. The computer? Oh yeah. It was government that took the leap on that crazy idea. Check out Autocoder.

On the schools issue. I have no children of my own. Why should I pay for schools? Because someone did it for me, that's why. That's how it is in a mixed economy that plans on continuing into the future. I'm not going to lecture you on socialism, but I'll damned sure guarantee you wouldn't be reading this without it.

ID for voting? In and of itself, it's not all that bad an idea. However, as I pointed out, instances of voter fraud are few and far between. You can't just throw out red herrings and straw men and then walk away. The voter ID tempest is BS. The required ID's have been deliberately chosen to screen out particular demographics, typically those that are associated with voters who pull the "D" lever. Do you have a passport? When you are 75 and have no need to drive, do you suppose you'll carry a valid DL? Why do you need an ID? Many people are paid via direct deposit. Many pay cash. Many use a debit card. There's no need for ID.

If these totalitarian bastards want people to vote "R", then put out a superior position. They haven't. They can't.

That's my take. Why is that a sticking point of the Dem side? I don't know. You'll have to ask a Democrat. By the way, what's my side?

The ABO nonsense should embarrass you. I take it, you'd vote for me. Charles Manson? Anthony Weiner? Really now, don't you see how silly that makes you look?

Kirk and dsdsherm -- Please go find the website for actively petitioning the government and do something productive to promote your agenda. It's a new option you both should take advantage of.

dsdsherm -- I responded to your posts yesterday go read it might help you.

David, again we could go back tons of posts between you and I and I have agreed with you many times before but you havent once given an inch even when proven wrong. You just ignore that point and move on to one you feel more comfortable with. Putting me on ignore is your right but it also calls into question your thin skin and ability to critically think. But to be honest, I think the Obama administration has put the rest of the country on ignore as they continue to advocate unpopular position after position which is why you are comfortable with ignore yourself.

Your velocity of money discussion makes no sense and has no real bearing on an individual who is making real life decisions daily that are economic. Banks dont make money on our deposits as thats a liability they have back to you. They used to make money on the spread between rates they loan to individuals and businesses and what they pay back but now they generate revenue so many different ways that this spread is just a small part. In fact, when you deposit money, they generally give it back to the fed and borrow it back based on the fed funds rate.

Your long discertation did nothing to respond to either his or my views on the different philosophy on creating each of our own version of success. There is no doubt that equal opportunity isnt perfect in this country (but its the best system anywhere else in the world and maybe ever) and that the government plays a role in attempting to create equal opportunity--but your utopian dream of having equal opportunity will never come. There will always be the child of a rockefeller or the child born to a disadvantaged environment so its the government's job to address the mean not the exception. So we need basic rules and laws that address discrimination, education but here is where you and I differ. The basis for achieving that success has been for the history of this country self reliance, personal responsibility and accountability. There were never governmental rewards and incentives for economically disadvantaged behavior. Its only been in the last 50 years that this has started. You feel that government needs to go even farther than it has and force equality regardless of the impacts on the whole to address inequities you see on the margin. Its the punish the whole for the sins of one. In your world every wealthy person got their through an advantage, every poor person is a saint and needs their hand held. Yes, there are income inequities and power inequities in our system, their are abuses, there is crony capitalism at times but instead of a nuanced approach, its take the money and power from the successful because that will balance the scale. You ignore the education gap and its causes. You ignore that so much a person's station in life is based on the personal choices good or bad one makes. If someone told you that 100% of the people who took mortgages that they couldnt pay for were completely aware of it when they did, you would still point to that one bad bank that acted predatory and excuse the borrower. Somehow you forgot how you got to where you did and the choices you made to get there but want to say the world has changed and I know better now so let me take my neighbors money to make it all better for you.

Whats interesting about that ABO is that I didnt know what it stood for until I met a local democratic chicago politician who is on the city council about a month ago maybe longer and he was wearing that hat at a golf course. He told me what it stood for and that he wears it in private because we need someone in the white house who actually understands how business works. Sort of telling isnt it.

Dont carry it all--not sure what you mean by that? I dont have an agenda just bored at work. Can you explain that? Are you telling me you want me to leave? Thats not nice when I was nice to you. Plus I live in Illinois so I am stuck with even a more worse version of Obamanomics.

Not at all Kirk, just think you have something you'd like changed and that energy is channeled to people who disagree. I think it's a good thing to be proactive not reactive. I posted links long ago. Carry on. You are not stuck, lol.

Thanks appreciate the advice. I agree being proactive rather than reactive is the best. I am actually involved in local village politics so maybe that is one outlet for me ha.

Good for you Kirk! : )

Independent Redneck Va.

Is this the America that you envisioned passing on to your children?

It sure ain’t mine.

It does point out American “exceptionalism” though.

Some of our Republican/T.P. brethren are exceptionally short sighted and callous.

Independent Redneck Va., Great post to start the day off with. The GOP t-baggers really need to take a look at what is going in this country.

The policies they espouse will take 99% of Americans into more than hunger. It is now destroying this country right before our eyes.

Pass the Jobs bill

Obama/Biden 2012.

"Meanwhile, Gallup found that just 6 percent of Chinese said there were times in the past 12 months when they lacked enough money for food for themselves or their family, compared to 19 percent of Americans"

IR- I believe that's what Hannity calls "American Exceptionalism".

Post left off 'also'....

Sad information, IR. Since their elevation to majority in the House and various state governments the GOPTP has radically ramped up their attack on the middle class. The impoverishment of the American middle class has been stark and dramatic.

Wonderful, IR. What bothers me the most about it is the Republican candidates insistence that if you are hungry, losing your house, without insurance that it is a moral flaw on your part. Reminds me of Victorian England.

Cain talked about how Jesus of Nazareth was a conservative, which would come as a surprise both to Him and anyone familiar with the story. Jesus fed people without asking why they were without food. Cain's Jesus would have told the multitudes "I have Mine, and if you don't, don't come crying to Me," the very antithesis of the ministry that Jesus preached. The gospel talks about one group of people having trouble getting into heaven, and it wasn't the poor.

There is no more"Pass the Jobs Bill." Only pieces of it will pass. What a bunch of back pedaling lies from the Liar in Chief.

Great point, NDD. The Hermanator would have trouble recognizing this as satire -- http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/03/09/17_franken.html

There is no more"Pass the Jobs Bill." Only pieces of it will pass.

Republicans killed the American Jobs Act. Now it's time to get it passed piece by piece, and EVERY PIECE has the support of a majority of Americans.

Keep spinning the work of Congressional Republicans, against both the wishes and interests of the voter, as somehow a positive. It isn't.

Cain would've been one of the people Jesus drove out of the temple!

Wonderful, John B!

Post 1.29

Don't you love how Raylotzanumbers is ALWAYS and consistently wrong? You can count on it just like the sun coming up in the morning.

@newday -- You have who is wrong reversed. The bill was dead on arrival and everyone knew it. There were enough Democrats waiting in the wings to vote NO on the bill if it looked like some Republicans would vote in favor for passage. Quit your damn crying about GOP obstruction and learn how to develop and manage a coalition of support. If Obama can't do that, then he doesn't deserve to be re-elected.

Wait, what? And there he goes again. Did I mention ANY of this this morning.

Good old Ray. You can't make this stuff up. Wrong all day long. Must be painful.

Proof required, Ray. GOP obstruction killed the American Jobs Act just as it killed 400 bills that passed the House in the last Congress...a record.

Meanwhile, I see Conservatives don't like this discussion of decreasing food security under their war against the middle class. They're working hard to turn the conversation elsewhere.

I guess the Republicans would say that if you don't have enough to eat it is your fault. Same as if you don't have a job, it is your fault. That's just how they think.

Ray, "only pieces of the bill will pass"

The part time Congress (3days, three weeks a month) needs things in bit size pieces.

Let see if they can pass a "small" bill for jobs for teachers, first responders etc. It will be paid for by a tax of .05% on the second million in income for some part of the 1%

Yes We Can!

Good Ole Crazy Joe thinks if you are against the president's jobs act you should either have a gun put to your head or have to submit to a 200lb man.

That's good stuff. Did Gabby Giffords write that speech for him?

Ray -- The Republican jobs bill will go nowhere. So what are your solutions...cut regulations? Well many fact check organizations have dispelled that myth as it applies to jobs. Business overall states lack of demand holding them back from hiring. That is their foremost concern, demand. How can we create demand then? Any ideas there Ray?

What we need is massive spending on infrastructure. Not only will it spur employment it will also be investing in the very backbone of our Country. Something that is tangible and beneficial to all both short term and long term. Business, the Chamber of Commerce and many Republicans support that plan. In fact you seem to be a person that follows Trump, he also supports this kind of spending.

@Northstar -- Lest you forget for the first two years the Congress was ran by Democrats that set the schedule. It is less than 11 months that the Republicans on have control of one house of Congress. They will pass the piece you describe without new taxes though.

@DCIA -- Too many people on here just look at one little aspect of something. Cutting regulations has to be a part of the overall package of making the U.S. globally competitive. Includes tax reform and lowering of the corporate tax rates; dropping Obamacare; Dodd Frank etc. and cutting spending. If you want infrastructure jobs then that is fine just find the money somewhere in the budget. Time to balance it.

Ray -- Nice to hear you voice when you leave hyperbole/rhetoric out of conversation.

You said: Includes tax reform

Something almost everyone can agree on. Add infrastructure spending and the two sides could come up with a pretty good plan for this Country.

Thank You, Mr. President for the wonderful job you have done. Yes we can, and yes we will beat back this dysfunctional radical right that is out to take down the middle class.

2012 :-)

Ray, Glad we agree on one piece of the Jobs bill.

I also agree on need for infrastructure jobs.

Right now in MN one in 17 bridges are rated deficient.On a national level it its one in 9 bridges are deficient. This was front page news yesterday in the Pioneer Press.

That is one of the most irrelevant surveys I have seen -a Gallup phone survey asking questions? Lets look at poverty in the US and see how many of those would move to China to obtain a better life. First the statistics that base poverty on those making less than 22k in income totally ignore the welfare and other forms of government assistance that would make up the total income level of such person. In america, the average poor person has a car, air conditioning, two color televisions one of which is flat screen, cable or satellite provider, DVD player, Xbox or Wii, a residence larger than the middle class residence in Europe let alone China, were not hungry and in fact in average 30 pounds overweight and could obtain medical care as necessary. We have spent $16 trillion on the War on Poverty and the statistics dont seem to have moved but the quality of being poor has dramatically improved so lets not be hyperbolic in terms of trying to compare being poor in the US to china because we all know the next link is that the GOP wants to tax these poor people and give that money to the 1% and make them eat dog food right?

John B, Des Moines, IA.

Republicans killed the American Jobs Act. Now it's time to get it passed piece by piece, and EVERY PIECE has the support of a majority of Americans.

I hope Obama keeps sending pieces of the bill to Congress for the Republicans to obstruct right up until the 2012 election. That would serve as a constant reminder to voters who caused the current economic mess in the first place and who's still trying to block an economic recovery for their own political gain.

Independent Redneck Va.

More Americans than Chinese can’t put food on the table

That's how the Republicans plan to create US jobs. Once Americans are willing to live and work in even more miserable conditions than the Chinese workers endure, the US will be competitive with China and everyone here will have jobs! Lousy jobs with low pay and dangerous working conditions, but that's price we must pay for free enterprise. By "we" of course I mean the 99%, not the 1% to whom we must be grateful for blessing the rest of us with their magnificence.

[Good Ole Crazy Joe thinks if you are against the president's jobs act you should either have a gun put to your head or have to submit to a 200lb man.]

Sorry, Raab...liar liar pants on fire...

The latest Conservative FYIGM ploy on poverty is to claim the poor in America deserve no sympathy because even those in poverty have more than they once did. Ignored in that rhetorical device is the fact that not so long in the past even the fabulously wealthy didn't have private jets, electric lights, or even central heating...that didn't make them poor.

A corollary to that is a mode of thought that the poor deserve nothing because they aren't living in mud huts like the poor of Somalia. I guess that's understandable among those who also accept the premise that Americans are paid too much because we make more than workers in India, Malaysia, or China.

IR Va.

Meanwhile, Gallup found that just 6 percent of Chinese said there were times in the past 12 months when they lacked enough money for food for themselves or their family, compared to 19 percent of Americans

I feel relatively certain the average poor person in the US is much better off than the average poor person in China. And I am sure the criteria is different.

In China, if a family has a bag of rice, according to them they have enough food. In the US if we dont have Pop-Tarts, ready made microwaveable meals, chips and dip, and soda, then we dont have enough food. And heck, we only have $20 so not enough to buy this stuff. We still have plenty for multiple bags of rice, but we would say we didnt have enough for food. Not to mention, I bet these same people who didnt have enough for food according to them had their cell phone bill paid.

Leaving the question up to the individual for criteria is a suspect way to do an irrelevant survey. We have economic and cultural differences between the US and China. If a Chineese person says he is hungry and does not have money for food, I would believe him before I would believe someone on Welfare here in the US. And if the person here in the US said so I would suspect you could easily identify multiple items they could eliminate from their budget in order to have more money for food, but that they would never dream of changing any of them.

I dont want to sound down on poor people, but I see people in the grocery store all the time talking on thier cell phone while paying with food stamps. It occurs to me the food stamp office was NOT the last resort as it was designed to be.

And as more and more of the poor are young single parent homes, these young parents have no concept of money and what is and is not important to survival. Since when did a cell phone expense become a necessity? In my day, a landline phone was not even a necessity if you were poor. It was a luxury you added when you could afford it.

Clara KCMO

collapse this, suckers!

LOL! What happened to freedom of speech there Clara?

Only if its a liberal statement i guess, huh?

(You are a despicable hypocrite!)

Whatever are you wailing about now, SOB?

Perhaps you shouldn't tread when you know nothing about what is being said. My comment is not directed at anyone or thing on this thread. But now I am curious, to whom do you accuse me of referring to?

and really, DESPICABLE?

all righty then.

John, I truly dont understand your response. Explaining that poverty in american cant be compared to China which is what IR tried to do isnt at all connected to sympathy. Again you want to police political correctness by not stating reality. That doesnt equate to lack of compassion, sympathy or a position on how to raise the standard of living on the poor. The difference lies in the difference of opinions on how you rise from poverty. Many of us view that self reliance, accounatability for personal choices (no rewarding economically disadvantaged behavior) and personal responsibility is the method and you view it as providing government subsidies.

Your chip on the shoulder for the successful though comes out in your post though when you couldnt help yourself but to slam the successful for their planes etc when if they made the money they deserve to spend it anyway they want. Are you saying that Derek Jeter shouldnt fly first class if he wants? Did he somehow not earn the right and should be punished for being talented?

Your last paragraph is somewhat despicable as alluding to us thinking that we view the poor as needing to be like the poor in these countries. I hope you dont also have the view of many progressives that Globalization is bad because it raises the standard of living in foreign countries and somehow the african kid doesnt deserve to have the same opportunities that an american kid should have but different debate. Again, its not about comparisons, its about how your rise out of poverty. After $16 trillion dollars spent on a variety of failed progressive programs, when is the light bulb going to come on and say wow I guess just pooring money at the problem doesnt work. Maybe we need to give them the tools to use self reliance and we need to stop rewarding behavior that keeps people poor.

Kirk and dssherm

An individual has not started living until he can rise above the narrow confines of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of all humanity.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

IR, I couldnt agree more and when I die, please feel free to judge me based on that measure but please dont impose your view of what a centralized government mandate of what those individual concerns and how to address them. Isnt this the same argument you use against the pro life crowd when they want to impose their views on what a life is to a woman's body or their views of morality. You are just doing the same with your views on how I should spend the money I earn. Keep your fingers out of my pocket and I will keep my morality from you.

Well said, IR. Comments like this;

Your chip on the shoulder for the successful

just illustrate how deeply they're stuck in their own narrow world view. I've stated my position umpteen times, yet they continue to view my position in the ideological stereotypes of Conservative talk radio. Now, I don't know dssherm all that well, but to state what Kirk has been told so many times by now he should know it by heart.

As a member of management for close to 20 years I am not a Communist or Socialist. I do not expect the government or anyone else to establish equal outcomes. I make more than my employees and I EXPECT to make more than my employees. I make less than ownership and I EXPECT to make less than ownership.

At the same time I recognize that unfettered, unregulated Capitalism as the current crop of radical Conservatives advocates is a corruption of the American way. The genius of the United States is pairing the creative and motivating features of Capitalism with reasonable regulation. That reasonable regulation is ESSENTIAL in that pure Capitalism INEVITABLY leads to an extreme level of inequality. Not only is this a known fact both historically and from present day societies in other parts of the world, it just follows from the way the system is made up. Those who already have all the advantages endowed by wealth will work the legal system to increase their advantage even further and are doing so as we speak.

I don't expect equal OUTCOMES, I expect equal OPPORTUNITY. Conservatives have worked tirelessly to destroy that equal opportunity.

Kirk

Judging Others

Lk. 6.3738, 4142

1

Judge not, that ye be not judged.

2

For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. Mk. 4.24

3

And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

4

Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?

5

Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

6

¶ Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.

IR-? whats the relevance to our discussion?

John B, see here is where we are exactly alike but your view of success and how to get there is just different. Maybe respectfully different. We both want equal opportunity and so does the GOP and the wealthy. They just think the method of achieving that equal access isnt holding thier hand--its called self reliance and personal responsibility. If you think us fiscal conservatives have evil or bad intent--your mistaken--its a matter of how you achieve that equal opportunity.

And nothing I communicated says anything about not believing in self reliance OR personal responsibility. My stand isn't about against those things. It's against;

Corporate welfare

Socializing risk while privatizing profit

Allowing bankers to act more like loansharks

Giving the ultra wealthy a lower marginal tax rate than the average American

Neutering the regulations that keep our food edible, our drugs safe, our air breathable, our water drinkable...

Eliminating workplace regulation that keeps the workplace safe

Handing natural resources owned by the American people over to private developers at bargain basement rates

Destroying public education

Privatizing essential services, a route proven to increase costs to the public

Destroying the social safety net

Attacking worker rights

Eliminating reproductive rights

Legislating morality

Which pretty much sums up the Conservative agenda.

John B, no again I would tell you that the fiscal conservative like me is absolutely on the same page but feels a different path either addresses or is a better attack on those problems. Again, you feel that the government is the correct path and in some of your examples I agree that government might or would be the best solution and others its not.

1) Corporate welfare--both parties push this whether it be for farming subsidies, green energy, oil and gas--so I agree that corporate welfare needs to be eliminated and the government out of picking winners and losers in the business but you cant blame this on the GOP

2) socializing risk and privatizing profit--well again this is a bipartisan issue. Bailouts came under Obama correct? Didnt he bail out GM and Chrysler as a huge political favor to the auto unions as the expense of the banks? At the same time he bailed out the banks at the expense of the taxpayers? He also is bailing out borrowers with government loan modifications at the expense of those borrowers who followed the rules. He continues to socialize risk and privatize profit via fannie and freddie by excluding them from the Dodd Frank regs. This is a problem on both sides of the aisle

3) Sorry but its not the bankers that lend as I deal with them on a daily basis, its the risk associated with the investment banking, trading and investment side that creates the problems. Glass-Steagal should never have been eliminated. Commercial banks continue to follow the more strict underwriting criteria basically pushed and set by the government

4) Just hyperbolic and you know it. There may be philosophical differences on tax policy but if you want to treat social security as an untouchable retirement plan, then you cant include the employees contribution into that retirement plan as a tax. The remaining tax burden on a rate basis isnt even close to being less than the average american and you know it. Those statistics have been out and all over the place. You can argue that there are abuses, loopholes and even that the progressivity could be greater, but lets not act like average american pays less tax or even the same marginal rate.

5) Lets stay within reality. Again hyperbolic and provide me with one source or bill proposed by a republican that endangers our safety. If you are going to tell me that because the GOP opposes stuff like the soda tax, or prohibiting McDonalds from selling fries because they are fattening or opposing Durbin's proposal to ban chewing tobacco for MLB players then you really dont believe in self reliance and personal accountability and do want the nanny state

6) Again provide me with some evidence

7) Again provide me with some evidence. Allowing natural resource exploration for revenue isnt that same as private developers

8) This is the province of the democrats so not sure why you put this on the GOP platform. They have been trying to reform education for at least 25 years with constant push back and roadblocks from the democrats the whole way. Sorry but you are on the wrong side of this one

9) This is nuanced because Chicago is completely democratic and they have privatized a ton of various services so this is a bipartisan issue

10) Given that they havent and so far never have but want to make sure the funds are spent efficiently productively and with a end game that doesnt create the current entitlement expectation that generational welfare does, not sure how you can pin this on the GOP. Provide me with some historical evidence that the GOP has ever been successful at destroying the social safety net. Thats the same argument that was used with welfare reform and guess what the GOP proposals were a huge success.

11) No they are advocating freedom of choice. I am all for private unions as thats a contract between private business and union labor. But there is no reason for government unions and the benefits and crony capitalism that has popped up with democrats

12) huh? Hyperbolic. Is this your pro life vs pro choice issue? I am pro choice but completely understand that this a very nuanced issue.

13) the GOP definitely goes too far on gay marriage and some aspects of sex education. But give me a break. Legislating morality is what we expect of our politicians. We want them to protect us from pedophiles, killers, people who steal etc. You want politicians out of the bedroom and I want them out of pocket. Its the same issue just a matter of degree

So why are we having such a problem with obesity?

Ummm... maybe because healthy food costs more then the processed stuff which isloaded with starch, sodium, sugar, and the rest of garbage that contributes to obesity...

Feisty: why do people not get this? If you can't afford the fresh fruits and veggies. If you can't afford lean meats....obesity might become a problem!

Feisty: why do people not get this?

Like everything else in the RWNJ's rigid world it's only 'black & white', they have NO idea about 'grey' areas...

Good point Feisty, and testimony to one of the big wastes in our budget...our "cheap food" policy. In reality it isn't a "cheap food" policy, it's a policy which guarantees cheap inputs to the giant agribusiness corporations while doing little to help family farms survive. The majority of farm subsidies go to giant farms, now frequently over 10,000 acres, worked almost entirely with hired hands, and sometimes owned by people who can't be directly involved because they live in other states.

As a result the fattiest, highest calorie, least nutritional foods are the most affordable for the poor. Corporate welfare at the expense of the health of the poor.

It was only yesterday Congress voted down a bill that would of limited the portions of french fries served in our school lunch's.

Loading the kids up on carb's & starch = recipe for obesity!

Especially since the school lunch is the major meal of the day for the majority of them!

Of course that was much more pressing then say, a JOBS bill!

The potato industry sure knows how to throw it's weight around!

Why is it the Federal Government's job to decide on School Lunch portion sizes? I guess you don't have Mayor Bloomberg to decide for you.

As a result the fattiest, highest calorie, least nutritional foods are the most affordable for the poor. Corporate welfare at the expense of the health of the poor.

And if this is such an important issue to the left why did you not address it in 2006? You didn't do anything else until 2008. And from 2008 through 2010 you had all that time to end corporate welfare and help the poorest in society.

Can I ask, is this a plank in the Democratic manifesto for 2012?

Limiting Portions?

You've got to be kidding. Were they going to lower the cost since they weren't going to serve as much?

Of course not.

Personal Reponsibility is tough. Especially for Libs.

This is where Cain has it right:

Let the obese eat 'used food'. It is less appetizing, so they will eat less of it. That, and save some coin in the bargain.

What's not to like?

So the original article was wrong? It's that Americans can't put the "right" food on the table?

Well dbo, that's the point of Supply Side economics, probably better described by its original name...Horse and Sparrow. Since the horse eats the grain the sparrow eats...less appetizing food.

Drive-by---I'm still very troubled by the "used food" image. Could Cain be talking about food banks for the unemployed? No, wait---that would be their fault that they are unemployed.

Alan -- When hasn't government dictated what goes into school lunches? Now some wise people decided to inject common sense nutrition and you are upset?

Fiesty and John -- An additional point on fresh fruits and vegetables is sadly, most have no access to fresh produce. The city farm is taking hold, thank goodness.

Alan, I am sure the new Jobs Bill can add a few more government jobs to dictate what we eat and dont eat. I love Dick Durbin wanting to eliminate MLB players from chewing tobacco. I am all for elimination of chewing tobacco but not government mandated. There really is a huge difference in philosophy here. Progressives think they know whats better for everyone else and want to choose for them and have it done by a centralized government and the majority view its all about self reliance and personal accountability and responsibility. I dont understand the people like John B and Anna Molly who try and give their personal story and say I have done it on my own but dont use me as a role model of how to gain success because I was lucky. It couldnt have been hard work, talent, ambition it was just luck so we need to have the government provide for me and hold my hand through the process. Its like the young woman from the OWS crowd that CNN interviewed this morning and tried to show that she wasnt one of the purple haired anarchists. She said after $50,000 of student loans she came to NY got a job but lost it and is now $30,000 more in debt and she thinks that the rich should give back so she can stay in NY to keep looking and that the government should forgive her student loans. Of course, the interviewer didnt ask her if she chose to get an education with those loans. He didnt ask if she was willing to move to anywhere else to get that job because she said she loved NY and wanted to stay. This sense of me me me and entitlement is why this protest is so much different than the Tea Party which had similar sentiments but it was about changing government for the better for our kids and grandkids not about what government can do for them individually.

Alan -- When hasn't government dictated what goes into school lunches? Now some wise people decided to inject common sense nutrition and you are upset?

I said "Federal Government". This is the same as when you don't differentiate between immigration and illegal immigration. For example exactly what does the Federal Department of Education add to the success of a student?

I'm sure you were backing Reagan when he used the Federal Government to declare ketchup a vegetable.

I've said it before: If people could behave like ladies and gentlemen, and concerned citizens, and behave themselves, we would not need regulations.

But people cannot behave. They cannot work for the greater good or look out for their neighbor or make safe or moral decisions. They care only about their personal situation and about money.

So we need regulations.

The Chinese are putting food on the table, instead of on their families!!

Just read IR's 9:17 post, then this one above from Mr Bill.

Good God, y'all. "ME First!!", indeed.

I have to laugh at this characterization of the wealthiest 1% as "winners." Well, yeah they're winners, most of them in the lottery of who their parents were. And the Republican Party gives such people a huge boost by reducing the tax on their inheritance. In Maine, one of the first things our new Teapublican governor did was to raise the level at which inheritance is taxed from one million to two million. Many of us are decendents of Europeans who fled the rigid class system there only for us to see the rise of a modern day American aristocrisy of privilege and power.

Amy---you are so right that so many of the 1% are lottery winners----how would they be faring had they been born in any other country in the world? How many of the blessings in their life stem from that and from the characteristics they inherited from their parents? They had nothing to do with any of that. I'm not saying most of them haven't worked hard for their success but they don't seem to credit those other factors.

"ME First!!", indeed

You are so wise DBO-wan, we can always count on you to make a substantive contribution to the debate.

yeah they're winners, most of them in the lottery of who their parents were

And your evidence for that sweeping assertion is where?

And the Republican Party gives such people a huge boost by reducing the tax on their inheritance

So, you believe the wealth of the dead should be shared by all the living? And what exactly is your basis for that argument?

Bill FairFax

Sure, your dead people can hand down the first million untaxed, but above that, it's income. Tax it like income.

@Bill of F V,

"So, you believe the wealth of the dead should be shared by all the living?"

Your phrase the "wealth of the dead" jump off the page.

You know, maybe the "wealth of the dead" should be buried with the body. They did that a lot in ancient civilizations. Or they could give it away before they walk through the "narrow gate"... just a thought.

The majority of 1% are either dual-married professionals (Doctor/Lawyer comboes) and entrepeneurs. Of SMALL businesses.

A successful small business is enough to make the 345K/year (through pass-through taxation like an LLC provides).

If you guys honestly think 345K/year is out of your range, then I do feel sorry for you.

Americans would prefer to live the undisciplined lifestyle of movies and drive-thru than the lifestyle necessary to make either of those above scenarios happen. It involves Ramen every night for years, wondering if you'll have a house next month, etc.

Getting there is sacrifice, plain and simple.

Trust fund babies are such a tiny minority, it's not really worth looking at them. The majority of our 1% gave up a LOT to get where they're at.

your dead people can hand down the first million untaxed, but above that, it's income. Tax it like income.

Above that it's income? Says who, you?? Taxing inherited wealth is a ploy devised by government to provide fuel to its insatiable need to spend money -- other people's money, I might add. That wealth is "income" only to those who salivate at the prospect of getting their grubby little hands on it.

Or they could give it away before they walk through the "narrow gate"... just a thought.

And a wise thought, in my view. Because embedded in that thought is the conceot of choice. Before meeting their just rewards, every free American should have the option of choosing what to do with the wealth they have earned -- and not be forced to redistribute it to the masses in the form of taxation.

Dear Wall Street:

It's wrong to create a mortgage-backed security filled with loans you know are going to fail so that you can sell it to a client who isn't aware that you sabotaged it by intentionally picking the misleadingly rated loans most likely to be defaulted upon.

We are the 99%

Bill I am all for taxing estates above a certain amount. but I think everyone needs to choose what to do with the amount after taxes.

Two of my friends both couples have told their children they paid for their education and that's it. They are giving their money away to various charities, and non profits that work for justice.

Bill Fairfax:

Alternative idea. You can receive your entire inheritance tax free if the person who accumulated it never lived among people, never saw a doctor, never drove on a paved road, picked up a sandwhich at the deli, used a government-insured bank, turned on am electric light, or was taught by a teacher.

Alternative idea. You can receive your entire inheritance tax free if the person who accumulated it never lived among people, never saw a doctor, never drove on a paved road, picked up a sandwhich at the deli, used a government-insured bank, turned on am electric light, or was taught by a teacher.

Good grief, this bogus talking point again? The wealth remaining after the dearly have departed has already been taxed to pay for roads and teachers. What is it about these simple FACTS you just don't get: the top 1% pay 40% of all federal income taxes, the top 10% pay 70% of all federal income taxes. The suggestion that these folks have not contributed to the society that enabled their success is complete and total BS, and it astonishes me that folks of your ilk just can't grasp that.

BTW, what does 'living among people' or picking up 'a sandwich from the deli' have to do with the issue of taxing inherited wealth?

Soundbite monopoly--did wall street know it was going to fail packaging these mortgages because they knew that Fannie and Freddie were making loans to people who couldnt afford the mortgage who eventually would want to be bailed out and not have to pay that money back? How did they know when they packaged these together that they were going fail? You do know they failed because each of these funds was leveraged themselves so when people defaulted on their mortgages it became a domino across these funds that had very little equity in them. It wasnt the setting up of the funds in the first place that was an issue, it was the underwriting criteria in the first place that allowed the mortgage and the fact that Clinton repealed Glass Stegall allowing banks to take on investment risk like this. Everyone has a part of the blame for the bursting of housing bubble including politicians, bankers, borrowers, rating agencies and wall street but not at the expense of the others.

I tend to lean liberal in many views, and find much of the Republican discussion to be way out there. However, I have to give some props to Bill in some respects.

I think he is right that it is not "fair" that the top has to contribute so much to the income tax revenue of this country. I believe in a graduated tax system but not in freedom from taxes since we all benefit from the institutions of this country.

So, I'll offer that the tax code should be altered to require everyone earning about the poverty line pay some portion in federal income taxes. How much they should pay can be debated, but then everyone will appreciate the overall opportunities available to them.

This country needs more revenue. Some will come back when the economy recovers, but more will have to come from income taxes (corporate and personal). Again, how much can be debated. I think the president made a mistake in not allowing all of the "Bush" tax cuts to expire.

Taxes hurt, and the economy is bad. Paying more will make it more difficult for the lower income streams. But just as wealth concentration is very bad for society as a whole, tax revenue concentration is also bad.

While we are at it, all adults over the age of 18 should be required to either sign up to for military service, or some form of service. By having everyone at risk for military action, or even just seeing how the rest of the world lives, can only increase our awareness of how ggod we have it here and limit the desire to "force" others to our point of view. When the choices we make have widespread consequences, you be sure the choices will be well debated.

Finally, as much as I wish i didn't have to pay taxes, they are necessary, There is not now, nor has there ever been, any organized and stable society that did not require some amount of revenue to support that stability. And there will not be any in the future. We will have to live with taxes.

What puzzles me is why some people think that slightly higher or lower tax rates impact on hring and investment decisions. I do agree that they could affect decisions that are on the margin, but they do not impact the basic need or desire to invest or hire. What is most important is whether the hiring or investment will make money. If there is no market for the labor or investment produced goods or services, no tax rate will make that hiring or investment decision happen.

i wish the current jobs bill excluded all tax cut considerations and focused totally on infrastructure or public safety jobs. Public safety to insure we are safe and infrastructure to get something tangible and durable for the investment. Tax cuts have a way of rewarding those who are working or making money, not those without jobs or profitabiity.

Random thoughts surely to be criticized by all. Have a ball.

@Amy,

Sure, your dead people can hand down the first million untaxed, but above that, it's income. Tax it like income.

Did not the person who made this money pay taxes on it when it was earned and while they were alive? What is special about this money that it gets the privilege of being treated as income twice and taxed twice as well?

And what makes you believe this is money the government should have any say in? As I see it , the government has the right to tax income earned by labor and services. This money was already subject to this tax when it was earned.

It seems the Libs keep forgetting the money piles are not the governments money, but rather the fruits of a persons labor and risk. The government should not have the right to treat it as the governments money and the decision of the government exactly how much the individual gets to keep of their own money. It is the individual's money and they have the right to expect the government will take only what they need to keep the necessary services and programs funded that the government supplys its citizens. And they should be able to expect the government will treat all individuals equally.

When did this concept become so convoluted and easily ignored? And why do so many now disagree with these ideals? Obviously the concepts of the Divider in Chief have become mainstream?

I surely hope not.

ABO 2012

ABO 2012

Bill, Fairfax VA

You have a very concrete idea of money. Inheriting money is not the same thing as inheriting your grandmother's dentures.

If you receive a letter through the post office, you can put it in your files, or frame it on the wall, or throw it out, but you can't put it back in the mail without buying a new stamp.

Just because money was taxed once, doesn't mean it can't be taxed again. You wouldn't tell a clerk "don't tax me for this purchase because the money I'm giving you was taxed once before."

Just because money was taxed once, doesn't mean it can't be taxed again.

Spoken like a true liberal. Heck why stop at taxing it once or twice, let's tax it a dozen times and spread that wealth around until there's no more of it left.

As for your granny dentures and put the letter back in the mail analogy, good grief...

Hey! I worked a long time on that analogy!

I've know a few millionaires, and their children, in my time, and most are interested in the world around them, and in creativity, success and innovation for it's own sake. The money is just a by-product of their success.

They don't begrudge paying taxes because they have a realistic idea of how interconnected their success is with the efforts and achievements of people in their communities, some of whom are never financially rewarded for their contributions, but who contribute never the less. Personally, I was never so poor as when I worked in daycares, but I think that was probably the most important work I ever did.

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

Then there are those who have a sense of entitlement. Entitled people conveniently forgot the invisible structure which makes their lives safe, healthy and prosperous. They ignore the fact someone inspected their food before they bought it, somebody helped their kid cross the street for school, somebody laid down their life to protect them from terrorists. It's all "my money" mine, mine, mine. Funny, those particular people don't seem to prosper too long.

Apple.... meet orange...

Really Amy?

First off your Post Office analogy is absolutely stupid...... If I was able to mail items at NO charge then maybe you would have a leg to stand on.... but the post office is a service that I have to PAY for to use.....
If I want a letter sent in the mail I must either purchase a stamp or take it to the post office and pay the person there to put a stamp on it.

Please dont let your blindingly obvious love for all thisngs liberal and big government ruin your life....

Tell you what why dont we do it this way.... Why dont we make it so that when a person dies they can CHOOSE to DONATE their estate to the government or they can CHOOSE to leave it to their family or they can CHOOSE to leave it to whoever the heck they want to.

Since when is the money that I have already paid taxes on become taxable again just because I die?

Please explain that to me..... oh wait..... I know....

Its because that money should go to those who DONT work for a living so that the Democrats can build their voting base.....gotcha

sorry larry;

but the analogy is fine. If they return the letter for any reason - or MISDELIVER the letter, you still have to pay to stamp it again,...

In the 1800's the wealthy in Portland Maine built their mansions in the West End, which had a view of the White Mountains in the distance and rolling hills in the foreground. Only the poor lived on the East End, which was near the waterfront.

Flash forward to modern times. The West End still has a view of the mountains in the distance - but highways and a stripmall in the foreground. The East End is full of tenement-style apartments that are still relatively cheap and have a view of the water. A wealthy friend never failed to complain that it just wasn't right I, with no money, could live in a neighborhood near the ocean, whereas his lovely mansion was inland. He was serious. He truely felt it wasn't "right."It upset his sense of entitlement that poorer neighborhoods had a view of the water and wealthier people didn't.

Hey! I worked a long time on that analogy!

Well, in that case you get an A for effort :) Besides, if Clara likes it then it must be good...

I don't get the analogy.

If he was that wealthy, nothing prevented him from buying a house on the shore.

Tek,

I guess he didn't want people to THINK he was poor,...the horror!

@Amy,

You wouldn't tell a clerk "don't tax me for this purchase because the money I'm giving you was taxed once before."

That is sales tax, not Income tax. Apples and Oranges..

Even money your earn that you pay income taxes on is taxed at the sales level. And in that instance, the money you get from inheritance would be taxed over and over again provided you spent it.

There is no justification for imposing another income tax on it as the income tax has been paid.

If your thought pattern is correct, if you made money one year and saved it, the government should be able to tax your savings the next year, and every year afterward, as income.

ABO 2012

"Bet we don't hear much comment from the GOPTP candidates or the ones in Congress either regarding Khaddafy--they can never admit that egg has been on their faces many, many times."

I bet we don't either, Jody- but I AM waiting for some posts that say "yeah, but Cheney and Bush made it possible, you know".

Sure. Recall the rhetoric - "Days, not weeks". "Wars power act doesn't apply", "Libya War is Legal, Because Technically We're Not Involved".

And of course Obama has nothing to do with the bad economy, it's the Republicans fault. But if the economy were to rebound (don't worry, it won't, not with Obama) Obama would be demanding all the credit.

And besides, Obama will always have the "Walking Over Hot Coals" sisters like Jody here, and Amy, to cheer their hero on, no matter what.

Make sure to have a good podiatrist gals.

Bush would have found a way to f@#$ it up.

Glad to see another Muslim, middle east dictator dead. Hopefully he won't be replaced by another one.

Congratulations on UBL and Ghaddafi and Al Alaki. Even a blind squirrel will find an acorn eventually. Thanks for leaving in place the military command put in place by President Bush.

Well Well, did I mention 'every silver lining has a cloud' or what?

Great post, Jody. I notice it took 11 minutes to rewrite history so that Conservatives have been right all along.

Bravo to the Libyan freedom fighters!

I am happy that no troops were sent in, and relieved that none of our pilots or our CIA and or special ops on the grounds were not hurt. While I may have used a different term to describe the Libyans, Jody, I am relieved that he is gone and they can build their country.

Now walk away, do not provide any military advisors or personnel. Provide minimal diplomatic support, but no financial support, none.

Let's lead from behind and let Europe pay the tab for the Libyans to clean up their mess.

I would call it a foreign policy success and disassociate ourselves monetarily from this. If we continue heavy involvement here there will be more chances of the next regime tainting us. Time to just walk away.

Jody--I think part of the rejection of "one size fits all" Middle East policy comes from the fact that the President and the Secretary of State are intellectually curious and honest and, along with their staffs, have thought through these issues to recognize that each country in this difficult and dangerous region must be evaluated and handled on its own, with understanding of the unique issues and roles they all play.

Mark,

I agree, get out now. While we are at it, get out of Afghanistan, Yemen, Uganda, Iraq and anywhere else we are trying to save the world.

Let's save ourselves first.

I hope it is more of a foreign policy success than Egypt appears to be.

We were pretty happy about the outcome there at one time, if I remember correctly.

The will be a lot of unhappy GNOPers today because of the Gadhafi death.

Too bad. The families who lost loved ones over Lockerbie are feeling some sense of closure today.

President Obama and Secretary Clinton are to be congratulated for their vision and guts in getting this thing done.

Obama/Biden 2012! Keeping America Safe one terrorist at a time.

I love how you double standard hypocrites give Bush partial credit for "Putting in place the Security" to eliminate terrorism but Obama is only to blame for the economy? Which is it?!

Did Bush ruin the economy with "Failed Policy" and Obama is trying to fix it? Did bush over attack terrorists and Obama is trying did fix it?

Bush may have forged the sword but Obama is the Ninja. Sleep with one eye open terrorists and lets move these GOP hypocrites out of office so we can fix this mess.

"RighteOusness you can believe in!" with a Capital 'O' and that's why he'll get my vote!

White Collar , I agree 100% with you. When it comes to foreign policy we should be doing what is best for America. I watched a general in Afgan saying something like maybe we can get our troops out by 2021. (Shakes head)

Like I said, I salute our invovlement in these operations, the diplomacy with the UN and Nato. Ghadaffi was an evil dictator, he is dead and it could be said that our involvement helped get him. However, not to seem jaded or anything but that is not the end of the story for Libya. It should be the end for us though.

Let the UN and Nato help this new regime, transition to hopefully a peaceful society. Not to be a squeaky door, but if a GOP were to neglect the War powers act, I would question it. If a GOP POTUS would conduct 'humanitarian bombings' that seemed to involve us in a Civil War I would question it just as I did with Obama.

There should be no team blue or team red when it comes to foreign policy.

Cheers! Good to see the Yellow Dog and the Arch-Conservative agree on something.

Now y'all need to take that policy to the WH.

Makes me wonder if he is another Donald Trump---talks like he is mega-wealthy but is really a working guy.

Gingrich is doing the same thing.

It'd be a huge pay cut for Newter (with adverse consequences on his Tiffany's line of credit), but I think he seriously wants the job. His pursuit of it is just totally inept. Gingrich and nept aren't in the same time zone!

Alan:

Are you one of those folks who expects the fire department to have the house rebuilt right after they put out the fire?

Reality check time my friend.

"If he was correct why didn't his first stimulus work and create some self-sustaining jobs?"

Yeah, you're right. We immediately slipped into another great depression, and are still losing jobs at the rate of 700,000 per month.

Silly me.

Are you one of those folks who expects the fire department to have the house rebuilt right after they put out the fire?

No, but I would expect from a man who thinks that all his decisions "have been the right ones",(I can hear GWB laughing right now), to have learned that a stimulus has to be weighted towards infrastructure and that you cannot expect instant results (National Infrastructure Bank anyone?). Instead he just trots out the same failed plan again cut by 50%.

Nobody is arguing that teachers, fireman and police are unimportant but if you are going to spend 35B of borrowed money why do it on what even the Administration admits is a temporary measure? We had a deficit of $1.3T last year. That is a year that did not include TARP or the first stimulus. Now the Administration wants to borrow another $500B to spend in the same way as the first stimulus. How does that make any sense?

And they are borrowing the money because the taxes earmarked t pay for the spending do not start until 2013 (wonder how they picked that date) and last 10 years.

Yeah, you're right. We immediately slipped into another great depression, and are still losing jobs at the rate of 700,000 per month.

So this was the measure of success? I missed this part in Romers arguments to spend 800B. Is this the same as create and saved? A measure that only exists in a computer model of the economy?

Silver linings? Clouds?

Get it? Alan, does I bet.....

Nashville: "As usual, President Obama is busy doing one hell of a job under impossible circumstances, all while getting zero credit and being second guessed by folks who have no idea what they are talking about."

Exactly! I think this is the main reason that the Republicans in Congress absolutely refuse to help Obama do anything to increase jobs (despite campaigning on that in the mid-term elections)--because they know that if the unemployment rate goes down, Obama looks good. The fact that THEY would also look good doesn't matter. They just can't stand the thought of Obama succeeding even if it means that REAL Americans are helped.

@Bethie -- bottom line -- what did the killing or capture of Khaddafy do to benefit America??? I'll give you Bin Laden and Al Alaki, but there are more pressing issues in this country to focus on than Libya which was of no threat to the U.S.

If the LWNJs on here want to spout about Congress tackling anything other than the jobs bill, then this should be right up there with that.

Must be tough making all these decisions while rolling around Virginia and North Carolina on bus campaigning for re-election. I don't know where he finds the time. Of course he works a long day if he's up at 3am making calls.

Poor Ray and Alan . . . the President is doing a good job and they can't come up with anything worth a damn to complain about.

Oh well.

Ray-4054460

"@Bethie -- bottom line -- what did the killing or capture of Khaddafy do to benefit America???"

SO- do we hear you saying taking out Kaddafi was a BAD thing, then? Sure sounds like it to me, but why do you want to coddle a terrorist (think Lockerbie)?

@Bethie -- bottom line -- what did the killing or capture of Khaddafy do to benefit America??? I'll give you Bin Laden and Al Alaki, but there are more pressing issues in this country to focus on than Libya which was of no threat to the U.S.

Were you this critical of the war in Iraq, another nation which was contained and of no threat to the U.S.? Our debt problem RIGHT NOW would be a lot better if you had been.

@DBO -- Taking him out was a good thing. Now where does it end?

@John B -- Damn right I was critical at the war in Iraq. It was a good thing we got Hussein as well. I did not approve of the way the war was waged which was never a question when polling the American public. I did not favor boots on the ground as soon as they were sent there. I was not in favor of trying to run a "PC" war. Screw the prisoners at Abu. If the low lifes were hiding behind women and children in mosques -- take them out. Just like the collateral damage the drones are causing now. And the debt problem would have been better now if Obama would have lived up to his campaign promise in being out by the end of his first year.

Now either of you want to answer my question without a question?

Criticism that we weren't sufficiently brutal and barbaric in our prosecution of the Iraq war is not the same thing as saying we shouldn't have done it.

As far as I can tell NATO prosecuted their aerial support for the Libyan rebels effectively. We fulfilled our obligation to NATO.

Poor Ray and Alan . . . the President is doing a good job and they can't come up with anything worth a damn to complain about.

You're right. I should stop whining about the deficit, debt and unemployment. We got Kaddafi!

Think that will work as an bumper sticker?

"The economy's @!$%# but it's worse for Kaddafi"

"You've no job, but I'm right all the time"

Who are you gonna vote for Alan? Which Republican has the answers that you cleary think President Obama doesn't?

Who are you gonna vote for Alan? Which Republican has the answers that you cleary think President Obama doesn't?

That's my problem. Basically it comes down to Romney and who the hell knows what he stands for. I like Ron Pauls foreign policy and his fiscal stance though. Does come over as your favorite crazy uncle though.

Hey Nashville Fan---great post. This may be one of your best lines ever (and there is a lot of competition):

"President Obama doesn't receive 3 AM phone calls, he places them, mmmkay?"

Of course the Republicans can't give the President credit for another foreign policy success. Instead we get drivel like "even a blind squirrel finds an acorn".

"Now either of you want to answer my question without a question?"

Nope.

Good morning Steeler Fan . . . thanks for the kind words! :o)

One benefit of no more khadaffy is that we are no longer spending that money on drones,...

But I'm a 'bright sider'.

Alan, did you feel the same way when Bush took to the road to educate the people about his policies?

One benefit of no more khadaffy is that we are no longer spending that money on drones,...

But I'm a 'bright sider' (Clara).

=============================

Me too, Clara! It's hard, though, to find a "bright side" to Iraq. Too many Americans killed, too many innocent Iraqi civilians killed, no WMD's found, major instability there still, huge costs to the taxpayers, etc. Yes, Hussein was taken out. However, many would argue that he was a buffer between us and Iran. We are there and can't turn back the clock, so Obama is doing the best he can to bring the troops home.

There was TONS of resistance to our going over there, Ray--you have a very short memory. It's the single thing that caused me to drop my support for Bush (though I never voted for him, I supported him--I certainly wanted him to be a good president and lead our country well!). I have never blamed Bush for 9/11--no one could have predicted the perfect storm, even with some of the warnings that he had. However, I do blame him for his inept response to 9/11 and his using it as an excuse to invade Iraq.

Alan, did you feel the same way when Bush took to the road to educate the people about his policies?

LOL, a sentence with Bush and educate is too funny. And when did he have to go out to "educate" the people. The frikken congress rolled over and gave him whatever he wanted, including when Daschle was majority leader and Pelosi when she became speaker.

Also, your superior arrogance is showing through. You are insinuating that the people are not smart enough to understand the appeal of Obama's policies.

Alan, you brought up the bus trip, not me (see your own post, #8.3). I merely pointed out that Bush did similar things when he was pushing legislation. You seemed to be criticizing Obama and Biden for campaigning for their jobs bill. Were you not?

Also how is my post showing "superior arrogance"?? You are reading WAY too much between the lines that just isn't there!! I agree that Bush got basically what he wanted, but that didn't stop him from taking bus tours. Also, it wasn't my idea for any president to take any tours. . .so explain how my stating the FACT that they have taken these tours shows any kind of arrogance on my part? Maybe you don't like my word choice "educate"--FINE! How's "inform" or "publicize"? Is that better?

OMG.

Damage- do us and your country a favor; Go to NYC or some other city, put on a police uniform, and arrest 'em.

Save us, big guy!

DBO, good idea for Damage.

But I think he really wants to be a citizen journalist then move on to a FOX news gig.

But he is starting with FR and then emailing his "list" to everyone he knows...

I think your suggestion would work better for him.

Fleabaggers!! Fantastic!!

Cost so far to the city of Los Angeles as reported by the LA TImes this morning is at $45,000 - doesn't seem like much, but with damage to the park where the fleabaggers are camped escalating and the inability of city workers to access the park for maintenance the tab is expected to top $400,000 by the time these morons clear out.

One fleabagger dismissed the city's estimate. "That is ludicrous." said protester Lawrence Ziense, who has a degree in landscape architecture. "That's like 10 times what I would charge."

Nice response. Demonstrates zero sense of civic responsibility. No consideration for those of us who work hard and will be footing the bill for this crap.

I just returned from two weeks on business in Europe and every time the news there showed protest camps I just cringed. OWS is a national embarrassment - is this how our ostensibly educated young people show the world how Americans enact progress?

Come to think of it,...

damage has a LOT of O'Keefe/Breitbart characteristic,...so maybe he's in drag. Oops, I mean incognito over here on FR?

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Was it the same type of cringe, Mark, everytime Bush said "Nucular"? or "Wanted Dead or Alive" or you know,...any of the Tea Party signs? Any of THAT make you cringe? Or just when it's not your message?

Clara, Mr. Bush provided us all with plenty of opportunities to cringe!!

Obama has deported more illegal aliens (mostly Latinos) in the last 3 years than the Bush admin did in 8 years.

Half of those deported were dangerous criminals. See, President Obama can distinguish between criminals, and people who contribute to our country. It's a distinction Republicans, who like to turn everything into a black or white issue, have trouble making.

Only liberals have trouble distinguishing the term "ILLEGAL" from "ENTERING THE COUNTRY ILLEGALLY", which is by definition a criminal act. Illegal=criminal in all other worlds except the bizzaro world the liberals live in.

Again; why do you all assume that all Latinos support lawbreaking and WHY hasn't Obama touted his massive deportations as a positive success of his administration?

And Amy, if Obama and his people are apparently able to distinguish between "criminals" and "people who contribute to our country", what criteria is he using exactly? I'm guessing that, to liberals like Obama,"contributing" means contributing to the line of people waiting for welfare, free healthcare and other social services designed to keep the poor dependent on the government thus making "undocumented immigrants" into "unregistered Democrats."

Undocumented status is a Class B Misdemeanor akin to driving approximately 10 Miles Per Hour over the speed limit in most states.

What part of ILLEGAL is the speed limit?

Please DO explain it for us, damaged. PS. Further explain why you are targeting Latinos and not the hordes of others that come here from other countries, include Canada. mkay, thanks.

Damage perhaps not a good idea to talk to you, but I agree with Amy this is not a black or white issue/right or wrong issue.

You probably don't care what I think but as a brown, Latino I'll tell you anyway. I have no problem with deporting criminal immigrants who have broken the law - murderers, rapists, robbers. Those that come here to not work but to participate in other activities. I also don't care for those lazy ingrates and gangbangers that give my kind a bad name either.

Yes, I agree Obama has upheld the law and deported tens of thousands of people. However, along with the group mentioned above, hardworking men and women, students and children are deported. These people are only trying to better themselves, in this previously purported nation of immigrants.

Of late, Obama has requested that ICE look more at trying to concentrate on deporting people who are actually hurting the country (violent immmigrants) vs. those who are contributing to the country with their labor. I know you would like us to be like "sweet home Alabama", but now that the GOP legislature has run off tens of thousands who is going to pick the farm owners quickly rotting crops?

To someone like you, I guess you don't see a difference, but I do.

It is a problem nevertheless a problem that can't be solved by deportation alone. Comprehensive "federal" not state reform should include, border enforcement and severe fines and jail times for employeers who knowingly hire undocumented workers. I supported Bush's temporary or season workers permit. I also would support a gradual increase in legal immigration and a pathway to citizenship.

And as another brown...I'll actually contend with you, good man.

Crops rotting the in fields? Perfect. We have 14 million unemployed.

Now we just need to incentivize their getting a job, even if it's lowly crop-picker.

I was a ditch-digger for a few months post-military, they can be crop-pickers. More honor in a job, no matter how 'menial' it's considered, then UI.

Guess we need to carrot and stick this one.

PS- Not a fan of illegal immigration from EITHER border. Why do they feel they should get preference over Filipino's? Or Haitians? Or Cubans? The system takes as long as it takes. No race should be 'preferred' or discriminated against. That's called equality.

Teknishan

Going for the day, perhaps we can talk another day about this issue. You do realize that the state just shifted this problem to the bordering states. Perhaps some Americans will apply for these honest hard laboring jobs and save the harvest.

Worked as a teenage detasseling corn, not fun work.

By the way talk about getting a preference you just need to look at Cubans - dry foot policy.

bcplus3

"bottom line...are you and this country better off then you were 3 years ago?"

Yes. I'm still employed, making more that I was 3 years ago, my 401K is much better off, and Palin and that one old guy are history.

Thanks for asking.

Thansk for the compliment on my response.

But- remeber when you say it's not just about me- the country IS each one of us.

Jeanne: "Here he is in Las Vegas with the highest unemployment rate..."

You criticize Romney? Why don't you ask Obama and the Senate Leader Reid (DEM) since he's from Nevada? They have no budget and the Repub bills are sitting on Reid's desk with NO vote because Reid is afraid his own Dems will vote for them ! Obama has made promises and FAILED on the unemployment issue. It's time for a REAL change.

Obama raised the debt $4 trillion all by himself.

Romney/Cain in 2012 for JOBS JOBS JOBS.

Leona, what do you say to Jeanne's charge that Romney is happy to let banks foreclose on customers and have investors (opportunists) buy them on the cheap and rent them out? What does that do to neighborhoods and families? Would Romney as president help the middle-class families trying to work things out with the banks to stay in their homes? How about the Republicans in Congress? They were elected on the promises of "Jobs, jobs, jobs" but have failed to deliver and refuse to work with Obama on this issue. Romney is totally out of touch with the average American.

Hey Bethie, If the Dems didn't force banks to give mortgages to people who cant afford them, we wouldn't even have this problem ! Barney Frank and other Dems should be in jail! You want banks to give away mortgages? I paid my mortgage. Why should anyone get a free pass to own a home ??

You say the Repubs "refuse" to work with Obama? I guess you FORGOT that Obama said to John McCain when he wanted to collaborate on healthcare....." John, the election is over, I WON."

Don't ignore the facts. Put down the kool aid, you're drunk enough.

If by facts you mean lies, then you're right on target, Leona. NO ONE at the government forced banks to give loans to people who couldn't afford them. The banks did that all on their own.

So...Leona, you would say that Republicans are actually working together with President Obama to get things done? Really? You can insult me all you want, but you can't be serious about implying that Obama has had anything but obstructionism from the right. Remember McConnell's plege?

“The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.” ~Mitch McConnell, Senate Minority Leader, (R-Ky.), October 2010

Doing what's right for America, like raising the debt ceiling in a timely manner, wasn't important to do. Nor was it important to work together to get a jobs bill passed. Forgive me for losing faith in those who sacrifice what's best for America on the altar of politics.

JOhn, "NO ONE at the government forced banks to give loans to people who couldn't afford them. The banks did that all on their own."

hey John, HAHA.......There's nothing else to say BUT........... I see the kool aid is extra strong these days.

Even better than THAT, John, many bankers directed people to creative loans to encourage them that they really COULD afford that bigger house. There seems to be no shortage of 'capitalists' who will prey on the naivetee of others. But that's just their 'dumb' luck, right, Helmsley?

Well Leona, it's your assertion that government forced the financial industry to give loans to people who couldn't afford them...prove it. If you can't do that you're just spreading Conservative lies.

John B

Yep, I think you pegged it,...Leona is the GnoP's personal manure spreader,...and MAN howdy is she prolific,...

If you suspend reality, integrity and reason for a few minutes, you get a glimpse of what it's like in her alternate universe.

She's a Trolltastic Sergeant in the Limbaugh Misinformation/Misdirection Legion for SURE!

Monetfan,

Sounds like you are feeling the threat of the JOBS MAKERS which may be finally coming to "fix" this country. We need a CHANGE in 2012 !

ROMNEY/CAIN 2012 for JOBS JOBS JOBS !

I my self like Cain

When people learn that Cain wants to get rid of SS and medicare, he'll be toast. I'm surprised that the media hasn't picked up on that yet (other than LO) but it is true. His solution is that people should turn to the "state, cities, churches, local businesses and charities if they need assistance. Don't believe me? Go to his website hermaincain.com and read for yourself.

No one in their right mind is taking Herman Cain seriously.

He is not running for President. He is selling books.

It does not matter how many hands went up in Franks Luntz's focus group.

That is all theatre.

Sheila,

Here are the facts that go with Obama's 3 years, and it's "NOT THEATRE."

We have 9.1% unemployment, $15 trillion debt, open borders, 2-3 wars, s&p downgrade, "green" company money pits, and our kids have a bleak future and CAN'T FIND A JOB !

james hale: "....wall-street has the gas market cornered...."

James, with all due respect to your situation, here are some facts to think about...

Obama is actively trying to destroy the oil companies ( and the JOBS that go with it ) because he wants to usher in "green" energy. Ask his ex "energy czar" who had to resign because he's a communist ! Obama is sinking billions into "green" companies who are going bankrupt, hence we lose tax payer dollars. ( "We the people" want our money back !!!!!)

Guess who gets rich from "green"???

Answer: N.Pelosi's brother-in-law & Al Gore.

Where's your proof, Leona?

Bigot

fll: "....further wipe out American workers..."

hey fll,

That's NOT Romney. That's Obama's priority. He is sinking billions into "green " companies in order to destroy the oil industry......and guess who's getting rich from "green" ?

ANSWER: Al Gore (D) & N.Pelosi's (D) brother-in-law, to name a few.

What will you say when Libya becomes "Terrorist Controlled Libya"?

That's when Obama will try to run away from it and blame the whole thing on NATO.