An article in WaPo addresses the false argument on regulations Perry likes to talk about. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, roughly 1100 people were laid off due to regulations and roughly 145,000 were laid off due to demand according to companies surveyed.

Additionally factcheck.org has debunked the myths here:

http://www.factcheck.org/tag/regulations/

As for the facts of how many jobs will be created and when... it would take 10 years to see full results and most jobs created would last a few years as these projects progress. See link below for several articles addressing those issues:

http://factcheck.org/archives/search%2Dresults/?cx=000672474746801930868%3Aa87hh_euyka&cof=FORID%3A11%3BNB%3A1&ie=UTF-8&q=Perry+job+plan&sa=Search

Happy reading all!

Times are hard and people are angry.

But, I hope this anger does not mean we elect any of the leading Republican candidates for president.

Any of them would only make things worse.

Republicans want us to return to the policies that created this mess.

No more.

The job growth that Perry loves to promote and take credit for are minimum wage jobs, from fast-food restaurants, retail stores and other low-end service sector jobs. Cutting grass, child care, cleaning services all pay minimum wages. Restaurant employees work for less than the minimum wage with the hopes of earning more money in tips. This is not the kind of job growth that any governor should be proud of. Where are the jobs that require a college education, pay a living wage and provide good benefits? It's about time that the rest of the country is learning about Perry's so-called "jobs growth and plans". Additionally, the illegals that have been employed in Texas are our competition for these low paying jobs. Gov Perry likens the federal government to the big, bag intruder taking our rights away; however, there are many, many military establishments (aka government) in Texas that provide economic stability to the state. If those establishments were to be shut down, Texas would be a cess-pool of poverty.

Nice hair.

"The idea that I'm going to let people talk this plan down for the sake of just having an intellectual discussion, that's not correct," Perry said.

Perry having any kind of "intellectual discussion" is rather hilarious.

"juxtapositioned" Slick Rick bought a thesaurus. Does the bigot version include "n head" ?

When the job numbers are Obama's, they are unacceptable, he is failing, the same numbers attributed to Perry becomes a good start, these guys are pathetic, they are like a child with chocolate all over their face claiming they did not eat the Halloween candy.

Maybe it should only be a family of 2. People have children without thinking of the cost only that they want them. Birth control should be mandatory until people can prove they can afford children before having them. It is not up to the taxpayers to support their wants.

Nice hair.

Yup. Nice hair. Nuthin' under it,.....but nice hair.

$8 an hour translates to $320 a week --- which happens to be what average unemployment checks are. President Obama, by continuously extending unemployment benefits, thinks $320 a week is completely acceptable for a family to live on.

Just what America needs, Forrest Gump as President.

320 a week would be plenty if we handled our natural resources like Norway does. Nationalized resources basically provide everyone with a house, all their bills paid, and enough money to feed and cloth their family easily. WHy is that not implemented here?

I forgot

The needs of the few greedy outweigh the needs of the many poor.

How about Forrest Grump for president, what do think of that?

Deb: Gee what a plan-- Pick and choose which citizens have basic human rights...(with friends like you, the republicans don't need any enemies). Sieg Heil...

Candace, where is the incentive to work in Texas if people can't make more by working, than they can by not working, plus by not working you can save a lot of money because it costs money to get to work, 50 bucks a week is a lot when it is your last 50 bucks. I thought Capitalism is where if you want to work hard you can make more money, people in Texas don't seem to have that opportunity.

"Perry's goal translates into about 52,000 new jobs per month over a four-year term -- a pace that current President Barack Obama currently matches."

Huh?????????????????????

The average number of people employed for 2008 (Bush's last year) was 145,362,000.

For 2010, after 2 years under Obama, the average number of people employed was 139,064,000.

That's a LOSS of 6,298,000 jobs under Obama.

Here's the link to the government's own Bureau of Labor Statistics site to verify these FACTS. Look under Employed - Total for each year;

http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat1.pdf

Nice try at a 'spin', msnbc

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL

WOW You can shure start a discussion in only 3 short sentances!

Here is my take on Perry's job plan.

The rich are looking for servant upgrades.

College grads only need apply:

$7.00/hr for yard maintenance

$8.50/hr for cooks

$9.00/hr for chauffeurs

$10,000/month for 16 year old preppy high school party girls. Costumes, negligees, and bathing suits furnished Applicant must demonstrate skill set during interview and MUST also sign a no-tell agreement.

BEBEFITS

No social security, no medical benefits, no vacation pay, no sick pay. You must furnish you own liability insurance.

Abortions done on site for the 16 year old preppy high school girls only!

And this is just Perry's contribution to the creation of job for the 99%.

There are three things we could do if we had a government that would definitely bring back jobs.

1. Stop all incentives to outsource. No more tax breaks or special treaties.

2. Force our public owned corporations to pay our minimum wages wherever they go. This would bring back jobs and show a little respect for workers.

3. Make all government guaranteed loans directly for a low interest. This would reduce house notes by half or more and leave trillions in the hands of our people instead of thieving banks. This would increase demand for products and services and add greatly to growth and job creation.Why should anyone pay a bank 600k or more for a 200k house when the tax payer backs the loan?

To do these things would require a government that is not owned by banks, wall street and big corporations.

Deb, you sound like a totalitarian communist...prove you can afford kids before you have them. Sweet. You use the term birth control. How about public funded abortion so that unwanted children don't wind up on welfare or prison?

Let me tell you how strange rich people in Texas are: A couple of months ago there was a horse show and riding competition for teenage girls, the horses got sick, so instead of cancelling the whole deal, they had these teenage girls prance around the course pretending to ride those silly little horse heads on a stick. I am not making this up and maybe someone seen what I am referring to. I tell you I have never seen something so funny and sad at the same time.

Here we go again ROY WILSON, how many of the Bush jobs came and went during the Real Estate bubble? You claim the Housing bust is the fault of Democrats, yet you boast about Jobs during the boom?

Can't have it both ways, If Freddie and Fannie caused the Crash they damn sure caused the hiring boom. Just saying. Facts suck when your a Political hack.

ROY WILSON-336103

Correlation does not imply causation, Roy, just because Obama was President in 2008 when unemployment started to skyrocket doesn't imply that Obama was the cause of the increase in unemployment. Point to any policy he created in 2008 that caused the unemployment to escalate and back it up. Bet you can't do it. Bet you go whimper in a corner somewhere.

JimTN-3229159 "Point to any policy he created in 2008 that caused the unemployment to escalate and back it up."

- Moratoriums and bans on drilling. If you don't think that cost jobs, you're hopeless.
- Obamacare, which increased companies medical insurance premiums to skyrocket by over 20% in the first year alone - Just wait until the other costs hit them.
- A record 81,000 pages of regulations in Obama's first year in office (2009).
- Proposed 'Cap & Trade' which will dramatically increase energy costs for EVERYONE.
- Proposed increased taxes on businesses.
And the list goes on, and on, and on............

Its very encouraging that Perry thinks he can take it slow and easy, sorry Perry your not in Texas anymore. Sadly he thinks this is a foot race. He doesn't realize he's in the deep end of the pool and every time he opens his mouth another sand bag is added into his swim trunks. His candidacy is sunk!

Sheez ... Forrest,

Texas ranks number 25 out of Obama's "57 states" in median income. Combined with the low cost of housing, low cost of living, etc., Texas is ahead of most states.

Liberal California is ranked number 9 yet has 12% unemployment and 1/3 of the nation's people living on government assistance.

Texas is a lot better place to live than most states and the middle class of California are moving to Texas and other states like Texas. Pretty sad, but that is what happens with liberalism.

You guys hate the rich and love big government, but 4 out of the 5 wealthiest counties in the US are not the Wall Street commuters but the big government commuters that surround DC..... and DC has some of the worst unemployment in the country.

Funny how libbies blame conservatism for destroying the middle class. Oh well.

BTW - Forrest Grump for President?

Either you or the little girls on their stick ponies would be infinitely better than Obama.

kevinoffsite "Facts suck when your a Political hack."

Especially when they don't agree with your pre-conceived notions.

By the way - The average number of people employed for 2000 (Clinton's last year) was 136,891,000. That was an increase of 8,471,000 net new jobs under Bush vs the 6,298,000 jobs lost under Obama in his first 2 years. The link to the official government site is above at my post #1.18.

Darn those nasty FACTS. It sure makes it hard to spin things.

LoL Feisty. Overdone, underdone, tough and stringy bird who thinks he's Bonnie Prince Charlie or something. Sheesh. Loaded with plenty of stuffing and more than enough tryptophan to make vampires sleep at night.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Roy Wilson:

That was an increase of 8,471,000 net new jobs under Bush vs the 6,298,000 jobs lost under Obama in his first 2 years. The link to the official government site is above at my post #1.18.

Even official government numbers are just numbers until you put some context to them. Unemployment rose from 4.9 percent at the end of 2007 to 7.2 percent in December, 2008, BEFORE President Obama took office.

http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2009/jan/wk2/art02.htm

So, brainiac, how exactly did HE do that?

Ahhh...facts are a nice thing to keep in mind when discussing these issues. But when your arguments are based on projections and assumptions vs. facts the argument is useless.

A "Great Recession" was brewing in 2000's and hit at the end of 2008 creating massive layoffs and that mortgage derivatives thing sort of created a huge vacuum that sucked up the "wealth" which is likely to never to be seen or heard of again. Thus we find ourselves in a state of de-leveraging. That sucks for sure.

To blame this President is a vast stretch of imaginative and wishful thinking by those on the right.

Roy -- You have your hands full with all us gals here, lol. Have at it!

I appreciate your vote Bob, and when I am president, here is one of the things I plan to do, I think you will like this. No more handouts to countries that can afford to pay something, no more 100 dollars a barrel for oil and 3 dollars a bushel for food. We will trade a bushel of corn for a barrel of oil, a bushel of soybeans for a barrel of oil, I will tell these countries that we feed "I hate to be a hard ass, but here it is, that's the deal, and if you don't like that we will make ethanol out of our corn, and bio-diesel out of our soybeans and you guys can eat your oil." As your president, I am not going to tell the American people we have no help for them while we feed the world for free and take it on the chin for oil. How do you like that foreign policy plank Bob?

LoL DCIA -- I guess we showed them. ;-)

Forrest:

How do you like that foreign policy plank Bob?

Who cares about Bob? Forrest Grump for President on the Common Cents Ticket.

Anna

Roy is fun to argue with when he responds, LOL!!!

Us gals make a great tag team......they can't handle that! : )

C'mon Roy where did you go???

Anna Molly "Unemployment rose from 4.9 percent at the end of 2007 to 7.2 percent in December, 2008, BEFORE President Obama took office."

And Obama promptly took it up to over 10%, and it's been stuck at over 9% ever since.

So what was your point? Perhaps that Obama 'kept it under 8% with his 'stimulus' plan'?????? lol

The CBO says that the $860 Billion 'stimulus' "may" have 'saved or created' about 1 million jobs, but let's do some simple math - That pencils out to a taxpayer cost of about $860,000 per job, and most of those jobs were temporary - when the subsidies ended, so did the jobs.

In contrast, the typical private sector employer is paid about $42,000 per year to produce a product or service that can actually be sold for a profit - costing the American taxpayer $0. Gee, I wonder which one works best?

Of course, those government subsidized jobs do have one nice benefit for Obama - They're mainly union jobs, and unions make some very nice political contributions to the Democrats. Even Obama's proposed 'Stimulus 2' is designed primarily for union workers.

Dont_carry_it_all "AnnaRoy is fun to argue with when he responds, LOL!!! C'mon Roy where did you go???"

Sorry, but I got distracted. Was there a point you wanted to make?

And yes, it is fun sometimes to get on FR, even though most liberals consider it their own personal 'chat room'. Interesting point - In tracking comments on FR over time, it's normally about 85% liberal, but in recent times it's dropped to about 60% liberal. It looks like Obama is losing support even with his far-left base.

If he was 'smart', he'd step aside and let Hillary run - she would make a great President - far better than McCain, or Obama. I always thought she was cheated out of the nomination.

Oh darn - Feisty got collapsed again. Too bad, she's good for a laugh. Whatever happened to 'free speech'?

I wish people knew perry like Texas does. The man isn't a debater but the man knows how do do stuff and has done wonders for texas. Too bad they don't, but i'll vote for him if he gets the nomination.

Roy:

Whatever happened to 'free speech'?

Too easy. Citizens United.

Thanks to corporatist conservatives, speech is no longer free.

Be proud.

And Obama promptly took it up to over 10%, and it's been stuck at over 9% ever since.

Now, I may not be as smart as you, brainiac, but it seems to me that to get from 10 percent to 9 percent, unemployment had to come DOWN.

So, in the absence of any other reasonable explanation, what do you suppose caused THAT?

Maybe the stimulus wasn't big enough to bring it all the way back -- mostly because it was built in significant part around tax cuts, which are proven not to create jobs, but it's hard to say it didn't do something.

Even for you.

Awww Roy, ever the numbers man, lol. Not necessarily a bad thing. But someone has to counter your perspective on things.

My point is clear you neglect to put reason behind the numbers. Glad to see you would support a woman President. And I know you can sometimes be reasonable. I just hate when you spin and it stops a little lopsided.

First Read draws you in and it's kinda like a dysfunctional family at times which does keep things interesting and hilarious.

Just having a little fun on the weekend while watching the games. : ) I'll try to concentrate and be more serious. Maybe.

Would someone please restore the collapsed posts?????

Forrest,

Do you realize that there are 192 countries in the world .... and we give money to 174 of them!

I love your plan, but have one reservation.

Why would we trade cotton and soybeans for oil?

Why ethanol and bio-diesel?

The United States is the richest country on the planet with respect to natural fuels. We literally have more than anybody, more than most of the middle east combined! And that is just oil, natural gas and coal - doesn't include shale oil etc. We literally have hundreds of years of resources with new finds almost daily.

See Forrest - I told you you would be infinitely better than Obama.

If First Read readership has changed from liberal to more conservative, the reason might just possibly be that this is REALLY a big tent, unlike the Republican Party.

Unlike the rest of the so-called "liberal" blogs, we welcome everyone with open arms.

Even bob-180. Hiya, bobby. Hope you're having a good weekend.

And now back to the Steelers and the Detroit Lions.

Lordy, how I always dread the bye-week.

Forrest:

How do you like that foreign policy plank Bob?

Who cares about Bob? Forrest Grump for President on the Common Cents Ticket.

As your president I would promise to consider and fairly and honestly address the concerns of all citizens, even Bob's concerns and others who I often disagree with, I would only ask that as a citizen you give me the same fair and honest consideration even when you disagree with me. This is how I plan to take the valid points from both sides of an issue and negotiate a solution that utilizes the best points from both sides and implements a plan everybody can have at least some confidence in. I will be a take matters in my own hands kind of president, I will solve some foreign policy problems by just personally inviting a head of state to the Whitehouse, and personally throw him a good old fashion American ass whipping, saving countless American lives and treasure. If you want some things kicked in the rump, vote for Forrest Grump.

Ahhh...facts are a nice thing to keep in mind when discussing these issues. But when your arguments are based on projections and assumptions vs. facts the argument is useless.

And when libs don't even have a simple grasp of the facts, it is amuzing, but utterly useless except for the independents who drop by.

A "Great Recession" was brewing in 2000's and hit at the end of 2008

The "Great Recession" was caused by a credit bubble that began during Clinton's administration and burst in December 2007. The recession peaked in September 2008 and officially ended (by economic definition) in June 2009..... the facts.

creating massive layoffs and that mortgage derivatives thing sort of created a huge vacuum that sucked up the "wealth" which is likely to never to be seen or heard of again.

With Obama as President, very true.... just like liberal "progressive" FDR could never get us out of the recession. Liberalism/Progressive big government doesn't work - never will.

How mant times does it take for you guys to understand?

With someone who understands economics, how this country was built, what made it great .... someone who is not trying to "transform" the country into a big government socialistic state, it can recover in no time.

Thus we find ourselves in a state of de-leveraging. That sucks for sure.

True again ..... Obama's "America" sucks big time.

To blame this President is a vast stretch of imaginative and wishful thinking by those on the right.

Actually it takes a vast imagination and wishful thinking to defend Obama.

Obama's number one job was the economy and jobs, yet the first thing he did was to try pass Obamacare, an entitlement that destroyed job creation, created more debt, added cost ..... the worst thing he could have done for the economy.

Obama's policies/stimulus took care of big government, big unions, big banking, big corporations and did nothing for the actual job creators - private sector small and medium sized business.

Obama's QE crap pushed the price of gas/energy - the life blood of an economy - to double the cost. The cost of everything, even the cost of a can of soup for the poor has gone up.

Sheez ....we have ....

Lowest employment since the 80’s.

Lowest property ownership since the 60’s.

Highest deficit to gdp since the 40’s.

Worst long term unemployment since the 30’s.

Highest government dependency rate of all time.

Biggest debt in the history of the mankind.

Nope - all you need is an acceptance of historical fact to understand Obama's ineptness.

If you want some things kicked in the rump, vote for Forrest Grump.

LoL You can start any time. In fact, maybe you should start with bob-180.

Of course, bob would nominate me, I'm sure. ;-)

If you are making $8.00 per Hr. you can't afford 1 child. Take responsibility for your life,STOP BITCHING...

And Obama promptly took it up to over 10%, and it's been stuck at over 9% ever since.

Now, I may not be as smart as you, brainiac, but it seems to me that to get from 10 percent to 9 percent, unemployment had to come DOWN.

So, in the absence of any other reasonable explanation, what do you suppose caused THAT?

_______________________________________________________________________________

The unemploymeny rate in November 2010 was 9.8%. It dropped .4% the following month and dropped to 9% in January 2011.

Hmm ... what happened in November 2010 .... was there an election or somthing?

A little assurance that there would be a check on Obama's agenda with repubs making major gains - taking Congress back ..... maybe?

Bob we do have fossil fuels and we use the heck out of them, but they are still finite resources once they are gone they are gone, and they are world commodities so they can only get more expensive in the long run. My plan conserves US resources as much as possible, to make them more affordable to more people for a longer time, and so our military will have them to attack other countries for theirs, in the event we never transition to alternate sources of energy. My plan is longer range than yours, your plan would require we start to transition to green tech energies right now if we are going to drill, and dig, and crack all our fossil fuels right now, to make them plentiful and affordable in the short range. To do what you want we would have to start taking some chances on some green techs, and if private companies did not offer to spend their cash now to make a profit later, as the president I would feel it would be necessary and responsible to propose that we use government money to support the research and development.

It's good to have both a short range plan and a long range plan, because that gives you an option depending on how quickly something needs to be addressed compared to other pressing needs. Now because we had a simple discussion we have a couple of plans and are seeing how both our ideas have to fit together to work better than either one alone.

LOL Bob -- Trying to argue with me???

Lowest employment since the 80’s.

What did you expect with the Great Recession? An uptick in employment?

caused by a credit bubble that began during Clinton's administration

Blaming only Clinton now eh? Pretty amusing as the list of those to blame is a mile long. But nice try.

QE crap pushed the price of gas/energy

Really? Then what caused it to go up under Bush?

Biggest debt in the history of the mankind.

I agree. 12 trillion of which was Reagan Bush and Bush, compounded of course. : )

As for the rest....blah, blah, blah, waaa, waaa, waaa!

Anything else you need Bob? I did learn two new words today....tebowed and netflixed.

bob-1805084

You're so full of crap. What ludicrous statements. Speaking as a Californian, you'd could pay us 2 dollars a day and it's still not bad enough to move to Texass.

Anyone who'd trade ocean, mountains, palm trees and sunshine for the secessionist state needs their head examined.

Maybe you're talking about Texass' constant meddling in California politics because of our energy regulations. Or perhaps the Texass initiative to steal Vernon jobs (one industrial town) with tax breaks. Too bad none of them took you up on it and our voters consistently vote down your energy lobbyist trojan horse initiatives.

Enjoy your tumble weeds and endless sandy plains. I'm going surfing in the lovely California sun on our lovely beach just outside our lovely multi-cultural city. Yeah... there's an exodus from Cali to Texass. I'm going to go laugh now.

The United States is the richest country on the planet with respect to natural fuels. We literally have more than anybody, more than most of the middle east combined! And that is just oil, natural gas and coal - doesn't include shale oil etc. We literally have hundreds of years of resources with new finds almost daily.

Too bad those companies don't want to invest money in safety and the best least polluting technologies. They would rather pollute and pay the politicians to get rid of regulations that protect the air we breath, the water we drink and the land we use. Silly now isn't it when they could use all that lobbying money to actually pay for something useful. Past behaviors have caused too many to never trust these companies again to do the right thing and they need strict oversight and regulation.

BTW What facts and sources did you use to make those statements Bob???

Lowest employment since the 80’s.

What did you expect with the Great Recession? An uptick in employment?

Your "Great Recession" was over in June 2009. It has been a recovery (again by economic definition) since then.

Do I expect an uptick in unemployment?

After almost 3 years and trillions spent ..... duh .... yea.

Didn't Obama promise one? What was all that talk about "Summer of Recovery" last summer?

There have been 11 recessions / recoveries since WW II. None compare this Obama economic abortion.

We spent trillions, have been downgraded and this idiots repsonse is more of the same?

How absolutely ignorant can you be?

Blaming only Clinton now eh? Pretty amusing as the list of those to blame is a mile long. But nice try.

You call that a rebuttal?

Pathetic try.

Really? Then what caused it to go up under Bush?

Wow, I'm surprised you are even aware it went up under Bush. Regardless, Bush did open more leases and the prices came down to under $2. Obama has been reaping the benefit of that production while at the same time stifing new leases which will effect the price before too long.

I agree. 12 trillion of which was Reagan Bush and Bush, compounded of course. : )

Got the math on that? (And don't even think of trying the thinkprogress twist ... this ain't yahoo.)

Bush was spending 40% of GDP - Obama is spending 100% of GDP!

The cost of the wars that libs cry about ..... was $760 billion for 8 years ..... Obama BORROWED more than twice that this year alone.

BTW - The average annual cost for the wars under Bush was $95 billion a year - under Obama it averages $165 billion a year!

As for the rest....blah, blah, blah, waaa, waaa, waaa!

Couldn't even fake it anymore, huh?

You really aren't very good at this are you?

Anything else you need Bob?

Obviously not from you .... you are way too cluelessly obtuse.

I did learn two new words today....tebowed and netflixed.

Well good for you.

Maybe you will learn something about politics, economics or history someday.

We already have Mr. Purple lipped Potato Head in Office...

how long before security escorts you out of that office?

Anyone who'd trade ocean, mountains, palm trees and sunshine for the secessionist state needs their head examined.

Actually that , or they need a job .... a decent standard of living.

You are right though, California has everything. Magnificent beaches to desert to mountains. Glorious bays to wine country to hollywood to defense contracting to high tech to some of the best argicultural areas in the world ....... on and on.

California had the 6th biggest economy in the world!

Now 9th and dropping ...... where is Texas ..... 10th?

Sad that California, when it can afford a couple, has to buy school books picked by Texas, huh?

Have fun a the beach ..... it is a great ..... best in the world ...... place to stick your liberal head in the sand.

There are worse places you can stick your head than in the sand, like that place where you stuck your conservative head.

Anna Molly "Roy: Now, I may not be as smart as you, brainiac, but it seems to me that to get from 10 percent to 9 percent, unemployment had to come DOWN."

Not really - all you have to do is convince enough people to stop LOOKING for jobs, and the unemployment RATE can come down.

Here's an example;

In 2009, we had an average of 139,877,000 people working and the Unemployment Rate was about 10%.
In 2010, we had 139,064,000 people working (a loss of 813,000 net jobs), yet the Unemployment Rate actually dropped to about 9.3%. Well over 1 million prospective workers just gave up looking, and since the government only counts people 'actively looking', the rate went down along with the number of people employed.

Back to football - see ya.

Well as a matter of fact I did learn something else today Bob can you guess what that is? LOL

Too bad those companies don't want to invest money in safety and the best least polluting technologies.

Actually most do.

To bad that the Obama administration waived the testing of BP's BOP, huh? And wasn't Obama the largest recipient of the most BP campaign cash in American history?

Too bad that Obama left the clean up to BP, the company with the worst safety record, huh?

Well at least it was nice of BP to give UC Berkeley a $500 million dollar grant for green crap. UCB PAC then gives $1.6 million to Obama and Steven Chu, the guy that worked the grant for UCB gets a part time job as Obama's Secretary of Energy.

They would rather pollute and pay the politicians to get rid of regulations that protect the air we breath, the water we drink and the land we use.

Oh ..... kinda like what I just described except that with a really corrupt guy, they just forget the regulations when it suits them and there buddies - then write more regulations to get rid of the little guys and other competetors.

Silly now isn't it when they could use all that lobbying money to actually pay for something useful. Past behaviors have caused too many to never trust these companies again to do the right thing and they need strict oversight and regulation.

Yea, they need prudent regulations and oversight ..... why didn't Obama do it ..... campaign money?

BTW What facts and sources did you use to make those statements Bob???

Congressional Research Service / US Fossil Fuel Resources: Terminology, Reporting and Summary dated: November 10 2010.

Go to Table 6 - page 18.

Yea, they need prudent regulations and oversight .

We can agree on the above statement. Any more dialogue with me requires civility and humor. ; )

Have a great night!

Dcia,

The country is in a lot of trouble. A lot of people are really hurting ... my kids' futures are at stake and it is all so unneccessary. I don't feel like joking around about this stuff most of the time.

I was civil with Forrest, Anna and my other responses to you, but when you start a reponse with LOL ... a flippant dismissive tone and you can't seriously refute anything - you are going to get a few shots.

Any more dialogue with me requires civility and humor. ; )

You can also spare the fake liberal sanctimony.

On a final note, Anna Molly is pretty good at this. Maybe you should learn from her and pick your spots, or do like Feisty .... and just know you are out of your league and move on.

(The last shot was for the sanctimony in case you were wondering.)

Have a great night and see ya in the FR funnies, Don't _

Sorry to see you fighting alone here, Bob. I found your arguments by far the most detailed and factual, and none of the people debating against you really answered your points, and certainly not with the same depth or research.

I have to say, though, I think some of Forrest's ideas for foreign relations are spot on. We have no business sending money to so many other countries, especially when our government is telling us they need to raise taxes to get things done. Enough is enough. Foreign policy should be something like "you cross us, we'll nuke you, otherwise have a nice day and we'll leave each other alone."

Bob -- Well obviously you do not get my humor. I thought it would be fun to argue with you and did not use LOL flippantly. My argument was with Roy and you sort of took it up. I found that funny. It is very clear you are upset with Obama. I don't have a problem with that, to each his own. But I disagree with you why and how things happened. That is my right In our free society. We see things differently that is true. It's hard to refute opinions, though one can persuade with a compelling argument/piece. As for the fake liberal sanctimony....well I'm not a liberal but I was flippant here. I pretty much have my own view of things. (BTW- I do not even go to thinkprogress?) My views are all my own and I read a lot of papers and books such as the WSJ, WaPo, NYT and anything else I can get my hands on. I don't watch cable news channels unless I've read something I want the latest on and then I usually turn on CNN. I occasionally watch Morning Joe and always watch the Sunday Morning shows on politics. Other than that I research just about everything I'm interested in but at non-partisan sources. I have lots of friends both liberal and conservative and truth be told I tend to lean slightly right on fiscal matters. I consider myself a Democrat with an Independent lean/streak. And with the exception of a few times, after hundreds and hundreds of posts I treat everyone respectfully as long as they are civil in their post. Can you say the same? Am I always right about everything? Well no and I acknowledge when I've been wrong about something. I do have a pretty good handle on what's going on in the world though. I feel your frustration as I felt the same of Bush especially in the second term. Presidents will come and go and Congress is the problem in my view. BTW as frustrated as I was with Bush I never ever disrespected him. Not my style. Read through my posts sometime. You will see I enjoy a good argument with conservatives but I also like a little humor occasionally. And I have changed my mind on issues when facts change.

I'll try to look up your statements tomorrow and argue your points if your around.

I did not say anything about nuking anybody, I said I would just personally, privately kick their head of states ass, we don't have to nuke anybody unless he kicks my ass!

It is not America's nature to let people starve, nor is it mine, hell our soldiers give their rations away to children they come into contact with, they always have, we do not even let our enemies starve. We pretty much help feed world, all I was saying is that we never get the relative value when we deal with some of these countries, they need our food, we need their oil, we give the food away we take it on the chin for the oil, I am all for helping when we can but often we could trade for a little something of value, such as oil or precious minerals. If they have nothing of value that's one thing but I would drive a harder bargain before giving food to oil producing nations.

Not really - all you have to do is convince enough people to stop LOOKING for jobs, and the unemployment RATE can come down.

Roy, a person can be applying for 20 jobs a day,every day, and will still be considered as "not looking for work" when their unemployment runs out.

ghostcoon,

Thanks for your comments.

Regarding President Forrest Grump's foreign policy, sorry I wasn't clear (watching football), but I was trying to agree with him (and you).

I mentioned that there are 192 countries in the world AND WE ARE GIVING AID TO 174 of them?

Insane.

We literally borrow money from China ...... to give aid to ....... China?

Obama actually asked for the aide to Libya be raised to $1.7 billion ..... a month before ...... Moammar and the rebs started going after each other.

How crazy is that - giving money to Moammar before trying to remove/kill him because he was such a bad guy.

My reservation had to do with trading for oil.

We have the greatest supply in the world. We can be energy independent for centuries. We can create millions of jobs, reduce our trade deficit, increase our federal revenues / state revenues, etc. ..... and Obama is killing the fossil energy?

Crazy. Oh well.

Yep Forrest is right on about the brokest country in history giving money away.

Don't_,

It's all good ...... no prob.

Deb, Having birth control be mandatory with this Republican crowd is laughable. If anything they want to eliminate some forms of hormonal birth control. Additionally, their Human Life Amendment touted by many of these same flaming right wingers and scheduled for a vote in Mississippi this November, would declare that a fertilized egg be a human being from the moment of conception and therefore has the same rights as the rest of us. What this effectively does is on top of the obvious purpose to end a woman's right to choose whether to continue a pregnancy, would be to outlaw contraceptives such as the IUD, morning after bill, and any other hormonal birth control that prevents a egg from implanting in the uterus. What is most scarey about this amendment is those of us who have had ectopic pregnancies (pregnancy that occurs outside the womb) could be prevented from obtaining emergency care thus ensuring that we would die. I've had three ectopic pregnancies that occurred in my fallopian tube. Had I not gotten immediate emergency surgery, my tube would have ruptured and I would have bled to death in a matter of hours or days. These people are sick bunch of SOB's and deserve to be called out for the misogynists they are.

That's their idea of smaller government, small enough to fit in a womens uterus and govern.

Forrest Grump is in the hunt, for the republican nomination. I only got six votes, but that is enough to put me ahead of Huntsmann and Johnson, and I am right on Santorum and Bachmann's tails. Anna Molly can I use "The Common Cents Ticket" I really think it's good, and I would like you to consider taking the top job in the Justice department if I am elected. If I was faced with a largely inept and completely belligerent Congress as president Obama now is I would personally and repeatedly TP the Washington residences of the offending members as befitting and illustrative of their crappy level of cooperation and competence. I know you must have reservations about me running as a republican but the Democrats have a really good candidate, so I figure my best chance is to run against a weak republican field.

PS How long has it been since you were involved in a really good TP job on someones house, I need some volunteers because I think I will start with Mitch McConnels house tonight as a campaign kickoff stunt and a nice October Surprise for my friend in the Senate, I think tonight will be perfect. There will be a sign up sheet for volunteers and TP donations for anybody that wants to join in the fun. Besides it is about time somebody asked him, Trick or Treat Mitch which is it going to be for the American people?

I agree, I don't want to vote for any of them. The more I see and hear from them the less I like any of them, expecially Perry, Romney, and Cain. They are all stuffed as a Thanksgiving Turkey. Romney is doa with his Romneycare in MA., Cain is selling pizza with his 999, and Perry is the little boy crying about the other guy not telling the truth. Please grow up.

Ron Paul 2012

Only candidate that will help clean up the mess that is not bought off by the banks.

But you people keep voting along partisan and ethnic lines. One day you will wake up hungry and without path to throw off the chains that bind you.

Ron Paul . . .

A Republican/TP Inc. party member who votes along the Republican/TP Inc. party line . . .

And he's not partisan, how?

Ron Paul is a nice, honorable guy, but his political philosophy only differs from the Republican/TP Inc. party in mostly minor ways (with a very few exceptions that do not involve economics), is unworkable in a modern society and economic system, and is counter to many of the founders' ideas about government.

Mark: And it isn't partisan or ethnic to vote for the old white guy who wants to gut civil liberties for anyone he doesn't agree with, hand increased tax breaks for the rich at the expense of everyone else, shred social security and medicare, and pretend the rest of the world doesn't realy exist?? No thanks.

Ron Paul is a libertarian. If you walk into his place of business and he does not like the way you look, no service for you. You have no civil liberties under this old white guy.

Not from this country? And who would that be, Steven.A.G? Be specific, and provide proof, please.

If you are an example of the people who find value in, and support Ron Paul's positions, we have A LOT to lose, if he is elected.

All adults should watch their stools. Apparently, Governor Perry doesn't.

We've already discussed that increased drilling in the United States or just off our shores will NOT decrease the cost of gas at the pump -- Because oil is sold on the global market at prices dictated globally, so the only folks who would benefit are US Big Oil companies.

The second lie is that the president is blocking oil production, when in fact oil is currently being drilled at record levels, and the president has made yet other concessions in regard to piping sand oil (as well as delay of EPA regulations).

The third lie from Perry (and Romney) is that drilling oil will create a huge number of jobs. Drilling oil does not create a lot of jobs and never has. This from Michael Levi, an energy expert at the Council on Foreign Relations:

The numbers that Perry and Romney are offering for job creation in the energy sector are unrealistic. They assume that they will be reversing deeply anti-industry Obama policies that don't actually exist (which is not to say that the Obama policies have no flaws), ignore real constraints at the state level, and don't fully account for market dynamics. Five hundred thousand is a reasonable upper limit for the number of jobs that a new policy might create by 2030, of which 130,000 or so might actually be in oil and gas. Taking into account market dynamics could lower those numbers further.

Then Perry's claim that if elected POTUS, he would create 2.5 million jobs is only "bold" from the perspective of being ridiculously small for an entire 4-year term. President Obama created more than that in only one year, and it is not enough. Economists at Barclays Capital estimate (taking into account the graying of America as well as population growth) the number of jobs needed going forward is a minimum of 75,000 to 100,000 per MONTH.

Perry is scary in more ways than one. I hope the media will stop letting such lies go unquestioned, and people will do their homework before they vote.

Drilling, digging, hell, praying in our waters or on land generate JOBS. You ding dongs forget this is the core problem in our nation. JOBS!!!!!

Our energy policy is a freakin' joke.

And if we needed to stop buying from a potential ENEMY, having our own resources at the ready is also good defense policy.-

But you liberal empty heads just keep spouting your slanted nonsense, it will make whoever the Republican nominee that much easier to elect - they could run Mickey Mouse against the idiot in the white house right now and win.

StevenAG::: To whom are you referring who is not from this country? I have yet to see Rick Perry's birth certificate-- he may be from Mexico. And Romney may be from Canada. Ron Paul may be from Norway.

If you are referring to President Obama, are you listening to The Donald, Rush Limburger or the others from Faux News? He was born in Hawaii-- and last I knew, Hawaii was a part of this country. I can remember when it wasn't tho-- like back in 1941 when the military dependents were shipped to the states from the Philippines and the ship had a layover in Hawaii. But things have changed since then.

Chris, I beg to differ with you. The only candidate for President who is not electable is Barack Obama. We have to hope for Huntsman to come to life so that we can avoid having a psychopath in office come 2013. Obama's chance of re-election is zero and falling daily.

Susie

L O L

Here, let me try my hand at some Tea. Perry's a SOSHULIST. He's secretly MEXICAN! Where's that thar birth CERTIFICATE? And not the one publicly on the web, THAT'S FAKE. He's a SOSHULIST MOOSLUM planning takeover! WHY WONT HE RELEASE HIS GRADES DADGUMMIT!!? IT'S A CONSPIRACY YYYEEEEEARRRGH!

How'd I do? Did I spell too many words right?

Paul F. -- To become dependent from foreign oil, we need to invest in alternative energy, much of which is cleaner as well. Thanks for reminding me of LIE #4 about having large oil reserves in the US. You may note whenever you hear this advertised there is never mention that the US has only ONE of the largest reserves, but compared to reserves elsewhere such as the Middle East it is minuscule. What we have is a lot of natural gas, which is cleaner and cheaper than nuclear plants etc., so I support development of that.

In the meantime, we are losing wind turbine business, electric battery business, solar business, bio fuel business etc. to China and other countries like Brazil. We need to sponsor a NASA-style energy program, but the narrow-minded and short-sighted Teapublicans will never support such efforts, and therefore are the last who should preach about energy and national security. Heck, they have no business preaching about national security period.

DM -- You left out that the Moon Walk never happened...

Oh heck, what's the use. Jobs? We don't need no stinkin' jobs. Obviously the presidential bus (which is just like the one McCain used and the GOP/TP candidate will use), $16 muffins (which didn't really cost $16), and abortion (and making birth control, miscarriages, etc. illegal as well) are what's really important anyway.

Not to worry Eyelyn Ron Paul will not be the next president nor will Obama....

Not to worry Eyelyn Ron Paul will not be the next president nor will Obama

You got the first part right.

Eyelyn?

"Perry, Cain, Bachmann, & the T-Nut Clowns are DONE"

Ron Paul 2012, my ass. Paul has been a pork barrel politician like every other senator or house member. Paul has taken $M's from special interest groups and now has some imaginary purist image among the Baggers. If you take $5M or $1B, no difference, you are beholding to the donors. I'm assuming that if a person murders 2 people or 100 people--both are still murderers.

http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/07/ron-paul-texas-federal-spending-pork

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cycle=Career&type=I&cid=N00005906&newMem=N

"y'all just gotta try harder to find that oil in the ground - just look at Texas!!"

Rick's jobs plan

If the oil field produces 100 jobs how many jobs are produced by what those 100 spend?

old fat guy-1144960

If the oil field produces 100 jobs how many jobs are produced by what those 100 spend?

1000's of jobs will be created in futile attempts to clean up after fracking.

Hey Bachmann, I'll see your millions of jobs and create billions of jobs (as mini me stands beside him with a smirk)...

"unelectable"??? "This bi-partisan crap has to go"??? The man is half way through his first term. obviously, he was elected or you'd be on here whining about the failure of President McCain to reverse the disastrous policies of GW. The polls against each of the Republican challengers show Obama will be re-elected to finish the job. The fact you'retouting the bona fides of the ancient isolationist who's views are well known and roundly rejected, having never won a single primary in any of his efforts at a national election, speaks volumes about your political insights.

Mark, please provide links to your assertions.

I mean, you're claiming that the current 'inflation of prices' (whatever that means) of 3.87% is higher than it was in, say . . . December of 1979 when it was 13.29%? http://inflationdata.com/inflation/inflation_rate/historicalinflation.aspx

President Obama was the worst thing to happen to this country? Really? So racism, the KKK, the skinhead movement, anti-Semitism, The Great Depression (to name just a few things), etc., were better than President Obama being elected by the majority of the people, and electoral votes? Wow, that's quite a statement. How about expanding on that statement, to back up your assertion.

Opinions are not facts, Mark, no matter how many times you say them. And the problem with facts is that they can be checked. I'm betting that you are a young college student, maybe in your first or second year of college, and have no idea of what you are talking about. That's okay, Mark, but try applying the methods of rigorous research to your political opinions that you are required to apply to your college studies.

Mark - Its clear you are delusional. Just a little curious what the voices in your head are saying!

Mark can absolutely share his opinions. Not a problem. The problem is, he is not just stating opinions, he is presenting something that is simply not true, as fact (the inflation rate). I simply pointed out that his assertion about the inflation rate is not factual, and also asked him to expand on his stated opinion about President Obama being the worst thing that has ever happened to this country.

Never told him to stop posting, or to shut up. So, butt out, [not so] jollyoldsoul1.

I hear how much people blame obama for not getting things done. Even when we had a minor majority of the sentate and house and control The republicans had filibuster power and threatened to use it. The last 1.5 years of tea part non sense. Their goal hasn't been job or economy. They openly took a vow to remove Obama. They block bills that have their policies in them just because Obama decides to agree with them. All in the light of trying to make Obama the bad guy. Is obama perfect Noo. Anyone in the middle class that votes for a single republican is ignorant of their self interest. If anyone votes straight down their party lines they are ignorant. We need people in office that are not out for themselves, their party or special interests. We need someone who will work for the people. Who will be fair to everyone. I would take Ron Paul over either side right now If I had a choice. If for only the reason he is someone different not directly attached to special interest and lobbying right now. If there was someone better I would vote that person. We truly need to end the party lines, party bickering and the party's just trying to get more power on one end or the other. Both parties spend so much time trying to PISS in each other's cornflakes and see who should have more power or who's viewpoint is right or wrong. UMM they kind of forget we are the cornflakes and we are tired of getting pissed on. This message had been brought to you by Kellog's Corn Flakes and demanding a better and more balanced BREAKFAST!!!

jollyoldsoul1

What are you doing wasting time posting here? Get busy and get back to your job (stated by you on newsvine) helping Chinese companies steal our industrial base. Come on, those jobs aren't going to outsource themselves, Tea Party patriot! Hurry up or a family in Detroit might keep their factory line job for another week and cost the company money in real wages!

"GREAT PRESIDENT?"

We already have a GREAT President, his name is President Barack Hussein Obama... silly!

Next question?

By the way, alwaysfaithful, frosty, ireckcon and the rest of your previous monikers - enjoy it while you can! Tick Tock... little troll... tick...tick...

Let's time travel a little nixon (crook) reagen (bad actor) bush (liar) see a pattern today to many nut cases to mention not a real presidental person in the (mob) it would be funny but it's really sad. BHO it win in 2012!

Yep,,, President Barack Obama is the Ronald Reagan conservatives can't find among their own

Reagan was a liberal socialist, he gave 11 million illegal aliens amnesty, raised taxes, and exploded the debt, but they only like to remember what they want to about him.

Colin Powell.

Colin Powell is forever compromised by the weapons of mass destruction BS, he went along with Rice, Bush and Cheney, and tarnished an otherwise wonderful reputation as a straight shooter.

Ok my fellow Americans......Who do you think would make a "GREAT PRESIDENT?"

Dennis Kucinich.

Ron Paul.

Ron Paul

He said GREAT Red not GREATEST loser. I can understand where that gets confusing.

Ron Paul has about the same chance as Rue Paul.

Let's make George Clooney president. He's multicultural, affable, used to making big money deals, directing people, and doesn't tend to fumble in the limelight. Plus, seeing his face every time national events happen would make the events just a little better. :)

Lots of women would have a crush on the president.

Reagan was a liberal socialist, he gave 11 million illegal aliens amnesty, raised taxes, and exploded the debt, but they only like to remember what they want to about him.

yep, they seem to have forgotten about the Iran/Contra thingie, or that he slept through his second term. In his third term (served by GHWB), the economy imploded from all of Uncle Ronnie's exploits, which in turn led to him being a one-termer (something else the TBaggers never mention). Then Clinton came along and made things right again only to have Son of Bush screw it up worse than it's been since 1929. Of course Obama, having no magic wand, can't fix things overnight so he's an unmitigated failure in their misguided minds.

Any wonder they defend candidates like this, when their favorite president was actually suffering from senility before he left office. Do they know he was a union boss, president of the Actors Guild (union). Republicans are not really sure what they adore and what they hate anymore. They love Hermann Cain, they had posters of Obama with a bone through his nose, so I guess that was about his fiscal policy or something. They hate handouts, but they love them for profitable oil companies. They hate big government telling you how to live your life and taking personal responsibility away from you, but they want to tell women how to live their life and deny them the personal choice and responsibility to bear a child. They hate communists, unless they are in communist China working as slave labor making products to sell you. They hate to see a lazy incompetent Public sector union employee somehow get paid, but they are OK with the CEO's, hedge fund managers, and bankers who continue to get million dollar bonus checks for crookedness and incompetence that brought the economy to the brink of collapse. I guess this is why they don't mind pinning their hopes on a flip flopper like Romney, hell they are so used to it, they don't even notice the difference anymore. Vote to Cut Your Throat, because less is more! Vote for rich people because that is the only thing that will ever help poor people. Whatever, even 22 year old kids see that as nonsense and are protesting that silly crap.

Excellent post Forrest. Your list is almost a perfect illustration of the "double think" that Orwell created. And as Orwell explained, double think doesn't just happen, it requires it's practitioners to actively and completely believe one "reality", even as as they completely believe it direct opposite. Moreover, it becomes impossible to demonstrate to a "double thinker" that they are hypocrites.

Carol O MI

The teapartiers' were so livid at their protests before the last election because they thought that the democrats were wanting to take away their social security and medicare. How ironic! Are they blind to reality!?

Yes they all lie, making promises they know they can't keep. Even if a Republican were able to fool the people and get elected (that is assuming that all of the Republican Governors and Secretary of States are able to block all elderly, disabled, and low income, and minority people from voting), the Democrats can use the same tactics the minority Republicans have ben using for the past 5 years. Object, force 60 vote majorities on all votes, affecting TAX CUTS, CAPITAL GAINS CUTS, CORPORATE TAX CUTS, INCOME TAX INCREASES ON THE POOR. ELDERLY, DISABLED. Poor Republican President wouldn't have anything to sign. He wouldn't be able to control a woman's body, and that would just break his little heart.

Sorry Chuck, but there are enough bought and paid for pseudo Democrats who will gladly whore themselves to the R's that those tactic won't happen. These minority terrorism tactics only work if a Party demands absolute adherence to its catechism as the GoP/TP have done.

those kinds of misspellings are trivial. What I hate more than anything is the TO MUCH people. Its TOO MUCH! Too few. too big. too small. always t double o, never TO. That crap pulls me out of a comment like a whiplash! Oh well. I used to hate english, but now I care too much. Damn public education.

The truth hurts..eh wilman (senior koolaid drinker for the Republican party)

The republicans voted unanimously to kill jobs bills, they did that twice, politically that is all that counts right now, more people now blame republicans for the unemployment than they do the president, those votes gave Obama a get out of jail free card, thank you Mitch!

The throw money at unions a bit longer, and worry about how we can pay for it later plan?

Tax de rich...

Republicans throw money at the most profitable oil companies on the planet, and tax de poor.

Union members pay taxes, oil companies, not so much.

De poor don't pay any taxes..

Neither do the rich.

If you paid that much you must have grossed over $500,000, or you need a new tax accountant, but keep the money flowing in we need it for Exon.

It's not cheating it is considered smart business to reduce your taxes to the lowest amount possible by using the legal loopholes avialable to you.

wilman,

I call bull on you claim of paying 100k in taxes.

Anyone that makes that much would 1) not waste time on a blog, they would be putting their time and money to a better use, 2) could articulate better arguments than you do.

The poor don't pay any taxes, wilman? Really? So what do you call payroll taxes? What do you call gas taxes? How about all of the other fees, and taxes paid on utilities, etc.?

An honest examination of the claim that '47% of Americans don't ay income taxes' will reveal that many of that 47% includes people in the top 5% of income earners, and small businesses that file taxes as individuals using a Schedule C form. In fact, anyone who derives all of their income from capital gains, interest, or various other investments, don't even pay the payroll taxes that fund SS or Medicare that the poor pay. Shoot, even unemployment is taxed.

I agree with Dennis, you are probably not who you claim to be, nor do you earn enough to have to pay $100,000.00 in taxes.

Hi Matthew....I dont mean this in a bad way, but I get soooo tired of this "47% dont pay taxes" thing. On Fox, it's '50%'. The reality is that it's closer to 38% See FactCheck.org

I cant speak for all of them...I only know two. They're my inlaws; in their 80's, living in their (paid off) house and working 8 hours a week. The temperature in their house is usually cooler than normal, they dont take vacations, and I swear...they trim each other's hair lol.

Anyway, I agree with your statement. I just hate to see this un-fact continueing. About 38% of households dont pay income tax. And as you mention...they DO pay all other taxes.

that's okay. We all believe you, wilman. I bet you are also 6' 5", weigh 280 lbs. and personally took out an entire brigade of NVA soldiers in Vietnam.

No problem , Ouch! I understand, I was just using their own figure from their own arguments. They make it soooo easy, sometimes.

factcheck.org, and other similar sites are in my favorites list.

It is sad that your in-laws have to live that way, and still have to work 8 hours a week at their age. They are an example of what trickle down our legs economics, and the free market produce when left unchecked.

The 38%, does that include the non-poor who also do not pay income taxes? Such as the corporations, hedge fund managers, trust babies, etc.? I've been a bit busy with a new job and recent move to do a lot of studying or research on the situation.

Wilman::: What do you mean by "the poor don't pay taxes"? Clarify it for me. Do you think that they don't pay taxes? They might not pay FEDERAL INCOME TAXES-- is that what you mean. Qualify your statement. You pay taxes when you buy things at GoodWill or Salvation Army-- well, maybe you are so rich you don't have to use those places but us plain folk do.

well, maybe you are so rich you don't have to use those places but us plain folk do.

Trust me Susie, the guy is nothing but a paid troll here only to stir s--t. Nothing else. Once the election is over and the TRepubs are sent packing, he'll go away

The poor don't pay Federal, State or City Income Tax.

Nice for Obuma to classify Social Security as a payroll tax....

But that's only camofloge...

For the rest of you losers, believe what you want...

GOPisextinct - I love your reply above! That was perfect.

Pertaining to your last post: Huh?

Just what were you trying to say? Try again, but this time, please try to be coherent.

whose last post?

wilman's, Bill. You, and I were writing at the same time, but you posted sooner. Ain't the Internet grand?

Even in the energy sector President Obama's policies created jobs

For bankruptcy lawyers to sort out the 500 mil green boondogle he created...

We spend 8X that much each and every year for oil company subsidies, and they are posting the highest profits in history bar none. 8 Solyndras a year, and nobody on the republican side says a thing, not a peep.

Wilman as if you haven't read this.Bush had a 50 billion renewable energy plan billand solyndra was part of that which adds up to 1.3% of that bill not including 250 million put up by private investors.Read it might hurt a little but you will end up with more knowledge than before.

And why should the government subsidize any of these businesses at all? If it's such a good idea, someone will put up the money for it... If it's a loser, then the government will...

Because then you would only have things that are profitable and only so long as they are profitable, people in rural areas would not have electricity for instance because it is not cost effective. What company would have put a man on the moon, or launched the first satellites.

That's funny Jim.

The pundits on the left claim Perry simply benefitted from demand and don't want to give him credit for the jobs created in the energy sector in Texas.

You want to give Obama credit when in fact his policies have hampered growth across the board.

Hilarious. Leftists are funny.

Hi Doug

Forest, I notice the prolific Wilman only shuts his trap when faced with the truth...great point to which he has no answer.

How are you "anchor daddy"?

Funny how you Democrats always feel it's ok to spend someone else's money.

I agree with your point regarding electricity.

How about Amtrack? How much is this subsidized? And at what cost?

How about putting a man on the moon? What was the cost? Forty years later, we are still wasting money on NASA....

Pam they never want to take things to their logical conclusion, its always some short and sweet bumper sticker slogan that is going to solve some very complicated problems. How about we close the Small Business Administration, maybe they should not be involved with supporting small business upstarts with tax payer loan guarantees, you think they want to go that far?

The logical conclusion is that we have a fourteen trillion dollar deficit created by an out of control government.

I'm fine Doug, I hope you are as well, I had a little fun last night, and I hope you don't mind me pulling your leg a little bit, I thought the whole idea of an Anchor Daddy was pretty funny.

Well wilman the point is that it is not one way or the other, the government needs to and should invest in certain things, we just have to be smart about how and when we do, we waste a lot of money, but we do not waste all of it. We need to go after waste and fraud, but we should not throw the baby out with the bath water.

That's true, but more often than not the government does not spend our tax dollars wisely.

I enjoyed it forrest. Quite funny.

You mentioned SBA. My litmus test is constitutionality. I'm curious....what department would you cut?

I often have conversations with a fellow who is very Democrat who worked in military intelligence. He would cut none. His view is they were all created with a purpose. What do you think?

I would have to think it through to give you a sensible answer, but I would go through every department, and agency and look for obvious waste to be eliminated first, and quite possibly some departments could be eliminated, or consolidated with others to reduce the operating costs.

That was a sensible answer forrest.

We can discuss our interpretations of "general welfare" another day.

Have a great rest of the day.

Will do, and you do the same.

Forrest,

See Forrest you are closer to the Tea Party than you like to admit. (your post 15.18 above). In March 2011 the GAO put out a report show casing billions in federal spending being wasted on fraud, waste, duplicated services, and over lapping programs. If you have read many of my post in the past, you will see that I have always said once the government cuts spending, waste, over lapping programs, and quit issuing more and more regulations then the people will look at raising revenue across the board. We have to many civil servants, at both the federal and state and local levels, that try and justify their positions by continuous issuing more and more regulations, but never canceling the ones that are no longer needed. We need to revise the tax code, currently about 20,000 pages that no one can understand) and do away with loop holes, before raising taxes, because if we raise taxes the politicians in Washington (democrats and republicans) will just find more programs to waste them on.

There is only one tax that I would agree to now, that would be anytime a President w/congressional approval send Americans to war, they will have to pay for it with an added War Tax on all Americans.

As far as what departments to cut, I would start with removing the Department of Education, Department of Energy, and Department of Transportation, for starters. Might put some of their current responsibilities with other agencies but would remove them from Cabinet status.

Now back to football, have a good day. BTW, the Tea Party is saying pretty much the same thing you said in post 15.18.

Maybe so Sarge, but I did not get to the part where I then take all those savings and give them to the unions. Ha ha Trick or Treat!

Wilman::: Let me see. Show me how President Obama created such a deficit in so short a time. That is easy to solve-- Shrub (that is a little Bush) created most of it over his 8 years in office. Then you have to remember that Shrub (your little tin god on wheels) didn't figure any of HIS wars into his budget. No, every month there would be an "emergency" so he would just help himself to that money. President Obama DID figure Shrub's wars into his budget.

You sound like a typical rich bich that has contempt for common folk. Thank God the common folk for the most part have more sense than you seem to have.

Exactly Susie, they put their war on Obama's tab then bitch about the size of "his" tab. Now they won't even leave the tip, so the poor waitress can make a living.

When Obama put the cost of Afghanistan and Iraq 'on budget' everyone with half a brain knew the budget deficit would go through the roof, which it did. GWB may not have been as stupid as we thought. Afterall, who else could spend tens of billions and leave office with his followers still thinking he was a conservative?

Bruce -848280 you are little slow on your statement. When the Democrats took over the House and Senate in 2006, The bill for Iraq and Afghanistan was put ON BUDGET. If the Republicans had their way, it would still be funded on an emergency basis.

Here's an idea, close the f'ing Department of Homeland Security. Bush "consolidated" about 20 agencies to "streamline" our security, and instead created a more bloated bureaucracy that was more expensive and provided less effective functionality. Save money, protect the country. win-win!

Neither was Obama...

Wilman,,,, Nobody is qualified to run for the highest office of government who hates government! -- That would be like appointing an arsonist to run your house!

"Neither was Obama..."

That dog just won't hunt. But you birthers keep at it. Betting that tin hat you wear is hot and miserable in the summertime.

Boy that Wilman character thinks his s**t don't stink. Fraid he's not any better than anyone else, regardless of what he thinks of himself. Crackhead? Well, we can't argue with a meth user, so just calm down before you bust a blood vessel.

Oh Susie, you're such a card.... Too bad it's up to me to pay for your illegitimate kids, since the drunk guy you brought to the trailer park won't.

Nope,,, He hides those thoughts under his "Perry Rock"

Here's an interesting fact...Bain Capital Employees presidential campaign donations. You know the same Bain Capital that Romney worked at. For 2011, $34,000 to Romney's campaign and $76,600 to Obama's re-election campaign. That's a little telling don't you think.

Don't Vote,,,, Not much,, Romney also got a multi-million dollar "Golden Parachute" from Bain Capital for killing jobs...

All it tells us is that Bain Capital understands who will lead us into full economic growth

Gee, all I see is Obama going around the country collecting millions of dollars.. Why is it that you liberals are OK with this, but if a Republican does it.. its a problem. What a bunch of hypocrites!! or maybe sheep.

We all know that both parties are in the money and election business. We need short campaigns, free debate coverage, and limited campaign cost.

Somebody should tell jcook140 that President Obama's donations are reported. 99% of Republican donations are NOT REPORTED thanks to the REPUBLICAN Supreme Court Citizen United decision.

Fact of the matter is, Obama improved Bush's policies & created more jobs even for the oil industry

Keeping federal government out of these issues was always a weak foolish argument Gunny --- Big Energy won't stop lobbying federal government & they write our nation's Energy Plans, we go into wars to defend oil profits

Hey Jim, last I checked, via CSPAN hearings, the environmentalists are the ones writing our energy plans.. How can you say that the oil companies have control when there is no new drilling in the Gulf, no drilling elsewhere, reluctance to go with gas for trucks (Pickens plan).. complaints about coal, fracking, no oil sands no pipeline.. If, as you say, the Oil companies are in charge, they are doing a lousy job of protecting their "interests"... The Natural Resources Defense Council, on the other hand, pretty much wrote the Cap and Trade legislation that Boxer, Markey, Waxman and the Dems proposed..

Big oil gets billions tax free from the oil depletion allowance. Also, they have great effect on what OPEC does. Why do you think we spend billions on defending the Saudi royal family and the Emir of Kuwait. Also, the big oil share holders are the big auto company owners.That's why they hated to produce an efficient engine. Pump it and burn it and get your tax free dollars was our energy policy for decades and still is to some degree.

Repulsive as it may be, it is quite obvious that big money runs America and owns our government. We will force real change or continue our downhill ride to disaster.

The poor don't pay Federal, State or City Income Tax.

Nice for Obuma to classify Social Security as a payroll tax....

But that's only camofloge...

For the rest of you losers, believe what you want...

I didn't realize "President Obama classified Social Security as a payroll tax". I could have sworn it was called that before 2009....

The poor pay a much much, much, larger percentage of their income in sales tax and property tax than the rich. How much income tax should someone making $9/hour pay after they've paid for food, clothing, shelter, utilities, doctor's bills, meds, transportation, fuel, insurance, phones, etc.

The poor pay a much much, much, larger percentage of their income in sales tax and property tax than the rich.

Here - the rich pay less for their multimillion dollar home - than a person with a $60,000 dollar house pays. In fact a guy who paid $10,000 for a run down old home with a small lot pays more in property tax for his home than the guy with a $500,000 house. Pays to have money and political connections.

Moreover - if a home owner who doesn't have connections - asks the Assessor to reaccess his property because he feels he is paying too much - the Assessor will INCREASE his taxes - punishment for wanting what the rich and connected get on request.