Looking Presidential”

That’s what Barry was doing on his “Asian” trip to Hawaii and the South Pacific instead of exercising some Presidential leadership back in Washington. When the going gets tough, Barry flies off for a road trip.

From Politico:

Obama comes home, may miss road
By: Jennifer Epstein and Glenn Thrush
November 20, 2011 06:59 AM EST

Homecoming is such un-sweet sorrow for Barack Obama.

The president’s critics have carped that his nine-day Asian Pacific trip — which came in the middle of the supercommittee’s food fight — was ill-timed and off-point. But, from Obama’s perspective, he couldn’t distance himself far enough from the flaming political garbage dump that is Washington, and the old political headaches returned anew when Air Force One went wheels-down at Andrews in Sunday’s wee hours.

Obama spent more than a week looking relaxed and presidential while he pitched a jobs agenda to some of the country’s most important trading partners — interrupted only by a semi-gaffe that’s become grist for Fox News. Now, as international flattery gives way to domestic sniping, he will seek to avoid getting sucked into another partisan battle over deficits and government spending.

His trip, punctuated by an Asian trade deal and a new U.S. security pledge to Australia, was, above all, a stab at reasserting Obama’s commitment to American exceptionalism at a time when he’s been forced to play small ball back home by hostile congressional Republicans.

“There are times [when] we question our influence around the world,” Obama said during an appearance in his hometown of Honolulu early in the trip — stoking GOP criticism even then by referring to his location as Asia. “But the news I have to deliver … is American leadership is still welcome.”

Good luck maintaining that lofty level of discourse over the next two weeks if the supercommittee fails to reach an agreement and the Washington blame game kicks into high gear.

In fact, the GOP offered some barbed alohas to the president while he was still island hopping, blasting his comment that U.S. corporations have gotten “a little bit lazy” in seeking foreign investment.

(even though House Speaker John Boehner and the GOP walked away from the president’s grand-bargain offer last summer).

Thank you for that reminder!

President Obama offered up over a 4 TRILLION deal & these Yahoo's in Congress can't even come up with 1 TRILLION!!!

Great posts to start the week Backhouse & Jack! ;o)

PS: Senator John Kerry schooled Gotcha Gregory on MTP yesterday morning...

Jack,

For a list of the President's remarkable accomplishments, here is a new and fabulous website:

Please check it out at: http://www.barackobama.com/record

I hope this Congress rating goes to2%

Welcome home Mr. President brought back thousands of jobs for the American people. This Congress can’t refuses to get its act together to resolve this Budget issue.

President Obama is still rocking the world. Congress is laughed at.

Backhouse, terrific post.

As I said in my Friday post, the GOP lacks the courage to tell Grover Nordquist to "shove it". Allegiance to one unelected American is inexcusable and is not democracy. Why are GOPTPers afraid of simply tearing up that pledge to Grover? Do they think Nordquist can target everyone of them? So what if he does. It takes courage to do what is right; that seems to be lacking when it comes to standing up to King Grover for the good of the country.

Jack, terrific post as well.

THIS IS HILLARYOUSLY FUNNY:

Chris Matthews Criticizes Obama on MSNBC 11/20/11

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcvjbQ_GRd0

What a shame. The Democrats have the simple solution of raising revenue, that will work. Then the Republican solution is to cut spending that hurts the people that can't afford it.

Listen to Lord Grover and protect the rich.

Really good signs

Best sign seen so far:

"Obama is NOT a brown-skinned socialist who gives free health care - you're thinking of Jesus."

"If they enforced bank regulation the way they do park rules we wouldn't be in this mess in the first place."

On a happier note:
TWO CAMPUS POLICE officers in California have been suspended from duty after footage showing peaceful student demonstrators being dosed with pepper spray went viral over the weekend.
http://www.thejournal.ie/two-officers-suspended-over-pepper-spraying-of-peaceful-protesters-284319-Nov2011/

What not to do:
The cops in Oakland, CA must be insane or have very dense people calling the shots. Their response to Occupy Oakland was so over the top it’s staggering. Tear gas, riot gear, flashbombs. Hundreds of armored police descended on the peaceful encampment.

If you want to create martyrs to a cause you oppose, this is how it’s done people:

“They came in force, bringing hundreds and hundreds of para-military police officers to subdue a group of campers who offered no resistance. JP Dobrin has some amazing pictures of the police assault, if you want to see that. I find myself thinking much more about what isn’t there anymore, the social infrastructure that these people treated as a violent threat to, something. We shouldn’t romanticize what was happening in that camp; parts were incredibly beautiful and inspiring, and then parts were, like anywhere else you have people, problematic. But it was working and growing and struggling, until, of course, it wasn’t allowed to anymore.

I support peaceful protest and democratic dissent. What we should never countenance is state violence against people who are not using violence themselves, whatever the cause. I don’t care if it’s Occupy Wall Street or the Tea Party. Though those Tea Partiers had lots of guns.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/10/26/how-not-to-respond-to-a-peaceful-protest/

More from Oakland:
It was heartbreaking and surreal to be at the “crime scene” that was, until recently, Occupy Oakland. I don’t really have words. When I first went down there, the police had the whole area blocked off and you couldn’t get close. There were pockets of occupiers gathered on street corners talking about what they had seen, what had happened, and you could hear a lot of anger and amazement at the number of police that had been deployed. People were naming off the different police departments that were represented, like trainspotters. A whole lot of different police departments were represented. At one point, a column of San Leandro police in full riot gear came marching along the sidewalk and I stepped back, almost involuntarily. It’s a scary thing to be standing there and look at them staring right through you.
http://zunguzungu.wordpress.com/2011/10/25/preoccupied/

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

Those are really good signs. How will FOX NOISE SEE them?

It has almost become a truism that talking points (Tax cuts create jobs.), catch phrases (socialist wealth re-distribution), and silly words (bundlers), have virtually no value in an honest debate. In the black and white world of simpletons, who have no real-world experience, they are the bell that makes them drool, but they make no meaningful contribution to public discourse.

However, we were treated to an exception to that "rule", that truism. Congress has proved that there really are times when something is "designed to fail". The so-called Super Committee was designed to fail. If that is too cynical, consider the Super Committee from another perspective. It could not have succeeded.

These sellouts - let's call Congressmen exactly what they are - took from their worthy ranks, the crème de la crème, the experts, the best minds and elevated them to the rank of SUPER CONGRESS PEOPLE. Surely, with the pressure of a deadline and triggers that would lead to draconian budget cuts (Have you noticed, all budget cuts are draconian?) we could expect major budget adjustments that would cure our fiscal ills. Not in a million years, folks.

On the Democratic side, we have Representatives Becerra, Clyburn, and Van Hollen. Senators include Murray, Baucus, and Kerry. Their average time in Washington, D.C. - 21 Years. It's almost too funny that Ms. Murray says she went to D.C. as a "tennis-shoe Mom" because she wanted to make a difference. Yes, of course, making a difference since 1992.

On the Republican side, we have Representatives Hensarling, Upton, and Camp. Senators include Portman, Kyl, and Toomey. Their average time in D.C., a mere 16 years. Rookies! To his credit, Toomey actually kept his promise to remain a Representative for only three terms. He's baaaaaack! This time we have his expertise as a Senator. These are the people who say government is the problem? They seem to like it there.

Many in this stellar group of 12 SUPER CONGRESS PEOPLE have also put in time in state houses. Many have worked as legislative aides and assistants. They really seem to like government.

Only the most obtuse, the most willfully ignorant can miss the fact that these people have been in Congress as we have piled up an astounding national debt of 15-trillion-dollars. Partisan hacks are going to throw out utterly irrelevant statistics. Unemployment rates? They go up and down, regardless of whether Democrats or Republicans hold a majority. Inflation? Up and down, regardless of who holds the majority. Such statistics fluctuate. That is their nature; up and down.

However, there are two things that have never gone down since 1980. National debt has increased every single year. EVERY SINGLE YEAR. Whether Republicans or Democrats hold a majority, the debt increases. What else goes up? Congressional pay! It NEVER declines. Since 1980 it has almost tripled. Destroy the budget, pile on debt, and give yourself a raise. See for yourself. http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/97-1011.pdf

Oh yeah. Those are the guys who are going to fix this problem. The Super Committee was designed to fail. That anyone votes to re-elect these people is beyond rational explanation.

Anyone ever see the details of that 4 TRILLION dollar package Obama "offered up"? Yeah, all talk. Obama has to pacify his low information supporters into thinking he's actually doing something when in reality he's doing nothing, except campaigning.

Keep looking for the mystical 4 TRILLION dollar package Libs. Too bad it doesn't exist.

Watch how all the low information Libs jump to the Obama talking points on this subject. It will be fun to watch.

I realize that arithmetic is a basic skill severely lacking in anyone on the left, but the super committee was made up of twelve people- six democrats, and six republicans.

The democrats insisted on higher taxes- period.

Who is intransigent?

As to the "fairness" issues- half the country pays NO federal income taxes- these are the very same people who use most of the government services. This is not a sustainable system- part of the electorate cannot continue to be allowed to vote themselves heaping helpings of what the other half has earned.

If a bunch of millionaires feel so compelled to pay higher taxes that they see the need to lobby congress to raise them- they can just write checks to the Treasury as gifts. The program exists, and they should take full advantage.

When they do, and they show the world the cancelled checks, I'll be happy to listen to their ideas. Until then- well, let's just say I have a habit of tuning out hypocrites, and leave it at that.

JODY, thanks,

Norquist is the Wrangler that represents Big Money corporate interests that seek to control us and usurp our Government. That's how he's funded and how he keeps GOP afraid.

He made it clear that what he does is EXTORTION. He is extorting allegiance by saying: If you don't sign the pledge and stick to it, I will get you unelected.

This is what Norquist said last night on '60 Minutes'.

Joanne and NONJ,

Seems like you are the only two who can't stay on topic: Congress!

You can just keep posting your automatic Obama bashing reply to any topic on FR.

Happy Thanksgiving to both of you.

Chris Matthews is, and always has been, a gas bag. He invites interesting people on his show, asks them questions--and as soon as they begin to answer he interrupts them. I wind up screaming at him to STFU! because I want to hear what his guests are saying. Drives me crazy--can't watch him. He's only interested in what he has to say, and is annoying as Rush and O'Reilly and others on the right fringe.

Can one of you Rebaggers please tell me why the top 1% and corporations should not bear some the burden? And don't give me the same old tired crap that they are job creators. I have heard that BS for the past 30 odd years. The plan, what the GOP has wanted to do since the 30's and 60's is to get rid of social security and medicare. To get rid of all the social safety nets. To destroy the middle class (that's why they want to get rid of unions). Careful, some of you Rebaggers are in the same socio-economic group. You may be biting off your nose to spite your face.

If not the worst Congress ever, then certainly the least Congress ever.

Least in touch.

Least productive.

Least respectable.

Least compromising.

Least cooperative.

Least dedicated to the common good.

Least ... [fill in your own favorite].

And good morning from the Heartland, everyone. Where a substantial majority of residents (approximately 58 percent including 24 percent of Republicans) are calling for the recall of Governor Scott Walker.

Walker protesters even rallied on the street where he lives, and his neighbors came out to sign recall petitions.

http://host.madison.com/ct/news/opinion/editorial/scott-walker-s-whining-about-protesters-shows-his-disconnect-with/article_f594cf8e-5aa0-56f2-86e3-b49f7baf6413.html

And 30,000 rallied in Madison on Saturday in support of the recall.

http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/tens-of-thousands-rally-for-walker-recall-at-the-capitol/article_157512a0-12cd-11e1-8615-001cc4c002e0.html

The good news for Republicans? At least 50 people showed up to support the Governor.

LoLoL

To all my friends at First Read this Thanksgiving week -- yes, even you Joe --

-- may you know peace, love, and happiness and always be near the ones you love.

Actually we are finally seeing that the majority of the country's problems have not been the presidents we put in off...he is not a magician...it has been congress.

Even Bush...congress failed to stop him from executing his agenda and messing up 100 years of foreign policy. I have emails and phone conversations to prove that on that day I was ashamed to be an American since the president was making a massive mistake and the congress that was supposed to supply checks and balances has also failed. I realized this on this day and became and independent.

And people, congress is GOP and Dems alike. If you are a die hard Republican or Democrat eventually you will come around and see that both parties are messed up..and no where is this more apparent than in congress....so how do you expect one of these same guys...a candidate from congress!!!! to take the seat in the oval office and be any better???

Beverly in Chicago,

"I hope this Congress rating goes to2%"

It's hard to imagine that 13% actually approve of this Congress' job performance. Who are these people? 13% of the people they polled must have been street people with no access whatsoever to news sources. I can't believe that 13% has any idea at all of what is going on.

The thing that set me off this weekend was the whole Iowa bit. Crying!? Really? Wow... I instantly gained respect for Romney just because he refused to attend that pathetic event.

This is the America that has spent countless time putting the alpha male on a pedestal. Our current generation of candidates grew up in the cultural influences of John Wayne and Dirty Harry movies. We are the nation that worships greed and the coldly corporate sharks who hide their true feelings and intentions behind emotional masks. These are what our nation considers to be "real men". Yes, men are allowed to be touchy feely behind closed doors and in their private lives. Yet when they're on stage (be it in government or business), they're supposed to be pillars of strength and unstoppable like a force of nature.

How in the heck did this American culture create the situation of the Iowa round table? Being honest and bravely admitting your flaws / mistakes is one thing. Bring them up to illustrate lessons that you learned or to talk about how they made you grow as a person is fine. Yet crying about your failings? Begging for forgiveness on national television? What a load of crap. I'm shocked that this group of people weren't booed off stage for being weaklings.

America may have given the 2010 elections to the republicans ... it is a sure thing that America is regreting that decision .. how did it happen .. Democrats didnt think the election was improtant .. ..the tea Party put all there money into it .. as a result America got a bunch of crazy people in congress ..while the sane republicans areto afraid to say anything.. I dont believe the Democrats will stay home in 2012 .. I believe the Sane Republicans will not vote for more extremism in 2012..

joannasmith ... the supercommittee was not supposed to be the presidents job to come up with answers ..or direction .. no one in there right mind would expect a republican to say anything to President Obama except NO .. get off that talking point that the failure of the Supercommittee wa Obamas Failure .. start blameing the real culprit NORQUEST

I can't wait until the US is on the verge of collapse just like in 2008 and than we are gong to see these corrupt politicians panic and this time it is going to be too fuc.ing late, just like Greece, Italy, and others.

Jody, Norquist said on '60 Minutes' he will get the big $cash behind would-be congressionals and get them elected, but only if they sign and uphold the pledge.

Norquist said in his giggly thugster mafia-ish way,

that if they play nice, the predators will "get to govern".

So how does everyone like that vote for change, back in 2010 now?

no joe:

As to the "fairness" issues- half the country pays NO federal income taxes- these are the very same people who use most of the government services.

Oh, you mean like roads and bridges, and the Interstate Highway system, and railroads, and sanitation, and airports, and police and firefighters, and nurses and doctors and hospitals, and snow removal, and lifeguards, and the Coast Guard, and the National Guard, and the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines, and sports stadiums, and state and national parks, and Small Business Administration loans, and public transportation, and oil company subsidies, and subsidies for the Chamber of Commerce, and food inspection, and drug safety, and public schools that produce an educated workforce, and public libraries, and all the myriad other services that the so-called job-creators in this country use to enjoy their privileged lives, keep themselves healthy, move themselves from one home and/or vacation spot to another, and sometimes, even to move commerce --

-- you know, services that the "very same people" pay for with OUR taxes, and some of which, many of "the very same people" cannot afford to use ourselves?

How much more do I want them to pay? Question is, how much do I want to stop paying them!!!! Their loop holes, paying any real taxes - how about all the money the hide in the Caymens? Puhleez. Give me a break. How much more do you think the rest of the country can take? Or the world? The times they are a changing and it is time to realize that.

Joe in Albany

THIS IS HILLARYOUSLY FUNNY:

Chris Matthews Criticizes Obama on MSNBC 11/20/11

Correspondent Joe in Albany,

Hardly anyone listens to tweety bird any more. He has lost all dignity and veracity. Not only he is a chameleon he also is spewing RWNJ rhectoric just to pimp his historical mythological book. Chris Matthews has lost me as a fan.

MSNBC should lean forward and give Chris' 6pm to Martin Bashir. At least Bashir doesn't abuse the Queens English every time he opens his mouth. Neither does Bashir slobber all over his guest. Bashir stands up to RWNJs instead of agreeing with they by giving them a big wet one.

Read this from a Southern girl:

First of all, I am white. Secondly, I am a woman. Thirdly, and most importantly, I am a Southerner. Got that?

People need to realise that Bagger Vance didn't really exist, and neither does Barack, the Magic Negro.

When the President broached healthcare reform, he saddled Congress with the task. That's actually what Congress is supposed to do: legislate. Or maybe Chris has forgotten what happened when the last Democratic President sent the First Lady to Capitol Hill with a fully written draft of healthcare legislation, with the message to "pass it." A Democratic Congress handed him his ass.

http://emiliawahoo76.blogspot.com/2011/11/chris-matthews-lets-dogs-out.html?spref=tw

JoAnna:

AM - you're getting more shrill, as if that was possible. Half the people of this country pay no income taxes to pay for the roads they drive on, the bridges they cross over, the police and firefighters they have access to, the federal, state and local government services they receive, and the defense of this country. And still you complain.

Au contraire, JoAnna. I pay my taxes, too, and I'M not complaining about that.

You are.

Have a nice Thanksgiving, JoAnna, and please try to remember what Thanksgiving is about.

PhinePhancy,

One of the millionaires in the Patriotic Millionaires for Fiscal Strength group told Norquist:

that if Norquist is so opposed to taxation, he should move to Somalia.

NJNB -- Damn right they insisted on new tax revenues. Get a grip on reality. Below is a piece from WaPo's Wonkbook explaining how grand bargains succeeded in the past.

Catherine Rampell: "Republicans on the deficit-reduction supercommittee have offered a deal with 24 cents of every dollar in savings coming from tax increases, and the other 76 cents from spending cuts...In the five fiscal grand bargains of the 1980s and early 1990s, tax increases accounted for an average of 61 cents of every dollar saved. In fact, in President Reagan’s 1982 and 1984 budget-trimming deals, more than 80 percent of deficit reductions came from tax increases. What’s more, the deals passed with majority support from both parties. Mr. Reagan may be remembered as an antitax hero, but he actually raised taxes 11 times over the course of his presidency, all in the name of fiscal responsibility."

I mean, really, your party's naked self interest is disgusting at this point NJ. The no tax mantra has been exposed for what it is; nothing but a pile of manure, in other words, fertilizer for the rich.

Why did Reagan raise taxes 11 times people?????

Link below:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/wonkbook-the-supercommittees-real-failure-isnt-on-the-deficit/2011/11/21/gIQAkeTZhN_blog.html?hpid=z1

AM - Have a nice Thanksgiving, JoAnna, and please try to remember what Thanksgiving is about.

I imagine for you, you'll be protesting the pilgrims.

phine - stop with the liberal talking points. We're not PAYING them anything. The tax loopholes they use just let them keep more of the money that was theirs in the first place. JoAnn does not ask an unreasonable question. Everyone's mantra is that the rich ought to pay their fair share. Asking how much you think their fair share should be is a "fair" question. If you don't have an answer, all you are doing is parroting the liberal line.

I love it when libs claim they want to cut spending. I don't care if they offer $4 trillion or $2. It's all lie and propaganda. They have never cut spending. They have this delusional idea that not increasing spending as much as they were going to counts as cutting spending.

And then they want to convince us they will keep their word to follow thru 10 years from now? Anytime the libs tell you they promise to cut spending years from now, you can just discard that as another of their usual lies.

Dedicated to the spinners and GOPtpers who refuse to listen to the voices of the American people because they put Pledge Over Country:

"68% of millionaires (those with investments of $1 million or more) support raising taxes on those with $1 million or more in income.

Fully 61% of those with net worths of $5 million or more support the tax on million-plus earners".

http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2011/10/27/most-millionaires-support-warren-buffetts-tax-on-the-rich/

When Chris Matthews steps outside he sticks his finger in the air to see which way his political wind will allow his spittle to be blown.

Case in point:

MSNBC's Chris Matthews said that Kennedy had "turned the ball over to Barack."

"Barack is the last [Kennedy] brother," Matthews said on NBC's "Today" Show in 2009

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/08/26/msnbcs_matthews_barack_is_the_last_kennedy_brother.html

And how many people remember that Chris Matthews, who calls himself a Democrat, not only voted for Dubya Bush twice, he became the biggest Bush cheerleader at MSNBC, right up until 2007, when the Democrats retook Congress and Bush's Lame Duck period well and truly set in. In other words, when it was safe and fashionable to jump on the anti-Bush bandwagon, Chris did so.

between 2001 and 2007 that Matthews, on MSNBC, went out of his way to praise, not only Bush, but the Republicans in general. You can watch Matthews have a giggle with a sober (as in he looks less orange) John Boehner and trash Hillary Clinton here:
http://mediamatters.org/research/200603070008

On the March 6 edition of MSNBC's Hardball, host Chris Matthews interviewed newly elected House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) and KT McFarland, a candidate for the Republican nomination to challenge Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) in New York's 2006 U.S. Senate race. But rather than asking his Republican guests "hardball" questions, Matthews repeatedly praised them, remarking that he was "proud" of Boehner and "can see this man's greatness," and describing McFarland as a "delightful candidate" who will "probably do very well in this uphill battle as the underdog." Matthews also used his interview with Boehner as a platform to attack Clinton, claiming that "people will say" she is "Dukakis in a dress" -- a reference to unsuccessful 1988 Democratic presidential candidate Michael Dukakis -- and pushing Boehner, unsuccessfully, to call her a "socialist."

And here's where Chris calls Bush a wise man and likens him to Atticus Finch (also another fictitious character). Or how about this one from 2005, when Matthews praised not only Bush, but Cheney and derided Democrats as carpers and complainers?

http://mediamatters.org/research/200602270010

Matthews gushes again: MSNBC host praised Bush's "brilliant political move"; derided Democrats as "carpers and complainers"
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200511300013
===========================================================
Do you need more?

Jack in Portsmouth

Chris Matthews is, and always has been, a gas bag. He invites interesting people on his show, asks them questions--and as soon as they begin to answer he interrupts them.

I feel the same way. It even annoys me when he has conservatives on his show when he won't let them finish a sentence before he interrupts them. In one episode of "The Simpsons" cartoon show, Matthews keeps asking Harry Reid questions and then interrupts every time while Reid is still trying to get his first word out. To his credit, Matthews played the Simpsons clip on his show, but he didn't seem to realize how close to the truth it actually was.

Congressional approval rating is a joke poll. When you ask Republicans they will say they disapprove because they don't like Democrat policies and will see Republicans caving in to get something past, and Democrats see things the same way just the other way around. Both will say they disapprove of congress but for different reasons. Besides you can all rail against congress but my guess is once elections come around you will most likely vote for the guy in currently serving in congress if he is a member of your political party.

(Jack in Portsmith) But press on, Mr. President. Your salvation lies in assisting the Republican Party’s own efforts to expose themselves as enemies of the 99%.

* * *

Jack,

As a Republican, I must confess that the greatest sin of my party is to "narrow" itself to death. Republicans have a bad habit of making enemies, when making friends is a better approach both to getting elected and governing. Here are a few enemies the Republicans have made and why a trip to the woodshed is needed:

HISPANICS

If ever there was a naturally conservative community in America that could be comfortable in the Republican Party it is Hispanics. Yet, the isolationist bent, and the narrow view on a COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION POLICY still eludes them.

UNIONS

In both Wisconsin and Ohio, police and firemen unions, are being not just pushed, but shoved away from Republicans. Again, naturally conservative groups are being shunned at the behest of very NARROW BUSINESS INTERESTS. The recall elections should serve as great instruction, but expect the Republicans to double down instead of wising up. Hard to believe, I know.

THE ELDERLY

Again, the older crowd, is not usually the group that dyes their hair green and listens to Alternative. However, an entire group of faithful voters, who merely want practical solutions for SS and being told that their trusted program is a "ponzi scheme" and that it should be fazed out. Incredible.

So, for this and other reasons, sometimes Republicans have to learn painful lessons at the ballot box in order to wise up.

Why did Reagan raise taxes 11 times people?????

Because he mistakenly assumed liberals have honor and compromised with the liars. They promised massive spending cuts if taxes were raised and then after the tax increases, the libs reneged. Then the libs did the same thing to Bush. I sense a pattern. So why should we believe the party of lies and propaganda today?

JH--

And Anna, I pay plenty in taxes and don't complain.

How funny, when all I ever see you do is complain.

But I see all the waste and I don't want my taxes, or yours, to go any higher until there are major cuts and no more waste like we see today. It's pretty simple actually.

Simple, maybe, but so what?

Who LIKES waste, JH? We'd ALL like to get rid of waste. That's not an agenda. That's just a different way of selfishly complaining that YOUR taxes are too high.

@ JoAnna -- No, I won't be protesting any pilgrims. That's not how I think.

That's how YOU think.

Shaking my head. Congress (all of them) have now failed the American People. It doesn't matter if they are republican/democrat, they failed to do this country was truly founded on.. it's called compromise... I still say, kick them all out, send in "Joyce" who runs the local florist on Main Street. "Joe" the policeman who looks after a small rural town in Wyoming... Add Bob, the Mail man..... these are 'examples' of ordinary americans who know what life is about in this country.

Phinephancy, Re your #1.24,

“The government’s social safety net, which has long existed to catch those who are down and help them get back up, is now being used as a hammock by some millionaires, some who are paying less taxes than average middle class families,”

Sen Coburn (R OK) wrote earlier this month.

Let's get REAL for a moment.

When Congress says they are unable to compromise on "cutting the Deficit by $1.2 Trillion over 10 years", they are not really talking about actually cutting the Debt, but merely slowing the INCREASE in the Debt. Here are the actual projections, according to the official 2012 White House Budget prepared by Obama;

National Debt at the end of fiscal 2008 (Bush's last year) = $10.025 Trillion.

National Debt today = $15.039 Trillion, a further increase of $5.014 Trillion.

Obama's projected National Debt in 2021 = $26.345 Trillion, an increase of $16.32 Trillion over 2008.

In other words, the so-called 'Deficit Reduction' they are stalemated on will not actually REDUCE the Debt, but allow it to INCREASE by $15.12 Trillion (Obama's projected increase of $16.345 Trillion minus the $1.2 Trillion being debated).

Now that's really "Change we can believe in".

Surprise, surprise, surprise.

Here's the link to Obama's 2012 Budget projections to verify - look at Table S-14 - It's easier to read if you Rotate Clockwise;

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/tables.pdf

One word, DETROIT! Wait for it........wait for it.......... Can you say Financial Manager! All public union contracts will be tossed and re negotiated. I wonder how things got so bad here?

joemike404

Asking how much you think their fair share should be is a "fair" question.

You're right. It is a fair question. The fair answer is that the rates should be increased to the Clinton-era tax rates. The rich still managed to get richer and there were budget surpluses. With the Bush tax cuts, the rich are getting richer faster, but we have a huge deficit.

Tax rates are now lower than they were before Medicare was enacted. Either tax rates need to increase, or Medicare will have to be abolished (the Republicans' real objective, along with privatizing Social Security and abolishing most federal regulations protecting consumers and the environment).

dsdsherm

@MarlonJacobs

Die Party of No Compromise!!!

That would be your Liberal buddies you realize. After all, they wont budge off the idea of a tax increase.

Anyone with half a brain knows that balancing the budget requires revenues and cuts.

Are you telling me you lack even that?

Kick the T-Retards off the supercommittee and than we can get a compromise !!!

JPSOWT -- Bull@!$%#. We need to cut spending, eliminate waste and increase taxes. Get over it. That's reality. Reagan knew this and the real republicans know this too.

joemike404:

JoAnn has so completely depleted her credibility, she is summarily dismissed. She simply cannot be trusted.

You write: "Everyone's mantra is that the rich ought to pay their fair share."

I can assure you that is not everyone's mantra. However, you have clearly shown the problem with the "fair share" nonsense. Who the hell knows what is fair? That's purely subjective. There is simply no way we can define "fair share" in a way that will satisfy everyone. Let the "stuck on stupid" crowd argue about that.

My take on that is that we have a serious debt problem that must be resolved. How do we bring the budget into balance in such a way that the nation can function smoothly AND reduce our debt? We've already agreed that there must be some sort of revenue increase. However, that's not enough to cover the gap. We still need cuts.

We have incredible problems with waste. I suspect much greater than we know. There are huge savings available there. We have enormous amounts of income that is out there in the underground economy and avoiding taxation. There is also a great deal of outright tax evasion.

It may not play well right now, but we really must have bright minds in Washington. We actually did, once upon a time. Today, there's so damned many hacks, along with dispirited employees that we are getting a substandard work product. That has to stop.

Fair share? That's whatever it's going to take to get the country back on track. That's my take anyway.

JoAnna:

"Think"? You're more of a reactionary.

Why, thank you. What a lovely sentiment. ;-)

jollyoldsoul1:

I wonder how things got so bad here?

Well, there WAS that period when they weren't making very good cars. Lousy engineering and built-in obsolescence, doncha know? And then they moved a lot of jobs overseas. That might account for some of it.

I've always said that it's better to keep the jobs home and let the profits go overseas than it is to keep the profits here and let the jobs go overseas.

But those who believed otherwise are now watching the consequences of their beliefs unfold, while they casually shrug and deny any culpability for their own short-sighted selfishness.

That's you, by the way.

1. In 2007, the upper 1% was capturing 23.5% of all US income. It was followed by the Great Recession of 2008.

2. The last time this scale of inequality happened was in 1928 and it was followed by the Great Depression.

Both the results of bias in the distribution of income....skewed towards the wealthiest.

For change you can believe in, re-elect Obama.

Houston! "Either tax rates need to increase, or Medicare will have to be abolished (the Republicans' real objective, along with privatizing Social Security and abolishing most federal regulations protecting consumers and the environment)."

Gee, what a 'fair and balanced' comment.

I wonder if maybe the Republicans might actually want to make those programs "Solvent" instead, rather than just letting them go bankrupt. And just perhaps we could have held back on the record 81,000 pages of new anti-growth 'regulations' in 2009 alone until we got out of the recession?

That’s what Barry was doing on his “Asian” trip to Hawaii and the South Pacific instead of exercising some Presidential leadership back in Washington

Congress failed us, not Obama. If it's his job apparently to do everything by himself, what do we pay Congress to do?

Try again.

What else are we to expect from a know nothing DO nothing tea bagging republican extremist congress whose only goal is to subvert the government and see its end. They hate you they hate the government and live in a fantasy world that the 8 years under Mr. Bush did not in fact exist at all. People such as these seem to hold there obligation of oath to Mr. Norquist himself in higher regard then the oath of office to the people in front of God on the holy bible. ; ]

It would seem Thomas J. is there God and Mr. Norquist is there messiah. Insanity is there religion as they continue to attempt the same tasks over and over again expecting a different outcome. Hate has become them intolerance the trade and name calling a staple of it. Scared ar the weak of ignorance. Where intelligence BIG words are stupid and unexpected mediocrity is there goal indeed. Indeed. ; ]

Cheers

Backhouse "The last time this scale of inequality happened was in 1928 and it was followed by the Great Depression."

Can you provide a reliable link to verify - people seem to make up figures to suit their agenda. Also, was that 'pre-tax or after-tax'?

As always David, you are a voice of reason in a sea of chaos. I think just about everyone thinks they are already paying their fair share so that's probably not a good measure of much of anything. Probably most of the few millionaires that have expressed an interest in being taxed more, could take care of that themselves simply by taking less writeoffs and thereby increasing their tax payment.

Instilling fiscal accountability into government is much more important than the rhetoric of "fair share" or "job creators", blah, blah, blah. Solving our financial crisis is a three legged stool - increase revenue, decrease spending, eliminate waste. If we do not do all three we will fail as a nation. I fear though that the voice of reason is being drowned out by a tidal wave of hate, fear, anxiety and political pandering.

JK-4363698 "For change you can believe in, re-elect Obama."

Thanks, I needed a good laugh today.

Did you read my Post #1.61 on the "Change" he's already given us?

"Today, the 12-member congressional supercommittee is expected to announce failure to reach an agreement to cut $1.5 trillion from the federal budget.

One of major "sticking divides," as Democratic co-chair Sen. Patty Murray (WA) noted, has been Republicans refusal to consider a widely supported tax increase on America's wealthy.

This intransigence is largely motivated by the shadowy influence of lobbyist Grover Norquist, the head of Americans for Tax Reform, who threatens to serve any Republican who breaks his anti-tax pledge with electoral defeat.

Today on CNN, supercommittee member Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) noted that Norquist's handcuffs on his GOP colleagues essentially makes him the "13th member of this committee without being there":

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/11/21/373269/supercommittee-norquist-13th-member/

Thanks, Greg Parker. I liked your post.

I got "collapsed"! I thought it was a pretty mild post, but I must have hit a nerve.

Hell, I'm outta here! It was my birthday yesterday and I'm going to take the day off and go for a long walk along the ocean. . . .

WHY do people still bring up the tired propaganda point of the rich paying the most in taxes? Guess what? They SHOULD but DO NOT!

1. Paid income does not in any way represent the income of the rich...and their income has been growing exponentially while everyone else's has not.

2. The rich control an even larger proportion of the country's wealth, than of income -- so they SHOULD pay a greater share of taxes.

3. The lower half pays a LARGER relative share of the their income in taxes! State, local, payroll, sales, etc.

4. The poor do not pay federal income taxes because they don't make a livable income anyway! Oh, and MOST poor people work! Earned Income Credit (EIC) is a federal credit for people who WORK and have CHILDREN to support.

Roy Wilson ...So let's see now...People who didn't earn six figure salaries during their working lifetime need Social Security abolished? People who work for employers too cheap to offer a 401K match who also stagnate their employees salaries for 5 years at a pop should be punished for not earning what rich asses do?

Read that Ayn Rand again. That pig woman was the most overindulged, childish, self-centered idiot to hit town. Her self-interest was mostly disguised like all Biggie Piggies do...as narcissism.

I'd like to hear your ideas on how an 80 year old who earned $15,000 a year in 1960, was not offered a pension of any kind and had no healthcare insurance like Biggie Piggies all do today is supposed to exist?

Or is this some Hitlerian version of survival of the fittest and to hell with everyone else?

No, it wasn't 'pre-tax or after-tax':

It was around tax, under tax, bypass tax, no tax, avoid tax, forget tax, how-do-you-spell-tax, who-needs-tax,

is what it was.

ROY WILSON-336103

I wonder if maybe the Republicans might actually want to make those programs "Solvent" instead, rather than just letting them go bankrupt.

I wonder if you don't know how to read, or you're just pretending. As I noted, the tax revenues are now LOWER than they were before Medicare was enacted. The Republicans want to keep them low to force Medicare to be abolished and replaced with a voucher system (which they'll call "Medicare" in good Orwelllian fashion), so that the private sector will have a new revenue stream currently denied to them.

And just perhaps we could have held back on the record 81,000 pages of new anti-growth 'regulations' in 2009 alone until we got out of the recession?

The claim that regulations have anything to do with the slow rate of economic recovery has been proven to be a Pants-On-Fire lie. The lack of regulations and lax enforcement of existing regulations is how Bush and the GOP caused the Great Recession in the first place.

Houston...When the rich fear a threat to losing a dime, they go all obsessive proving how they are "victims". As usual, they love the take, just never the give. According to their self-acclimations and self-interests, they are immune to having to ever give of themselves.

Of course, we are not supposed to feel overburdened by their constant take, take, take attitudes when we are the ones who end up doing all the giving.

Jack. your closed post was excellent, to bad the sheep don't like hearing the truth they rather the American people be like them, deaf, dumb & blind, Obama is one smart cookie letting these MORONS hang themselves by not offering a compromise this is what happenes when the GOP bites off more than they can chew, NOW gag on it ....

"The supercommittee was widely expected to extend the payroll tax cut and the expanded unemployment benefits. Those policies alone are expected to add 1-2 percentage points to growth next year.

Some of the proposed deals included further stimulus measures like increased infrastructure spending, which would have given the economy a further boost.

There was also talk of patching Medicare's payments to doctors and the Alternative Minimum Tax, neither of which is specifically a stimulus measure, but both of which would hurt the economy if allowed to expire now.

The supercommittee's failure throws those deals into doubt." (Ezra Klein)

all I can say is anyone who vote publican next year needs to check into the nearest mental institution and go on some really good meds

Rick...That's why President Obama will win re-election too. He's hugely intelligent and knows the fine art of letting his opponents dangle on their own fishing lines long enough to strangle themselves.

This president has tried and tried to accomplish things that the GOP stupidly resisted recklessly jeopardizing the entire country. And all for what? To insure that the 1% stay on top?

How is that not an attempt to overthrow a democracy in which all men are created equal? In which all men and women have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

How do you pursue happiness when 1% are trashing jobs so they can live large? How do you enjoy life when your life is nothing but working to pay taxes that the rich don't have to pay?

There is no liberty in indentured slavery. This is exactly what Republicans have been after since Rove, Bush and Cheney created the direction toward the end. Yes. They are to blame for this mass narcissism, self-interest and blatant greed. They did nothing to stop it. So they are to blame.

They chose to lead and then led the country into an entangled mass of debt they knew the Middle Class and working poor would have to pay while their rich ass cronies sat on the sidelines like bourgeoise pigs enjoying foi gras, champagne and caviar and laughing at the serfdom they created.

Increasing taxes to Clinton levels gives us anywhere from $90 to $110 billion more annually. Obama's 2011 budget deficit sits at $129 billion. Taxing the rich won't even cover the deficit spending let alone pay for the off-budget items that are adding $1.3 trillion to our debt this year alone.

MSNBC: Instead of repeating that gas bag, Chris Matthews' show repeat Martin Bashir's show. Martin Bashir's has integrity and does " NOT" slobber all over RWNJ guests.

Long before Obama came into office, even long before that absurd Bush Dynasty took root on The Hill, We Americans have been spending money like there was no tomorrow! From the time we are toddlers barely able to understand English we learned from the media (that being our TV sets) that in order to be 'happy' and 'satisfied' with life we needed to buy, buy, buy!

Big business knew, with the advent of the television set, they had it made.. They hooked us from the instant this new media went into every home and have never let go, gripping tighter and tighter as each year passes and, like Pavlov's Dogs, we have dutifully spent trillions of dollars buying useless products that, each year, have grown more expensive to buy.. And, what's worse, by our all-consuming spending we have created literal mountains of trash that will remain with and on the planet for thousands of years! STILL we continue to spend more each day! We have never learned to say NO!

So we suffer as more and more people are brought to bankruptcy's door while big business continues to bombard us with hours and hours of daily commercials to go out and spend even more money, especially at this time of year! We KNOW, we understand, that what we spend is making a few, a small minority only, filthy rich and they, in turn, know that they are destroying the fabric of our society by their and our greed, but that makes no difference to the rich.. Why should they worry, their money is safe in off-shore accounts..

Will we ever stop, I wonder? Or will the time come when the last ordinary, hard-working American will simply run out of money and no one will have anything to spend on that next new bottle of shampoo or Vera Wang dress? And the fact that 98% of what we have purchased throughout our lifetimes lies in some dump somewhere, does this mean anything to any of you?

Think about it, people.. Do you actually NEED a new car every year? Do you NEED to pay $100 for a pair of jeans that once cost you $5? We Americans have truly gone off the deep end spending money and gone into tremendous debt because we CANNOT and WILL NOT control our urge to spend money for things we do NOT need to survive AND survive quite comfortably.. We spend like this because we are TOLD to every single day of our lives..

Our financial troubles today is our own fault.. One can say the media bears some responsibility but, in truth, we humans, like sheep, followed orders dutifully, without question and now we stand knee deep in it.. No one is to blame but ourselves for not standing up and saying NO to our excessive spending a long, long time ago!

Mickey: Don't you think the gridlock in congress might just reflect the division in this country?
Just look at these comments!

Polls aside, maybe the Congress is simply carrying out the wishes of their constituents.

The solution seems simple. Our GDP is about $14 trillion. Our deficit is about $1.4 trillion. Therefore we need to raise tax rates on EVERYONE about by about 10%.

How about it?

Dems ... are you willing to to accept a 10% increase in tax rates on the poor and middle class?

Reps ... are you willing to accept a 10% increase in tax rates on the rich?

Let me guess, the Dems insist that the poor can't pay any taxes and that the middle class already pays too much. The Reps will insist that the rich already pay most of the taxes, and that raising them will cost jobs.

So ... neither side will compromise.

Why are we upset with Congress? It seems like they are just a perfect reflection of their constituents.

We had reasonable compromise in Domenici-Rivlin and Simpson- Bowles. Neither were adopted. Why?

So, most of the buffoons in here want to give our criminal government more money, right?

Your hard earned tax dollars, right?

Our government does such a wonderful job making sure our taxes are used efficiently, right?

If any of you agree with this, not only are you delusional, you’re an idiot!

Did any of you honestly believe that this unconstitutional gathering of 12 mindless misfits were actually going to come to a consensus on reducing our deficit? If you do I have some great European Union bond investments for you in Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal and Ireland.

Between these 12 buffoons they have 204 years of seniority in government. That's an average of 17 years per person. These same people have been doing NOTHING to reduce the size of our deficit basically since 1994 (on average).

Now, since the beginning of the year we have had the following plans submitted for deficit cuts and revenue generation.

Rand Paul Plan

Republican Study Committee Plan

Paul Ryan Plan

Obama Plan #1

Obama Plan #2

Debt commission Plan

Senate Gang of Six Plan

Cut, Cap and Balance Plan

Mack Penny Plan

9 (NINE) different plans with dozens of proposals and they have been summarily dismissed!

Now, let's just look at some proven areas that could be used to reduce our deficit/debt.

$700 Billion dollars, over 10 years, of waste, fraud and abuse (WFA) in Medicare and Medicaid.

Social Security is such a mess you can't find any statistics on the WFA in it.

Let's see if I can find any other areas we can cut spending.

Now remember, I don't have 17 years of experience in our government, I just Googled Waste, Fraud and Abuse and here's some of what I found.

1. The federal government made at least $72 billion in improper payments in 2008. (Enough said.)

2. Washington spends $92 billion on corporate welfare (excluding TARP) versus $71 billion on homeland security. (A true free-market system would never allow this.)

3. Washington spends $25 billion annually maintaining unused or vacant federal properties. (Why?)

4. Government auditors spent the past five years examining all federal programs and found that 22 percent of them–costing taxpayers a total of $123 billion annually–fail to show any positive impact on the populations they serve. (Yep, government sure is using your money wisely isn’t it?)

5. The Congressional Budget Office published a “Budget Options” series identifying more than $100 billion in potential spending cuts. (Pfffft, why would our illustrious Congress or President use any of these?)

6. Examples from multiple Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports of wasteful duplication include 342 economic development programs; 130 programs serving the disabled; 130 programs serving at-risk youth; 90 early childhood development programs; 75 programs funding international education, cultural, and training exchange activities; and 72 safe water programs. (Total=839 programs, betchya there’s more.)

7. Washington will spend $2.6 million training Chinese prostitutes to drink more responsibly on the job. (Saki makes the heart grow fonder.)

8. A GAO audit classified nearly half of all purchases on government credit cards as improper, fraudulent, or embezzled. Examples of taxpayer-funded purchases include gambling, mortgage payments, liquor, lingerie, iPods, Xboxes, jewelry, Internet dating services, and Hawaiian vacations. In one extraordinary example, the Postal Service spent $13,500 on one dinner at a Ruth’s Chris Steakhouse, including “over 200 appetizers and over $3,000 of alcohol, including more than 40 bottles of wine costing more than $50 each and brand-name liquor such as Courvoisier, Belvedere and Johnny Walker Gold.” The 81 guests consumed an average of $167 worth of food and drink apiece. (Happy?)

9. Federal agencies are delinquent on nearly 20 percent of employee travel charge cards, costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars annually. (Who cares, right? It’s not their money.)

10. The Securities and Exchange Commission spent $3.9 million rearranging desks and offices at its Washington, D.C., headquarters. (This is the same commission that was watching porn during the housing collapse.)

11. The Pentagon recently spent $998,798 shipping two 19-cent washers from South Carolina to Texas and $293,451 sending an 89-cent washer from South Carolina to Florida. (Kinda makes you miss the old $600 hammer and $400 toilet seat, doesn’t it?)

12. Over half of all farm subsidies go to commercial farms, which report average household incomes of $200,000. (You gotta love them subsidies.)

13. Health care fraud is estimated to cost taxpayers more than $70 billion annually. (This has been going on for decades. And you buffoons want more government in our health care?)

14. A GAO audit found that 95 Pentagon weapons systems suffered from a combined $295 billion in cost overruns. (Efficiency and government should NEVER be used in the same sentence)

15. The refusal of many federal employees to fly coach costs taxpayers $146 million annually in flight upgrades. (It’s only money, right?)

16. Washington spent $126 million in 2009 to enhance the Kennedy family legacy in Massachusetts. Additionally, Senator John Kerry (D-MA) diverted $20 million from the 2010 defense budget to subsidize a new Edward M. Kennedy Institute. (Can YOU shuffle $20 million around on a whim?)

17. Federal investigators have launched more than 20 criminal fraud investigations related to the TARP financial bailout. (And to date NO prosecutions. Why bother?)

18. Despite trillion-dollar deficits, last year’s 10,160 earmarks included $200,000 for a tattoo removal program in Mission Hills, California; $190,000 for the Buffalo Bill Historical Center in Cody, Wyoming; and $75,000 for the Totally Teen Zone in Albany, Georgia. (Now you know why it’s called PORK)

19. The federal government owns more than 50,000 vacant homes. (Is that in the Constitution?)

20. The Federal Communications Commission spent $350,000 to sponsor NASCAR driver David Gilliland. (This isn’t in the Constitution either.)

21. Members of Congress have spent hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars supplying their offices with popcorn machines, plasma televisions, DVD equipment, ionic air fresheners, camcorders, and signature machines–plus $24,730 leasing a Lexus, $1,434 on a digital camera, and $84,000 on personalized calendars. (No wonder they couldn’t come up with a compromise on deficit reduction!)

22. More than $13 billion in Iraq aid has been classified as wasted or stolen. Another $7.8 billion cannot be accounted for. (Again, it’s only money, right?)

23. Fraud related to Hurricane Katrina spending is estimated to top $2 billion. In addition, debit cards provided to hurricane victims were used to pay for Caribbean vacations, NFL tickets, Dom Perignon champagne, “Girls Gone Wild” videos, and at least one sex change operation. (8 words, ROTFLMAO!)

24. Auditors discovered that 900,000 of the 2.5 million recipients of emergency Katrina assistance provided false names, addresses, or Social Security numbers or submitted multiple applications. (That’s 36%, if you’re interested)

25. Congress recently gave Alaska Airlines $500,000 to paint a Chinook salmon on a Boeing 737. (Why?)

(Continued Below)

(Continued from above #1.98)

26. The Transportation Department will subsidize up to $2,000 per flight for direct flights between Washington, D.C., and the small hometown of Congressman Hal Rogers (R-KY)–but only on Monday mornings and Friday evenings, when lawmakers, staff, and lobbyists usually fly. Rogers is a member of the Appropriations Committee, which writes the Transportation Department’s budget. (Coincidence?)

27. Washington has spent $3 billion re-sanding beaches–even as this new sand washes back into the ocean. (What government gives, the ocean takes away)

28. A Department of Agriculture report concedes that much of the $2.5 billion in “stimulus” funding for broadband Internet will be wasted. (Those 3 words, Waste, Fraud and Abuse, just keep popping up)

29. The Defense Department wasted $100 million on unused flight tickets and never bothered to collect refunds even though the tickets were refundable. (Nothing to see here, just keep giving more money)

30. Washington spends $60,000 per hour shooting Air Force One photo-ops in front of national landmarks. (Don’t bother, I already applied for the job.)

31. Over one recent 18-month period, Air Force and Navy personnel used government-funded credit cards to charge at least $102,400 on admission to entertainment events, $48,250 on gambling, $69,300 on cruises, and $73,950 on exotic dance clubs and prostitutes. (Oh come on, they need a little fun too.)

32. Members of Congress are set to pay themselves $90 million to increase their franked mailings for the 2010 election year. (They better be using the USPS!)

33. Congress has ignored efficiency recommendations from the Department of Health and Human Services that would save $9 billion annually. (There’s that word again, Congress)

34. Taxpayers are funding paintings of high-ranking government officials at a cost of up to $50,000 apiece. (Don’t bother, I already applied for this job also)

35. The state of Washington sent $1 food stamp checks to 250,000 households in order to raise state caseload figures and trigger $43 million in additional federal funds. (Government=Criminals)

36. Suburban families are receiving large farm subsidies for the grass in their backyards–subsidies that many of these families never requested and do not want. (HEY! I have grass in my backyard!)

37. Congress appropriated $20 million for “commemoration of success” celebrations related to Iraq and Afghanistan. (Did we success?)

38. Homeland Security employee purchases include 63-inch plasma TVs, iPods, and $230 for a beer brewing kit. (Don’t worry, I’m sure this was for the Monday Night Football parties)

39. Two drafting errors in the 2005 Deficit Reduction Act resulted in a $2 billion taxpayer cost. (Again, it’s only money)

40. North Ridgeville, Ohio, received $800,000 in “stimulus” funds for a project that its mayor described as “a long way from the top priority.” (Keep it, no one will notice)

41. The National Institutes of Health spends $1.3 million per month to rent a lab that it cannot use. (Yep, gimme more of that Affordable Health Care)

42. Congress recently spent $2.4 billion on 10 new jets that the Pentagon insists it does not need and will not use. (Can’t they just give us rides in them? We paid for them)

43. Lawmakers diverted $13 million from Hurricane Katrina relief spending to build a museum celebrating the Army Corps of Engineers–the agency partially responsible for the failed levees that flooded New Orleans. (There’s that word again, diverted)

44. Medicare officials recently mailed $50 million in erroneous refunds to 230,000 Medicare recipients. (Once again, gimme that Affordable Health Care. Gimme, gimme, gimme.)

45. Audits showed $34 billion worth of Department of Homeland Security contracts contained significant waste, fraud, and abuse. (Pfffft, that’s only 680,000 jobs at $50,000 per year.)

46. Washington recently spent $1.8 million to help build a private golf course in Atlanta, Georgia. (Do we get to play for free? It is our money.)

47. The Advanced Technology Program spends $150 million annually subsidizing private businesses; 40 percent of this funding goes to Fortune 500 companies. (Subsidies, dontchya just luv em?)

48. Congressional investigators were able to receive $55,000 in federal student loan funding for a fictional college they created to test the Department of Education. (How ironic, testing the DOE!)

49. The Conservation Reserve program pays farmers $2 billion annually not to farm their land. (Don’t bother, I just bought 10 farms not to farm.)

50. The Commerce Department has lost 1,137 computers since 2001, many containing Americans’ personal data. (But hey, Dell made out like a bandit)

I have about 12 more pages of Waste, Fraud and Abuse, I’m sure there’s more.

Yep, I can see why our elected civil servants can’t find anything to cut in our massively bloated government.

Oh, and if any of you want to give MORE power and money to this government, you’re absolutely delusional and should have your voting privileges revoked. I, and every single tax paying American MUST refuse to give another penny to our incompetent, unsustainable government until it cleans its house up of all this Waste, Fraud and Abuse!

Do you tax lovers actually believe more money will fix our debt problems?

This, my good American friends, is what happens when we all worry more about who is winning on IDOL, DWTS or Monday Night Football than what our criminal government is doing right under our noses.

God Bless and save America.

@ Jack in Portsmouth --

A very happy belated birthday, Jack. May you have the opportunity to take many, many more birthday walks along the ocean.

@ FreedomRingsLoud --

Some excellent examples of fraud, waste, and abuse in government spending.

On the other hand, the level of disconnect that you display in your post is astonishing.

I sincerely hope you understand that liberals don't LOVE taxes. Liberals only see taxes as a necessary price of a free society, as someone once said. Conservatives only see taxes as something that robs them. They ignore the fact that taxes, poorly spent, rob us all.

I hope you also understand that MANY of the items on your list are not expenditures that liberals would either have supported or would wish to pay taxes for.

In other words, conservatives are every bit as bad, or worse, at milking taxpayers. In the case of liberals, they want to milk taxpayers to help people in distress. In the conservatives, they just want someone else play for their pleasure palaces and diversions.

Anna -- Excellent rebuttal to Freedom's post. Freedom isn't cheap or free. Waste is disgusting to all people not in Congress.

Jack -- Happy belated Birthday! Great posts today as well.

Anna Molly

With all due respect, you seem to have me confused with someone who gives a s**t about you Democrats OR Republicans.

I'm a Reagan Conservative, Constitutional Originalist and a Fiscal Libertarian. I have been fighting against bigger government for over 3 decades. I was raised in Detroit in a UAW loving Democrat household.

Until I grew up.

Until I realized what an embarrassment our government has become. You can spout all the definitions about Liberals and Conservatives you want, I guarantee you, as a Conservative, you are wrong.

Let me give you an example.

You say,

they want to milk taxpayers to help people in distress

First of all, NO ONE should be milked of their tax dollars. Taxes are supposed to go to funding our government to function under its Constitutionally mandated Enumerated Powers.

PERIOD!

As far as helping people in distress, everyone would agree. But our "safety nets" have become lifestyles. This can no longer be allowed.
These abuses are not new. This waste, fraud and abuse has been going on for decades. Let me remind you of an often forgotten fact.

In 1984 Reagan created a special commission called the "Private Sector Survey on Cost Control”, better known as the “Grace Commission”. The OMB Office of Management and Budget) didn't even know how many programs existed. As it turns out 963 different social programs existed and you could be enrolled in 17 of them at the same time even if you didn't need or qualify for them. 161 private sector executives volunteered their time in 36 task-forces. It was funded by $75 million dollars of private funds.

Three years later the commission reported they found nearly 2,500 cost-cutting and revenue generating recommendations that could save the government almost $425 BILLION Dollars in the first 3 years. With complete incorporation the plan was reported to be able to save nearly $2 TRILLION Dollars by 1999. Over 90% of the recommendations were ignored by Congress.

Why were they ignored?

Simple. Our criminals in government have no intention of reducing the massive Waste, Fraud and Abuse because these are their gravy-train tickets that ensure their reelection. No more, no less.

Now, helping people in distress is noble, but consider this. In 1960 we had a poverty rate of 14%. Today, prior to the recent jump to 15.1% due to the depression/recession, our poverty rate is 14.3%. This, despite the fact we have spent approximately $12 TRILLION DOLLARS (estimates range between $12 Trillion and $19 Trillion dollars) on the War on Poverty.

How much more will it take to fix this problem?

$10 Trillion? $50 Trillion? $100 Trillion? Obviously, NO AMOUNT OF MONEY can fix this. Yet you and many others still want to give our incompetent government more and more of your hard earned money.

When I read those 50 examples I posted above, my anger grows. I myself refuse to give our criminal government another penny of my hard earned money until they can prove to me that they will use it as efficiently as possible. I also recommend that those mean, nasty, rich, fat-cats refuse also. If you want to, knock yourself out. You're just throwing good money after bad into the black-hole known as government.

Despite tax rate changes over the past 70 years we have maintained an average 18% revenue generated. The problem is NOT revenue, it's SPENDING. If you don't believe me just look at what is happening in Europe. No further evidence should be required for any reasonable person.

Remember, we all have two of the most powerful weapons to use against our out-of-control government. 1. Our voice. 2. Our vote. When you keep voting the same criminals into office for decades and expect different results, you are the epitome of Einstein's definition of insanity.

I think you know that definition.

Again,

For the facts on the President's accomplishments:

Despite the openly-declared agenda from the Republican Leaders - to obstruct his progress & the progress of this country, no matter the cost to the 99% of American people.

Please check it out at: http://www.barackobama.com/record

FreedomRingsLoud:

you are the epitome of Einstein's definition of insanity.

I think you know that definition.

Oh, yes, I know that definition. I live it, every single day.

But I call myself an optimist.

And actually, I would suggest that YOU may be the epitome of insanity.

Because Ronald Reagan was the biggest fraud of all.

A model of fiscal self-control he was not.

FreedomRingsLoud:

Despite tax rate changes over the past 70 years we have maintained an average 18% revenue generated. The problem is NOT revenue, it's SPENDING.

This just goes to show how much you've drunk the kool-aid.

If spending has been at the same level relative to GDP for 70 years, then how can we suddenly be in so much trouble?

In case you don't recognize it, that's one of them "rhetorical" questions you hear tell about.

Because it answers itself. If spending hasn't increased relative to GDP, then the only reason we can be in so much trouble is that revenue has decreased.

And it has. Starting with Reagan, of course, partially fixed by Bush 41, fixed a little more by Clinton, and then sent right back into the abyss by George W. Bush.

Starve the beast, remember?

Your heroes are nothing to be proud of, sir. If sir, you are.

The shame republicans have brought this country the last eleven years continues. Would not know honor if staring them straight in the face. Polarized to stupidity. Yes, republicans have made this the worst congress ever in history. Truly, working americans need to rid themselves of this unethical, unhonorable bunch of greedy thieves.

Anna Molly

Because Ronald Reagan was the biggest fraud of all.

Well, there you go again. You're amusing.

I'll take his 92 months of consecutive growth anyday.

Anna Molly

If spending has been at the same level relative to GDP for 70 years, then how can we suddenly be in so much trouble?

I think the Kool-Aid has you confused. I never said "spending" has been at the same level relative to GDP. I said revenues were.

Spending has been historically at about 20.3% of GDP. You undestand with that our deficit has been growing at a about a 2.3% average which follows the debt accumulated since about 1970.

This graph may help you understand this better.

heritage.org/budgetchartbook/runaway-spending-tax-revenue

You may want to dilute that Kool-Aid a bit.

Americans, the only solution is in November 2012, unequivocally finish the job you started in Nov 2011.

FreedomRingsLoud,

Great time and effort to present facts to a liberal based audience. I agree with your findings, but it would be impossible for these funny girls and boys in government land to supress the taxpayer funds for their individual enterprises. If this would occur in the private sector, those committing these types of abuses would have their employment terminated, with restitution expected.

But in the government sector, budgets are so bloated, that this type of spending is the norm.

Was also is a problem is the large number of federal agencies and departments that regulate similar programs for the taxpayers. Each organization has a budget, large staff environment, while creating and spending to increase the next year budget.

The Democrats talk about the need for additional taxes but has the government looked into methods of reducing and consolidating these departments? The answer is no, for removing them would reduce the power many have over them.

It is unfortunate that no one would present such a review on behalf of the taxpayer.

Freedom -- Reagan raised the national debt to a historical level. Facts are facts.

I can't believe people are still posting the black and white simpleton talking point that we have a spending problem not a revenue problem.

Dems have agreed to spending cuts, with the $1 trillion prior and the $1.2 trillion automated. Teapublicans could have gotten even more spending cuts including savings from entitlements, but they just...can't... compromise.

The talking point above from a Teapublican supporter brings me to mycurrent position that Teapublicans inability to play fair on Team USA is NOT because of their unconstitutional pledge to Norquist. More likely they are appeasing their brainwashed base, and want the economy to flat-line until 2012.

After all, if Teapublicans agreed to a top tax bracket of 39% that would be a tax cut from 39.6% if they do nothing and the Bush tax cuts expire. And they could eliminate tax expenditures, otherwise known as subsidies and loopholes. So it goes much deeper than some random dweeb named Grover.

If Congress and Obama let the Bush tax cuts expire -- all of them -- that would produce another $4 trillion in deficit reduction over 10 years. So if Congress ends up doing NOTHING, you could see $6 trillion in deficit reduction. That said, efforts are already underway to restore military spending cuts, as well as those Bush tax cuts.

"They" meaning Teapublicans are plotting and conniving (that's all they're good at) to restore military cuts -- RESTORE SPENDING CUTS -- as well as extend the Bush tax cuts. After all, they always get their way, or at least 98% of what they want.

What blackmail will Teapublicans use this time? Will the Dems have to give in for the sake of the country once again? Stay tuned...

@dsdsherm and here you go again...That same tired crap that you keep posting about how the Republicans REALLY balanced the Budget durning Clinton's terms. Funny how when it was a Democratic President it was really the Congress who fixed everything but now that we have a deficit, (tripled during Bush's terms with 6 out of 8 years having a Republican controlled Congress), it ALL Obama's fault. Can't have it both ways. BTW, the super committee was NOT tasked with cutting spending, it was tasked with finding ways to reduce the deficit. The deficit CAN NOT be fixed by simply cutting spending. We NEED more revenue's in order to keep the country running. In that same vain, notice how when the automatic spending cuts would go into effect if the group fails how the right wing is already working on ways to circumvent those spending cuts but only to the defense and the bush tac cuts. You really need to wake up and smell the coffee. If you want to see how much the right wing is "looking out" for you, just read this article Maybe then you can understand that cutting taxes isn't meant to help the average American. Not to mention the fact that these right wingers are already gearing up for yet another war. Where are you going to cut spending for that? Are we going to close public schools and privatize police and fire departments. Should we just get rid of social security and medicaid, (if so, I want ALL the money I've paid into them back in a check as soon as that legislation is signed). Explain to me where the money for this new war is going to come from with the Republicans firmly entrenched in keeping wars going, keeping the tax cuts for the wealthy in place and the loopholes in the tax code open for corporations.

LoudRinger:

I'll take his 92 months of consecutive growth anyday.

I see you've been reading the Heritage Foundation.

But then you'll also have to take the recession caused at least in part by Reagan's S&L bailout, too.

Too bad he left it for Pappy Bush to pay for.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/21/opinion/21krugman.html

For it did fail. The Reagan economy was a one-hit wonder. Yes, there was a boom in the mid-1980s, as the economy recovered from a severe recession. But while the rich got much richer, there was little sustained economic improvement for most Americans. By the late 1980s, middle-class incomes were barely higher than they had been a decade before — and the poverty rate had actually risen.

When the inevitable recession arrived, people felt betrayed — a sense of betrayal that Mr. Clinton was able to ride into the White House.

Surely, you remember.

"Read my lips," said Pappy, "no new taxes."

"It's the economy, stupid," said Bill Clinton.

As Hamlet said (Act I, Scene V) --

"... one may smile, and smile, and be a villain."

And that just about sums up Ronald Reagan.

winemaker-4308406

What amazes me the most is that despite how many times I post a list like this there are STILL those that defend more government.

My only conclusion is that they have beecome so indoctrinated into the "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs wants" mentality that they can't, or more likely don't want to, break free.

The only other conclusion is that they have been so incapacitated to survive on their own they need the government to provide everything for them. This is a shame.

Our Founder's and Framer's NEVER intended our government to become the "provider of last resort". They clearly and correctly listed the federal governments responsibilities in Article 1, Section 8.

Unfortunately, we have allowed the bastardization of the Constitution by Progressivism as we were preoccupied with "Keeping up with the Joneses". This is as much our failures as real American's as it is their usurpations.

The most horrific example of that was during the criminal FDR's self imposed "Revolution of 1937". This opened the door to governments profligate spending and corruption. Of course they will argue it's in the best interest of the poor, needy, oppressed, victimized, exploited or any other adjective they can confabulate. However they never attribute it to faullts of their own, to poor choices, bad habits, faulty judgement, lack of ambition or other defects in character.

Until we all realize that no matter how much money we pour into our government the problems will remain the same until we demand personal accountability regardless of success OR failure.

We can only hope.

Anna, I think you misread Freedom's post.

Despite tax rate changes over the past 70 years we have maintained an average 18% revenue generated. The problem is NOT revenue, it's SPENDING.

He's saying that revenue has been (fairly) constant. He's mostly right, if you discount the past few years; it's been quite a bit lower since the recession set in. But it's really spending that has truly spiked recently, as this chart makes abundantly clear:

That gap has to close, and it's really unrealistic to assume that revenue collection greater than 20% GDP can be sustained long-term. It never has in the past and there's nothing to indicate that fundamental economic principles have changed to make that work. Revenue can be increased up to about that 20% point, but spending is also going to have to decrease significantly if the debt crisis has any hope of eventual solution.

@LogicReguired and others:

LogicReguired said, "Congressional approval rating is a joke poll."

Damn straight.

The overwhelming number of people who disapprove of "Congress" might, I fear, revert to their old habits and bite us in the @ss.

What do I mean?...:

"Congress sucks. Yeah, most of 'em in DC are horrible; but, MY (___fill-in-the-blank___) is an OK/honest/etc. guy/gal! I'll reelect him/her knowing the rest of the nation will know what bums their guys/gals are! I'm so smart."

Been a problem in the past, and might be again. Everyone wants his/hers, and if the incumbent delivers the pork, well.... If my Federal delegation gets me "mine," they be pretty cool!

dsdsherm pays no taxes. Has stated this in the past on previous posts.

This is why dsdsherm fights so hard against tax increases period.

Until we all realize that no matter how much money we pour into our government the problems will remain the same until we demand personal accountability regardless of success OR failure.

Thus is the crux of your original post of which has gotten lost in the reeds. The other problem is a large portion of the electorate get mired in hyper-partisan trite "R's are bad D's are good and D's are bad R's are good).

When it comes to the Legislative Branch, no party or ideology holds a monopoly on virtue.

Anna Molly

And that just about sums up Ronald Reagan.

Anna, Anna, Anna, lemme splain some FACTS to you. The Kool-Aid keeps obtunding your thought process.

This is what Reagan “Inherited” from your boy toy Peanut Boy Carter.

One of the worst recessions in 1981-1982

Unemployment 10.8%

Inflation (CPI) of 13.5% (Carter tried to convince everyone inflation was now endemic in the economy)

Prime interest rate 21.5% in 1980

Poverty rate of 15.2 %

Decreased home values by 10% from 1978-1982

Family income decreased by 10%

From 1968-1982 the stock market lost 70% of its real value

Hmmmmm, looks a LOT WORSE than what our current POTUS “inherited” doesn’t it?

What did Reagan do? Did he whine like a child about what he “inherited”. Cry about some mythical car in the ditch? Blame everybody but himself?

Nope.

He got to work.

Decreased tax rates from 70% to 2 rates of 28% and 15% by 1986.

Decreased total Federal spending from a high of 23.5% of GDP in 1983 to 21.2% in 1989, a 10% decrease.

Created an anti-inflation monetary policy by reducing money supply growth compared to demand to stabilize the dollar.

Deregulation which saved an estimated $100 Billion. Eliminated the idiotic price controls Carter placed on oil and natural gas, the price of oil declined by more than 50%.

He then initiated the longest peacetime expansion. EVER!

Four simple steps created 92 months of uninterrupted growth. That’s almost 31 quarters.

During this time economic growth was 33%, the amount of West Germany’s entire economy (they were third in the world at the time). 1984 had an unequalled 6.8% of growth, the highest in 50 years.

Nearly 20 million new jobs were created, increasing employment by 20%

In 1989 unemployment was 5.3%.

Inflation dropped to 6.2% by 1982 and 3.2% in 1983. Contraction (NOT EXPANSION) of the money supply created the recession of 1981 that he inherited from Jimmy Cahhtah.

Per-Capita disposable income increased by 18% between 1982 and 1989, a Standard of Living increase of nearly 20%.

Poverty levels decreased by 13%.

The stock market more than tripled from 1980-1990.

From 1982-2007 America experienced the greatest period of wealth creation in history. Adjusting for inflation more wealth was created in America in that 25 year period than in the previous 200 years. Debt increased simply because we were in the end-stages of the Cold-War. I’m sure you Liberals just discount this as a minor inconvenience. You should ask your boy JFK what an “inconvenient truth” it really was.

I’d be happy to compare Reagan’s accomplishments against Obama’s up until now if you’d like, but I don’t think you want to go there. Do you?

He embarrasses himself enough alone, he doesn’t need me helping him.

Right?

LoudRinger:

Spending has been historically at about 20.3% of GDP. You undestand with that our deficit has been growing at a about a 2.3% average which follows the debt accumulated since about 1970.

Sorry I missed this earlier. You DO read the Heritage Foundation, I see -- LoL -- but you still can't follow a statistic to save your life.

Spending stays the same but the deficit grows, only because REVENUES have decreased.

I'm not the one drinking the kool-aid.

And the Heritage Foundation link in your post -- which I didn't see before -- PROVES it.

But if you REALLY want a GOOD laugh, you should really read the Heritage white paper where they propose the health care mandate.

I found it on-line last week, but can't seem to find it anymore. Now why do you suppose that might be?

....

Response to your last post --

My, my, the kool-aid tastes great, doesn't it?

Of course, Pappy had to raise taxes to clean up Reagan's mess. I notice you stop just short of that, don't you?

Poverty levels decreased by 13%.

Not according to Krugman. And if you look at ANY chart of what has happened to personal income since 1980, you'll see right away that it has been largely flat -- at least for the 99 percent -- since about that date.

Sorry, not buying.

Worst. President. Ever...Ever!!!

LoudRinger:

Decreased total Federal spending from a high of 23.5% of GDP in 1983 to 21.2% in 1989, a 10% decrease.

Again, another statistical anomaly. By your own admission, that was a growth period. He eaily could have increased spending and still have it drop as a percentage of GDP.

You may want to look at some actual numbers that explain it better than I could possibly do.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaganomics

Spending during Reagan's two terms (FY 1981-88) averaged 22.4% GDP, well above the 20.6% GDP average from 1971 to 2009. In addition, the public debt rose from 26.1% GDP in 1980 to 41.0% GDP by 1988. In dollar terms, the public debt rose from $712 billion in 1980 to $2,052 billion in 1988, a roughly three-fold increase.

So let's see you spin those numbers. ;-)

Here's a little extra bonus to counter your assertion about poverty under Reagan --

http://www.nhi.org/online/issues/135/reagan.html

As you can see from this, the seeds we're reaping today were sown then.

IT MATTERS NOT WHETHER YOU ARE DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN !!!!!!

Government jobs - This is truly shocking

Just a short video you really should see.....a real eye opener!

Freedom - You used averages on the revenue side. What are the averages over the same period of time on the spending side? Do you not agree that both spending and taxes can be used fluidly to mitigate circumstances beyond typical. Reagan raised taxes 11 times. Can you imagine the bigger hole he would left had he not done this?

Anna I know your busy fighting a losing battle with Loud, but if you want to know why Detroit is where it is, look up the last 4 Democratic Mayors starting with Kwame Kilpatrick and work your way back to Coleman Young! Its pretty easy reading, and a few of them you can find wore pretty orange jumpsuits, and will more than likely be wearing them again soon. Old Kwame just got charged with 20 more federal racketeering charges.

For those of you that do not understand why the POTUS is traveling the Pacific Rim, I feel sorry for you. You do not understand how the world works. We can no longer play the "isolationist nation", (that's what baby bush wanted, it is foolish and futile). Not if we want to stay a 'world power'. Try to think why this is being done... it has to do with our security in the future... are you getting it yet? No? do some research, I'm not going to explain it to you, you wouldn't accept the answer anyway.

Is this the worst Congress ever? It's all shades of gray at this point. Congress hasn't had decent numbers for a very long time. New lows? The question should be "Can Congress get lower than a serpent's belly?"

With all this media talk of job approval ratings it got me to wondering just how do American's feel about the Media? Well I did a little search using these key words Trust in Media and found this,

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/14/business/media/14survey.html

I skimmed this article that is two years old and it states that only 29% of Americans feel that the media “get the facts straight” Hmm... Media you're fired. I'm sorry if you lie to me once, I'll never trust you again.

Note: I do not support either corrupt political party. Vote out the incumbents, for true term limits.

There has been some sincere remarks about voting out incumbents, one thought I have about voting that way is if enough of us do it, it will scare the stuffing out of our politicians. Our government needs to fear the people.

We've got a Republican party who looks to cater to the extremest right, the most whacked out in the country. So most Republicans aren't happy with them.

The Democrats occupy (no pun intended) that sort of center-right space that Republicans are normally in, which is far to the right of most Democrats. So why should Democrats be happy with them? And let's not pretend that even the most moderate Republicans are willing to say that they agree with the Democrats, so there's no reason to think that there's compromise to be had there.

It's no wonder no one likes Congress right now; The Republicans represent big business, and the Democrats have to act for big business to fight for the money to get elected.

The only thing you can blame Obama for in this case is for not doing what he said he would and try to change the way we elect people. We've gotta get the money out of politics, or else they'll continue to work to ensure that everything that this country is run on is funded by the lower and middle class.

@Christian,

You ignore the facts. Clinton went along with the balancing of the budget and the expense cutting proposed by a GOP Congress. Obama refuses to do the same and the Dem controlled Senate blocks anything proposed by the House in order to insulate him from thsoe decisions anyway.

I give Clinton credit for the balanced budget as well as the Congress. He went along with the plan, and therfore he was party to it and deserves credit. BHO would never agree to such bold moves.

The supercommittee has no mandate to reduce the deficit. If that is the case it is a ruse. Because even if they fulfilled the goal of cutting 1.2 Trillion over 10 years, the deficit would still baloon out of control, as even with substantial cuts, most federal programs/agencies would continue to see their budgets expand year over year.

As far as a new war, I am not a fan of the ones we are in now, and feel if there is cause for a war we need to go back to the days of spoils of war. If Libya wants our help, fine, we help. But afterward we get a percentage of good that county produces until such time as our cost incurred is re-couped. If Iran wants to rattle our cage, we will forcible remove thier nuclear capabilities and conditions of their surrender include re-payment. It seems simple enough.

Better than blowing money to liberate Libya into the hands of a new regime which more than likley will be more hostile to us than the old one. At least the old regime was attempting to make changes to get the world off their back. But we help the rebels without pre-conditions of what they will put into place to replace this regime?

The GOP put forth Cut Cap and Balance which would have forced the government to curb spending to the level of income. It was and is the most responsible way to fix the spending issue. But the Dems blocked it.

Why is it the Dems have such an issue forcing the government to spend only what it brings in?

I do not want circumvention of the mandatory cuts and will voice my opinion on that as well.

But all the tax increases suggested will not balance against the 25% GDP spending this failure of a president has us at. And there should be no tax increases until such time as the federal outlay is 15% of GDP maximum. The rhetoric that tax increases will fix this is foolish. The only thing that will fix it is spending reduction. And any effort to increase taxes in exchange for proposed cuts is folly. This has been done numerous times in history and each time the taxes come, but the cuts do not. Cut Cap and Balance would force the issue and make things happen.

But one thing is clear. BHO has no interest in doing anything but increasing taxes and spending even more. He has increased spending to 25% of GDP which is unheard of. His Stimulus did nothing to stimulate, His jobs bill is s joke, and nothing he does or proposes is anything but tax and spend more policy.

Time to reverse the course.

ABO 2012

Dont_carry_it_all " Reagan raised the national debt to a historical level. Facts are facts."

And then Bush 1 did the same thing, and then Clinton did the same thing, and then Bush 2 did the same thing, and then Obama did the same thing.

So what was your point?

I realize that arithmetic is a basic skill severely lacking in anyone on the left, but the super committee was made up of twelve people- six democrats, and six republicans.

The democrats insisted on higher taxes- period.

Bzzzt! Wrong...but thanks for playing.

Democrats offered to reform entitlements -- the Republicans' main bogeyman -- along with an increase in revenue. That goes against the Republicans' gospel: thou shalt not increase taxes, all hail King Grover I. The main problem lies in the Republican pledge to King Grover I to not raise taxes under any circumstances. Who is Grover Norquist to dictate to any segment of our population? Because of one man -- one man -- our economy is in the toilet and close to twirling farther down the drain. Don't fool yourselves, right wingers, that one man is not Barack Obama, it's Grover Norquist.

Fortunately, in a little less than a year the problem will be resolved. The American people, sick and tired of Congressional gridlock, will give the Republican platform a resounding "NO!" by decisively voting them out of office and sending them to the brink of extinction. The polls showing that two thirds of the people favor increasing taxes on the wealthy -- despite Republican objections -- bear this out. If Obama stops being a wuss and caving in to the GOP he'll be assured of being re-elected...and he's finally showing signs of doing so. Just keep hammering the GOP on their obvious efforts to do nothing to help the country in an effort to simply prevent Obama from getting a second term, and on their total subservience to King Grover I, and you're more than halfway to marginalizing them...

I made it, Roy.......but maybe I should add worshipping a politician is never wise.

Houston! "ROY WILSON-336103 "I wonder if maybe the Republicans might actually want to make those programs "Solvent" instead, rather than just letting them go bankrupt.".......I wonder if you don't know how to read, or you're just pretending."

My reading is fine - It's 'comprehension' that you have a problem with. Anyone that thinks the sole goal of Republicans is to destroy Social Security and Medicare has a problem with reality. They have repeatedly said those programs need 'fixing', because all of the experts say they're heading for bankruptcy.

So your answer is to ignore the problems and criticize anyone that suggests solutions? And you really think that's smart?

Your version of reality leaves a lot to the imagination.

DSD to Cut Cap and Balance would never work because it is to harsh. The sudden change many would have to deal with in order for the cuts it asks for will change the lives of many American and I feel that would be for the worst. You may argue that in the long run we will be better off but that is unproven. I think there are more reasonable measures especially since I personally dont think America is at a point where the damage is irreversible.

The republican and conservative (nowadays I do believe there is a difference) sentiment I do not understand is that against taxes. In the end no matter how much they seem to argue other reasons, it seems they do not want to pay more taxes because they do not want to pay more taxes. I think that is a fair notion no one wants to give more of they earn with no benefits to themselves as the lifestyle of the wealthy will not improve through tax increases. What I cannot understand is how these same people want to point out how the deficit is a crisis and needs to be reduced. If that was the case, if it was a crisis, we should do whatever we could to stop it. Meaning increases in revenue and decreases in spending, much more coming from the decreased spending.

I feel both conservatives and republicans have lost touch with the meaning of a deficit. It is the outcome of revenue expenses. It is an equation not a number in itself. When one looks at it that way you see that the democrats alone cannot be blamed for the deficit.

It is said in the article that the military cuts and the Bush tax cuts are currently be worked on to be rinstated. When looking at the definition of deficit I said earlier one can see;

The extension of a tax cut all things staying the same(we are currently running a deficit) = an increase in deficit

Reversal of Defense automatic cuts = increase in deficit

The conservatives here have clammored at the more liberal on here about their spending tendecies raising many arguments about crazy government spending. Many of these arguments could be seen as valid. However, I did not see any of these conservatives complain on the extension of the Bush tax cut or the reversal of the defense cuts. I did see some of the Liberals who of course are addicted to spending complain about the outrage.

My point the spending is a government problem not a party issue. I may be biased but I feel the democrats are doing a better job understanding this part. There is a fundamental flaw in the way America has governed itself fiscaly and yes change is needed in both parties. The republicans will have you believe the budget deficit was completely at fault of the dems where as the dems are only blaming the republicans for not raising taxes.

Which story sounds more believeable?

ewent "Roy Wilson ...So let's see now...People who didn't earn six figure salaries during their working lifetime need Social Security abolished?"

What are you talking about? Can you find a single post where I have suggested abolishing Social Security?

I happen to think it's a great 'safety net' program for people, and the only thing I have EVER suggested on Social Security is that it needs to have some minor 'tweaks' to make it solvent on a long term basis.

Try to do some research before you make silly comments - it will help your credibility - what's left of it.

So by doing nothing this bad boy effectively get's punted to the next President & Congress?

Anna Molly "If spending hasn't increased relative to GDP, then the only reason we can be in so much trouble is that revenue has decreased. And it has. Starting with Reagan, of course, partially fixed by Bush 41, fixed a little more by Clinton, and then sent right back into the abyss by George W. Bush."

You might want to do some research before making assumptions. Here are the average spending figures for recent Presidents;

Carter = 20.26% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

Reagan = 21.98% of GDP.

Bush 1 = 21.59% of GDP.

Clinton = 19.54% of GDP.

Bush 2 = 19.44% of GDP.

Obama = 24.24% of GDP (through 2010).

It must come as quite a shock to see that Bush's average spending level was lower than Clinton's, huh. Sort of goes against the 'Story-line' that Bush was such a 'big spender'.

Those 'Inconvenient Truths' keep getting in the way of a perfectly good 'spin', don't they?

Anna Molly

Well, as much as I would enjoy sparring further with you about the spending that the Democrat controlled Congress and the significance of the Cold War, which many of you are either too young to remember or have selectively forgotten, during Reagan's terms demanded under the former Speaker O'Neill, I have to get to a Precinct Committeeman meeting.

BTW, when you use Krugman, Wiki and Peter Dreir as your fact basis, I have to be skeptical of your open-mindedness. I met Dreier in 1994 during a mid-term campaign run. I have to admit his Socialist and Progressive roots run very deep. His association in the DSA and being on the Editorial Board of Social Policy along with Naom Chomsky, Frances Fox Piven, Wade Rathke and Gloria Steinem doesn't elicit much confidence in his,,,"impartiality".

Have a Great Day!

Roy -- Does the number under Bush include spending for Medicare part D and the wars?

Reagan was second in line for spending and he wasn't even funding a war....interesting.

@Rick-3608408,

You said, "Jack. your closed post was excellent, to bad the sheep don't like
hearing the truth they rather the American people be like them, deaf,
dumb & blind,

Obama is one smart cookie letting these MORONS hang themselves...."

Wow! First time I've seen anyone say out loud that we 99% are "deaf, dumb & blind...."

Oh, we've heard before we're "MORONS," so that's not new.

BTW, did you read the story this weekend about the lobbyists (aka "L"obbyists) who were looking for $$$$ so as to discredit/humiliate the OWS/99% movement and Democratic candidates in "important" states? -- wanted to preempt the backlash after "Wall Street" & Bankers get their multi-$,$$$,$$$ ($millions) bonuses?

Yeah, we're sooooo "deaf, dumb & blind." You just keep thinking that, OK?!

Dont_carry_it_all "Roy -- Does the number under Bush include spending for Medicare part D and the wars?"

Yes, it includes ALL spending by the federal government, including the wars.

Worst Congress ever?

Yep.

Clinton LOWERED federal spending from 22.5% to 18% during his 8 years in office, Bush 2 RAISED federal spending from 18% to 25% during his 8 years.

Don't forget, a President elected in 2000 doesn't take office until 2001.

commonsense.... "Clinton LOWERED federal spending from 22.5% to 18% during his 8 years in office, Bush 2 RAISED federal spending from 18% to 25% during his 8 years.....Don't forget, a President elected in 2000 doesn't take office until 2001."

The figures I posted at Post #1.139 are accurate, so your 'made-up' numbers are not credible. Also, those figures are for 2001 thru 2008 for Bush.

"Worst Congress Ever? According to Gallup, just 13% approve of Congress’ job"

Close, but no cigar. Here's a media quote from 2008 when the Democrats controlled Congress;

Congress approval ratings are the lowest in history
Published: July 8, 2008 - 9:07 PM - You read right: the approval ratings for our Democrat-controlled Congress have hit single digits, and are the lowest approval ratings ever seen, at 9%. 52% of voters say that they're doing a poor job, which ties the record high.

Here's the link;

http://wizbangblog.com/content/2008/07/08/congress-approval-ratings-are-the-lowest-in-history.php

Now you might think from the record low approval rating for the Democrat controlled Congress that the Democrats might lose seats in the election only a few months later, but they actually PICKED UP seats in that election.

It's the same old story - People think that THEIR congressman is doing fine - it's the OTHER ones that are doing badly. So if people expect that the current Congressmen will have a problem in the next election, don't hold your breath.

FreedomRingsLoud, effective stuff and pretty well across the board as far as waste, fraud and snouts in the trough (think you could find a few more in the Offense Dept.)

This proves 2 points - The Military Industrial Complex via the government is running a protection racket (after all what happens when you don't pay your taxes the government comes and gets you and it is the only "crime" where the accused has to prove innocence rather than the other way around).

and 2 - We need TERM LIMITS to limit the damage.

Trying to lay it all on the Democrats is a bit of a stretch, they did not start the current unfunded wars ..... and I am somewhat surprised that is not on your list if that is not waste and fraud I don't know what is.

Of course, all these idiots who run their gums over that 50% talking point have NO IDEA who those 50% are, or what their lives are like. There is a REASON those Americans pay no income tax...

• Unemployed
• Retired
• Children and college students without income
• The incarcerated
• The disabled
• The working poor

These people pay no income tax because they do not make enough money to. The TOTAL US WORKFORCE is not 100% of our 310Million citizens.

That top 10% of the people who you claim pay 70% of the income tax? They also own 90% of the nation's wealth. AND (a BIG and) most of the wealthiest people in this country DO NOT earn their money from INCOME, but from capital gains on investments.

Would any of you political masochists like to explain exactly HOW the derivatives markets create JOBS? Good luck with that one. It is THAT sector of the Wall Street Casino that caused the Hell we are living in right now.

But, understanding the problem, or NOT blaming other ordinary citizens for the nation's woes would disturb your rabid partisanship and maybe, God forbid, require some critical thinking skills on your part. Germany had the very same mental problem in the 1920's. We all know where that went.

Oh and let's not forget that much of that percentage who don't pay federal income tax are in the "top bracket" so to speak, but can afford to take advantage of loopholes and schemes to reduce their TAXABLE INCOME (remember these figures are based on taxable income not earnings) to zilch and they pay no tax either.They are the one's that the Repubs should be after (oops sorry they are the Repubs and/or their financiers) not the poor bloke that can barely make ends meet from month to month.

@A Yank in Australia Post #1.150 - yes I am an American in America, for every one of the 200 millionaires calling personally, in person, to the halls of congress for a tax increase I heard strong members speak to many more (at least hundreds more millionaires) that could not be present (this group only a sample) but share their idea of shared sacrifice. The millionaires all call for the individuals that would fall under the proposed tax (the Obama Jobs Act and Tax increases and now the failure of the Super committee the President must propose a plan and push the already existing plan) be approved and subject to said tax. For congress to move get off their behinds and work to make America work for everyone.

I might add they call to end the loop hole of all loop holes end the capital gains tax rate (The Buffet Rule) and raise rates to regular net taxable income rates: the canard and lie of job creation we know now after more than thirty years the most beneficial years since The Gilded Ages for our form of Royalty our 1%, one percent that own 80% of America job creation is a lie and if they seek tax relief or a no-tax on this off-shore proposal loop hole close it and increase the participation in the worlds largest market ($14 Trillion GDP WOW to foreign entities under our reg's plus they already are in just open the country up more). The Investment Trading Tax that had been a integral part source of Federal revenue and a small rate was in place for years of course the Koch bros (only the tip of the spear stuck in the back of ordinary Americans) bought academia to present learned studies and think tanks abetted my the media their further their economic free market ideas and agenda of no unions. The trading transaction tax was in place for many years, for the rest of working America the 99% this is of little significance put it back, they used the bought off politicians to approve one more ENTITLEMENT to the 1% adding to the other special ENTITLEMENTS.

The Millionaires call for a simple IRS capital gains tax reg. 1031 at the same rate as the office secretary pays and most probably you and I, plus the NOL stays in place and re-institute a carry forward of at least to the old 5 year prorating of said 5 years and even increase to say make it 10 years. Bring the accelerated tax on investment machinery. Relax and waive the capital requirements to garner investmentors for a small business proposal via the Internet with small risks and limits of up to $1,000,000 one million. A structure and a template followed (verifiable) easy prospectus and oversight of already existing departments of Federal and State plus financial reporting of the entity, the principles in the corporation (waive incorporation fees to a minimum).

It is true the largest employer in America is the small business entity but within this truth is another truth: it is NEW small business entities that are the driving force of new job creation. Approve the benefits in total of the American Jobs Act which the Tea-Baggers in lock step, slaves to a one-page Norquist pledge? Gave orders to The Party of NO along with the DINOS and the result we have a stagnate economy. We could do so much if only we really and truly assist the creation of NEW small business entities and offer help to existing small business owners, it is there in The American Jobs Act jettison the rest and approve in this bill those measures that offer immediate help to the small business owner.

For example, you have a great idea to cater to a to a niche market of landscape for the well to do and use new methodologies plus some labor saving cost to plant, grade ground, set-up a low cost user friendly irrigation systems, maintenance of systems, use landscape ideas on a smaller scale of Olmstead - lets call this Neo-Olstead home Landscaping Artistry without and within plus a division for ordinary large lot maintenance (smaller weekly maintence contracts) you have a great market plan but need $300,000 but all the red tape, attorney costs along with filing fees, Federal and State Regulations that require a lawyer, a formal prospectus etc etc. The impediments are the same as if you wanted to start a $2,000,000,000 two billion dollar corporation. This makes no economic sense if I want to buy some shares of the NEW small business venture as I see a return based on a audited prospectus and a complete credit and personal resume of the managers/owners then let me take the risk and if I can get say 10% or more return for years to come then lets get this business started - why not?

The correlative of all the others to Matthews (a refined example) as he is only stereo-typical of those not focusing on what will work and of paramount importance he is a capital hill wonk and thus wonks us - he is a political wonk by admittance he says so himself of himself. The creation of real jobs or any jobs is not his Forte. The presentation to us of the failure of government he gives a mixture of political analysis and infotainment it is mixed so one must pick out what is news and what he rails about on "slow news days", mind you he is one of the best by consensus I think he is one of the best at what he does.

OK - have a great Weekend.............Good Luck

Rob,

"How in the world did the executives at MSNBC let the Chris Matthews interview with Alex Witt go on air?"

Hmm... Could it be that MSNBC is ACTUALLY "Fair and Balanced"?

"Worst Congress Ever" is certainly the narrative the Democrats will want to carry into the 2012 elections. Trouble is, half the Congress is controlled by Harry Reid and the Democrats. Harry must be thrilled with the plan Obama has come up with to blame Congress seeing he has to defend 23 Democratic seats next year.

Notice that Obama only blames others. He never comes up with a feasible plan that will move the country forward. All of his economic plans have failed, and he and his administration really aren't smart enough to come up with any other new ideas to improve the economy. So to distract his low information voting base, Obama has to cook up this "I'm running against Congress" idea. It won't work. Sooner or later Obama has to make a plan for the future, he's failed to do so.

Im an Obama fan. Some of what Matthews says rings true, and other issues do not. I'm not sure the communication issue is much more than generational. The old-guard...Baby Boomers and the politically entrenched, communicate in person and by phone. Gen Xers communicate by email. Millennials text. It's on the President, and anyone in leadership, to understand his or her audience, but there's lots of evidence to this.

I think Matthews is dead on about the ability to articulate the vision for the 2nd term. The President is trying, and I think the trip to Japan is a pretty good example of how he sees the future in terms of global partnerships, but he hasn't been able to allow those kinds of solutions shine a lot on the problems that fog us in on a daily basis. If he can make that transition, he'll be elected to a 2nd term easily. If he can't, it's wide open.

Trouble is, half the Congress is controlled by Harry Reid and the Democrats

Smiff,

As usual you have it wrong. This Congress is controlled by Republican filibusters.

Jack in Portsmouth: As usual you have it wrong. This Congress is controlled by Republican filibusters.

Stay in that denial of yours Jack. It must be a comfortable impenetrable shell for you to live in.

Can someone please tell me why we have to have 60 votes for everything in the senate? Could it possibly be because the Republicans filibuster everything? Or is it just my imagination?

As usual, GOP revisionist history.

Bali

MSNBC is not fair and balance, It is just desperate Democrats that sympathise with Hillary , looking at Democrat President taking our country down with a big chance to loose the reelection. But fair and balance .....is just a joke.

Because phine, those are the Senate rules. They have been the rules in the Senate for decades. They were not written by the republicans in the last six months. Them's the rules, don't like it, too bad.

YES! Worst congress ever, why the question mark? You can thank the tea party, and the republicans with no vision or backbone that let the tea party take over their party and put their candidates in elected offices.

Easy fix; Vote ALL republicans out of ALL elected offices in 2012 and every chance you get in the future. Take America back.

All of our electedofficials that wont fix America must be charged with TREASON... There is no fixing this dysfunctional government... Throw them all in the slammer.

JoAnnaSmith1

Jack in Portsmouth is absolutely correct. Look at the congressional voting record and how many times the Repubs Fillibustered bills. The NYT as recently as Nov. 3rd reported the exact same thing. The Repubs may be the minority in the Senate and majority in U.S. House but they launched a RECORD number of fillibusters. Further, a January 3rd article reported that congress did consider to change it's rules to dare I say it curb fillibuster abuses. The congressional voting record speaks for itself as it never was approved.

Rob in ma-3189632

How in the world did the executives at MSNBC let the Chris Matthews interview with Alex Witt go on air? In a rare instance of honest commentary from Matthews, he railed against Obama as have no ideas, no plans, basically no nothing to deal with today’s challenges.

It must shock you to know that every single morning MSNBC has a show hosted by Joe Scarborough, a former Republican Congressman.

As for Matthews. He's in book-selling mode. He's peddling a book about John F. Kennedy, so he's been ranting that Obama should be like Kennedy (a womanizer, who got pulled kicking and screaming into the Civil Rights struggle, and who got suckered into the disastrous Bay of Pigs fiasco followed by a confrontation over Cuba with the Soviet Union that almost resulted in World War III.

Obama has his faults, but I'll take him over JFK any day of the week. And I certainly prefer him way more than any of the clowns in the GOP traveling circus.

Smiff,

Stay in that denial of yours Jack. It must be a comfortable impenetrable shell for you to live in.

And you called Anna Molly a "reactionary"!?!

I know it's difficult to hold a book much less read it when you're swinging from limb to limb, but please give it a try one day. Sheesh.

The democrats had control of the senate and house in Obama's first two years and what happened all they did was spend us into a bigger hole and not even get close to passing a budget. Thats the problem with the democrats, they get elected by spending taxpayer money on any program that keeps them elected. The TEA Party brought that to the hard working americans attention and took control of the house again. The democrats only recourse is to blame them and anyone else, mainly the rich, that its there fault the economy is so bad. When the truth is, the domocrats only want to raise taxes to keep funding programs that will help them stay elected.

If it is true that that government is best which governs least, then this congress is clearly the best congress we have ever had.

Well put whitt231 I might add that the Republican controled congress has passed at least 22 bills which would create jobs and save this economy all while cutting spending and NOT raising taxes however the Dems in the senate will not even bring any of these bills to the floor for a vote. Of course you don't see this reported on MSNBC.

NOW WHO'S OBSTRUCTIONIST????

So some of you think I should vote for Democrats to help fix all of our problems over the next couple of years? Now tell me since Republicans have NEVER had a filibuster proof majority in the Senate, and the Democrats did for two years (2009-2010) and yet all seem to take no responsibility at all for the mess this country is in, why should I vote for them again. I'm fine with Democrats saying they could of done more if it weren't for the Republicans, but seriously they had the House, the Senate with a filibuster proof majority, and the Presidency and what did it get us? Republicans have admitted they spent to much while in power under Bush, name one thing the Democrats have admitted to doing wrong while they were in power. Name ONE.

Worst Congress Ever is an appropriate epithet.

The 13% who approve of this House of Representatives must be drinking tainted tea. Whatever is in that tea poisons the brain.

i think the US might have had its fill of sentimental failures. boo hoo you can cry. and as most of you know im an even lesser fan of the demorcrat. i dont think it is a president we need who can cry for more hand outs better than the next, because he or she suffered. this country needs a president who will actually lead this nation, not the EU/NATO. one that deals with American issues, the real ones. we dont have one now, and i dont see one in the making, period.

Congress is doing exactly what I think is best. They have produced $600 billion in cuts to reduce our $1600 billion deficit each year- that only leaves $10 trillion more to cut over those 10 years. They have slowed the regulation mill to a trickle. Now, if they would only go on Thanksgiving Holiday and not come back untill the New Year, all would be perfect.

Let's get REAL for a moment.

When Congress says they are unable to compromise on "cutting the Deficit by $1.2 Trillion over 10 years", they are not really talking about actually cutting the Debt, but merely slowing the INCREASE in the Debt. Here are the actual projections, according to the official 2012 White House Budget prepared by Obama;

National Debt at the end of fiscal 2008 (Bush's last year) = $10.025 Trillion.

National Debt today = $15.039 Trillion, a further increase of $5.014 Trillion.

Obama's projected National Debt in 2021 = $26.345 Trillion, an increase of $16.32 Trillion over 2008.

In other words, the so-called 'Deficit Reduction' they are stalemated on will not actually REDUCE the Debt, but allow it to INCREASE by $15.12 Trillion (Obama's projected increase of $16.345 Trillion minus the $1.2 Trillion being debated).

Now that's really "Change we can believe in".

Surprise, surprise, surprise.

Here's the link to Obama's 2012 Budget projections to verify - look at Table S-14 - It's easier to read if you Rotate Clockwise;

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/tables.pdf

This began in 2009 when the Dems had control of the House, Senate, and the White House. They felt there was no need to compromise with, or include the Republicans. We continue to reap the oats Obama, Ried, & Pelosi sowed at that time!

Hey liberals you have over spent your allowance by hundreds of times, and not no but hell no, this country is not giving you an increase so you can spend more. Starting with the failure of the super committee, there are going to be cuts across the board as you wanted. My family and I will be fine I have made sure of that by working, investing, and saving. Are you going to get mine, hell no. So enjoy the cuts moonbats.

To all job creators, entrepreneurs, investors, and anyone classified as rich, please join me in a strike. I am not a part of the top 1% nor the top 30% for that matter, but for those of us who are tired of the government taking what we earned and wasting it, let us go sit in a park and not do work for a couple of weeks and see how this country does. Let us take our money out of investments, and out of the banks and put in our safes and mattresses. Let's let those who attack us run the show for a week or two and see what they can do. If no lessons are learned from this strike then let us leave this country like our forefathers did in search for a new promise land where our success, hard work, and wealth creation is not punished and scorned, but look at as hope for others that they can achieve the same. I hope all those who are against these leftest tactics join in their own strike. You want to control wall street, have at it, let me first cash out my money before you idiots drive it into the ground.

This is as good a place as any to inform those who persist in the Senate Super majority lie of the 111th Congress and the continuing obstruction of the 112th Congress. And don't give me any crap about "well how did anything get passed?( ie. Healthcare Reform, etc.) because even then and now, every bill needed votes from the Independents, Blue dog Dems and Republicans

No matter how many times you repeat that Super Majority lie it is still a lie. And don't forget the Blue Dog Dems,either(ie. Evan Bayh, etc?) In fact, they never had a Democratic super majority because of Leiberman(I. Conn), just another pissed off Independent that consistently votes with the Republicans. he backed McCain, didn't he?

There was never a "Senate Super Majority" for any length of time. The GOP/TP has set a historical record for the number of filibusters in this administration and it continues to obstruct any bills to move us forward. Senate Supermajority myth

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

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

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

July 7, 2009 – Al Franken seated. 58 Democrats, 40 Republicans, 2 Independents.

THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THE DEMOCRATS HAD A SHOT AT A
60-VOTE MAJORITY AND STILL NEEDED BOTH INDEPENDENTS.

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

September 25, 2009 – Paul Kirk appointed to Teddy Kennedy's seat. 58 Democrats, 40 Republicans, 2 Independents.

THIS IS THE SECOND TIME THE DEMOCRATS HAD A SHOT AT A 60-VOTE MAJORITY AND STILL NEEDED THE INDEPENDENTS.

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

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

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

Super-majority? It never really existed because during
two periods when Teddy Kennedy and/or Robert Byrd were unable to vote they still needed to get the votes of every Democrat plus BOTH independents.

FACT: The "Democrat supermajority" is a G.O.P. lie.

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

So some of you think I should vote for Democrats to help fix all of our problems over the next couple of years? Now tell me since Republicans have NEVER had a filibuster proof majority in the Senate, and the Democrats did for two years (2009-2010) and yet all seem to take no responsibility at all for the mess this country is in, why should I vote for them again. I'm fine with Democrats saying they could of done more if it weren't for the Republicans, but seriously they had the House, the Senate with a filibuster proof majority, and the Presidency and what did it get us?

Once again, someone seems to forget the basic facts. The Democrats only had a filibuster proof majority for six or seven months: July of 2009 to February of 2010. Before then, Al Franken was still awaiting the recount for his Senate election, and after then, Scott Brown had won Ted Kennedy's seat in a special election.

And even when the Dems did have the filibuster proof majority, it meant absolutely zip because the Dems weren't unified. In fact, Senators such as Ben Nelson and especially Joe Lieberman were often voting more with Republicans than Democrats. They are a large part of the reason why we got the mess that was the health are bill, because Lieberman and Nelson certain wasn't going to vote for a public option, and in fact Nelson was not going to vote for the bill at all unless his state got the federal government to pay all of the Medicare bills indefinitely (which he ultimately withdrew from the reconciliation measure after he was embarrassed at how the whole thing made him look so bad). Thus, a Democratic filibuster-proof majority is a myth.

Cynthia's point,

So you're saying all those years Republicans were in power but did not have a SuperMajority can also now be blamed on Democrats because after all there was no SuperMajority?

The two "INDEPENDENT" Claim.

Joe Lieberman - Over 30 years as a democrat but lost in a primary for re-election. He COULD NOT run as a Democrat so he ran as a Independent winning the election. He still is closely tied to the Democrats and votes with the party.

Bernie Sanders- A self described Democrat-Socialist caucuses with the Democrats. He is a real, no apologies, socialist. He is further to the left then Kerry, or Obama, so to consider him some "Independent" you have to win over is ridiculous.

The point is you really didn't need any Republicans, and even if you did people like Olympia Snow who are Republican in name only could of easly been persuaded to join your ranks had the Demos put forth anything of economic substance. They wasted all their time and capital on health care reform that will probably be found unconstitutional.

The only real logic is that the people we elected to the House and Senate must work 'together' to accomplish anything. It is not supposed to be "my way, or the highway" politics. It is based on "compromise". Something that has been lost for the sake of party, and the hatred of the POTUS.

It painfully obvious from the GOP/TP posts in this forum that they are oblivious to documented facts and to some degree reality itself. As unwitting participants in their own demise, they've adopted the anti-intellectual, dogmamic ideology of the uninformed. As opposed to the authenticity of independent media that play no favorites. Non-partisan independent web-sites such as FactCheck.org and PolitiFact.com who routinely expose the divisive mendacity of the right wing's messages.

History has shown repeatedly that power and greed obsessed elites will overreach for too long and too often. As a result we have a national uprising against the corruption and abuse of power by the current De facto Super-Plutocracy. In spite of the mocking of the Occupy protesters by the corporate owned and controlled media and the unprovoked violence by reactionary police forces, this movement will not be stifled.

Our first priority must be to: ( 1.) End the corrosive influence of big money in our nation's politics. Demand only public financing political campaigns and the removal of the legalized corruption of corporate millions and their lobbyists access to congress. Of course the Status quo will never do this on their own. Therefore, in order to accomplish this we will need to: ( 2. ) Vote the vast majority of our politicians, who are nothing more than corporate shills, out of office. ( 3.) Trust next to nothing of which the corporate owned and controlled mass media is responsible. Rely exclusively on non-partisan independent news sources. ( 4. ) Withdraw your money, close your bank accounts and do business only with a credit union or small local banks.

Why in hell should FR headline this? Because YOU say so! You and the equine that was your mode of transit! It ain't gonna happen! Ms. Clinton disavows any interest in the presidency. Even if she WAS interested, it ain't gonna happen!! A couple of has-beens bump their gums and you get a tingle up your leg!

WOW, Auntie, calm down. I fear you're going to have a stroke. Methinks thou doth protest too much. What is it you're really afraid of? That those democratic pollsters might have a point?

Bob-1887910

In the Wall Street Journal this morning, Democrat pollsters Doug Sheon and Pat Caddell call for President Obama to step aside and allow Hillary Clinton to become the Democratic nominee.

Patrick Caddell is a Fox News pundit, so I'm sure the Democrats will seriously consider his advice on how to lose the election.

BTW: I hope Hillary DOES run for president. In 2016.

I can't help but notice how none of the GOP supporters are admitting why the Republicans are ready to crash this committee....Does a $500 billion in tax credits for the "highest income earners" ring a bell?

Two members of the super committee last week admitted that the Republicans are holding the line on cuts to Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid until the Democrats agree to hand over a $500 Billion tax cut to the "highest income earners".

How is allowing the highest income earners to avoid paying their fair share of taxes to the tune of $500 billion not going to increase the burden on the very people the Republicans are demanding cuts from?

So now we come down to it. The Democrats rightfully refuse to make cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, all payroll deductions we pay for, so that the highest income earners can get off without paying $500 billion in taxes.

Stick it to the Middle Class is what Republicans today are all about. They see absolutely nothing wrong with hurting elderly people who rely on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid while they lavish more money on those who are already obscenely wealthy.

Prepare for mass recall if these Republicans get that $500 billion tax cut. In fact, prepare for mass revolt by sane, rational Middle Class working people who are fed up with this BS.

There is NO reason to give the "highest income earners" another tax cut. They've already had 3 in 10 years. Or, is this now their demand every 3-4 years until they are paying zero taxes?

Mickey-1983943

Beverly in Chicago,

"I hope this Congress rating goes to2%"

It's hard to imagine that 13% actually approve of this Congress' job performance. Who are these people? 13% of the people they polled must have been street people with no access whatsoever to news sources. I can't believe that 13% has any idea at all of what is going on.

Mickey-1983943

It was noted by the Nationalist Dunces over @ Radio Rwanda

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_SPVDLmYLaBA/Swsabih51HI/AAAAAAAABX0/CyA69mjvQGU/s1600/Tosca+and+Amy+Fox+News+007.jpg

that most of the protesters had i-pads, and other luxuries.

Representatives of “the 99 percent” have been camping out in lower Manhattan to protest economic inequality since late September, but the riches on display at some of their home addresses clearly came from “1 percent” families.

We searched Google Maps and the real estate Multiple Listing Service for the home addresses police collected during the arrests of less-than-law-abiding New York City “occupiers,” and found dream homes aplenty. These opulent houses include in-ground swimming pools, manicured lawns, and golf course access.

Frustrated with the rich? Tell a protester. Isn’t life rough?

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/11/02/opulent-homes-of-the-99-percent-slideshow/#ixzz1eMcqDzMn

Beverly...No one is frustrated by wealth when it's earned without help. When it is, the wealthy have to put back what they take from consumers, taxpayers and their employees.

If the wealthy only get that way by avoiding paying taxes the rest of us have to pay, they must be forced to pay their fair share. Are they so stupid they don't know that the more they earn, they more they have to pay? Is that why Republicans go after the working poor and Middle Class before they touch a dime of money from the rich?

Sorry, but selfish is a rich person who only takes and never gives back. There isn't a wealthy person in this country who didn't have help getting that way...DUH...THAT'S why they have to give back. Because they didn't earn their wealth without help.

And, from the looks of what the GOP has done since Bush took office, giving them a tax cut every 3 to 4 years in the taxes the rich are supposed to pay is now obviously the only way the GOP can get those rich asses to contribute to their campaigns.

Why should Middle Class people pay more in income taxes on salaries that are 425 times less than CEOs? Furthermore, if CEOs are so in love with that foreign cheap labor, maybe it's time to insist that CEOs also receive the same kinds of salaries of CEOs in those foreign countries where their cheap labor comes from.

joemike404

"What is it you're really afraid of? That those democratic pollsters might have a point?"

I'm not afraid of a damn thing and the only point Schoen and Caddell have is their HEADS!!

Partisan politics aside, the most significant 'call' the bonehead's in Congress made recently is to declare pizza sauce as a vegetable!

Their failure to cut $1.2 trillion from the budget is criminal. All should be recalled for sitting on their thumbs! Immediately!!

ewent,

Is that why Republicans go after the working poor and Middle Class before they touch a dime of money from the rich?

Can you show me where the Republicans wanted to tax the middle class and poor more then they are being taxed now? Even if you count tax ideas like 9-9-9, or the flat tax, the middle class and poor still pay less then the current system.

(even though House Speaker John Boehner and the GOP walked away from the president’s grand-bargain offer last summer).

Gee, FR wouldn't be taking sides, would they?

As I recall, they agreed to $800 Billion in new taxes and $2.4 Trillion in spending cuts, but then Pelosi and Reid objected and sent the President back to demand $1.2 Trillion in new taxes, and the 'deal' fell apart.

Let's get REAL for a moment.

When Congress says they are unable to compromise on "cutting the Deficit by $1.2 Trillion over 10 years", they are not really talking about actually cutting the Debt, but merely slowing the INCREASE in the Debt. Here are the actual projections, according to the official 2012 White House Budget prepared by Obama;

National Debt at the end of fiscal 2008 (Bush's last year) = $10.025 Trillion.

National Debt today = $15.039 Trillion, a further increase of $5.014 Trillion.

Obama's projected National Debt in 2021 = $26.345 Trillion, an increase of $16.32 Trillion over 2008.

In other words, the so-called 'Deficit Reduction' they are stalemated on will not actually REDUCE the Debt, but allow it to INCREASE by $15.12 Trillion (Obama's projected increase of $16.345 Trillion minus the $1.2 Trillion being debated).

Now that's really "Change we can believe in".

Surprise, surprise, surprise.

Here's the link to Obama's 2012 Budget projections to verify - look at Table S-14 - It's easier to read if you Rotate Clockwise;

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/tables.pdf

LogicRequired...Every time the Republicans gave the 1% a tax cut, someone else had to make up the difference in loss of incoming revenues. This is not rocket science. The Middle Class pays far more in taxes for one reason: We do not have million dollar tax accountants with PhD knowledge of how to cut our taxes like the rich do. See the disparity in that?

Or are you assuming that's our fault because we can't afford tax accountants who know how to cut our taxes like Big Business does? How about those subsidies that Big Oil and Big Pharma get for R&D that should be part of their regular business costs? Why are taxpayers handing them this money when Big Oil and Big Pharma CEOs are earning in the hundred millions?

A flat tax doesn't work. The minute the rich asses decide to jack prices, that flat tax BS goes out the window. Or are you saying that the rich will forego salary increases for half a decade the way they stagnate their employees salaries?

If you can't see the inequity in telling working poor and Middle Class that they have to pay an equal amount of taxes to someone earning 425 times they do, you need a course in economics.

You cannot overburden 99% of the population by demanding more and more in taxes while 1% gets to make full decisions on how they'll spend their money.

The greed in this country is at a level now where it's enough to make decent Americans vomit. Don't try and impress people that we aren't being sold a bill of BS by Republicans who are demanding $500 billion more in tax cuts on the highest income earners. Do these people need a 4th tax cut in a decade?

Our current system forces those who earn the least to try to keep pace with those earning more than they deserve or should. Sorry, no American CEO works hard enough to deserve a hundred million salary. And certainly not when the only way he can earn it is to unemploy 9 million Americans.

How about we demand legislation that says that American CEOs who hire only foreign labor can only be paid salaries of the CEOs in the foreign countries they hire cheap laborers from? I can hear the piggies squealing already.

To all job creators, entrepreneurs, investors, and anyone classified as rich, please join me in a strike. I am not a part of the top 1% nor the top 30% for that matter, but for those of us who are tired of the government taking what we earned and wasting it, let us go sit in a park and not do work for a couple of weeks and see how this country does. Let us take our money out of investments, and out of the banks and put in our safes and mattresses. Let's let those who attack us run the show for a week or two and see what they can do. If no lessons are learned from this strike then let us leave this country like our forefathers did in search for a new promise land where our success, hard work, and wealth creation is not punished and scorned, but look at as hope for others that they can achieve the same. I hope all those who are against these leftest tactics join in their own strike. You want to control wall street, have at it, let me first cash out my money before you idiots drive it into the ground.

Bob-1887910 "Worst. President. Ever. In the Wall Street Journal this morning, Democrat pollsters Doug Sheon and Pat Caddell call for President Obama to step aside and allow Hillary Clinton to become the Democratic nominee."

That would be the 'smart' thing to do. I created my own model to forecast the 2012 election, and it looks pretty bad for Obama, basically, because of the dramatic drop in the number of voters that self-identify as Democrats and the percentage of Independents that now oppose Obama's policies. Other minor factors include the expected drop in the 'youth vote', and if Marco Rubio is the VP nominee for the Republicans, a larger portion of the Hispanic vote is likely to switch.

Right now, my estimate is that Obama would get between 43% and 45% of the vote today.

Hillary could probably win.

LogicRequired...What job creators? The ones who create more jobs in India, Mexico, Thailand and China? Poor little rich victims...they are "tired of the goverment taking what they earn". Well? So are the rest of us but we are the ones who are responsible for the roads the job creators use to get their products to market. We are the ones who stuff money into FEMA when these poor, poor, poor, poor, lil job creators end up with a flooded or burned out warehouse of goods.

These are the big babies who whine their lives away because..woe is them...they have to pay salaries. They can't have slave labor like their Big Daddy plantation owners did.

The government wastes money every time it hands another Billion or more to Big Oil and Big Pharma. But the whiner rich asses don't like to be reminded of that wasteful spending do they? Who gives taxpayer revenue to obscenely profitable businesses who don't need it?

Oh look at the poor poor poor lil high risk investors who love to use everyone else's money but their own to feed their investment addictions.

As for what we can do, clue babes...we're already doing it. We're living on salaries so stagnated that it bleeds with every new stretch. We're cutting off the Big Corporate America thieves who feed on exploiting their employees by promising benefits they will never pay for but their employees will.

We already stuffing our money into credit unions and the small unconnected banks so Biggie Piggies can't run off with it when the crash comes.

We already are showing Wall Street we don't need them. Why do you think Wall Streeters hate being reminded by the OWS of their greed they are willing to pay lobbyists to bash the OWS apart?

Crash Baby Crash....No more Cash, Baby, Cash.

Sure the righties don't want anyone to protect their own paychecks. How else can these greedheads get their syrupy mitts into our wallets if they don't control our paychecks?

Try stupid, righties...It's the moniker most closely aligned with narrow minded thinking.

Haha, this is such silliness. The problem isnt O'bamas, our the House, or the Senate. The problem ....social policies.

It is very apparent that NOBODY wants to take on our debt citation, because it is absolutely out of control impossible!!!

This country needs a compromise....fiscal conservatism in exchange for social liberalism! Meaning, lets drop abortion, gay marriage, and family values out of the conversation. We need our government to focus completely on fiscal responsibility. Cut social, cut military, start doing the @!$%# that needs to be done. If this does not happen, we are screwed.

I would look for a VP change on the Democratic ticket...Hillary Clinton. It makes perfect sense; she would energize the women's base and bring a lot more popularity to the cause than another Obama-Biden offering.

Just want to point out that there were Republicans AND Democrats on this committee, and they are EQUALLY to blame. But the Lions share of Blame belongs to Obama that coundnt even lead 12 members of congress to get something accomplished. He was too busy out campaigning

Kornfed ... you would have been a great side writer of the Wizard 0f Oz!!!

There's one thing about proposing something .... then there's proposing something that can actually happen ... yours is lip service and nothing else!

There's one thing about proposing something .... then there's proposing something that can actually happen ... yours is lip service and nothing else!

I could get very specific, but there is not time or room for that here. You must present things for the sheeple to be able to grasp

Logic, you evidently don't know a thing about the income tax system if you believe the poor would be paying less with a flat tax or the 9-9-9 tax system.

Larry,

Both plans have credits and minimums making those who currently pay nothing in taxes also pay nothing in taxes. Someone with no knowledge of the details of the plans would of course think "flat tax" applies to all, but if you look at the details many people wouldn't pay anything in taxes just like now.

Backhouse,

You are suppose to post your thoughts on this Blog but all you have done is Cut and Paste from the Barrack Obama Teleprompter.

Please get a life and an Education it will help you. Now please go back in your Tent as Mother Nature will be calling soon.

Bob: That's simply hilarious. Conservatives now WANT Hillary...(the same Hillary that was PILLORED by the right wing nuts as a socialist, commie feminist ??? THAT Hillary???)

Carl: This is the best you can do?? 'barrack teleprompter'?? Have you not gotten your ditto head talking points today?? (psst...you're supposed to be posting about him being too SMART today, not about too dumb...come on, get with it!)

Bali - They have not pledged their allegiance to Norquist. They have made a pledge TO THEIR CONSTITUENTS not to raise taxes. The people that signed the pledge weren't going to vote to raise taxes anyway, with or without the pledge. Also, federal officials do not pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States. The take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States and signing that pledge does nothing to affect or diminish that oath and is not an act of treason.

joemike...Oh really? So I'm guessing only their RICH constituents count? You want to explain why another $500 billion tax cut on their "highest income earners" while they cut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid to the bone, is not a pledge to their RICH constituents?

Get real. No one is fooled by GOP BS anymore. We know who they represent. Example: one month ago, a Cantor speech, "We intend to see to it that 1% stay on top". Gingrich...in the last campaign debate..."We should fire all school janitors and make the students clean up after themselves."

You don't think for a minute Grinchrich meant the rich bois in prep schools in those $500 blazers cleaning and mopping up after themselves do you?

In fact, I'd love nothing more than for Grinchrich to demand that the Ivy League prep schools students get down on their knees and started mopping in those prep school clothes. Grinchrich fools no one with his anti-Middle Class BS. He's got his and he doesn't give a fat rat's patoot how he decimates life for anyone not in his NOCD (Not Our Class Dahling) League.

Grover Norquist's interview on 60 Minutes last night was very interesting!

So signing a pledge to not have the Government TAKE more money from private citizens under penalty of law is treason? How much wealth do you want your government who has a low approval rating to take? Should they take 90% of everything so as to make sure it is handed out fairly? How much do you need to make to be rich? Is a husband and wife who together make $150,000 rich? How about $350,000? What about $1million?

joemike,

They signed a pledge put forward by Norquist that he was clever enough to word in such a way as to insulate himself from responsibility. If the pledge was to their constituents, then please explain the disconnect shown here-

"The Washington Post/ABC News survey asked American adults whether they supported or opposed a list of proposals to reduce the deficit. Seventy-two percent of all respondents said they supported raising taxes on annual income over $250,000, including 54% of respondents who said they “strongly” supported that position. Democrats were most supportive of that proposal (91%), but so too were a majority of independents (68%) and Republicans (54%.)"

The legacy of the ultra rich is and has always been "irresponsibility". They don't learn until they end up in prison as Madoff, Abramoff, Ebbers, Kozlowski, Skilling and a host of other did.

They just keep pushing and pushing because to them, enough is never enough. Americans are far too educated now to fall for their childish tantrums and irresponsibility.

If you operate an American business in the US, you better do it safely and equitably and stop the victim act. This is exactly how the naive Republican base manage to get snookered by the rich who play victims to an Oscar-award winning performance level.

They whine they are overtaxed. So they get 3 tax cuts in a decade that made them 11% richer with each tax cut. Was that enough to shut those rich yaps? You bet not. Now, Norquist is working on zero taxes on anyone of wealth. Why? Because their real privilege class initiative is finally revealed for all to see. Why be a rich man if you can't be privileged is their mode of thinking.

How is that rich entitlement to privilege different than the privileges of royalty? How does that entitlement to privilege of wealth fit into a democracy? It doesn't. That's the lie the rich never admit to.

Joemike, how can it be a pledge to their constituents when more than 60% of their constituents favor raising the tax on incomes above $250K? It’s not a pledge that their constituents asked for. Except for the fact that once again they are showing that they consider their constituents to be those in the top 1%.

ewent - the speech you are referring to... Would that be the speech at Wharton Business school that Cantor cancelled and never gave? I can find absolutely no evidence of the quote you apparently attribute to Cantor. The closest thing I can find is a statement made by an aide regarding what the cancelled speech at Wharton would have included.

While I don't think Gingrich's plan is viable or necessarily even intelligent, you should at least quote him correctly. What he said was, "Most of these schools should get rid of unionized janitors, have one master janitor and PAY local students to take care of the school."

My first job was cleaning bedpans and urinals at the local hospital. I don't think a job cleaning something would kill anyone.

My comments were merely meant to address Bali's ridiculous claim that signing the pledge was an act of treason. All of your crap is just stuff you read into my comments without any basis in fact.

Michigan - I think you should check with the TEA party members (not 1%'ers, but the working/middle class TEA party members) in those representatives' districts and you will find that many of them support the fact that those Congressional representatives signed that pledge and work hard not to raise taxes. Bear in mind - I don't support the pledge and I think we have to raise taxes. All I was saying is that signing the pledge is NOT an act of treason.

joemike...Yes..that's the one...Why did Cantor cancel it? Was it because that twerpy little Tea Party rich boi knew if he uttered those words, his ass was grass and the rest of us were the lawn mower that would have mowed him into recall mode like Walker?

When Grinchrich includes all of those students in Ivy League prep schools let me know. Till then, his comment however, unintentional was aimed at the poor and Middle Class. What else might an educated, intelligent, intelluctually astute listener assume?

I don't hate Republicans. I was one BB (Before Bush). I hate what neoconservatives did to this country. They had their 6 full Congressional years to ward off the mess. The red flags were all there and they ignored it. They had 8 years of a presidential administration to address the red flags but they knew by dumping it on the next guy, they assumed they'd be off the hook for accountability. Wrong as wrong can get.

We need a Republican party who represents the people. Not Big Business. I am just as hard on Democrats when they revert to placing Big Business before the will of the people. Thus far, it's been the Democrats who are trying to right the mess and all they get from Republicans is more resistance to common sense.

How can any administration get a country moving in the right direction when 12% minority in Congress act as if they are the ruling 50%?

The collapse punks are out again. So, it’s re-post time.

What a shame. The Democrats have the simple solution of raising revenue, that will work. Then the Republican solution is to cut spending that hurts the people that can't afford it.

Listen to Lord Grover and protect the rich.

ewent

re: post 4.3

Hey now! I went to a boarding prep school for high school- a seminary in the mid 1970s. Our blazers cost $35. We had work periods 3-4 times a week lasting from 2 -4 hours in length for the upkeep of the building.Study periods every night and longer on weekends. Longer work periods on weekends also. I worked harder and studied harder there than at the public school I opted for during my last 2 yrs of high school. But it was a 1st class education. When I went to public school I twiddled my thumbs until graduation because the seminary classes were college level in comparison. So please don't lump all prep schools into the same "rich boy" category. My school wasn't.

ewent - So you acknowledge that Cantor never made the statement you claim he made. Not that I'm a Cantor fan, just keepin' you honest.

I am still a republican, I'm just having a more and more difficult time figuring out why. The only thing is, I don't think the democrats have the answer any more than the republicans do. Fortunately, the voters will have another chance to try and get it right in about a year.

It seems the 'collapse police' are out in force today.

Let's get REAL for a moment.

When Congress says they are unable to compromise on "cutting the Deficit by $1.2 Trillion over 10 years", they are not really talking about actually cutting the Debt, but merely slowing the INCREASE in the Debt. Here are the actual projections, according to the official 2012 White House Budget prepared by Obama;

National Debt at the end of fiscal 2008 (Bush's last year) = $10.025 Trillion.

National Debt today = $15.039 Trillion, a further increase of $5.014 Trillion.

Obama's projected National Debt in 2021 = $26.345 Trillion, an increase of $16.32 Trillion over 2008.

In other words, the so-called 'Deficit Reduction' they are stalemated on will not actually REDUCE the Debt, but allow it to INCREASE by $15.12 Trillion (Obama's projected increase of $16.345 Trillion minus the $1.2 Trillion being debated).

Now that's really "Change we can believe in".

Surprise, surprise, surprise.

Here's the link to Obama's 2012 Budget projections to verify - look at Table S-14 - It's easier to read if you Rotate Clockwise;

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/tables.pdf

Job1,

Raising revenue will work? Since when? We are borrowing about 45 cents on every dollar the Federal government spends. I have yet to see a tax increase suggested to address this huge borrowing rate.

The Republican solution is the only solution. You cannot continue to spend at the current level PERIOD. All the tax increases suggested will not put a dent in our rate of borrowing.

Your party's "Solution" is smoke and mirrors and not a solution at all. The fact that you buy into it and post it as gospel that is will work is just another sign how ignorant you are of the facts.

By the way, did you see the latest numbers of BHO in Florida? Pathetic.

ABO 2012

Goal of the GOP is Oligarchy under an executive branch of Plutocracy. With all the attending fears and prejudices astride the psychology of a "Black President" this mess of manipulators felt this was their best chance to achieve this long sought perversion. They may yet succeed, especially if they are able to neutralize the OWS movement.

dsdsherm, you seem to do what most republicans do these days -- you simply ignore facts that you find inconvenient. Your statement that tax increases will have "no impact" on the deficit is absurd on its face. As the article points out, allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire would generate trillions of dollars in revenue. Is that what you call "no impact"?

Second, your attempt to blame President Obama for the economic collapse is equally absurd. Surely you have not forgotten that the economy had badly collapsed *BEFORE* the 2008 election. (Hint, that was when REPUBLICAN George Bush was still president.)

Honestly, these days I wonder if republicans ever tell the truth.

If obumbo is so great and had two of his three years with a demo majority in congress why are they rated as the worst congress over?? Geeeee, if the shoe fits...........................

usa1967...I absolutely detest Americans making themselves look like 6 year old children who call this president stupid names. What's with this hideous need to make up names for this amazingly intelligent, effective president?

Is there some dark, dirty little secret venom to try and dumb down he who can't be dumbed down by the ignert?

The GDP of the US is roughly $14 trillion. The current deficit is roughly $1.4 trillion. Seems simple, we need to raise tax rates on EVERYONE by 10%.

Dems ... will you support an increase in income taxes of 10% on the poor and middle class?

Reps ... will you support an increase in income taxes of 10% on the rich?

Let me guess, the Dems will say that the poor can't afford to pay any taxes and the middle class can't afford an increase. The Reps will say that the rich already pay most of the taxes, and that increasing them will cost too many jobs. Neither side is willing to make the same sacrifice they are demanding of the other.

Why don't we approve of Congress? It seems they are a perfect representation of those that elected them.

Gop T-ReTards that signed a pledge allegiance to Grover Norquist should be prosecuted for treason and put in jail for life-for deliberately sabotaging our Nation.

If you watch 60 minutes interview of

The Pledge: Grover Norquist's hold on the GOP
this is not treason. This is simply EXTORTION. Why, those who have signed the pledge 270+ plus Norquist should be accused and put on trial for extortion. On what basis? Simply as he states on 60 minutes there is an exchange of contribution funds and support ($) from the financial supporters of the American for Tax reform. What happens if you do not honor the pledge? He publicly states that they will campaign against that congress person to throw him out of office. They will put all their resources to get you out of office. That is a clear threat and the money issue is clear on each party indirectly receiving a benefit. That is extortion. Where is the Department of Justice? Is everyone blind in this issue?

"Raising revenue will work? Since when? We are borrowing about 45 cents on every dollar the Federal government spends. I have yet to see a tax increase suggested to address this huge borrowing rate."

Would it not lower the need to borrow if we were to raise revenue?

When I ran my own small business, there were times when, for many reasons, I was required to borrow money to keep my business running. Adjustments were made to increase revenue by raising prices (tax increase) AND streamlining production processes (cutting cost/spending). (Compromise) It took time but things did come back to a profit position and I was able to then pay back my loans. To try to balance the budget solely by cutting spending would be like me trying to get through tough times by not buying new inventory. How does that work?

FlAcct. let me guess...You missed the part where the Middle class and poor have salaries so badly stagnated that they are barely hanging in there? You missed the part where the HMOs have all but bankrupted these people for over a decade and now many are either in medical bankruptcies or they are losing their homes thanks to mortgaging banker scams?

You must have missed the part too where there have been 6 price increases since 2009 in utilities like gas, oil and natural gas, right? But that doesn't erode incomes does it? Does it erode the incomes of the richest 1% at the same levels?

If the only way to resolve an issue is to always compromise with Republicans who only know how to cut programs Americans are entitled to receive because they are payroll deductions and then hand the rich more cuts in the taxes they pay, then no...the Democrats need to stand their ground.

How much more savaging should the Middle Class endure just so the rich don't ever have to feel a pinch in their too rich asses?

ewent, ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Home run" ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~!!!

This is as good a place as any to inform those who persist in the Democratic Senate Super majority lie of the 111th Congress and the continuing obstruction of the 112th Congress. And don't give me any crap about "well how did anything get passed?( ie. Healthcare Reform, etc.) because even then and now, every bill needed votes from the Independents, Blue dog Dems and Republicans

No matter how many times you repeat that Super Majority lie it is still a lie. Did you forget the Blue Dog Dems,(ie. Evan Bayh, etc?) In fact, they never had a Democratic super majority because of Leiberman(I. Conn), just another pissed off Independent that consistently votes with the Republicans. he backed McCain, didn't he?

There was never a "Senate Super Majority" for any length of time. The GOP/TP has set a historical record for the number of filibusters in this administration and it continues to obstruct any bills to move us forward. Senate Supermajority myth

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

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

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

July 7, 2009 – Al Franken seated. 58 Democrats, 40 Republicans, 2 Independents.

THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THE DEMOCRATS HAD A SHOT AT A
60-VOTE MAJORITY AND STILL NEEDED BOTH INDEPENDENTS.

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

September 25, 2009 – Paul Kirk appointed to Teddy Kennedy's seat. 58 Democrats, 40 Republicans, 2 Independents.

THIS IS THE SECOND TIME THE DEMOCRATS HAD A SHOT AT A 60-VOTE MAJORITY AND STILL NEEDED THE INDEPENDENTS.

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

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

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

Super-majority? It never really existed because during
two periods when Teddy Kennedy and/or Robert Byrd were unable to vote they still needed to get the votes of every Democrat plus BOTH independents.

FACT: The "Democrat supermajority" is a G.O.P. lie.

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

Based on these posts, the GOP is certainly losing the PR battle to the Democrats. You'd think that a lameduck Democratically controlled Congress didn't approve the extension of the Bush era tax cuts and that they weren't signed by the Democrat POTUS.

To believe the Democrats are any different in who they serve is pure folly.

PatrioticAmerican..I'm nothing if not a shill for my Middle Class people who are working themselves to death just trying to avoid welfare. It really POs me to no end when I see not a single twinge of pain coming from the 1%.

Let's stagnate their salaries for 5 years and see how they like it? I'm already refusing to buy from any but my local small businesses. I won't bank with a big bank that thinks my savings are a chance to risk it on investments.

I boycotted Big Oil 5 years ago when they got too high and mighty and started to jack prices they didn't need in the first place. I bought a hybrid when my old clunker went to the great classic car heaven.

In spring, I'm hoping to convert to solar energy. Anything that removes me from being a hostage of the Too Big To Fail and Too Rich To Change.

Wow at some of the vile comments on this forum. The blind rage I see speaks volumes about how closed some people's minds are. People certainly should be angry about the fools in office, but they should be spreading their anger at everybody in office, not just at one political ideology or another.

A lesson from history would tell anybody that when one group has absolute power, they muck things up. But the way some of us think on here, we should try people of one ideology for treason. A dead Bin Laden thought that way. Anybody who didn't think as he did deserved to be... How are the comments of some fanatics on here any different? Don't tell me because they don't wish death since it is seen time and time again the cheering of fanatics when somebody of one ideology or another dies. Those opposed to that ideology rejoice like Bin Laden did on 9/11.

If this country is to get back on it's feet and stay standing for an extended period of time, we need to put away this partisan garbage and work as a united group of people. This all or nothing that both sides take will only result in more of the same junk that has us where we are now. Start accepting some of the blame for what has happened and start moving towards a solution that everybody in this United States of America can live with. Both political ideologies have their good points, and both have failings. Deal with that fact and be civil.

ewent

I didn't "miss" any of the things you mention. All I did was point out that neither side is willing to compromise. Your response, however compelling, only illustrates why you don't feel you should compromise.

So, do you at least approve of the Dems in Congress? By not compromising, aren't they doing exactly what you want them to? What you elected them to do?

At the same time, the Reps who were elected by their constituents were given the same mandate. Can you blame them for doing exactly as the voters who elected them instructed?

Our representatives are merely a reflection of ourselves. You cannot blame Congress for their partisanship when the people they represent are equally divided.

Show me the jobs, quad1951-"Yes" Where is the Dept., of Justice ? I think its time they go to jail for destroying our Country !!!! The GOP TeaTards are deliberately sabotaging this Nation. I think we lost our minds putting them back in office.

Roy Wilson,

I checked the site. Amazing stuff there. And it's right out there in the open, in front of God and everybody. In the great plan this will all come together. The $26,346,000,000,000.00 will have much less impact after the dollar is de-valued. And it will be de-valued a lot, as much as 90%, because we can only pull that fraud on the world once. After that the lenders will demand our debts be valued in Euros, or gold, or whatever takes the place of the US dollar. So we'll have 'old debt' payable in worthless US dollars and 'new debt' with high interest rates payable in a currency with value.

I have worked in countries where inflation was measured daily. Workers were given pay raises every week or two. They spent all their pay the day they got the money before it lost value. When I wanted to exchange dollars people would be eager to sell me the local money. But regardless of the source the advice never changed; 'Don't change money in the morning! Wait until afternoon. You get more!"

That's how we'll pay our debt. It's coming here. It's right around the corner.

The end of the world is coming?

Get real. If you think the dollar is bad, the Euro is worse. There's a very likely chance it won't make it through the end of the decade. Anyone who thinks any currency is going back to the gold standard must also believe in Santa and the tooth fairy. It's not going to happen. Finally, if you think something like the yen or the yuan is going to become a reliable standard, you really need to get out more.

Yes, we have real problems, and in the coming years, we are going to see real consequences. These problems are, however, global. We are still the richest country in the world with the largest economy and the greatest production. Rather than condemning us and trying to dictate terms, most of the world is going to trust the US dollar more than ever.

In a time of real problems, what we need is real solutions. The guy on the corner with the "end of the world" sign has never helped anyone with anything.

I wonder why you bring up the gold standard and then proceed using the word "finally"as if it were in response. Why would you react in such a snotty way, using Santa and the tooth fairy, to something I did not say?

So, what do you see as the "real consequences"? We cannot pay off our debt without changes. No one will accept the changes. Even if all the assets were taken from the richest 1% we couldn't pay the new deficit. If 100% is their fair share, and they pay it, nothing changes!

IF, and that's a big IF, we're going to attempt to pay our debts the only way is to have a major de-valuation in the dollar. What happens then? 1: We can pay the debt more easily because there are lots of the de-valued dollars around and no one much cares because they're worth so little. 2: Imports become more costly. Our dollars aren't worth much so suppliers want a lot more of them in exchange for the goods they make there and sell here. This may result in an increase in domestic production. 3: Our exports become cheaper around the world. Our products are prices in dollars, but dollars don't have any real value any more. What would happen if the Mexican Peso went 1:1 with the dollar? American products would be 'those cheap imports'. Again, domestic production might increase.

All of this would naturally have an effect on the overall quality of life in America. And that effect would be bad, not good. But it is coming. There are too many people riding in the cart and not enough pulling it. Every day more and more people clamber to get on for a ride. Eventually the horse pulling the cart will collapse even though some people have tried to help. And the people still in the cart will sneer down at the dead horse and announce it never was a very good horse after all. As they sit and wait for the cart to re-start with no motive power.

Or, FL Acct, do you see us paying off this debt/deficit? How?

ewent "What's with this hideous need to make up names for this amazingly intelligent, effective president?"

You should consider a different line of work - Comedians are starving these days.

pacosperson "Roy Wilson,I checked the site. Amazing stuff there. And it's right out there in the open, in front of God and everybody. In the great plan this will all come together. The $26,346,000,000,000.00 will have much less impact after the dollar is de-valued."

Interesting, isn't it - and scary that Obama projects the debt getting to over $26 Trillion in less than 10 years.

As for your 'inflation' comment, you are exactly right. That is how the government (the Feds) expect to take care of the debt - massive inflation. It will wipe out most people's savings, but that's just another way to 'redistribute wealth' from those who scrimped and saved to the 'less fortunate in society' who didn't bother.

Did you know that the value of a 1970 $Dollar is now only worth 17 cents?

Americandude...President Obama will get a second term because Americans can no longer trust the motives of the GOP. Not when they spout rich boi platitudes like Cantor, Ryan and Grinchrich.

President Obama in 2009 attempted to get legislation passed every single one of which would have ended billions in corruption: campaign reform, healthcare reform, financial reform and consumer protection reform.

You got some excuse for why Repubblicans who are always in on the take for this corruption would have a reason to resist these reforms?

All Republicans love to do is bash this president. Well, guess what? The bash fest is over. The Republicans won the House in 2010 on the promise of jobs..Oh gee...Still no jobs. Not unless creating jobs in foreign countries is their version of job creation for Americans.

But do tell us all about that "personal responsibility" while rich asses stagnate our salaries back to 1971 levels, stuff their bank accounts by avoiding paying for employee benefits they promised at hire and then price gouge consumers with a half dozen price increases in a year's time.

You bet President Obama will win ...and by a landslide. Who could trust any Republican to represent the people and not their special interest lobbyists and cronies in Big Business?

Do any Republicans actually understand that Big Business has NO place in government? That people, not Big Business interest are the only priority the elected must honor?

Look at the slop the GOP is putting out there for president: A Bain Consulting Venture Capitalist on steroids who sold off businesses that unemployed tens of thousands, a Texas swaggering blowhard whose main intent is Texas and only Texas, a Libertarian parading in GOP costume and now we have Grinchrich who thinks his policies didn't hurt the Middle Class when his Contract ON America made the richest 1% richer while he created a whole class of working poor.

The defense spending should be cut to pre-9/11 levels, which was bloated enough anyway. At least some cuts will be made even if this worthless congress keeps doing nothing to cut the deficit.

mattpfl,

re: post #5.

You hit it on the head. They were sabotaging his administration before he even took office. They did everything except say " We don't want that ni66er in the White House"- though their every action said it. Sometimes one of them would almost spit it out. You see it continues with names like "Obammy" and such. Also, you'll never hear them refer to the President as President Obama- they bend over backwards trying to avoid it. Republicans have been betraying the Nation in their anger at losing the election to a black man- it just kills them, so it has been nothing but political sabotage from them since- no matter how much damage they have to do to the Nation and the Citizens. They set it up so President Obama would inherit an impossible situation from them- and then they refused to help in fixing the damage and stymied everything. To me and many others, that is TREASON- even if not by the constitutional definition. They stabbed us in the back.

I know shameful deragatory language that describes this congress. I am keeping it for the republicans though as they clearly deserve the brunt. So obvious to even a blind person, would not know honor if staring them straight in the face. Polarized to the point of stupid. Oh how I want to let go, and will and have, with some more oilfield slang on the repubs. Face to face. Have always gotten a positive response, they leave. Can not look you in the eye when told the truth. They physically have to run away as mentally cannot defend.

Merlin...I also wore a school uniform. It cost about $25 dollars. Catholic school girl...lol. I am trying to imagine the little geniuses of the Ivy League prep schools like the ones here in Princeton and Bedminister demanding their little darlings get a mop in hand. These are kids who drive freakin' Jags and Hummers to school. They couldn't tell you what a mop is. Much less use one.

If you watch 60 minutes interview of

The Pledge: Grover Norquist's hold on the GOP
this is not treason. This is simply EXTORTION. Why, those who have signed the pledge 270+ plus Norquist should be accused and put on trial for extortion. On what basis? Simply as he states on 60 minutes there is an exchange of contribution funds and support ($) from the financial supporters of the American for Tax reform. What happens if you do not honor the pledge? He publicly states that they will campaign against that congress person to throw him out of office. They will put all their resources to get you out of office. That is a clear threat and the money issue is clear on each party indirectly receiving a benefit. That is extortion.

Show me the jobs...

Just a wild guess, but you don't have a law degree do you?

Holding an elected official accountable to his campaign promises by the threat to support another candidate is not illegal. It is democracy. I would suggest you do the same.

Call or write your representatives. Tell them that if they do not uphold the promises on which they were elected that you will do everything in your power to legally remove them from office and elect someone who will do the job you entrusted them to do. You will find this is both legal and effective.

Congratulations go to Ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwent, you are definitely in the running for the daily Massengill Award ! With your ongoing venomous tone, your constant rants against "the rich", and your generally ill demeanor today ... you are the frontrunner !

Wow ! The topic is "Worst Congress Ever ?" and you have unleashed a plethora of attacking comments on anybody and everything as you play "Class Warfare" to the max.

I have to admit, the whole argument from the republicans/TP does not make sense to me. maybe someone can explain it....

they want to "cut" government spending instead of regulating corporate America......right, and in order to cut spending, they will want to form a committee, or create some new agency (Homeland Security, anyone?), to make those decisions, right? So they can spend the money on figuring out how to save the money. Classic.

they still haven't explained how they expect us to believe that tax breaks for corporations and high-earners will result in job creation, despite ALL EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY. As far as I've seen, in the time these tax breaks have existed, job availability has done pretty much nothing but go down. So really, it encourages them to create jobs? I don't think so. Just like the myth that taxing them more will make them stop creating jobs. For one, what jobs again? And for two, that's just a load of crap, period. Too many "1%ers" - including Warren Buffet himself - have contradicted that.

Republicans also argue that regulating wall street more would potentially create the same situation of spending money to save it - more government agencies, federal jobs (oh wait, new jobs!) to control the regulations and enforce them. But really....we already have that in place, it's called the SEC. Amending and broadening their function and rules would not require substantial spending.

there's a big difference between "free market" and "F everybody else market"

Yes...and the dems had nothing to do with this....oh, by the way, what about the democrat controlled senate? Tell me a story of their accomplishments to back up your rhetoric...

KJB...IN order for any bill to pass in the Senate, it requires a 62% bi-partisan majority. How do Republicans not know this? That means that unless 12% of Republicans agree with passage of a bill sponsored by Democrats, it hasn't a prayer of passage.

Still think the GOP aren't powermongering freaks who use their 12% like it was 50%?

Yes by voting in the Tea-Bagger/Republican to congress it has become the worst ever! The only way we can save the United States is to purge the Tea-Baggers/Republicans from Congress.

Americans are turning into sheep, just like Tommy boy here. That, friends, is the problem! Dont allow yourselves to be so easily manipulated!

By my calculations, only 1% of voters should be content with the current Congress. Who are the other 12%? Oh wait! I forgot. Corporations are people, too. They must be the other 12% who support this Congress.

Darrel...the damage is done. O'bamer cant do anything about it,,,without committing political suicide, and either can Republicans in the House. O'bama couldnt make it work when the Dems had the @!$%#ing house for Christ's sake! You people have got to start pulling your heads out of your collective asses!

In order to fix this, everybody is going to have to suffer. We can do it willingly, or we can be forced into it. Those are the only choices left. The rich will be taxed more, and so will the middle class. The poor are going to have to suffer with less social programs. There is no Utopia guys! Dont listen to these politicians, you know they lie...why do you keep buying into the rhetoric?

This article was meant to rile up all you sheep out there to hate the tea party. They could have easily titled this...O'bama, worst President ever? Baaaaaaaaaahhhhaaaaaa

Darrel B..Stand by...The next time you see a corporation in a voting booth, do take a photo. I'd love to see it. I agree with your post.

Tommy,

Stop calling them 'teabaggers'. Teabaggers are clean people who like having their balls licked and sucked on- it tickles! Call them the TP- they lick and suck further back and generally are a$$ wipes. TP is THE perfect reference for them (you know- Toilet Paper?).

Merlin, Thank was funny! I am still LOL!!

Ewent- GOOD COME BACK!!!,.. Nice rebuttal to another benighted, "vegged-out", 't-bagger' cultists. Who habitually respond to opposing views with robotic 'sound bites', and misinformation based on "Pants On Fire" lies. The same discredited propaganda from corporate owned and controlled, mendacity spewing media such as "faux-news". All this while demonstrating minimal knowledge ( at best ) how the government functions; and, oblivious to the highjacking of our Democracy by the amoral, "pigs at the trough" Super- Plutocracy of the top 1%.

Thank God!,.. The messages of the Occupy protests have taken center stage. As America becomes more cognizant of the gross iniquities of the establishment, the "ditto-head" supporters of the Status quo are finally being exposed as a radical "fringe" minority truly representative of the extremist "John Birch Society".

Tell me how the Repukes intend to reduce war spending and raise taxes on the rich. You show me yours and I'll show you mine. You first. The Repukes are SUPPOSED to be LEADING.

Can you site a republican plan that viably raises revenue? Didn't think so. Like most republicans you're a hypocrite. Democrats put all entitlements on the table as part of the 4 trillion deal that republicans didn't want to talk about. It has been well publicized but that isn't convenient is it. On the other hand, you're party's complete sell out to Lord Norquist is well known.

I can't give you what you ask for, Rob, but I CAN provide a little history lesson for the remaining members of the Obama cult-

During GHW Bush's term, the democrats shut down the government, insisting that they wanted to reduce the debt. They wanted increased taxes- then, they solemnly swore, they would reduce spending.

GHW caved- and the democrats gleefully took advantage. "He lied! He swore "read my lips"! Ha!"

Needless to say, spending went up.

GHW should never have fallen for that ploy- which caused an economic contraction. He had only to look to Reagan's term of office- wherein democrats promised that, in return to higher taxes, they would absolutely, positively, Scouts' Honore, reduce spending.

They lied.

It took Gingrich to get the spending cuts- and that after Clinton shut down the government-twice- all the while declaring that he would hold the line on the cuts.

When he caved in, he took ownership of the fiscal discipline forced on him. Clinton, however, was a master politican, and knew how to turn things to his advantage.

Obama is an overgrown spoiled child, who knows only how to blame others for his screw-ups.

That there are people on this board who are planning to vote to retain nine per cent unemployment, 25 million unemployed or underemployed, runaway spending, a staggering recovery, and a foreign policy that is incompetent, at best, and malicious, at worst, is proof that there are some people so uneducable they are not worth bothering to make the effort.

Obama shelved in 2012.

Itmtook

Hey, nojo, please tell me how ethical Newt was/is? Seems a little birdie told me he was kicked out the speakership. Did that birdie lie?

No Joe,

And which baffoon running is your shelved.? They have all come across as idiots. This from me a former Goldwater Republicans who left the party recently over the extreme right turn that the party made. Even Barry would be ashamed of his party today! Are you in for a shock of reality in 2012.

Actually, the little birdie did lie.

Democrats came up with 84 trumped up, baseless charges against Gingrich- and 83 had to get dropped. The remaining charge- teaching a class at a non profit school- was just as trumped up.

The ethics committee found him guilty of "not seeking tax advice". The IRS, which investigated, found no wrong doing.

Gingrich paid the $300,000 cost of the investigation out of his own pocket. That has been touted as a "fine"- when it was nothing of the sort.

After republicans lost seats in the following election, Gingrich resigned the Speakership. On his
own.

I realize that facts are not really all that interesting to you- you prefer lies. That's how you come to believe that nine percent unemployment, five trillion dollars in increased debt, and all the other Obama"accomplishments" are proof of his success.

Talk about your revisionist history!!!!!!! LMAO

From Wikipedia

During his term as Speaker, eighty-four ethics charges were filed against him; eighty-three of them were dropped.[66] The remaining charge concerned a 20-hour college course called "Renewing American Civilization" that Gingrich had taught through a tax-deductible foundation, Kennesaw State College Foundation. Allegations of tax improprieties led to two counts "of failure to seek legal advice" and one count of "providing the committee with information which he knew or should have known was inaccurate" concerning the use of a tax exempt college course for political purposes. To avoid a full hearing, Gingrich and the House Ethics Subcommittee negotiated a sanctions agreement. Democrats accused Gingrich of violating the agreement, but it was forwarded to the House for approval.[67][68] On January 21, 1997, the House voted 395 to 28 to reprimand Gingrich, including a $300,000 "cost assessment" to recoup money spent on the investigation.[69][70]
The full committee panel did not agree whether tax law had been violated.[71] In 1999, the IRS cleared the organizations connected with the courses.[72]

Gingrich resigned the Speakership- and the House- following the loss of five seats in the next elections.

I've seen the same information that no joe referenced regarding Newts departure from Congress, yet phinephancy you say it's revisionist history, where are YOUR source(s) to back up your FACTS?

RobinMa...Wrong. It's because Democrats work for their people. Republicans work only for the rich. The Democrats will NEVER agree to another $500 billion in tax cuts for the "highest income earners" as Republicans are demanding.

It comes down to Republicans bashing Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid while they lavish another $500 billion in tax cuts on the wealthy.

Are Republicans that stupid? They'd cut programs people need to the bone and then dump the cost of another $500 billion in tax cuts the rich won't have to pay on those who will? Get real.

Look up the impact of the Temporary Tax cut that Bush Jr. implemented. That will show a great percentage of the budget problem.

Oh sorry, I did not know you ignored FACTS.

Look at the last 28 years of Government 20 of which were by Republican Presidents. I wonder where the deficit came from?

As I read this I see several references to Republicans pushing for reprimands and penalties.

House Reprimands, Penalizes Speaker

By John E. Yang
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, January 22 1997; Page A01

The House voted overwhelmingly yesterday to reprimand House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) and order him to pay an unprecedented $300,000 penalty, the first time in the House's 208-year history it has disciplined a speaker for ethical wrongdoing.

The ethics case and its resolution leave Gingrich with little leeway for future personal controversies, House Republicans said. Exactly one month before yesterday's vote, Gingrich admitted that he brought discredit to the House and broke its rules by failing to ensure that financing for two projects would not violate federal tax law and by giving the House ethics committee false information.

"Newt has done some things that have embarrassed House Republicans and embarrassed the House," said Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.). "If [the voters] see more of that, they will question our judgment."

Carl, sorry to break it to you but the budget comes from the House. Since you're into FACTS, look up the biggest budget increase during GW Bush administration and you'll see it rose by 40% after the Democrats took over... just one of those annoying little FACTS.

If the Bush tax cuts were repealed, the extra income wouldn't even cover the Obama budget deficit (revenue from tax cut repeal estimated at $90 to $115 billion/year). Obama's budget deficit was $129 billion this year. With the tax cuts repealed there would still be a budget shortfall of $15 to $40 billion. The budget deficit doesn't even touch the real problem of off-budget items that have increased the national debt by $1.3 trillion.

Believe what you want but the tax cuts have little to do with the debt. Even during the Clinton administration the national debt rose by nearly $2 trillion dollars and that was with a BALANCED BUDGET. Should anyone forget, the balanced budget was a GOP idea that was vehemently opposed by Bill Clinton.

repost...oops

CarlLafoon...The Reagan recession ended his presidency just like Bush '43 ended his. And all for the same reasons. The Republicans keep stuffing money into the upper end of the balloon and then tying it off before it fills to the bottom. Then, they can't figure out why the working poor and Middle Class are not getting any further ahead.

Rob

re:post 7

People EARN or invest in 'entitlements" That is why they're entitled to them in the 1st place. Try aiming at benefits. Benefits are things endowed upon people even though they they didn't specifically earn or invest in them . Tax breaks for corporations and the rich are benefits etc... See the difference?

Veterans 'benefits' is a misnomer- they have entitlements. But calling them benefits instead makes it easier to screw them out of their entitlements. Language makes a big difference and it is used to manipulate people into doing what they normally wouldn't do, or supporting that which they normally wouldn't support..

Merlin....Slam dunk! Thank you.

Merlin the Magician...pulled that observation right out of his magical hat...Right on the Money!!!

Merlin pulled that "observation" OUT all right ..... but it wasn't OUT of a hat !

When did republicans put increased revenue on the table? It was taking away some minor loopholes for the rich. No like ending bush's tax cuts that really benefit the rich disproportionately! Norquist has them all signed sealed and delivered!

Northstar---I think Congress is counting on it being the same as it always has been---people hate Congress but love their particular Representative or Senator. I know that is not true for me---I intend to work for the election of someone new, but I wonder if others will feel the same.

Hiya Kida, Hiya, Hiya

From the ol' Froggy himself I have to say Kudos all around today. Backhouse great post as always. Jack in Portsmouth, thank you for that chilling reminder. I continue to worry about the safety of our President and remembering our history is the best way I know to insure his safety. And BEVERLY, best laugh of the day so far. Thank you so much, now I've got to find that slogan on a bumper sticker.

Folks, was there ever any doubt that the so-called Super Committee would fail? The whole direct marketing industry is based on this one simple premise, that people are more likely to repeat past behaviors than change. What made any of you think the Super Committee would succeed where the President himself had failed?

It's all part of something that is taking shape all around the world. It's a piece of the larger puzzle.

As a child of the 60's (I graduated high school in '68) the music of that era still resonates for me. It has been and always will be the soundtrack of my life.

Last week it was Dylan's "Only a pawn in their game.". But this week is it once again Dylan's "Ballad of a Thin man."

"Something is happening, but you don't know what it is, do you, Mr. Jones?"

Look at the Arab Spring and the continuing struggles in Egypt and Syria. Look at the "Occupy" movement in our own country and in Western Europe. Then put that into the context of our dysfunctional Congress, the military Junta in Egypt and Assad in Syria.

"Something is happening, but you don't know what it is, do you, Mr. Jones?"

Folks, the blame spreads equally to both sides and the problem reaches far beyond our deficit or the credit crisis in Europe or the upheaval in the Middle East. What those young people in the Middle East and Europe and on Wall Street are saying is, "We're tired of the status quo, we're tired of the rich and the powerful skimming all the cream and leaving us with sour milk. It is time that the 1%, world-wide, share the wealth and the power with the 99%."

It's time that not only the members of Congress open their eyes and their minds to the situation WORLDWIDE but WE THE PEOPLE need to realize that we're on the verge of something. Something very big.

"Something is happening, but you don't know what it is, do you, Mr. Jones."

Sadly, the ideologues in Congress, in Saudi Arabia, on Wall Street and in Cairo, Damascus and Beijing do not seem to realize that "something is happening" much less what that something might be.

It's going to be up to WE THE PEOPLE to show them and the only way we Americans can show them short of violent revolution is at the polls next near.

This may very well be the most important election in US history. Perhaps even in the history of civilization. Either we will see the beginnings of a brave new world, the very infancy of a new society that could carry us to the stars, or we will see the preservation of the status quo, which cannot stand.

"Something is happening, but you don't know what it is, do you, Mr. Jones?"

I know that half of you will disagree. To me you represent the Status Quo, a system that is failing world-wide. You are the past, not the future.

For me there is only one choice.

Obama/Biden 2012