Especially since it's Obama that's driving the car...

Obama took over the economy when it was on the side of the road and drove it off the cliff.

With an average loss of 6,298,000 jobs in Obama's first 2 years, and the economy sputtering along on one cylinder, how can anyone think he deserves another 4 years? He has become the most DIVISIVE President in modern history.

Here's the official government Bureau of Labor Statistics site to verify the loss of jobs under Obama, which shows an average of 145,362,000 people working in 2008 (Bush's last year) and only 139,064,000 people working in 2010; - Just look under Employed - Total for 2008 and 2010;

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

ROY,

It is important to look at the trend of employment numbers which indicate that the problem started with the Bush Administration.

The Trend: 2006 +2.1 mil, 2007 +1.1 mil, 2008 -3.6 mil, 2009 -5.1 mil, 2010 +0.9 mil 2011 +1.4 mil (thru 11 months) should hit +1.5 mil for 2011.

Thus the trend (as the graph at the BLS shows) started in 2007 reached its low in 2009 and has now turned around.

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001?output_view=net_1mth

The NEW trend will be 1 and done for Obama.

Dennis, Columbus, Ohio

Was it the Bush Administration or the Democratic Congress, which took over after the 2006 elections?

Here are some interesting facts concerning jobs over the last 30 years;

The government does not create jobs (except when they hire more people in government). They can only create an environment for the private sector to create jobs. That business environment is set by Congress, through taxes and regulations (either pro or anti growth). The President has little to do with it, except by signing or vetoing legislation.

When we 'do the numbers' based on who controlled Congress over the last 30 years (Through 2010), here are the actual results when it comes to 'creating jobs';

Jobs created when Democrats controlled Congress (12 years) = 8,100,000 net new jobs.
Jobs created when Republicans controlled Congress (10 years) = 21,773,000 net new jobs.
Jobs created when Congress was split (8 years) = 9,888,000 net new jobs.

PS – Over the last 30 years, we needed an average of about 160,000 net new jobs per month to maintain a stable unemployment rate. Anything less increases the (real) unemployment rate, while anything more decreases the (real) unemployment rate.

Sources - Democrats controlled Congress from 1987 – 1994, and from 2007 – 2010. Republicans controlled Congress from 1995 – 2000, and from 2003 – 2006. There was a split Congress from 1980 – 1986 and for 2001 & 2002. The government site to verify average employment by year is;

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

I'll let the facts speak for themselves as to which Party is better at creating jobs.

Romney is FULL of gas.

Not the kind that you can use as fuel, either. Just the kind that stinks.

ROY,

Job creation under the previous 10 Presidents (6 Republican, 4 Democrat):

Republican = 36.2 million (Ike to Bush Jr, 36 years)

Democrats = 49.1 million (JFK to Clinton, 20 years)

Average jobs per year:

Republican = 1.0 million

Democrats = 2.5 million

Obama took over the economy when it was on the side of the road and drove it off the cliff.

Not true!

President Obama took over the economy after it had already careened over the edge of the cliff and was on it's way down, free-falling. Since then, he's managed to get it back on the road.

While George W. Bush was President, the stock market lost half it's value, the S&P 500 falling from over 1500 to less than 750.

Under President Obama, the market has risen by nearly two thirds, with the S&P 500 standing just over 1200 today.

Dennis, Columbus, Ohio

So explain to me how a President creates jobs, since he has no authority to spend even one penny without the approval of Congress.

PS - I question your numbers - Here's what my analysis shows over the last 30 years;

Jobs created under Republican Presidents = 27,660,000 net new jobs

Jobs created under Democratic Presidents = 12,101,000 net new jobs (virtually all with a Republican Congress).

I hope you're not counting all of the men that fought in World War 2.

ROY,

So tell me why everyone except you tracks and credit jobs created or lost by President.

Perhaps it is because he is in charge, everyone looks to him, he sets the agenda and has the bully pulpit.

Dennis, Columbus, Ohio "ROY, So tell me why everyone except you tracks and credit jobs created or lost by President."

If you notice, I always try to say 'jobs created UNDER a President'. A President has little to do with actual job creation (except for multiple 'Czars' under Obama). Jobs are created in the private sector, and generally through actions of Congress that might 'stimulate' or 'retard' economic growth, which in turn affects job creation.

Jobs are created in the private sector

Could you please tell me what private sector business created the new job in the House of Representatives for my district? And while you are at it, could you tell me which private sector business created the jobs in my local police/fire departments, or those jobs in the CIA, FBI and other federal government agencies? Please enlighten me.

ROY,

Isn’t the private sector UNDER a POTUS always since he is the CIC?

Every President set an agenda that affects every individual and business in this country. The policies that they push will affect job creation/loss.

You are reaching to save your flawed point.

Dennis, Columbus, Ohio

Now YOU'RE reaching. The private sector is not "under" the President - they do not report to him. My point about laws and regulations by Congress affecting the business climate is far more valid than saying that the President can wave some magic wand and 'create jobs'. If your claim that "The policies that they push will affect job creation/loss" were the most significant factor in job creation, then it would appear that Obama has been a dismal failure. Let's also consider the Debt and Deficits by Congress;

Who's responsible for the Budget Deficits and the Debt?

While it's tempting to blame the President for Budget Deficits, it's actually the responsibility of Congress to pass a spending budget, which establishes the amount of the Deficit each year and any required borrowings on the Debt. So what does the record show, based on who controlled Congress over the last 30 years;

DEFICITS ($7.304 Trillion)

Total Deficits when Democrats controlled Congress (12 years) = $5.022 Trillion.
Total Deficits when Republicans controlled Congress (10 years) = $1.219 Trillion.
Total Deficits when Congress was split (8 years) = $1.063 Trillion.

NEW DEBT ($12.654Trillion = 93.3% of all the Debt in our History) (a)

Total New Debt when Democrats controlled Congress (12 years) = $7.623 Trillion.
Total New Debt when Republicans controlled Congress (10 years) = $3.260 Trillion.
Total New Debt when Congress was split (8 years) = $1.771 Trillion.

Spin it all you want, but these are the FACTS

(a) – Contrary to popular belief, the National Debt increases far more than the Deficits for each year, mainly because of the way that the government treats 'borrowings' from 'Trust Funds'.

Sources - Democrats controlled Congress from 1987 – 1994, and from 2007 – 2010. Republicans controlled Congress from 1995 – 2000, and from 2003 – 2006. There was a split Congress from 1980 – 1986 and for 2001 & 2002. The government site to verify National Debt increases is;

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt.htm

The government site to verify the Deficits for each year is;

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals See Table 1.3

I'll let the facts speak for themselves as to which Party is more fiscally responsible.

ROY,

I didn't say anything about President Obama.

Lost that point so you change the topic ... typical

Here is a new one for you about a failed Congress --

Republicans controlled the House from the start of 95 to the end of 06 (12 years) also the Senate for 10 of those same 12 years (except 01-02) and did nothing about Fanny and Freddie.

How dare they point at the Democrats for the failure of that institution !!!

Dennis, Columbus, Ohio "ROY, Republicans controlled the House from the start of 95 to the end of 06 (12 years) also the Senate for 10 of those same 12 years (except 01-02) and did nothing about Fanny and Freddie. How dare they point at the Democrats for the failure of that institution !!!"

Fannie & Freddie didn't get into trouble until about 2004, which is when the 'housing bubble' started to grow, but let's take a look at the REAL record - Remember, it takes 60 votes to break a Senate filibuster, and the most that the Republicans had were 51 during that time, but let's take a look at what Bush ATTEMPTED to do about those GSEs - By the way, the politician that received the most contributions from Fannie & Freddie during the 3 years before the meltdown was none other than BARACK OBAMA - By far.

For those who want to blame the Bush Administration for lack of concern over the Sub-Prime mortgage crisis until it was too late, consider this:

2001 April (Only 3 months after Bush took office): The Bush Administration's FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is "a potential problem," because "financial trouble of a large GSE (Government Sponsored Enterprise) could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity." (2002 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 142)

2002 May: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in the President's 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)

2003 February: The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market.

2003 September: Then-Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact "legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises" and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy requirements.

2003 September: Then-House Financial Services Committee Ranking Member Barney Frank (D-MA) strongly disagrees with the Administration's assessment, saying "these two entities – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – are not facing any kind of financial crisis … The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing." (Stephen Labaton, "New Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae," The New York Times, 9/11/03)

2003 October: Senator Thomas Carper (D-DE) refuses to acknowledge any necessity for GSE reforms, saying "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." (Sen. Carper, Hearing of Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, 10/16/03)

2003 November: Then-Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw explains that any "legislation to reform GSE regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and credibility to reduce systemic risk." To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have "broad authority to set both risk-based and minimum capital standards" and "receivership powers necessary to wind down the affairs of a troubled GSE." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)

2004 February: The President's FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital and calls for creation of a new, world-class regulator: "The Administration has determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore … should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator." (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)

2004 February: Then-CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress to "not take [the financial market's] strength for granted." Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by "ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Op-Ed, "Keeping Fannie And Freddie's House In Order," Financial Times, 2/24/04)

2004 April: Rep. Frank ignores the warnings, accusing the Administration of creating an "artificial issue." At a speech to the Mortgage Bankers Association conference, Rep. Frank said "people tend to pay their mortgages. I don't think we are in any remote danger here. This focus on receivership, I think, is intended to create fears that aren't there." ("Frank: GSE Failure A Phony Issue," American Banker, 4/21/04)

2004 June: Then-Treasury Deputy Secretary Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and calls for reform, saying "We do not have a world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term vitality of that system. Therefore, the Administration has called for a new, first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System." (Samuel Bodman, House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony, 6/16/04)

2005 April: Then-Secretary Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying "Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America … Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system." (Secretary John W. Snow, "Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee," 4/13/05)

2005 July: Then-Minority Leader Harry Reid rejects legislation reforming GSEs, "while I favor improving oversight by our federal housing regulators to ensure safety and soundness, we cannot pass legislation that could limit Americans from owning homes and potentially harm our economy in the process." ("Dems Rip New Fannie Mae Regulatory Measure," United Press International, 7/28/05)

2007 August: President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying "first things first when it comes to those two institutions. Congress needs to get them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider other options." (President George W. Bush, Press Conference, the White House, 8/9/07)

2007 August: Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd ignores the President's warnings and calls on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position. (Eric Dash, "Fannie Mae's Offer To Help Ease Credit Squeeze Is Rejected, As Critics Complain Of Opportunism," The New York Times, 8/11/07)

2007 December: President Bush again warns Congress of the need to pass legislation reforming GSEs, saying "These institutions provide liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is vital they operate safely and operate soundly. So I've called on Congress to pass legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs – and ensures they focus on their important housing mission. The GSE reform bill passed by the House earlier this year is a good start. But the Senate has not acted. And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation soon." (President George W. Bush, Discusses Housing, the White House, 12/6/07)

2008 February: Assistant Treasury Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms, saying "A new regulatory structure for the housing GSEs is essential if these entities are to continue to perform their public mission successfully." (David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, 2/7/08)

2008 March: President Bush calls on Congress to take action and "move forward with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They need to continue to modernize the FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages." (President George W. Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New York, NY, 3/14/08)

2008 April: President Bush urges Congress to pass the much needed legislation and "modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. [There are] constructive things Congress can do that will encourage the housing market to correct quickly by … helping people stay in their homes." (President George W. Bush, Meeting With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08)

2008 May: President Bush issues several pleas to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the situation deteriorates further. "Americans are concerned about making their mortgage payments and keeping their homes. Yet Congress has failed to pass legislation I have repeatedly requested to modernize the Federal Housing Administration that will help more families stay in their homes, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow state housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance sub-prime loans." (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/3/08)

"[T]he government ought to be helping creditworthy people stay in their homes. And one way we can do that – and Congress is making progress on this – is the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That reform will come with a strong, independent regulator." (President George W. Bush, Meeting With The Secretary Of The Treasury, the White House, 5/19/08)

"Congress needs to pass legislation to modernize the Federal Housing Administration, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance subprime loans." (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/31/08)

2008 June: As foreclosure rates continued to rise in the first quarter, the President once again asks Congress to take the necessary measures to address this challenge, saying "we need to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac." (President George W. Bush, Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08)

2008 July: Congress heeds the President's call for action and passes reform legislation for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as it becomes clear that the institutions are failing.

2008 September: Democrats in Congress forget their previous objections to GSE reforms, as Senator Dodd questions "why weren't we doing more, why did we wait almost a year before there were any significant steps taken to try to deal with this problem? … I have a lot of questions about where was the administration over the last eight years." (Dawn Kopecki, "Fannie Mae, Freddie 'House Of Cards' Prompts Takeover," Bloomberg, 9/9/08)

Congress had for years blocked attempts at stronger regulation and blocked reform of the Federal Housing Administration.

House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) criticized the President's warning saying: "these two entities - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - are not facing any kind of financial crisis ... The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing." (Stephen Labaton, "New Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae," New York Times, 9/11/03)

Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd also ignored the President's warnings and called on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position. (Eric Dash, "Fannie Mae's Offer To Help Ease Credit Squeeze Is Rejected, As Critics Complain Of Opportunism," New York Times, 8/11/07)

President Bush publicly called for GSE reform at least 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted. Unfortunately, these warnings went unheeded, as the President's repeated attempts to reform the supervision of these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who emphatically denied there were problems. Many prominent Democrats, including House Finance Chairman Barney Frank, opposed any legislation correcting the risks posed by GSEs.

Political contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac overwhelmingly supported Democratic officials - in particular members of Democratic leadership:

Since 1989, Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) has received $165,400 from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (Lindsay Renick Mayer, "Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac Invest In Lawmakers," Center For Responsive Politics' "Capital Eye" Blog, www.opensecrets.org, 9/11/08)

Since 1989, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has received $77,000 from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (Lindsay Renick Mayer, "Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac Invest In Lawmakers," Center For Responsive Politics' "Capital Eye" Blog, www.opensecrets.org, 9/11/08)

Since 1989, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has received $56,250 from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (Lindsay Renick Mayer, "Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac Invest In Lawmakers," Center For Responsive Politics' "Capital Eye" Blog, www.opensecrets.org, 9/11/08)

Dennis, Columbus, Ohio

Since you seem to think that the President has so much control over the economy and jobs, but I say that Congress has an even greater effect, lets take a look at what happened to both the economy and job creation during the 8 years (4 years under each) when both the Presidency AND Congress were under one party, since when they are split, one side can offset the other;

Economic Growth under Republicans = $2.757 Trillion increase in GDP.

Economic Growth under Democrats = $1.034 Trillion increase in GDP.

Net jobs created under Republicans = 7,942,000 net new jobs created.

Net jobs created under Democrats = 1,730,000 net jobs LOST.

At least it's nice to 'joust' with someone with obvious intelligence and some facts to back them up.

I have to go now because I have work to do - have a nice day.

Girls, girls girls.... other than trying to justify who leads better, why not just keep it to the current events of who makes and impliments policy.

To wit dennis you say, and I ame sure that roy would agree that...

Every President set an agenda that affects every individual and business in this country. The policies that they push will affect job creation/loss

After all, as the CEO of America that is the generic function of a POTUS. However that does not imply that a potus actions will be the only actions affecting jobs. As potus they have to also instill confidence within the community that everything is going in the right direction.

Sorry to say, mr obama has yet to instill that type of confidence for Americans except his 2008 campaign slogan of "hope and change"

Recessions are never nice, but to date no economist or politician has ever developed a policy to avoid them or have a sure fire plan for recovery.

ROY,

Why do you twist my words … I never said that any President has control over the economy … I said that the President always gets the credit/blame – once in a while for good reasons.

It is somewhat unfair to grade/judge economic growth under times of growth versus times of recession. If you were to measure the growth over extended periods of time it would be more valuable – when Congress was under one Party control (don’t forget about the Senate filibuster) and when both Branches were under one Party.

Once you start considering all those factors it becomes apparent that Congress and the President must work together for the common good of the country. However since the mid-90’s both Parties have become too partisan and nothing is getting done.

If one doesn’t pay attention on a daily basis, consider every amendment attached to a bill and the overall effect of the bill versus the effect of the amendments no one will ever understand the real impact rather than the political posturing. I am very weary of all the political back and forth, finger pointing and arm waving. Our country needs to solve many big problems thru compromise not bomb throwing.

I always appreciate a debate with you because you also come with facts and citations.

Did he really Spanky?

Maybe in your talking points.

Did you forget that he is the one who will have to sign approval and permission when they are ready to go, and he has already said he just ain't gonna do it. That looks to me like he has just checkmated the Repubs AGAIN. Why can't you guys ever see the big picture nor look past the end of your noses?

Besides, President Obama is the ONLY one in Washington DC who has been reasonable all along; it is your heros Boehner, Cantor, McConnell and their party who have been unreasonable since they got there with their "no compromise" "no new taxes" "take America hostage" and "defeat the President at any cost" attitudes. That is why they are going to be sent home their next elections. DUH!

You may wish to re-visit the position you've taken in your post.....

I saw this over @ The Obama Diary. This is for all those who worked and voted for President Obama. And are happy to do it again. Thank you Mr. Clooney.

I'm disillusioned by the people who are disillusioned with President Obama. Democrats eat their own. Democrats find singular issues and go, "Well, I didn't get everythying I wanted." I'm a firm believer in sticking by and sticking up for people whom you've election. If (Obama) was a Republican running, because Republicans are better at this, they'd be selling him as the guy who stoppd 400,000 jobs a month from leaving the country. They'd be selling him as the guy who saved the auto industry. If they had the beliefs, they'd be selling him as the guy who got rid of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", who got Osama bin Laden. You would be selling this as a very successful three years." George Clooney

***********************

I hope President Obama wins. But should he not, I hope the President leaves the White House with his head held high. Which he will. He was the president who kept working, 24/7, despite the out and out hate and disrespect from the left, the right the media and Congress, from day one. His wife as well has done a remarkable job as our First Lady.

He didn't deserve the treatment he received. But that is today's America. It's not a pretty picture. Who was it that said - President Obama didn't say "I'm the change we've been waiting for"; President Obama said "WE'RE the change we've been waiting for".

A Christmas Story

Donna/The Obama Diary got her telephone call from President Obama. Below is her story:

So today I decided to take a half day off from work to finish my Christmas shopping. My cousin who is a shopaholic told me about a newer Mall near Baltimore that had a specialty store that I needed to make a purchase from. So I leave work and swing by and pick her up and we head out to the Mall. Otherwise I would have been in the comfortable setting of my office when my phone rang at 5:04 EST. I almost didn’t answer because I wasn’t familiar with the number but thought it was one of my sons calling from work since it was a DC exchange. Now I was at the cash register when my phone rang and I answered it intending to tell whichever son this was that I would call them right back because I was at the checkout in the Mall. So I answer and a male voice asks if this is Donna S…….. and I respond hesitantly yes. He immediately says the most magical words that I have heard in my life. He says; hold for President Obama and within a second I hear. Hello Donna! Congratulations you were the winner of the grassroots fundraising challenge.

Now I drop the bags I had in my hand and said OMG its President Obama. My cousin looks at me as if I have lost my mind and the cashier’s face is scrunched up looking at me as if to say, what happened? I whisper to my cousin that it’s the real President Obama on my phone. The cashier goes crazy and all the cashiers rush over and my cousin is telling me that it can’t be. So I asked him to tell her it’s really him. Once she hears his voice she drops her bags and screams OMG it’s the President. I’m laughing hysterically at this point. Y’all had to be there to see that scene in that store.

I get the phone back from my cousin and he says; now you tell Jackie (my cousin) she can’t be hijacking your phone call. He said you know Donna I get this all the time. People never believe its me calling. I just don’t understand it. His sense of humor is off the chart.

He thanks me for winning the grassroots challenge. He says he is grateful for all the work being done on his behalf. I thank him. I tell him how much I admire and appreciate all that he is doing for our country and that there are so many of us that “has his back”. Then I told him about The Obama Diary and this wonderful space that our Chips has provided us to support him on a daily basis. I asked him to stop by someday. He said to tell you all that he is grateful for the support and that he loves you back and then he wished us all a Merry Christmas. I in turn wished him and his Family a Merry Christmas from both the OFA and TOD bloggers and then he was gone.

*******************

You never know what a little hard work will get you. Hopefully the re-election of President Barack Obama and a different Congress. A much different Congress.

Congratulations to Donna (who btw I do not know) and all those who helped her get one very special telephone call.

The Obama Diary. Extraordinary people there. Just like here @ First Read.

Three years ago...

To put it mildly, Obama has been lying throughout the primary season. Every single thing he has said is a lie. Without exception. The nuts in this country want Hilary, but they know she can't win. So they're going to stand with Obama.

Funny how politicians names are all so interchangeable.

George Clooney? You're quoting George Clooney to make and agree with his point? George Clooney spends most of his time at his villa in Italy. Do you really think he's in touch with the average American struggling in this economy? You would think experiencing the near melt down of yet another country would give him a different - and more realistic and compassionate - perspective.

You know, Pat, Mr. Clooney is part of that 1% you all find so offensive. But that doesn't matter if one of that 1% agrees with you, right?

It never ceases to amaze me how the thinkprogress dumpster divers feel so compelled to share the garbage ...

multimillionaire GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney has been harping on the supposedly hardscrabble 30 months he spent in France as a Mormon missionary

I put the waders on and went to thinkprogress. They had the video. What was really interesting was another link to the full video, a video that had not edited the first part, the last part and had not edited out the context of the actual exchange.

In summary, the following is the general narrative. BOLD print is what was edited out by thinkprogress. See for yourself if the edited part changes the context, changes the warped narrative of thinkprogress.

Mitt was responding to a specific question by an audience member, a man that asked if Romney could speak to an event or experience that changed his perspective, changed his world view, or changed him.

Romney mentioned the Mormon missionaries, then backed up to state he had grown up in a home with a great deal of affluence, his parents had done very well - a home where he had everything he needed and that he was asked by his church to go serve in France. He noted that France was not a third world country, but when he went to live there, they had to live on a savings limit of $110 a month - ($500-$600 a month today). From that amount they had to provide their food, clothing, rent, transportation, etc ... "so ..you know..you're not living high on the hog" ...... "so I lived with people in France who lived very modestly." ........ "Most of the apartments I lived in had no refrigerators" .... "I lived in a way that people of lower middle income in France lived and I said to myself wow, I sure am lucky to be born in the United States of America. I began to appreciate the freedoms and gifts that come by virtue of having been in this country"....."Before that school was sorta something fun to do and everyone was wanting to go to college and isn't that a fun thing"..... "When I came home after being there for 2 1/2 years, I was looking forward to getting an education so that I could lift my family and recognize that what I was doing had long term implications". ......... "It was a wake-up experience for me, I was 19 years old. I came back, I was 21, 21 1/2 or so" .... "I became much more serious about my life, about education, about the person I would settle with about raising a family" ..."it matured me in great ways."

The Thinkprogress part was 1:32 out of 3:55 and was the select part that they could build their narrative around. Look at the Patch video - then look at thinkprogress video for yourself.

From your post...

To show Americans that he can understand their troubles, multimillionaire GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney has been harping on the supposedly hardscrabble 30 months he spent in France as a Mormon missionary.

That is a gutless, deceitful misrepresentation of the actual exchange ... a lie.

Again, Romney responded to a specific question about what event or experience changed him. He described his life as priviledged and affluent and the awakening we had in FRANCE living among lower middle income French families.

Where did he ever offer, address, suggest or even approach the contention ... "to show Americans that he can understand their troubles?"

Harping? Answering a specific question in one meeting on one video is "harping?"

Romney said he lived in apartments that were so rundown that he was forced to defecate in a bucket

What he actually said - "A number of the apartments I lived in when I was there didn't have toilets. We had instead ... it had little pads on the ground, uh you know ... OK you know how that works" (people laughing) ... "there was a chain behind you with a bucket" (Romney in video acting out the procedure - reaching behind and above him) .... "I had not experienced one of those before" - (crowd laughing).

And from that you get "forced to defecate in a bucket?"

Pathetic.

for most of 1968, Mr Romney lived in the Mission Home, a 19th century neoclassical building in the French capital's chic 16th a

"Most of 1968?" .... Like maybe as little as 183 days? Like maybe as little as 183 out of the over 900 days he was over there? Elsewhere in tinkprogress they use the word "much" instead of "most" ... how much less of most is much .... 2 months instead of 6 months?

And besides, what did that have to do with the question Romney was asked? Why would Romney mention the Mormon mission house if it had nothing to do with an event that changed his perspective, his world view the way living with the lower middle income families did?

And coming from anonymous sources, from a British paper about his days in France ..... FORTYTHREE YEARS AGO?

It's entirely possibly that Romney lived in hovels in addition to the Mission Home, but it seems clear that Romney has been exaggerating the story of his lean years in France a bit.

Actuallly, it is entirely a certainty that this story is a despicable, deceitful fabricated debauchery of the reality by a degenerate "news" source.

Regarding your personal comments.....

Romney has been lying throughout the primary season. Every single thing he has said is a lie. Without exception. All he does is lie. Lie. And exploit. btw, does Mitt staying in a former Nazi palace takes points away from him? Or is this acceptable? There must have been tons of SS & Getaspo roaming that palace 65+ years ago. Shirley that must qualify Mitts as a Nazi. By today's standards.

Pretty crazy stuff, pretty funny too (and as Leslie Nielsen would say) .... and don't call me Shirley.

With respect for the words of Kristofferson ...

Then I crossed the empty street .... an' caught the Sunday smell of someone fryin' chicken...And it took me back to somethin'...That I'd lost somehow, somewhere along the way.

So how did you lose your sense of perspective, your honesty? Where along the way did you pick up your blind political bigotry?

I hope someday when you "stumble down the stairs to meet the day"

you can walk past the thinkprogress dumpster and find honest perspective again.

I hope President Obama wins. But should he not, I hope the President leaves the White House with his head held high. Which he will.

Yep, head held high with nose up in the air ... he is a narcissist and above everyone, afterall.

His wife as well has done a remarkable job as our First Lady.

True story ...

The other day, Obama went to Ft. Bragg to brag about himself and Michelle / welcome the troops home.

Obama said to the troops what a great First Lady she was ..... polite applause.

Obama said to the troops what wonderful work the First Lady had done for the military families .... .... ...... ..... ..... ...... ...... ..... ..... ..... ...... ..... ..... ...... ..... ...... ..... ...... ...... .(No joke -CRICKETS!)

Obama then said to the effect .... besides she is cute ..... a few chuckles.

Whew ... tough room fort, huh?

Is that where some Marine asks Michelle Obama to accompany him to the Marine Corps Ball?? Is that the best that this Marine can find?? And what does it do to The Marine Corp Ball?? Yechhh.

ABO 2012.

Ah, bob- not only are they out to lunch, but Obama? He's so far out of touch with the electorate I might have given the "birthers" some credence if they contended he was born on Mars.

Obama has decided on class warfare as his main campaign issue. It's all wrapped up in the ephemeral bow of "fairness".

I guess the campaign didn't poll on it, though.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/151556/Fewer-Americans-Divided-Haves-Nots.aspx

This on the heels of another Gallup poll that shows that the majority are just hunky dory with the fact that some people earn more than others- think the government's sole responsibility is to foster an atmosphere wherein the economy can grow, and everyone can have the opportunity to get into that "one percent".

The majority don't think he should be re elected;, AP, (which usually has the biggest "house effect" for Obama), shows him ten points underwater- and the liberals think it means something because he's tied with Romney and ahead of Gingrich. Show them trends, and they pooh pooh them- as if that makes them immaterial to election outcomes.

They are going to have to repair to an actual bar after next year's election. The virtual thing simply will not cut it.

Thanks Pat---Romney's lie about his Mormon mission in France should give the GOTP a gut check, but it wont. A phone call from the president would definitely make my day, but a republican getting that same phone call would first tell him to go back to Kenya, curse at him and hang up on him. Then he would high-five his fellow morons and tell himself that only he is a true American.

Yes no jo,

I have alredy selected, and purchased, the bottle of wine to savor, as I listen to the Obama concession speech. Hopefully the last speech from him I will ever have to hear.

ABO 2012

Hi no joe,

Yep, the liberals just can't figure out that most Americans are Americans, they still believe in America and understand that life isn't the Ellen or Oprah Show where all you have to do is show up, srcream a lot, be real emotional and the host / (the corporations) will give you everything.

The numbers have to be numbing for Obama, especially when you consider that in most cases, Americans tend to give their presidents every chance, they go a long time, but when they turn like this ..... they don't turn back.

Hope to see more of you next week.

Have a great weekend.

Well done, Pat! I'd say you scored a direct hit! Look at the stuttering, hysterical, rant like responses you got from the usual desperate characters! Raving about the usual things!

Diane Sawyer's program showed that mansion last night. It does indeed exist, and apparently little Mittens did spend his time there. Of course, the right wing nuts that have attacked you about what you said could be right I suppose. Perhaps Mitty considers that particular mansion to not be up to his normal luxurious lifestyle. You never don't know, as my neighbor would say.

By the way bobby, you want to see a real narcissist? Look at Newtoid. He has it all: the serial affairs, the re-definition of what normal standards of decency are, the refusal to take responsibility for his actions, that determination to have his view of himself believed regardless of fact. The excessive belief in his own abilities and what the world owes him. You don't see that with this President, it is NEWTOID who is the narcissist. Reminds me very much of my "dad" up to and including the statement that God says his affairs are somehow okay. He did it for the country you know. All that patriotism.

But people like you, no jo, Candice and the rest of your ilk are determined to be close minded about truth.

Enjoy that Thunderbird, Joseph...

I hope you have a great weekend, too, bob.

I'll try to be here next week- but this close to Christmas I'm so busy I catch myself coming and going. If I don't see you, have a wonderful holiday- mine is going to be filled with joy- my princess is two!

Raving about the usual things!

The parrots NEVER go off script!

I have to laugh at the effect ThinkProgress has on them - it's like holy water on a vampire! ;o)

I'll try to be here next week

Do you seriously think you are missed? lmao!

Talk about a narcissist!

PS: Pimping the 'princess' out again eh?

Feisty: I wonder what drives that hatred? Race, party affiliation, what? It is beyond all reasonable compass...there is nothing that the right wing will not make up about the First Family, and they ought to be ashamed.

Wait, that would require honesty!

I wonder what drives that hatred

I wish I had an answer for you NDD...

PS: Pat - that is one of my all time favorite Johnny Cash songs! ;o)

Hey newday,

Desperate characters?

Nah, what has Obama have going for him that most people care about. Don't Ask Don't Tell? Making the decision on a non decision to have the SEALs take Bin Laden?

Almost 1 out of every 2 Americans now at the poverty line?

Greatest number of Americans on food stamps in history? How many children are now homeless?

Sheez .. throw in Fast and Furious which gets uglier everyday, the growing green scandals .....

Nope, desperation is doing a pathetic hit piece on a Mormon trying to do his missionary work and fabricating, twisting .... unbelievable stories.

newday, look at the two videos and tell me where I'm wrong in my attack on tinkleprogress.

About Newt being a narcissist, I see a massive, monumental ego, an arrogance, obviously hits a few of the indicators, but a true narcissist .... like Obama? I don't think so. Newt has admitted a lot of his failings. Obama never has admitted anything. Newt knows he can be brought down. Obama seems to believe he can get away with not even making an honest attempt to create jobs.

Clinton has a massive ego, has an arrogance - was a serial adulterer, serial liar, but I never thought of him as the narcissist Obama is. Clinton knew he could lose, he shifted to the middle to win re-election. Obama still believes Obama is infallible.

Off the top of my head, I tend to see Gingrich as a less likable / personable version of Clinton.

I'm late for a ride, but we'll talk later if you want.

Oh yea - Look at the 2 videos and tell me where I'm wrong.

Yes, bob: desperate characters. Your response to me shows the panic you feel.

Newt=narcissist: part of being a narcissist is not being able to live by society's rules. And Newtoid admitted nothing. He excused his behavior based on two things "God forgives him" and he did it out of patriotism. Jaysus, bob, even YOU cannot forgive that.

So you can stammer about this all you want to, but facts are facts.

Bobby, you never fail to make me laugh. No. Newtoid is the narcissist. Part of being a narcissist is being unable to live by society's rules. Like having serial affairs. You want to point to a time when Obama engaged in that kind of acting out. Another part is redefining what that standard is. Like saying things like "God forgives him" therefore everything he does is all right. Or, he did it out of patriotism, saying that seriously and believing it.

You can't win this one bobby. Sorry.

Double post. The first one didn't show up right away. Sorry for writing this twice.

mine is going to be filled with joy

One has to wonder how the RWNJ's can feel anything closely resembling 'joy'!

It's Saturday morning, a week before Christmas Eve, yet, they roll out of bed, head straight to their computer and start pounding out their usual bile!

Unbelievable!

Good morning everybody. I am heading out to finish (actually start & finish) my Christmas shopping now.

I can hardly believe I'm typing this - I am going Christmas shopping with my granddaughters.

They have just moved back to Boston for good.

Have a wonderful day everybody.

Cheers.

Obama/Biden. Anyone want to make a 10k bet ala Romney style?

Romney said he ... was forced to defecate in a bucket and shower with a hose.

Now he wants to steal your social security account, hose your retirement, and defecate on you.

Unless you're in the top 1%, in which case you'll be given the combined social security contributions of the entire middle class.

I find it so funny that all the Right-wingers are on today. They have neither facts or substance only invectives to hurl against the only people that stand between them and a bread line.

Personally, I hope one of these Republican MORONS, wins so all these "Upper Middle Class" Righties, get all the economic freedom the deserve. Maybe the can get to the front of the bread line cause their so privileged.

elise, bet very few could afford obamas $35k/plate dinners either.

BTW - how is his $5/ticket raffle coming?

Did you mean to log on to Fox News or did you mistakenly think we give a s#*t about how much you hate the President? What is your religion? I think you kiss the feet of your 1% gods.

Boy Tom, the right wingers are out and about early this morn. They seem desperately worried. Do you suppose they feel it all slipping away?

Do you suppose they feel it all slipping away?

You THINK? lol

NDR---It's baffling to me that they continue to come here with no facts whatsoever and think that leaving behind their verbal turds has any effect on anybody's opinion. It probably makes them feel better but it reinforces for me how far to the right they have become. Thinking on their own isn't even possible for them anymore.

joe e parent Is that in your religion to make rude comments about people who might have a different opinion than yours. Did you get a message from your god saying its ok to do this. Yes your god works in strange ways.

Worries me, Tom,that people who think like this vote. They seem incapable of sorting through fact.

Newday.....

I don't feel anything slipping away, of course I'm not a RWNJ either, just a plain old american. I wonder if any of the LWNJ feel anything slipping away, I suspect they do too.

This much vitriol from both side reveals a lot of pent up fear... Don't ya think?

Which religion would that be Tom? Islam, Buddism, Hinduism?

Correction .. that was meant for Joseph, not Tom.

you wouldn't know religion if it slapped you in the face;

Who does the bible say was responsible for the death of "Jesus"???

Everybody else see Acts 4 verse 27 "gathered together"-old translation "conspired"-new

Egilman: I think fear of someone who does not look like anyone they have seen in the White House does drive this. I have no doubt that is true.

As a proud Lib, I am not in the least fearful. The pendulum swings wildly, it swung in the direction of the fringe right wing, and now, with the buyer's remorse, it will swing back. Course corrections are always interesting.

I hear ya girl, I'm a proud conservative and am very sad at the current state of affairs in this country.

We are ALL Americans, and we are better than this. "We have nothing to fear but fear itself" I wish he were here to tell everyone that again, seems like they have forgotten what makes us uniquely American.

The pendulum is swinging, wildly the last few years, hopefully it slows a bit.

I'm originally from the east coast, I learned very young that skin color means nothing, the cut of a mans clothes means nothing, it's the cut of his character that is what counts.

Through my 50 some odd years of political life, I've learned that every person has issues of character, there are no perfect people. I can respect the man that he is willing to take on a job that no sane man would ever want, that being said it is one of mans failings to seek out and drive for power.

If the current president has character issues I don't care, whether any of the opposition has character issues I don't care either. All I want is the man most capable of doing the job in the most honest, sincere and responsible way, he has all our futures in his hands, I pray that they are capable.

Yes, political course corrections are always interesting and good entertainment, I think most of us believe the same things but have a difference of opinion on who is best to handle it.

But the evil emotional hate rhetoric has to stop, from BOTH sides.

Egilman wow a thinking conservative thats cool. You could be blacklisted from your party for saying what you said. Now is the time to switch parties. Come on over to where people make educated choices. Its to bad that you have to be lumped in with the right wing insanity. To quote and I'm in agreement " The evil emotional hate rhetoric has to stop from BOTH sides"

Thank You and Happy Holidays!

Egilman: You are officially my favorite conservative, right up there with Frank "Grimey" Grimes.

Happy holidays.

Oh, in the interest of clarification, I do not believe that conservative and fringe right wing are the same people. A true conservative is a very thoughtful person, fringe right is someone from whom you will get knee jerk reactions.

Smitty....

I don't belong to any party, I doubt that either party would have me, I think too much for my own good is the way they would put it.

Newday....,

You and Feisty along with Forrest and a few others around here are the personalities that draw me back day after day. I know I don't post that much and am usually late to the party but I try to keep and put forth an even keel.

Most good liberals are also the thoughtful types that have no need to resort to hyperbole and mindless attacks when confronted with an opposing viewpoint. I'm not perfect and have fallen into that trap myself, anger has a tendency to make people lose their minds sometimes.

I know from your many postings that you can appreciate a reasoned argument, and appreciate it very much.

You have a very Merry Christmas lady, and a sincerely Happy New Year...

You have a very Merry Christmas, and a sincerely Happy New Year...

Same to you Egilman!

Like NDD - you are one of my favorite posters who sit 'right' next of me! ;o)

I appreciate your comments & hope you keep them coming, finding a reasonable opposing viewpoint around here these days, is a precious commodity!

PS: LOVE your snazzy new avatar!

Thank you Feisty, You have a dry wit that really tickles my funny bone occasionally.

It's an old avatar I used to use on other forums, it kinda fits my handle and where I live, the great Pacific Northwest. I go fishing quite a bit and have actually seen eagles snaggin fish just like that....

Actually that part of the interview was aired live on 60 Minutes so it isn’t like some kind of CBS ploy not to cover important parts of the interview. No conspiracy here.

His record of accomplishments ranks high compared to other Presidents during their first term. Like it or not most any person that holds a high position or office is guilty of narcissism. Listen to Newt or Mitt they toot their own horns many times every day.

Nobody But Obama

Bob if anyone would know its you. Is that the Ann Coulter who is the transsexual from Florida?