That was my first thought also when I read the title...

That's what I thought! Gingrich is the dictionary definition of "dangerous". Also "hothead" and "goofball".

Isn't that like the pot calling the kettle black?

Mud slinging is the lowest form of politics. Those who take part in it will never have my respect. Voters beware. If a candidate can not run on his/her own merits, but must attack others to raise his/her public esteem, then he/she is not deserving of my vote.

and the award for "most over heated rhetoric of the year" goes to ....

The Republicans seem to be veering toward the bizarre; they all seem to be a little bit nuts.

Pat - Smart enough is probably a term meant for something other then Politics. However fancying myself as a smart guy, I would say the most Dangerous person would be anyone who give their undying support to a Political Party.

Unemployment sucks not because of Obama but because the real estate market is recovering from a depression. None of the Republican candidates or their policies are going to fix that until the housing market recovers. That will take time. ACtually, their policies would probably have the opposite effect and unemployment would worsen.

Gingrich and his super PAC are full of it. He is the worst person in the GOP. He has said the best things about Mitt. Now he changed his mind, the label of Flip Flop does not belong to Romney, but it does belong to Gingrich.

Great column, john, you highlight a fact of the situation that neither political party wants to openly acknowledge.

Gingrich practically originated the practice of intense negative campaigning while complaining about that very practice. His whole life is based on saying one thing while doing the opposite.

Pat G-3324946

If you aren't smart enough to figure out who's the most dangereous man after three years in office, you are a part of the reason the economy is as bad as it is and why the unemployment sucks.

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

Actually, most of us remember that the economy tanked in 2008, before Obama took office. In addition many of us remember the policies that caused the economy to tank and the unpaid wars and tax cuts which make up a bulk of the current deficit.

Hmmmm, so Gingrich thinks Romney is the second most dangerous man in America huh? Well, that just confirms my original comment from several months ago, Romney is my SECOND CHOICE. Obama is my first choice and I believe he will be re-elected in a landslide but if the unthinkable should happen Romney is my second choice.

I wonder who Newt thinks is the most dangerous man in America? Certainly that would be a toss up between George II and Darth Cheney wouldn't it?

Obama/Biden 2012

And the circus goes on and on...............

Confussed - Thank you Professor, Now go back to Gilligan's Island.

Politics is perception.

He is interested in two things and two things only: making you afraid of it and telling you who's to blame for it. That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you win elections.

I always love to go back and watch The American President (c 1995) every election season. The playbook remains the same, only the voters get dumber and more forgetful of their past.

You guys got it all wrong - the most dangerous guy is out of the office!! 1. Uneccessary wars that cost us trillion, 2. Loss of 4800+ of our brave sons, 3. Corruption and nepotism at its worst and 4. Lax implementation of regulations that nearly cost us a depression

"Newt should be facing a federal corruption investigation, where is the Dept., of Justice. This loser is a Crook"

Is not mud slinging when a person who will not justify ther action as well as not admit to them.

You all are missing the point! Romney is probably the only candidate who can challenge Obama. His credentials are pretty good, he's damn near liberal sometimes, and he looks like a president.

Gingrich is fat, ugly, has cheated on two out of three wives, and has an uncontrollable temper. He says he is smart, but I think I hear more of that than I see.

I think this Gingrich Super Pac is actually funded by Democrats. This makes the Grinch look about as hypocritical as he can. The more he attacks Romney (and Romney attacks back), the more terrible the two of them look.

Have you noticed that Perry and Bachmann are still in the race? They should be long gone, but the Republicans are destroying themselves (and maybe with a little help from the Demos). It's anybody's game right now. Heck, Palin and Trump are still in the wings.

I would like to donate $10 to the Grinch's Super Pac. Good job, fellas.

Obama '12.

At Pat G, hahaha, seriously man? Bush/Cheney, and I would lean more towards Cheney, as Bush was just a bumbling idiot figure head and that total piece of sh!t Cheney actually ran things, almost single handedly, brought the United States, and the Whole World to the brink of destruction. I am always amazed at how so many of you repub bozo's believe that the mess that we find our selves in is a direct result of the Obama Administration and not the Bush/Cheney shows 8 years of corruption did to the U.S and the world. Cheney even went so far as to blow a so called friends face off, talk about dangerous. Now, if all you Obama Haters out there, so badly want him out of office, Nominate Ron Paul. Because if you don't, hey, guess what, it is gonna be FOUR MORE YEARS!!! And then, much more than likely, it will be another 8 years for the Dems in office. That last couple of lines should make this statement the most liked post in all of the history of MSNBC news sites..... LOL.... Ron Paul 2012.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Throw the Book at Getrich" 1.6 Million in Sin money"<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

PatG: IF the economy sucks as bad as the politicians and economist say is does, please tell me where did all these people get the 1/2 TRILLION dollars to spend on the Christmas Holiday. Somebody is lying to us and it's not the President!

Because, you know, I am going to listen to some Bulls**t SuperPAC, where the donors are anonymous.

F U to the 'Supreme' Court, conservative and liberal alike.

Nothing that the private party of Congress and their far too wealthy donors want to do more but than to take away the right to vote, however they can. And if they can't, they will try to make it not matter.

Jim 322's quote "Actually, most of us remember that the economy tanked in 2008, before Obama took office. In addition many of us remember the policies that caused the economy to tank and the unpaid wars and tax cuts which make up a bulk of the current deficit.

Yeah, I remember Jim it was when the Democrats took over BOTH houses of Congress in Nov. 2006. When Barney and Chris said "there's nothing to worry about, there is no housing crisis". Don't let facts get in your way. And these "unpaid" wars, I agree, so nice to see Obama wage another escalation in Afghanistan, and get involved in Libya. Tax cuts?, you mean the one's Obama has signed into place for the last 3 years? Those tax cuts?, you mean Obama's tax cuts?, he owns them now Jim. Nice to see Obama wanting to enrich employee unions and teachers unions by spending all of the stimulus money protecting his voting base rather than solve the problems we face, all the while adding 4.5 trillion to the debt, adding a 33% increase to our national debt in 3 years. The only problem Obama cares about is his re-election, everything else is expendable, including our country.

As supported by the dumb-ass Supreme Court ruling, the first-most dangerous "man" is the Super Pac... it has more money than mankind, more power than the President, more voice than any of us, and never held to any standard for facts. "He" (Super Pac) is Satan.

@Kevin,

I agree with you completely. I believe in ideas, not parties. Kudos

THank GOD by Tuesday our long State nightmare will be over!! Ron Paul will win Iowa Caucus, Romney will win the GOP nomination.....and Iowa will be back off the national political map for another 4 years! And we won't have to see all those horrible negative/stupid ad's ...until next October anyway...YEA!

Obama 2012!

zapper45701 "Mud slinging is the lowest form of politics. Those who take part in it will never have my respect"

Just wait for Obama to start his big-time mud slinging campaign. He'll have about $1 BILLION to spend, and what's he going to run on - his handling of the economy????????????

And remember, he'd from Chicago, where dirty campaigning is a fine art.

jcb, how much foolish can you be. Obama went into Afghanistan to get bin laden, after bush dropped the ball purposely, to start his phony Iraq war. Obama got bin laden, didn't he? He didn't get us involved in Libya other than to use some drones. No US casualties and Khaddafy is gone. That's a real good track record, right there. No, he didn't give the stimulus money to all his friends. Matter of fact, Cantor and McDonnell, and Coburn, and Kyl, and bachman and all those other repub friends lined up with their hands out for the cash the all voted against, saying how it brought jobs to their districts. And, yes, Obama did give us tax cuts, particularly the middle class which needed them. And, no, bush was in charge when the economy collapsed. It was his non-regulation and his "ownership society" that caused it. Remember, Bush did not veto one spending/pork bill brought to him by the repubs who owned both houses for six years. First veto he made was when Dems won Congress back. Must be nice to be a conservative with allyour revisionist history.But, like Gingrich, Romeny, Paul,etc, when did a republican ever speak truth?

FlyingArmed

I almost gave up reading before I got to your post, JCB. At least somebody on this liberal MSN blog. Most of these people are idiots who are still spouting the hope and change lines, or part of the equally idiotic Republican establishment that fears any strong conservative candidate who might come in and clean house. And no, I'm not a Ron Paul supporter because he's totally nuts on foreign policy.

Thanks for the kind words. I'm an independent who thinks both parties are ridiculous. I can not believe we are still occupying Muslim countries, wasting our young peoples lives, and costing this country billions over their lifetimes dealing with the savagery of war. There goat herders who want us off their land, and we refuse to leave. Afghanistan is no threat to this country, they have nothing, no Air Force nor a Navy. We never learn a damn thing. We spend money like drunken sailors, and the head drunk lives in the White House. He spends our money buying votes from idiots who think this man is the answer, he is the biggest part of the problem, and he is clearly way way over his head. That's what you get when you elect an amateur.

ROY WILSON .... when you only have to replay what people say ... it's not truly "mud slinging"!!!!

AND ... and I would say Obama could run on "his handling of the economy" when you truly look at the situation that he was handed ....... crash and burn was the scenario!

OR ... you could just hand it right back to the folks who put us in this mess in the first place!!!!

Amnesia is a terrible thing ............

Mikes quote "jcb, how much foolish can you be. Obama went into Afghanistan to get bin laden, after bush dropped the ball purposely, to start his phony Iraq war. Obama got bin laden, didn't he? He didn't get us involved in Libya other than to use some drones. No US casualties and Khaddafy is gone. That's a real good track record, right there. No, he didn't give the stimulus money to all his friends. Matter of fact, Cantor and McDonnell, and Coburn, and Kyl, and bachman and all those other repub friends lined up with their hands out for the cash the all voted against, saying how it brought jobs to their districts. And, yes, Obama did give us tax cuts, particularly the middle class which needed them. And, no, bush was in charge when the economy collapsed. It was his non-regulation and his "ownership society" that caused it. Remember, Bush did not veto one spending/pork bill brought to him by the repubs who owned both houses for six years. First veto he made was when Dems won Congress back. Must be nice to be a conservative with allyour revisionist history.But, like Gingrich, Romeny, Paul,etc, when did a republican ever speak truth?"

I'm not a republican Mike, never have been , used to be a democrat till I grew up and realized that that party has serious issues over wanting ever more power over our lives. You seem to forget #'s Mike, care to talk truth or is that to tough for you? FACT, Obama has increased the national debt by 32% over his first term. He spent the bulk of stimulus $ backing union jobs, not giving a damn that increasing spending within education has been ABSOLUTELY proven to be a waste of money, but hey, he needs the votes. And don't even start on the car company bailout, the biggest lie ever told, GM has paid the money back. Liar, pants on fire, the GM stock must hit 62$ a share, that will NEVER happen, it's at $28 and going down, yet he floats the bailout as a success, a total lie. A democratic Senate and Congress by huge numbers were in charge during the demise of this country, with W in the White House, a total loser. Say what you want Obama isn't change we can believe in, he's change were ending come November, he hasn't got a clue how to fix anything. He's a proven failure, and you saying "not so" does not make it not so.

by the way, do you know how to use spell check?, your English teacher would be very disappointed.

I'd like to comment on the view that this is a negative ad.........how so? It's not attacking Romney's personal beliefs, some adolescent incident, a personal matter, or anything that can be considered "out of bounds." All it does is state facts (things that Romney said) and an opinion about where that could lead America.

It's not like he called him the "Joe Isuzu of Politics" like Bush Sr. did to Dukakis.......that was actually funny.

I'm amused by the two party politics and really hope an independent makes the presidency in my life time.

Mike your quote "Obama did give us tax cuts"

LOL He never "cut" taxes Mike, don't let facts get in your way, he only extended the tax cuts that were already in place pal. Bin Laden, oh my, a old man siting in a dump, and we spent a trillion dollars finding and killing him, such a great way to spend money, let's stay over there forever teaching goat herders to drive. And, just wait and see what we get in Libya now that the kook has been done in, won't be pretty Mike, not pretty at all. Typical clown of the democratic party.

From Politifact.org / care to argue #'s Mike?

The latest posting by the Treasury Department shows the national debt has now increased $4 trillion on President Obama's watch.

The debt was $10.626 trillion on the day Mr. Obama took office. The latest calculation from Treasury shows the debt has now hit $14.639 trillion.

It's the most rapid increase in the debt under any U.S. president.

The national debt increased $4.9 trillion during the eight-year presidency of George W. Bush. The debt now is rising at a pace to surpass that amount during Mr. Obama's four-year term.

I wish this hypocrite Blingrich would just SHUT UP!

• Mr. 'no negative ads'
• Mr. 'no hiding behind Super-Pacs'

Go back to Mclean, VA - it's really close to the things you really love: Tiffanys in Tysons Corner and right across the river form your K. Street lobbying office ............

If you honestly think 2 years of practical stalemate from 2006-2008 caused this collapse, you might want to go back and look at your numbers. Deregulation over a decade ago set up the fall, and the usual shenanigans the financial industry gets up to when we stop looking over their shoulders, coupled with the all too common short term thinking greed of the American people cemented it. They could only fudge the numbers for so long before reality came calling.

But by all means, blame a couple senators and lecture others about numbers. Yours are wrong by the way, as most of the stimulus was tax cuts at the behest of Republicans who didn't vote for it anyway. And what GM paid back was the stimulus loan, the rest was invested and is owned as equity. If people expect that to appreciate to it,s full amount 2 years after bankruptcy' well, perhaps you don't understand the stock market much. If GM remains profitable we'll see dividends for as long as we maintain stock. It's a long term strategy (tho i admit dems are desperate for short term gains, mostly because American voters have a hard time taking the long view), with the added bonus of preventing an American industrial institution from being sold off for spare parts to foreign investors. But of course you'd never want to give Obama credit for that.

Also Obama was on the line for about 1.5-2 trillion before he was even elected, but for whatever reason you "independents" neglect to mention this. The debt was skewed massively by TARP and the Stimulus.

"And what GM paid back was the stimulus loan"

An outright lie. The amount of the stimulus loan to GM has not been paid back. We the citizens own "worthless stock" that may never be as valuable as the loan amount that was given to GM and it's unions over bond holders. Your pants are on fire.

What has been actually paid back is TARP, every dime of it. The "stimulus" was a union payback, nothing more, and Sylendra start up money, and other "pet" projects with Democratic leanings. Sell stupid elsewhere, we are full up on here already.

All Republicans are dangerous

Actually, the most dangerous man in American isn't even running for office: Rush Limbaugh.

"And what GM paid back was the stimulus loan"

An outright lie. The amount of the stimulus loan to GM has not been paid back. We the citizens own "worthless stock" that may never be as valuable as the loan amount that was given to GM and it's unions over bond holders. Your pants are on fire.

What has been actually paid back is TARP, every dime of it. The "stimulus" was a union payback, nothing more, and Sylendra start up money, and other "pet" projects with Democratic leanings. Sell stupid elsewhere, we are full up on here already.

Correction, TARP was used to bailout GM, not the stimulus, the only TARP money not paid back is the 42 billion that GM still owes, which is totally dependant on there stock rising to 62$ a share, never happen.

The gloves are off, or um....I mean the $13,000 Tiffany ring anyway.

JCB: You do know that that our full-year 2009 budget, complete with $1.4 trillion deficit, was drafted and instituted before Bush left office in 2008, correct? Yes, you could and should argue that the President has not reversed course (instituting austerity measures during a tenuous recovery could be disasterous), but for republicans to now scream that our debt is entirely Obama's fault, and to attempt to paint themselves as fiscal conservatives, is disingenuous at best, propaganda at worst.

"dependant on their stock rising to $62 a share, never happen."

If GM were trading at the same P/E ratios as their Japanese competitors, their shares would already be at that level... looking like a bargain right now at $19 with strong domestic and international grown late this year. Never say never, makes you look foolish.

GOP cash---the financial sector and Wall Street have given an overwhelming portion of their cash to the GOP candidates. These people wanted to be bailed out, yet now are of the opinion that they need no oversight. The insurance companies are throwing the money behind the GOP in hopes that they can keep the US's medical cost at #1--while ranking #37 in quality.

http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=F09

http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=F07

http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=W04

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/select.php?cycle=2012

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/select.php?ind=E01

rjj1208

"dependant on their stock rising to $62 a share, never happen."

If GM were trading at the same P/E ratios as their Japanese competitors, their shares would already be at that level... looking like a bargain right now at $19 with strong domestic and international grown late this year. Never say never, makes you look foolish.

P/E ratios, LOL, are you trying to compare Japanese car makers to GM?, that's laughable. There business model is the exact opposite of this countries GM business model. Why do you think there in Tennessee and not Detroit? Makes you look rather foolish, don't you think? Never compare the success of the Japanese car makers, they ate our lunch for 30 years and continue to do so, while the UAW bankrupted the big 3 American car companies over the last 30 years. Guess who's still ruining the big 3, yeah that's right it's the UAW, the noose around Ford's neck, Chrysler and GM too. Sell ignorance elsewhere please.

If your so sure of GM's success please buy some of their stock, and we will just see how that works out for you long term. Good luck, your going to need it, once again $62 a share, never happen.

"with strong domestic and international grown late this year"

use spell check, your teacher would not appreciate your spelling

sorry to bust your balloon but both Ford and GM were downgraded for 2012 by two worldwide financial giants, but go ahead and believe, Santa come on Sunday too?

Sandtrich, your per usual out of touch with reality your quote , "GOP cash---the financial sector and Wall Street have given an overwhelming portion of their cash to the GOP candidates. These people wanted to be bailed out, yet now are of the opinion that they need no oversight. The insurance companies are throwing the money behind the GOP in hopes that they can keep the US's medical cost at #1--while ranking #37 in quality"

I want you to do your homework for a change. I want you to research the price of the top 10 Insurance Companies stock price the week before Obama signed the Health Care bill, and then give me the massive increase in the stock price that took place right after he signed it. Then and only then will you be allowed to discuss this issue. Big Insurance OWNS this President, and you posting otherwise does not make it not so. The Washington insiders made a fortune off this health care bill, and all of them were in line after Obama. Fact pal, not fiction.

JCB: Quite obvious you do not work in the financial sector... GM's stock could very easily trade at higher multiples than it does now. Market is just as much about psychology as it is the political mumbo jumbo you just spouted off. Domestic auto industry has in the recent past, and will again in the future, trade at higher P/E ratios, which could very easily lead to the stated target stock price. This need not be tomorrow or even within 5 years to make it true. As it stands, GM has better operating margins and quarterly revenue growth than say, Toyota, but keep spouting your drivel. You proclaim yourself as an "independent"? Seems to me that you'll spin any information as it suits your needs to bash the current administration.

Oh, and keep throwing in juvenile comments about spell check to change the topic... helps your reputation a ton, I'm sure.

JCB--insurance companies are simply a middle man between your medical provider and you. The numbers tell it all in the campaign raising for this cycle. Pass single payer and eliminate the scabs. If you search, you don't have to re-search.

The Gringh turns into Mr. Biz-zarro, and will "fix us," hail to the "Fixerator."

JCB: Quite obvious you do not work in the financial sector... GM'sstock could very easily trade at higher multiples than it does now. Market is just as much about psychology as it is the political mumbo jumbo you just spouted off. Domestic auto industry has in the recent past, and will again in the future, trade at higher P/E ratios, which could very easily lead to the stated target stock price. This need not be tomorrow or even within 5 years to make it true. As it stands, GM has better operating margins and quarterly revenue growth than say, Toyota, but keep spouting your drivel. You proclaim yourself as an "independent"? Seems to me that you'll spin any information as it suits your needs to bash the current administration.

Oh, and keep throwing in juvenile comments about spell check to change the topic... helps your reputation a ton, I'm sure.

You are truly a fool. "work in the financial field", sorry I retired at 48 from real estate investments, your excuse? My father, though passed now, was a VP at Merrill Lynch for 40 years, you don't know squat about the market or you wouldn't be pushing GM's stock. Even Ford, a ton better managed company is on the do not buy list, it's stock scouter rating is in the toilet. Their electric car which GM has spent billions on is borderline a bust. They can't even repay their loan, and you think that a company with a listed debt total that doesn't even include the debt owed to "us" is in, or in it's price to earnings ratio , if you even know what that is.

Market is just as much about psychology as it is the political mumbo jumbo you just spouted off.

No the stock market is made up of public companies that trade openly to investors. It is not about psychology, it is about earnings, breakthroughs in technology, future earnings and stability of management, not political mumbo jumbo, other than when we have a President that thinks he can make people 'buy" insurance thus busting the insurance stocks through the roof, I loved it, because I knew what Pelosi and Obama would do, and they did it. And since your a know it all, I supported Hillary for President, not some rank amateur from Chicago, who is quite clearly way over his head.

and despite your remarks, I do think spelling is important

and I do believe in "single payer" but that an a dollar will buy you a cup of coffee at McDonald's, never happen in my lifetime, probably not in yours either

JCB, you "seem" to have the answer to everything. What you've failed to mention about the wars is that neither war was included in the budget during the Bush administration, which is an easy fact to look up. It wasn't until it was included in the budget during Obama's administration where the deficit took a heavy hit upward.

You talk about the stimulus not being effective. Knowing about economics, I disagree. Some money may have not gone to where it would have been most effective but if nothing had been done, you'd be seeing unemployment more in the 15-17 % range. Perhaps bailing out GM wasn't a smart thing to do in your mind, but it saved millions of jobs. Not just those jobs at GM, but hundreds of thousands of jobs from distributers, parts manufactureres, materials, and transportation. It's irresponsible to base a judgment of the stimulus on a narrow portion of what it accomplished. You do yourself a grave misjustice unless you look at the overall picture, taking every aspect into account.

You also mentioned the insurance companies stock prices going up a week before President Obama signed the Health Care Law. If you also remember, the President also said he wanted a bill passed prior to the time the bill was finally written and submitted. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that if a law were going to be passed that stock prices might go up. Check out previous laws passed for different reasons, then check out stock prices of companies related to those laws and you will see a pattern of the same.

In one post you mentioned you have never been a Republican and used to be a Democrat, which would make most believe you to be an Independent. But as a true Independent, you should be critical of both parties. You "say" you are, but your posts prove otherwise. Even though the last recession was as a result of policies from both parties, you only bother to mention the Democrats involvement within your posts. No mention of the Bush policies during his administration which lead to the recession, no mention that the first stimulus (which you insist did nothing to help) was passed by former President Bush. Independent? Hardly.

Someone has handed you a myriad of talking points to promote your views. Those of us who have a better understanding and grasp of everything involved with economic growth or failure know better than to use information you got from a partisan website, radio, TV, or news outlet. We understand that the problems of today are not caused solely by one party or the other.

Finally, I find it interesting...

1) How you twist what other people say to suit your needs in an attempt to prove your point.

2) Your pathetic attempt to make yourself appear knowledgable, even though some of that information you mentioned is simply not true and easily verified. I'll leave that for you to figure out which "facts" you mentioned I'm referring to.

3) Your ability to have any type of rational discussion without resorting to insulting others or explaining what "their" problem appears to be. Only a person insecure with themself would behave in that manner. Do you really believe you will appear more mature if you insult and ridicule anyone who disagrees with your comments?

I'd really like to try to have an intelligent conversation with you. That won't happen though for two reasons.

1) Intelligence does not appear to be your strong point. You're more of a "smooth talker" who mistakes his gift of gab for intelligence.

2) I rarely post here and don't really care to hear what insults you might have towards my post. You may not like what I have to say and if so, then I'm closer to the truth than you'd ever admit.

I hope you have a wonderful day.

from today's financial times /

General Motors

In November 2010, General Motors (NYSE:GM) shares began trading again with all the hype and fanfare befitting the once-stalwart American icon. Since then, GM shares have stalled, conking out nearly 40%. The auto market is tough right now, and with the U.S. and global economies growing at an anemic pace, U.S. unemployment and underemployment still persistently high and fears of a Europe-induced global recession on the horizon, GM shares are likely to remain in the slow lane in 2012.

JCB, you "seem" to have the answer to everything. What you've failed to mention about the wars is that neither war was included in the budget during the Bush administration, which is an easy fact to look up. It wasn't until it was included in the budget during Obama's administration where the deficit took a heavy hit upward.

You talk about the stimulus not being effective. Knowing about economics, I disagree. Some money may have not gone to where it would have been most effective but if nothing had been done, you'd be seeing unemployment more in the 15-17 % range. Perhaps bailing out GM wasn't a smart thing to do in your mind, but it saved millions of jobs. Not just those jobs at GM, but hundreds of thousands of jobs from distributers, parts manufactureres, materials, and transportation. It's irresponsible to base a judgment of the stimulus on a narrow portion of what it accomplished. You do yourself a grave misjustice unless you look at the overall picture, taking every aspect into account.

You also mentioned the insurance companies stock prices going up a week before President Obama signed the Health Care Law. If you also remember, the President also said he wanted a bill passed prior to the time the bill was finally written and submitted. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that if a law were going to be passed that stock prices might go up. Check out previous laws passed for different reasons, then check out stock prices of companies related to those laws and you will see a pattern of the same.

good points, I can accept those as at least based on merit.

"In one post you mentioned you have never been a Republican and used to be a Democrat, which would make most believe you to be an Independent. But as a true Independent, you should be critical of both parties. You "say" you are, but your posts prove otherwise. Even though the last recession was as a result of policies from both parties, you only bother to mention the Democrats involvement within your posts. No mention of the Bush policies during his administration which lead to the recession, no mention that the first stimulus (which you insist did nothing to help) was passed by former President Bush. Independent? Hardly."

you obviously missed this quote from me "I supported Hillary for President, not some rank amateur from Chicago, who is quite clearly way over his head." Sorry to blow your point out of the water.

Finally, I find it interesting...

1) How you twist what other people say to suit your needs in an attempt to prove your point.

2) Your pathetic attempt to make yourself appear knowledgable, even though some of that information you mentioned is simply not true and easily verified. I'll leave that for you to figure out which "facts" you mentioned I'm referring to.

3) Your ability to have any type of rational discussion without resorting to insulting others or explaining what "their" problem appears to be. Only a person insecure with themself would behave in that manner. Do you really believe you will appear more mature if you insult and ridicule anyone who disagrees with your comments?

I'd really like to try to have an intelligent conversation with you. That won't happen though for two reasons.

1) Intelligence does not appear to be your strong point. You're more of a "smooth talker" who mistakes his gift of gab for intelligence.

2) I rarely post here and don't really care to hear what insults you might have towards my post. You may not like what I have to say and if so, then I'm closer to the truth than you'd ever admit.

I hope you have a wonderful day.

Sorry, I don't converse with strangers on a web board. You can say anything you want on here, it's a free country, but I don't like the demise of solid banter. Sorry if my direct contradictions to bogus points and fiction not facts upset you so. And one other thing, never underestimate the stupidity of the American people. Look at who our leaders are, we get what we deserve. Sorry if the fiction you believe turns out to be wrong by the way. Don't be so judgemental of people you do not know, it's an ugly trait.

JCB: Dan pretty much hit it on the head... I don't see much need to further debate. By the way, refuting a point about a stock "NEVER" (your word) hitting a certain target price is not the same as "pushing" it, and no amount of spin or articles about the state of GM stock in 2010 will back your original myopic statement.

Also, not sure if my last comment went through, but a quick scrub of your last few posts shows DOZENS of punctuation, capitalization, and grammatical errors in this thread alone... don't be so quick to cast stones.

You probably could have apologized for calling me stupid while acknowledging you were wrong in your hasty response.

Also technically speaking GM doesn't "owe" the 42 or whatever it is now billion dollars - that wasn't a loan, it was an investment (for which we received a 61% stake in the post-bankruptcy GM). One we hope to recoup thru dividends and the sale of stock. That it will undoubtedly take longer than the next election cycle is why it gets spun so much by either side.

The most dangerous man in America is JCB-1236504.

Guantanamo, make a good camp for political prisoners, Newtie might be on the list.

Fact of the Matter - Are they all running for President of Iowa? What next President of New Hampshire? Last I looked their are 48 more states - what the devil are these people doing? Iowa has only picked one out of what 5 Presidents - so what's the big deal? Huckabee - he used it as a stepping stone to Faux News and slanted fairy tale videos

Actually it is uncontrolled "superpacs" that are the most dangerous. They prey on the uneducated voter's fears allowing a continuing attempt to elect people who will cut education so they can have a growing electorate of dumbasses to vote their puppets into power. That is why ALL incumbents of EVERY elected office in this nation needs to be tossed into the street EVERY ELECTION!

There is only one way to end all of this BS. Get involved NOW in the Popular Amendment Movement at www.faircampaignreform.us. It's too late to correct the problem for this election, but we can sure work to make sure it never happens AFTER 2012. There are two constitutional amendments on that website: Election/Campaign Finance Reform and Term Limits. The ECFR amendment will ban all third party contributions AND and advertising, as well as ban all lobbyists from ANY contact with members of Congress. Download the two petitions, sign and circulate them, help form a local grassroots organization to promote the petition drive, and then work with other statewide grassroots organizations. The blogs are there for you to communicate with others in your area and state.

I generally agree with Anti-trust Proponent, but I'm not sure those two amendments will correct all of the systemic problems that are currently plaguing our government. However, I do think people need to get involved, and that some systemic changes by Constitutional amendment are required!

With regard to the Super PAC issue, however, the real issue is that Super PACs should not be able to take this type of action. Our current campaign finance system allows a few large organizational contributors to both sway the outcome of an election (for example, by running these types of ads) and also to sway the votes that an elected official casts by influencing his decision by holding reelection campaign dollars over the elected official's head. That is why the current campaign finance system simply does not work. It results in our elected officials focusing only on the needs and desires of the party itself and the few large organizations that contribute to the party or the candidate's campaign, as opposed to focusing on the needs and desires of the majority of Americans - the people the representative is supposed to be representing! However, Congress will not willingly change this system on its own, as this is the very system that continually gets each of the current members elected or reelected, and also guarantees that the Reps and Dems stay in power while effectively excluding any third party from gaining a foothold. This all clearly needs to change.

I encourage everyone to check out the American Overhaul Act at www.americanoverhaulact.org, which tackles this and several other systemic government problems with a set of proposed Constitutional amendments focused on six areas of concern: Federal Election Campaign Reform, Congressional Compensation Limits, Elimination of Party Favoritism, Congressional Term Limits, Congressional Size Limits, and Federal Budget-Deficit Reform. And, if you agree with the proposals of the Act, pass it on to your friends, family, and elected representatives so that we may actually make a positive impact on the future of our nation!

We got the most dangerous men in America out of office Bush and Cheny. They killed over four thousand

young people and wound countless others. Please don't let the republicans do this again.

But your AOA proposals don't really explain HOW to accomplish any of the plans, whereas the PAM is very specific. You have never answered HOW elections are to be paid for. No real method outlined for Congressional Compensation Limits, etc. And how does reducing the size of Congress give the citizens any better representation....it just means more states will have fewer voices in Congress, since the seats are still governed by the Census and it still keeps the same amount of power in those states with the largest populations. AOA does NOT outline how any of these measures are to be enacted.....you call it an ACT, and only Congress can pass such "acts." Until you establish HOW you are going to get these various "proposed amendments" passed, you have nothing better than what the PAM has proposed.

Anti_trust...has anyone ever explained to you that lobbyists are constitutionally protected part of our democracy? (you know the "petition your government" part) and that there's a reason for that? Is EVERYONE supposed to be unemployed all of the time and able to run up to Washington to meet with their reps and senators to impact legislation they're interested in? Isn't that why you pool your resources and join groups to fight for your interests? As to your Congressional term and size limits: those are favored only by those who have never seen their government close up. It takes at least one term for congress people to even figure out how to begin writing legislation. If you want to limit the power of outside influence, then the last thing you want to do is insure a perpectual flood of new legislators who do not know how to govern. We already have term limits. They are called elections. (but I applaud your interest in getting involved...just not your solutions.)

Anti-Trust: Actually, if you go to the website at www.americanoverhaulact.org you can download a 20 page PDF that is very specific about the types of provisions that will be enacted.

First, with regard to Campaign Finance, there will be a federal election campaign fund established that will be paid for out of federal tax dollars (it will cost approximately $20 per household per year to fully fund all federal election campaigns through tax dollars - a small price to pay for removing the current unfairness of elections), and that money will be distributed to at least three candidates for any election (that way we remove the current barriers to a third party becoming a legitimate option). Beyond these federal campaign finance dollars, the only money that a candidate will be able to spend on a campaign is from donations received directly from individual constituents - no organizational contributors, no money from the party, and only people that actually live in the district can donate. These outside donations will be capped at approximately $2,500 per person (approximately because it is actually 5% of the median household income - you cannot set a flat dollar amount in a Constitutional amendment because it will become outdated quickly as the economic world moves forward due to inflation, etc.), and the total amount of outside donations that can be accepted is capped at 50% of the amount provided by the election campaign fund.

As for compensation limits, we propose fixing Congressional salary at 4X median household income (which was arrived at because that number is on par with what other professionals with high level of responsibility, such as doctors, lawyers, judges, and business leaders, typically receive). We also propose eliminating all retirement benefits (because serving in Congress is not supposed to be a career), and also removing health benefits after a member leaves office (because that is how it is for the rest of working Americans).

As for the Congressional size limit issue you raise, the argument of reduced representation is somewhat of a red herring for numerous reasons outlined in full detail in the Act website and PDF, such as the fact that Senate has always been fixed at 2 members per state and it gives sufficient representation. And, the size of the House has been arbitrarily fixed at 435 for years anyway (Congress set this limit itself). Moreover, reducing the size of the House does not keep all the power with the large states, but rather it actually rebalances the power so that the small states regain the power that they were supposed to be afforded in the House of Representatives. And, any downside that exists due to reduced representation is greatly outweighed by the upside of efficiency that is gained by slightly reducing the number of Representatives. The first House of Representatives had only 65 members, which is why they were able to get things accomplished. Getting a group of 435 people to agree on anything is nearly impossible, because everyone starts to push their own agenda!

So, as you see, the American Overhaul Act does set forth the proposals in great detail! Check it out at www.americanoverhaulact.org and I think you will see!

Oh, no, you're so wrong....one military spending bubble, followed by two housing bubbles, with a stock bubble in the middle, which heretofore was considered "growth" by everyone over at Fox News, who are now clamoring for conditions that create more of the same.....don't you know that was ALL Obama's fault? He should EASILY have been able to fix thirty years worth of economic fantasy in three years, without spending any money to avoid a severe depression- I think that's abundantly clear by now.....especially since the idiot savant parade says so at every debate they've had thus far.....LOL....

Talk to the Hand

The only Republican leadership there was was in the White House only. The slide started in 2007 when the Democrats took over the House and Senate. Look at the progression from January 2007 until November 2010. Started in May of 2008 (unemployment rise).

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

What caused the economic slide started in 2003 with the Ownership Act and bank de-regulation.

And any recent financial crisis has been created by the extreme positions of the Republicans in the House of Representatives.

Forest, and don't forget, with Democratic leadership in the house and Senate. When it comes to laws and such, the President is just a figurehead without the cooperation of both houses. In 2006 when Foreclosures were increasing Bush asked for an outside audit of Freddie and Fannie, but was assured by Barney Frank that both insitutions were solid, and would never need Federal funds to bail them out.

You mean the Bush who took the USA to war for no reason? How many lives? How many billions?

Janine-1645002, You are the only person who have the facts correct.

So, Janine, guess you don't think the unpaid wars, the tax cuts DURING a time of war, unfunded drug program for Medicare, and we mustn't forget all the deregulation has a little bit to do with it. Lord, save me from revisionists who see the world through rose colored glasses and think the GOP does no wrong. (I won't even bring up how the GOP in the senate always uses the filibuster to block any legislation)

Talking about lies! What about Libya, no fly zone to protect people from fighter jets, but close air support and bombing of tanks or i should say flying tanks. Now they are scared of the shoulder launched missiles that the terrorist could get.

The only Republican leadership there was was in the White House only. The slide started in 2007 when the Democrats took over the House and Senate.

You are correct. Except you left out the fact that all 12 times Bush pulled out his veto pen, was when the Democrats took the majority. Bush shot down all but two of the Democrats proposals. So who really was shaping policy then? Not to mention, an economy like ours, doesn't tank in less than two years of bad decisions.

We bled our funds dry by cutting taxes while starting two unfunded wars, an unfunded Medicare Part D that allows big pharma to charge over $1000.00 for a single prescription and an unfunded No Child Left Behind fiasco that actually made our kids dumber. As well as trying to put every person into a home knowing the banks would prey on them, or they couldn't afford the payments in the first place. When you go down a path of deregulation and unfunded policies, you reap what you sow.

In 2006 when Foreclosures were increasing Bush asked for an outside audit of Freddie and Fannie

Janine, in 2004 Bush was warned about his reckless housing Act he signed in late 2003. He was determined to get 5.5 million minorities into homes by the end of the decade that couldn't even afford the down payment at the tune of 200 million per year of tax payers money.

When he was told about the dangers of this putting millions of families out of homes down the road, he claimed it was just a rough patch. Bush gambled with the housing market just to get re elected.

Figureheads don't pull out a veto pen every single time a non Republican proposal is laid on their desk.

Andre-H, Regarding Lybia - that is the war ronnie should have declared, have you forgotten the Lockerbee, Scotland airplane bombing with our soldiers on board (coming home no less!) or the night club in Germany that Gadaffi proudly took credit for blowing up because our service men and women were known to hang out there? Well, I have not! Sadam Hussan was no problem to me, Iraq was never a threat and none of my business, however, Lybia and Afghanistan needed our destructive attention and I think President Obama accomplished something that neither bush or clinton could.

Newt, Romney, Perry, Bachman, what a total bunch of losers that lot is!!! Go ahead Re-pubbies, vote one of those as your candidate, I SO DARE YOU! Actually, I hope that you come to your senses and don't nominate any of these douche wads. What a lot of you people don't seem to understand is, is that if you nominate any of that four bunch of scum bags, that Obama, your sworn mortal enemy, will be in office for years 5, 6, 7, and 8, you can take that to the bank. All I can say is, it's either Ron Paul or 4 More.

sounds to me like you nailed it...

Yep, and the nail is a finishing nail (small head)! lol

Just like Mr. Obama "Hope and Change" he has done nothing and before you jump on the Republicans, remember the Democrats have not been very helpful also. BTW: Mitt Romney flip flops more than a fish out of water.

And Newt remains faithful to all his principles. Never changes position over night. Always loyal to whoever he promises to...uh, wait a sec. Who we talking about?

Hard not to jump on the GOP when their stated goal (on the floor of the senate, no less - check the congressional record) has been to make this president a one term president. The ODS from the right is simply amazing.

Just like Mr. Obama "Hope and Change" he has done nothing and before you jump on the Republicans

Deflect much? Can't defend Newt without attacking Obama? That speaks volumes of what you actually think about Newt. At least you stood tall blindly defending someone.

Newt said he wasn't going to go negative on his fellow Republicans. That didn't last long, now did it?

Unknown corporate sponsors already seem to be in control.

John - sorry things aren't working out well for you, but Hope and Change are working very well for our family, thank you for asking!

Hard not to jump on the GOP when their stated goal (on the floor of the senate, no less - check the congressional record) has been to make this president a one term president.

Hey Phiney,

That should be the goal of every thinking American. Let me go through this common sense analogy again for some of the slower posters. If you take your car to a mechanic because it is running badly, and it doesn't matter why it is running badly (maybe the last mechanic screwed it up), and the new mechanic makes it run even worse, you do not take it to him again. Very simple when you think about it.

Your name says it all, doesn't it? I've been in a union- good way to guarantee that lazy idiots keep their jobs, and nepotism rules. Let's see how long you keep that good ol' union job as Obama keeps printing money and raising the debt ceiling, ignoring the Simpson-Bowles commission he initiated. Let's keep increasing those welfare and food stamp rolls, all the while shrinking the base that pays for it all.

Robert. When my car goes to the shop it isn't the head guy that does the repairs. Sound familiar. He should replace all those mechanics with more qualified ones, but in government the head guy didn't hire the help and can't fire them. But WE CAN.

... which has also seemed to be Palin's motive for her various forays into/ out of campaigns. Actually, even Caine will probably benefit eventually: a book deal, maybe a movie.

It's the wonderful free market at work, enabling liars and crooks by rewarding them with endless publicity. Actual convicted felons aren't allowed to benefit from such deals -- too bad the law doesn't apply to these tin-pot demagogues as well.

Please rephrase " cruising in Greece or elsewhere with his trophy wife (#3)!!" to with his latest trophy wife.

Palin and Cain, like Gingrich, treated the presidential race as a self-aggrandizing book tour. This shows how seriously republicans take the business of governing.

Oh yeah? What about the convicted felon re-elected in OH in 2010? Or are you referring to book deals? I do believe there have been other convicted felons who have done book/movie deals over the last few decades, and maybe even centuries. According to a web search, not every state has such 'convicted felon" laws. In fact, the SCOTUS shot down the "Son of Sam" NY law in 1991 and in 2002, the CA Supreme Court struck down the similar "Son of Sam" law passed in that state. The FL law hasn't been struck down yet, but the Casey issue just might lead to that.

We must not forget Nancy Pelosi's $10,000.00 per night hotel bill on her vacation to Hawii.

I think it is an absolute hoot ! The republican candidates are demolishing each other. Obama's election campaign has to be very excited about all the information being handed them on a silver platter.

What a joke.

John: you really believe that or are you just being a good right wing soldier?? What about the supposed million dollar vacation...did that get downgraded in your talking points memo from Mr. Limbaugh already?

And like cancer they destroy their host

LynyrdSky - Unfortunately Ron Paul is what you see is what you get a resurgence of the Birch Society and the darling of Ron Paul - Ayn Rand - he named his son after her Rand Paul - same as Paul Ryan who has his staff reading her poisonous books -

Fortunately - I outgrew her at 20 - when I realized in her world my only worth was to clean out their toilets

What really scares me is that Alan Greenspan sat at her feet in adoration - so who screwed up

Objectivisim - doesn't work in a caring society - everyman for himself only works on a one man boat - and Ron Paul is a fake - if it was everyman for himself - why did he need his wife to work to put him through medical school

Supporting Ron Paul is NOT the same as being a disciple to objectivism or Ayn Rand's philosophies.

There are those of us who see how society has shifted towards rewarding the unproductive through entitlements, handouts to large corporations who have congress eating from their lobbyists' hands, foreign wars wasting hundreds of billions, and and in general an over-sized government causing more problems than it solves.

Voting for Obama, or any of the other Republican hacks will mean more of the same. This country has enormous problems that require enormous changes. Little changes like extending the payroll tax cut do virtually nothing for the economy.

look at the facts here http://www.justfacts.com/nationaldebt.asp

"...the federal government has $56.5 trillion in debt, liabilities, and unfunded obligations as of September 30, 2010."

the portion of government spending on social programs has gone from just over 20% in 1960 to over 60% currently.

Read the facts and stop associating your fear of major change with candidates like Ron Paul who have ideas that could make everyone's life a lot better.

Stop picking on Obama ! The most Dangerous people I ever saw in office were 8 years of BUSH/CHENEY ---- they ruined economy long before Obama took over, you idiot voters gave him 2 years to clean up 8 years of BUSH/CHENEY then you vote in the Republican Congress which has do nothing for the REAL AMERICAN population but put up blocks and objections to anything Obama wants to do to help most Americans

Obama 2012 !

So true, Larue. Now let's get rid of the republican congress. They are all traitors and deserve a traitors fate.

ug1: well now...your version of 'new and improved' is pretty outrageous...Your old man Paul believes in the balkanization of the US, where everything is a "state's rights" issue...As soon as people actually take time to understand what this lunatic fringer stands for, he will be abandoned to the dust heap of history (as in his first two presidential runs). He's an ineffective extremist (thank heavens) who has never passed a piece of legislation in his Congressional career and plays nothing but the spoiler each and every time out. His own colleagues don't take him seriously. Dismantle the IRS? Right....Let people print their own currency? oh sure....legalize prostitution and heroin...gee, there's a winning ticket. It's not like people don't know what the old man stands for...enough already.

Larue,

Good job, call names when there are no facts to back your claims. That is the typical liberal stategy.

I don't see how effective Ron Paul could be up against the Congress we have voted in. His ideas would be thorougly rebuffed by both sides.

No, it isn't against the law because SCOTUS OK'd it with the Citizens United ruling. That is why we need the two constitutional amendments referred to above in #2.3.

It is against the law for a candidate to direct or influence the "super pac" supporting him/her.

So John - What do you think? The Republicans have been hiding someone in a basement somewhere to emerge nine feet tall like a Darth Vader - no Cheney is too sick and too old - whom? Jeb Bush - only if he changed his name - Chis Christie - after 3 months at a fat farm - Haley Barbour - sorry does not compute - they have no one - there is no dark horse nor white horse - they are doomed

Any guess who?

sarah palin -- with notes written up both arms and both legs so she can be interviewed w/o sounding like a (total) ignorama.

Oh I don't know, they might have another Mormon out there somewhere...LOL

Poor John...all will be ok. Start focusing on 2017 and perhaps you'll actually find a coherent candidate by then to run for what will be left of the party of old white men.

And they have absolutely NO solutions to any of the problems this country is facing - other than cut taxes to the wealthy & corporations and keep on spending! For a party that puts itself out there as the "fiscally responsible" party, they have a strange way of going about it!

Tiny

Are you suggesting that the GOP cancel their convention and not field a candidate this go-round?

I can't speak for Tiny, but I have a different idea. My preference is for the GOPTP to be exposed for the haven for bat-crazy radicals that it is and go down to horrible defeat. Once the Republican Party implodes the radical, regressive, undemocratic, theocratic, authoritarian warmongers who currently control the party can be turned out and a reasonable, sensible group can return the party to it's former position as a responsible counterbalance to the Democratic Party.

Even more dangerous is the MISinformed voter.

If you don't listen to the media you are uninformed. If you listen to Faux News you are misinformed.

IMHO

Not only are you misinformed if you listen to Faux News - it is bad for you brain cells, it is a leading cause of the "dumbing down" of Americans.

According to politicfact.com, their pants are on fire. What some of these people have become is a shame. And I don't care if they go to church every day and have 5 or 10 kids and if they have been elected 15 times. Character matters and one with a good character does not even think of telling a lie on purpose. I love something that Obama has stated and that is morality is a very effective weapon. And imo one that the republicans do not have right now.

That Lieing thing...it works at my job. Management wants a convenient lie more than an unweildy truth.

Tallulah: yes, but it might help to know that its never really been any different.

1950: Claude Pepper's opponent George Smathers wanted to paint the Senator as an extremist before shouting liberal or progressive was the right wings favorite dirty words and no one got anywhere claiming someone was unpatriotic because they held different political views. Smathers gave a speech telling his uneducated Florida audiences that Pepper was "an admitted celibate" before marriage, and that his wife had been an "aknowledged thespian" in New York. It worked. Pepper lost his seat.

learn how to spell

Spell what, Ray?

What the heck is "nowadays"?

Destroying American exceptionalism sounds like a good idea to me. It's one thing to be proud of your country for something intrinsic about it. But to think that you are better than everyone else -- that you have the market cornered on democracy -- in fact to think that you created it and have a patent on it -- and then to invade one country after another to prove how democratic you are, is a psychosis that needs curing.

Anti-American progressive's perceive any republican candidate as the most dangerous person in America!!!!

Ummmm, the article states that chant is from the republicans towards other republicans Gary. The "anti-American" libs don't really need to bash the gop this election year, the gop has offered to do that themselves.

Gary, you put 5 question marks after a sentence that wasn't even a question, get a grip will ya?

Please explain in detail how Obama is destroying American exceptionalism? Is it by not going in and invading sovereign nations? Is it by trying to fix bridges and roads? Is it by trying to invest in new technologies? Is it by investing in education?

Please expain how??

Capitalists understand that don't they? Then why do some agree with Obama. Maybe your talking points are a little excessive and extreme. First of all as we learned in grade school" they" don't all bunch up and say anything. Capitalists are people across America who are working to support their families and their country. At least the good ones. We should not criticize capitalists as much as greedy capitalists. Even chocolate can be bad if that is all you eat. I have heard no Democrat criticize this group. Only laughter actually. An American capitalist should enjoy the freedoms they have and enjoy the fruits of their labor. However, with freedoms come responsibility so they must act in a manner that favors our country not hinders it and they should be doing all they can to see that America stays free and that we all can enjoy those freedoms and the vast wealth and opportunities to get that wealth that up to this point we and they have enjoyed. A close family member lives in Germany and I had no idea they do not have free speech. They can't be vile to their neighbors or politicians or others on the road without being called or arrested on it. So here in America, the land of the free, we have thus taken our freedom and used it to insult and defame others and make their lives as difficult as we possiby can. And that is exceptional in what way?

Now, if the GOP can bash the GOP for money...HEY! They're already doing that! Why can't I get paid for bashing the GOP. Now there's a dream job. LMAO

Oh yeah, they're being very Capitalistic about too. LOL

Exceptional hmmmm, I am a patriot and believe America is the greatest country on earth, but when was the last time we built something great or did something great. We have essentially ended our space program, our education system is becoming a joke, our political system has become so corrupt and toxic that it just simply no longer functions. The only thing Congress is able to do is kick the can past the next election. They are all, both parties, a collection of corrupt, self serving egomaniacs that hold themselves to a lower standard than the general populous. Our government regulation is a joke, our stock market no longer reflects actual performance of companies and is manipulated for the benefits of a few, and our number one employer is government and number two is financial services, so we are a country that makes paper and rules. Its time for a real change....Ron Paul 2012

WE need to rid ourselves of this muslim president period

MMC: You've got to be kidding. When was the last time the US did something great or built something great? What a childish and ignorant question. What field do you want to start in? Astrophysics? Cancer research? nanotechnolody? You claim the US education system is a "joke" but our little red school house mentality has still produced the world's leading number of patents, physicists, scientists and researchers---no one even comes close. If you want to argue for the irrelevant Ron Paul, who wants everyone's lives determined by the limits of their own front yard and thinks we're all our own little islands, you'll have to do better than whine at people that we're already irrelevant.

Ray...sweetie...You may think Pres. Obama is a Muslim, but I can tell you from personal observation, that he eats BBQ pork like a Southern Baptist......(something a Muslim would DIE before doing..LOL!)

Obama, Romney , Paul and even Newt are very dangerous men. That's why the only one to vote for is Rick Perry 2012. Texas is growing in leaps and bounds they don't feel this crunch like most are feeling. You got to ask yourself why is that why is Texas doing so well compared to the rest of USA states. My vote will go to Rick Perry!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Betty

Best I can figure is that you would have to be dumber than Cowboy Ricky to vote for him. I can't imagine that there are enough of the Super-Dumb to move the needle on election day.

Why is TX doing so well in spite of Cowboy Ricky? For starters consider that he started his campaign (raising money) in 2010. He has been AWOL for over a year. Have we missed him?

Texas has been doing very well for all these years. Not just for a (one) year.

So Loyal your a dumb a$$. Go Rick Perry!!!!

Yeah, Slick Rick was brilliant enough to be governor of one of the largest recipients of federal tax dollars...so much for the land of rugged individualists who don't need anything from the government.

Slide and ascension. Do they even know what some of these terms mean. It amazes me that some still believe our economy is worse. When are republicans going to find out that they are taken advantage of for begin gullible and believing anything these guys say. I say ft Newt says it it is questionable. I thought he was going to be positive. Oh I see I am being positive and smiling and saying Merry Christmas. I don't know that guy who is saying those mean disgusting things. That isn't me. Luckily they do themselves in.

Gullible is as gullible does. Do I look like a corporation? I'll believe a corporation is a person when Texas executes on of them. GOP is in a dog fight and the top dog will win. The American people just won't elect a dog.

(apologies to all real dogs out there)

Beam me up Scotty !!

Read the real news, not just "Faux News". The Economy is getting better, Obama has stopped the slide backwards, and the economy is slowly getting better. You noticed I said "Slowly getting better", way better than GW Bush administrations rapid decent into the deep hole the Neo-Cons took us.

Both these Republican candidates are bald face liars, if that maters to GOP voters, I guess not.

I'm going to puke LittleOhRed. Yep, right on your delusional statement. Still, the liberal-left rants on Bush and forgets who was controlling Congress for many years to the favor of the spend crazy Dems.