Dang it, I live in Texas, I know Rick Perry well enough to detest the man-child, but now I'm thinking about donating to his campaign...

Speaking of "vultures" ....

Don't look up.

Sorry Rick ... time to go.

Please stay in Rick.

You go GIRL !

Even Rick Parry knows that if Willard knew that his actions were pushing the economy off the cliff but he was still making money, he'd do it and do it every day. This morning he was talking about how he hoped American auto makers continued to prosper, when he was one of those who would have been fine with letting the big three go into bankruptcy. Willard is one of those who created this crisis we are all struggling with, so why let the fox into the hen house?

Obama 2012!

Perry refused to fall in line. GOP need to know even when a bussiness is legal, you don't have to make money off it. Romney must really be out of his mind to think he'll get a pass on this.

Obama/Biden 2012

Meanwhile, back in the real world...I'm reading an article in my local paper about a paper mill that the community needs for the jobs it provides, but that also continues to pollute the air, while politicians work to find money to upgrade it's equipment, and there is a reference to Koch Industry, smack dab in the middle, which had bought it and sold off some equipment at one point, and now a former paper mill lobbysist, appointed by our Teapublican governor has say so over whether to let it go on polluting, and on and on it goes....

http://bangordailynews.com/2012/01/11/politics/taxpayers-spending-millions-on-old-town-mill-that-keeps-on-polluting/

Wayne - Ford did just fine on their own. The others (and maybe Chrysler would have been a stretch) would have also. GM's unions convinced the administration that they could do it but there was a possibility they may not. He saved his contributors. And didn't need to unless the people at the helm of GM were total incompetent fools. No supplier wants to see a customer go down in flames and much like Ford, GM's suppliers would NOT have been less than cooperative.

@ Talk to the hand- I agree that Ford would have been fine with the financing they had available due to real foresight on their part, but certainly Chrysler and probably GM, according to all that I have read would certainly have collapsed. Romney was fine with this. I don't see your statement as much of a defence. The fact is, plain and simple, that Romney was quoted as saying he was against the bailout for the American auto industry. So much for "Be American, buy American." Had Romney had his way, this country would have been in a recession, and Romney would have probably made even more money as he gleefully watched millions more of Americans get fired.

What were those three things Perry wanted to tell us?

:-)

Hey Talk to the Hand... it's great when you don't know what you are talking about. Ford's president at the time saw the problems coming and borrowed "zillions" of money by mortgaging Ford's assets including it's logo. That line of credit allowed them to go forward without government help. But they did go into debt.... learn the facts....

I know... here I go again... I just can't help myself. I can't stand Romney for a lot of the same reasons I can't stand Obama. Just for example... Romney would buy up companies, either sell them off in parts, lay off employees, restructure the operation... etc... which is pretty much what Obama did with GM and Chrysler. Obama fired people, layed people off, restructured the conpanies...

In my minds eye, Romney and Obama are cut from the same mold. Perry and Newt are going after him.

Perry doesn't back down from his Bain criticism

This man is so stupid, they kept him in college with id D average gpa because they knew they couldn't get rid of this dewsh.

Face it Perry, you are an idiot with a low gpa and you still think you are college educated. Go back to college and learn something like

"U R A REAL LOSER". If it weren't for your wealth, you would have been tossed right out of college asap.

NH nor Iowa sees you as a winner, get the message, take a hint, learn your ABC's... but you have to face it Perry, you e a Texan loser like G.W. Bush is.

WAIT A minute , If you can pay your bills and go out of business , your just out of business BUT if you can not pay your creditors you file bankruptcy , Bain Capital / Mitt Romney invested 30 million in this company ,took out 180 million then the company filed Bankruptcy and went out of business , How many creditors got screwed ,how many of the work force had investments in the company ,they really got screwed , 600% profit and filed bankruptcy 150 million in profits and went out of business , I THINK THE WALL STREET JOURNAL IS CORRECT ,there is some Questions that need answered , AND AND it was the Wall street journal that brought this to the public attention at the beginning ,NOT Rick Perry or Newt Gingrich , I would have to say they are justified to want some answers from Mitt Romney As we all should ,

Hey Kevin, point is they worked as they saw what was coming. GM and Chrysler just threw their hands up and cried for help. And I do know what I am talking about. Any company that mis managed and out of touch with their condition is inept to say the least. Ford took the steps necessary to avert a catastrophe through insight. And they recovered quickly and no GovCo or union owned the majority of the business. If GM and Chrysler couldn't be that Creative and insightful, perhaps Romney is right. I too at the time of the announced bailout said "what". And yes Ford did go into debt. Filing bankruptcy does not mean you collapse. It means a regroup and debt forgiveness by you r suppliers in order to not lose what investment they had made. Thus working through, providing help as much as possible to keep them going and reaping the benefits when they did get back on their feet.

Romney thinks only about Romney. That's how he gotten his 200+ million dollars. It always surprises me when a CEO takes over, fires a whole bunch of people just to trim line the company, then gives themselves tens of millions in bonuses...

OK, one person get millions while thousands of workers lose their job... I guess that sounds right if your a right wing nut-job...

Domino jobs and Sports Authority!?!?! Those are the "high-paying" jobs that America is in store for under a Romney Administration.

What???????????

Romney didn't turn the kiddos at Dominos into rocket scientist at NASA?

Oh well .... at least he didn't turn rocket scientists at NASA into pizza delivery guys like Obama did.

Yeah Allen - if only Romeny had equipped Sport's Authority and Domino with employees with 'high paying' jobs.

So Allen - how much should those employs have been paid?

I know you would totally have go there to and bought $150 pizzas, and $500 basketballs;

Oh and then of course we'd have even more high school grads unemployed.

See Allan - those are supposed to be temporary jobs, not careers.

I would think you'd grasp that, but maybe not. Of course they had a system similar to what you describe in the USSR. It didn't pan out too well.

From the standard talking points I hear, the Federal Government doesn't create jobs anyway....so by your own rhetoric those bureaucratic elitist at NASA have been living off of the Public milk for too long.

Sounds like something you should be praising. If the private sector was all that, seems like there would should be plenty of jobs waiting for such smart people.

Hey Spanky, whatup? .... Where's your pal WCO ... buying GM stock?

Funny thing is bob - that is exactly what is happening here in the liberal progressive paradise that is Cali.

See, we are flat broke. Brown can't sugar coat it any longer and is making huge cuts.

And to your point Allen, so many highly paid public sector workers are now seeking private jobs.

WCO and GM stock? No idea, how about you?

So again I ask - why is the bluest state in the worst shape?

So Santorum wears a Sweater Vest

Now, Perry would like to trade in his Hunting Vest for Gingrich's Suicide Vest.

Good luck with that Ricky. But please do stick around you make thinks so much easier for my man Mitt.

38,000 farmers suing Corzine over missing millions. I'm sure Holder will be announcing his indictment any day now, right?

@ Spanky It looks like Feisty's great liberal paradise state of Illinois isn't far behind.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-quinn-illinois-debt-rating-20120111,0,7683916.story

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2012/01/10/bloomberg_articlesLXK2C51A74G7.DTL

Sounds to me like your talking points are against Romney, not me Spanky.

Romney's stump is that he will assist a private sector to create millions upon millions of "high paying" jobs and he uses his "experience" at Bain as an example of the leadership do that....where to your point, the only thing I see his experience as providing is a bunch of low-wage, no benefit, no upward mobility, non-career like jobs. What/where/who are his example of the 'people' who made high paying wages as a result of the work he did at Bain (and the example can't be the other Partners at Bain as the people who made money)?

How is "knowing how the economy works" that Mitt claims he has going to translate directly into action in the Oval Office? Don't tell me to get you there so I can see what you can do, tell me what you can do now and w/o the help of the Congress since that worthless bunch of freaks are pretty much good for nothing.

Spanky the bluest state in the worst shape, probably because you had a governor who was not a natural citizen that was too busy diddling with the maid to pay attenton to anything else. new slogan for the republican party: You are so republican if you are married and engaged at the same time!

Oh boy - panic time over at the White House.....it's because I'm black. Get ready to hear that argument over and over....

(AP) (AP/CBS News) WASHINGTON -- First lady Michelle Obama is challenging assertions she's forcefully imposed her will on White House aides and says people have inaccurately tried to portray her as "some kind of angry black woman."

@ Union How does that explain Illinois?

"some kind of angry black blah woman."

Haven't you heard Raaab?

BLAH is the new BLACK!

Do try to keep up... sweetie!

Times are tough when you lose Harry Belafonte's support ---

Day-o Day-o

Rob in ma-3189632

Times are tough when you lose Harry Belafonte's support ---

Day-o Day-o

=====

I wasn't aware it was Harry who put him over the top.

Sure Ahnold was a 'republican.'

But really he is and always will be an actor. Actors are even more worthless than politicians, but never mind the overwhelming majorities held by the dems in the state legislature.

Then again you do got Ill, NY and until recently NJ.

Allen - Mitt is Mitt, but we have been clearly and effectively shown that Obama does not understand how the economy works. Or at least the 70% wrong track-ers have.

Allen - Omaha, well argued, well said and touche' on Belafonte!!!!

I finally agree with Spanky. You're right dude, Reagan was worthless as a politician.

As for the presumptive Republican nominee, Mitt is a corporate raider. Bain Capital is nothing more than high-end chop-shop.

Yipee!! for the one tenth of one percent.

Allen - Mitt is Mitt, but we have been clearly and effectively shown that Obama does not understand how the economy works. Or at least the 70% wrong track-ers have.

====

This is the silliest talking point I think is out there. You submit nothing for Romney other than Mitt is Mitt and then go into your Obama bashing. WFT does the abstract statement of "does not understand how the economy works" mean? What has the Administration done in terms of policy that has taken the "economy" from shedding 700+ thousands jobs a month coming into office and turned into net positive job growth for 20+ months translate into he doesn't understand the economy?

For all those worried about the supposed lack of enthusiasm for Romney

http://www.kennesaw.edu/pols/3380/pres/1980.html

Like Yogi said, it's déjà vu all over again.

Perry will quit the race after South Carolina. No point staying in after that. I was an early supporter, and still like his tax plan as well as his economic plan.

I did not like his total lack of preparation for some of the debates. He had a couple of strong appearances, but only after he had blown a couple. Not acceptable. Not acceptable at all.

I said early on that Gongrich made me angry, because I believe he could have made a great president, but he lacked the self discipline necessary to attain the office- or to serve well once elected. Sorry, Newt, but you're outta here.

I have a great deal of admiration and empathy for Rick Santorum, but, enough, already, with the social issues. It's the economy, first, second, third, and last. So, for heaven's sake, (pun intended), get out, and hope for a spot in the administration. Like, maybe, HHS.

There were more than a few republicans with a great deal of animosity toward Reagan, because they considered him the reason Ford lost to Carter. Whether they were right or wrong, they got behind the candidate, and Reagan won in a landslide.

Get ready to salute President Romney. I guess you can all rename your imaginary bar the "alternate White House". It'll be great- kind of like having a fantasy team. At least you'll stop destroying my country while at your twenty four seven Obama worship services.

What has the Administration done in terms of policy that has taken the "economy" from shedding 700+ thousands jobs a month coming into office and turned into net positive job growth for 20+ months translate into he doesn't understand the economy?

The argument is though what would have happened if the business cycle ran it's course? What is 800B of borrowed stimulus and 3T in new money causing today. Commodities (based on the dollar) are going through the roof. The recovery is very slow compared to prior recoveries that did not have a stimulus. You seem to be one of the advocates that accept the economic models which claim that a dollar spent will cause 1.6 dollars of growth. Unfortunately, the economists that produce these models have not backed their predictions with empirical evidence. For example why does Zandi's model differ from the CBO's? Why is there such a large range of jobs created and/or saved? What is the criteria for a job to be created and/or saved and what is the rational behind the definition.

My basic beef with this Administration is that their philosophy is that the government can and should solve all problems. If there is a problem the solution should be government based and sponsored. My philosophy is that unless there is wealth being created there would be no government. it's not a chicken and egg question. Until we moved beyond subsistence existence then we had nothing extra to pay for a government. So to me the private sector should be the ones solving problems and the government should simply be facilitators.

Alan, Omaha, nothing Obama has done stopped the economy from shedding jobs- the economy hit the trough of the recession, firms had the fewest number of employees they could retain and remain in business, and that is what stopped the bleeding.

What Obama, through his policies, has done is to inhibit the recovery, which is the weakest we've ever seen coming out of recession. Obamacare, an additional increase in regulations, (over 13%, and counting), and a skyrocketing debt have left people uneasy and unwilling to spend, expand, or otherwise stimulate the economy.

The worst result of his policies is seen in the civilian labor participation rate- the lowest it's been since 1983. The reduction in the unemployment rate is almost solely due to the millions who have just quit the labor force- and, Alan, I really don't believe that all those people hit the lottery, or inherited money from their unknown relatives.

As to Romney's economic plans, he announced them back in September
http://mittromney.com/jobs

So, to continue to claim that he has no plan is completely untruthful.

Obama, himself, noted that he was one and done if he could not turn the economy in three years. He's failed, so now it's up to him to recognize the truth.

Obama shelved in 2012.

Learn something every day! I had no idea that no jo owns the United States!

One of the main reasons California is hurting financially is something called Proposition 13. Passed in the 1980s to keep property taxes from skyrocketing the welll meaning law has deprived the state of vitally needed income. Expenses for everything go up but when we are still using 1980s level income how is the state to survive. I don't mean in luxury but in federal mandates and basic needs for unning the state. Brown cut education, and cities have had to cut vital services such as police and fire. With all the unemployment the state is paying out more instead of taking in via income tax. Gov. Brown has no choice but to cut and slash there is no more income. California is also a donor state that contributes more to the federal government than it gets in return. Without tax increases along with the cuts the state will soon be frozen and unable to do anything because there will be no money even for the basics.

Fortunately a small recovery led by Silicon Valley companies, as usual, may help the state get back some lost revenue but that won't happen over night. One can only hope the state can hang in there long enough.

Yes...while simultaneously taking credit for serving a "conservative" Gov. in Mass as though he was the only Republican in the State.

Under his own logic, he should be chastising himself for spending 4 good years in office in a "blue" State vs. spending that 4 years in a "red" state.

yes they are (slashing and burning).

I wonder who is actually funding Perry. Could it be "vulture capitalists" or just your everyday wealthy capitalists?

Run,

In what category do we put oil men?

Much better to have all of the political hacks [i.e. all politicians] funded with private capital.

Unlike Obama, a venture socialist whose venture socialist buddies fund his campaign.

So phinp - you want those greedy evil oilmen wasting their money, or Imhelt, Kaiser and Corzine wasting ours?

By the way who has cause more peole to lose their jobs - Romney at Bain, or Obama's jobs czar and GE?

And of course I'm taliking 'bout american jobs.

Spanky,

No matter what I answer, you will have some kind of less than pleasant response. For myself, I see more jobs being created now than under the previous administration. I am more familiar with the types of companies like Bain that can and has decimated a community.

Your extreme views and snark no longer play with me. I am very tired of it. If you want a civilized conversation, by all means, we can try. Otherwise, please keep me out of it.

Come on now phinep - have I ever been anything but pleasant to you?

The simple question is - the 'oilmen' use their own $. GE, Kaiser and Corzine seems to be firmly attached to the gov. tit. Which do you prefer?

But tell you what - I would love to hear your views as to why Bain is bad. Bain, like capitalism is not for the weak. Those companies were weak, hence they were taken over. It's mighty hard to take over a strong, vibrant company.

And really,sad as it is, the weak die. That's just nature.

Speaking of venture socialist buddies, Obama will be in Chicago tonight charging his fellow 1%ers $35,800 a plate to attend the Dollars for Donors program buy in event. Normally Obama serves a plate of peas and a bowl of Jello. Rumor has it that tonight he is just going to give them only the plate with his mug in the middle. On the outer ring it will read "Thank you for your blind devotion to me, your Messiah, Barrack Obama, who I consider to be the fourth best president Evah"

Spanky

In the old, more prosperous times, people with a heart and conscience used to take profits and reinvest them in their own companies and worked hard at keeping their work force in the community - and making their company a part of the community. Today, the profits are not reinvested, not shared, and the company no longer cares if it is part of a community.

How much money is enough? When did profits mean more than people? When did the bottom line become more important than community? And this "new world order" is the one we want to leave to our children and grandchildren?

Spanks, looks like you lost a fan.

What pp doesn't comprehend is that in a capitalist society change is constant. Companies are always reorganizing both their product and services as well as their workforce. Companies like Bain provide the service to invest and reorganize companies to be as productive and cost efficient as possible, which is a real confusing process for many on the Left to understand.

The Left believes that when you have a job, it is for life, which is a methodology that is foreign to a capitalistic society. If companies are not allowed to innovate, to tailor their workforce to the needs of their customers, the company is destined to fail. Through this process, jobs are sometimes lost, only for be (re)created with new and modified companies in the community. That fact is lost on so-called "Progressives" that when they see real progress, they sit and wring their hands and worry that things won't remain the same.

In that sense, Progressives loathe progress. They want jobs for life, and pay to match. Anything different, they have a problem with that.

jas1

I have absolutely nothing against progress. I have a problem with putting money and profits before people. I see nothing wrong in my outlook.

JoJo, Spanky's fan is WCO and he has a frayed cord ... still waiting for a list of poets that either you or JoNo read.

Seems that a quantity of people on the Right disagree with you about Bain.

Nope Phinep that never happened.

Only difference now is everybody has more info. The world has always been run by the few. In fact, it always will be.

See, phinep - you could confiscate all the wealth in the country and give it all to the bottom 50%. In 6 months to a year the rich would again be rich and the poor would again be poor.

Your progressive beliefs are neat, but they do not trump nature. Life is hard, it is not fair, and although everybody is allowed to survive, only the strong succeed.

Unless they go work for the government.

pp: How much money is enough? When did profits mean more than people?

Excellent questions. Profits matter more than people when costs exceed the profits. Because without profits, a business, a company, a corporation will not be able to continue, and all the people working there will be pink slipped when the business fails.

So pp, be a capitalist and own something like a coffee shop. Employ more people than you need, pay them more then your competitors, and sell your product at a cheaper price than the coffee shop down the street. Making less profits and employing more people is the compassionate thing to so, until you run out of money, can't pay your vendors, and can't pay your mortgage. The bank will be in contact with you shortly afterwards.

Spanky,

It might not happen in our lifetime, but I can hope. I truly want a decent, caring world for my granddaughter. And I will do all I can to realize that dream. I am sorry that you find it amusing, but that's is how I feel.

jas1,

I feel sorry for you and Spanky. You both seem to prefer money to people. Now, I could be wrong, if so, I apologize in advance. We as a society need to start focusing on people - not profits.

@ Phine we all want that for our children but we also need to teach them personal responsibility, hard work and dedication has it rewards, choices and actions have consequences and life is not always fair. We have a generation of kids who thinks everyone gets a sticker regardless of their participation or contribution. I see it everyday in the younger employees I have working for me.

jas1: So pp, be a capitalist and own something like a coffee shop. Employ more people than you need, pay them more then your competitors, and sell your product at a cheaper price than the coffee shop down the street. Making less profits and employing more people is the compassionate thing to so, until you run out of money, . . .

pp: It might not happen in our lifetime, but I can hope. I truly want a decent, caring world for my granddaughter.

So what is this "decent, caring world" you envision? One with the compassion of companies "putting people before profits". Those companies seem to go out of business soon. Can you name one that does such a thing? Perhaps Apple? Maybe Google? Starbucks?

So do politicians create this "decent, caring world" of yours. It doesn't seem to be he case with the ones we currently have.

Can you name a time when America was this "decent, caring world" you envision? Maybe we can model today's modern world after this bygone era.

So pp, maybe you can explain how this mythical place of yours functions. Or are you talking about Sweden?

JoAnnaSmith1 ... the argument being made by Phine is that the overwhelming shift of power and wealth to a few will inevitably lead to a revolution, war or collapse of empire. It has happened time and again throughout history. You may not agree but greed is blinding those who rely on thinking that profit is the only worthy goal.

Ideology,

What is old canard "those who do not study and learn from history are doomed to repeat it"? Maybe some reading of the French and Russian revolutions are in order.

istv: JoAnnaSmith1 ... the argument being made by Phine is that the overwhelming shift of power and wealth to a few will inevitably lead to a revolution, war or collapse of empire.

The only unrest seen lately is that of the Occupy loons. It doesn't look like they could conquer a Barnes and Noble, much less a country.

So name your Utopian vision istv. Does such a place exist? Where might it be?

Need a historical reference? The EU has been trying this "fair and balanced" approach, shorter work days, huge benefit packages, and early retirement, all compassionate things. Where has that gotten them?

So go have your little revolution istv. When it's all done, we'll still be $15 trillion in debt.

Phine,

The working class is always responsible for economic depressions. {%-)

Ideology,

At least that is what some would have us believe! LOL

pp: jas1, I feel sorry for you and Spanky.

You can save your pity party for yourself pp. You seem to have this unattainable soft and fluffy vision of the world. Some would call it delusional.

JoA..., I have returned from England recently and debt to GDP is 1000% and the villagers in my town of birth are still hoisting a pint at the local pub. My relatives in Greece are sopping up prime olive oil with bread that you would die for.

The 'loons' may well turn into a mob, I would be fearful.

My Utopian vision ... it is indeed Utopian ... the final revolution between those with imagination against those without.

Still waiting for the list of poets.

love and kisses.

Question for Phine and Ideal, do you have shares of stock in any major companies and do you expect to have positive return on your investments? I wholeheartedly agree corp execs in many cases are overpaid. Greed doesn't stop with company execs.

ksw ... no, but I do own a duplex in my fair city/province/country that has since 2007 risen in value close to 100% ... not bad for a 'socialist' country. How is your property if you have one doing. We try to not ignore the workers up here.

@ Idealogy Here in the midwest our property values are still around the same. Are you saying no Canadians are shareholders? (Not even Tim Horton's or Candadian Tire?)

ksw: Question for Phine and Ideal, do you have shares of stock in any major companies and do you expect to have positive return on your investments?

More than likely not. Stocks are evil. Corporations are evil. Profits are evil. But government, hey, they're all for that. Especially when you got some 1%-er (as they call them) that says "I'm for the middle class, I'm for the little guy!!"

Sure he is.

Enjoy your $35,800 a plate dinner tonight at your fundraiser Mr. 1%-er, uh, President.

istv: My relatives in Greece are sopping up prime olive oil with bread that you would die for.

Taking a break from the riots are they?

Any truth to the rumor the EU has put Greece up on eBay?

ksw ... you asked me if I was a stock holder ... the existence of the TSE should answer your broader question. Canadian Tire is a great retail company that would do booming business if it entered the US market.

JoJo, More than likely not. Stocks are evil. Corporations are evil. Profits are evil. But government, hey, they're all for that. Especially when you got some 1%-er (as they call them) that says "I'm for the middle class, I'm for the little guy!!" ... you are starting to bore me, that is the dumbest statement you have ever made.

The deeper issue with Greece is that it is not truly a European country. It may well leave the euro-zone of its own accord. Spain is a larger problem.

Tell you what, don't diss my relatives and I won't diss yours.

Now back to the poets .... waiting.

EE Cummings, Walt Whitman and Robert Frost

Phine, ideology is nice, but won't win over human nature.. With regards to the french and russian revolutions, they both created a dictatorship with a minority in power over the majority which then led to a government system where the minority still had the advantage over the majority..

BTW- greed is neither left or right, rich or poor but rather an individual decision.

ksw, good choices although I can find Frost a little too Hallmark at times ... so let's have some e.e.

in Just-
spring when the world is mud-
luscious the little
lame balloonman

whistles far and wee

and eddieandbill come
running from marbles and
piracies and it's
spring

when the world is puddle-wonderful

the queer
old balloonman whistles
far and wee
and bettyandisbel come dancing

from hop-scotch and jump-rope and

it's
spring
and
the

goat-footed

balloonMan whistles
far
and
wee

You know what, pp? Do a little historical research- start with the Bible; particularly, Paul's letters.

What you will find is that, in the early Christian communities, they tried your kinder, gentler world. Lived in communes, they did. The situation worked out so well that Paul sent out a letter decreeing, "if he does not work, neither shall he eat".

Seems even the early, devout christians had a little problem with folks who deemed themselves above work, but not above sharing in the fruits of others labors.

Moreover, the religious imperative toward charity cannot be exercised through government- it is meant to be an individual obligation. Therefore, paying taxes does not exempt you from charity- far from it.

And, to he who believes himself an adept word warrior- I am no bully. I, therefore, never engage in a battle of wits with someone who is unarmed.

american, no one looks forward to a revolution, the intellectuals rooting for one are the first ones to be taken out back and shot.

Intersting post, American.

Our own revolution was different from those you mentioned because it was instigated by the land owning, upper middle class. I'm pretty sure that if one were to do the research, they'd find that Washington, Jefferson, Revere, Adams, Adams, Hancock, and all the others, we're the "one per cent" of their day.

Won't that just fry the liberals' talking points?

NoJo ... even anonymous deserves to be credited, most likely a woman. This is politics, and keep the bible out of it, it has much within it that is historically incorrect.

The deeper issue with Greece is that it is not truly a European country. It may well leave the euro-zone of its own accord. Spain is a larger problem.

I'm sure the news that Greece is not really a European country is news to the Greeks. So say they leave the euro-zone, make their German and French bankers take a haircut and reintroduce the Drachma what then? Their government still spends more than it receives in revenue only this time who is going to lend to them to make up the difference? It was nice when they could borrow at German rates to maintain their social safety net but now the money is not there who will suffer? The 1% in Greece who have their money in Swiss Francs or the poorest Greeks who are probably the old and retired.

This is the issue here. Do you want to help those who need it the most, or do you try and help everybody, the 99%, and go bankrupt in the process?

This is what Joe Mancin asked, hardly a raving right-winger.

Alan, NJ: This is the issue here. Do you want to help those who need it the most, or do you try and help everybody, the 99%, and go bankrupt in the process?

pp and her ilk talk of "compassion", "heart", and "people over profits".

None of that happens unless there is some way to pay for it.

As for the Greeks, all they may be able to afford may be their olive oil and bread. As a preview of what will happen elsewhere, the Greeks austerity is driven by the bondholders and and banks. "Cut, or we'll cut you off", is the message the Greeks are receiving from the ones bailing them out. The Greeks have no choice, they must comply.

At least the Greeks have the opportunity of being bailed out. Who bails out the US?

A deeper understanding of Greece's issues can be found here=

Georges Prévélakis
Greece: The history behind the collapse

sorry, as yet I cannot post links

JoJo-

"At least the Greeks have the opportunity of being bailed out. Who bails out the US?"

You do ... try what works up here

1 invest heavily in infrastructure

2 raise taxes especially on capital gains.

3 give corporations a choice- either higher taxes on their CEO's if they continue to shift their capital offshore or lower corporate taxes if they bring the capital back. Safeguards the stock holders.

And isn't that just the rub phinpep?

You want a good world left to your ganddaughter, yet here you are supporting policies that will leave her saddler with crushing debt, where huge portions of the GDP will have to be devoted to debt service.

It's $15 trillion right now. Obama is calling for another $1.2. You owe it to your grand daughter to oppose that request.

You owe it to her to demand that the bastards in congress cut spending and start to actually pay down the debt.

You owe it to her to demand entitlement reform - we are literally stealing from our kids to pay off our seniors.

Cause I'm afraid that if you don't do these things she is going to hold you [and all of us rightly so] accountable.

by 2016 the debt will be at least $22 Trillion. By 2020 $30 Trillion.

How old is she phinep? We she see 18 before the entire GDP has to go to debt payments/they print so much money we have to switch to the "New Dollar?'

I think this quote from Margaret Thatcher is quite fitting

Margaret Thatcher, in a TV interview for Thames TV This Week [[1]]on Feb. 5, 1976, Prime Minister Thatcher said, "...and Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They [socialists] always run out of other people's money. It's quite a characteristic of them."

Spanks: You want a good world left to your ganddaughter, yet here you are supporting policies that will leave her saddler with crushing debt, where huge portions of the GDP will have to be devoted to debt service.

pp has gone silent. The Progressives have an idea of what they perceive the problems to be, but they are vague when understanding the solutions to such things. pp wants a better world for her grand-daughter, a noble goal indeed. But yet pp is for the Progressive agenda, bigger government, more spending, more debt - all to be paid for by her grand-daughter (for one).

istv: You do ... try what works up here

So vague. The US spends more on "infrastructure" than any country in the world. The problem is, much of it is funded with deficit dollars. You see istv, the entitlements have consumed the entire US budget. Taxes account for around $2.2 trillion per year of federal income in the US, about what is required to service the debt and the entitlements. Discretionary spending accounts for nearly all of the deficit spending. So to your list, reform of the US entitlements is the path to prosperity in the US. Without doing so will result with what we have now, high unemployment, low GDP, poverty on the rise, debt spinning out of control, and a struggling economy. And neither major political party has a plan to correct any of it.

Infrastructure spending ... not really Josy, try

Dina Spector +

CHARTS: The Alarming Collapse Of US Infrastructure Spending

...like a tick on a dog...

I was going to try to answer your question to my other post, but I see you disturbed the nest.

Run,

I have a tendency, through no part of my own, to disturb nests. :)

I see that phinephancy.

Time to start packing the Raid...or maybe silver bullets.

Say Amy - I do so love your spirit on all things Obama, but was wondering if you could share what objective evidence you see that points to an Obama win?

Is it the head to head polling between Romney and Obama?

Is it Obama's own poll numbers? [As an aside I wonder if you have an explanation for Obama 4 point slide this week?]

If not those things, then what? From what I can see it's looking like a real horse race. But that's just on the objective evidence out there right now.

Subjectively I think it will be a landslide.

Do the polls elect a president or people? Do the polls of today reflect what the polls in late October will be? i have yet to see a poll elect anyone, and today's polls are always different from month to month.

Of course phinep - but AMy's assumption about Obama winning exists today.

Hence my inquiry of her.

Spanky,

You take great delight in trying to "score points" off some on these boards. I know I was the same. However, I got a little enlightenment from an 11 year old. Maybe you should, too.

Amy---I think you are on to something in that there appears to be a battle in the Republican party between the moderates and the conservatives. Conservatives like Perry, Gingrich and Santorum seem to be staying true to their core principles. I love the others in the party trying to shut them up from speaking the truth.

The phrase "vulture capitalism" is what it is and, oddly, summarizes a Democratic principal. We are not against capitalism--as a small business owner and advisor to other small businesses, I'm all for capitalism---the kind that creates jobs right here in the USA, not the kind that outsources them.

A battle within the party? During a primary?

No Way!

Kinda like the battle between Obama and Hillary in '08. It worked itself out, just like this one.

Wait until the public realizes that Romney is just another republicans who every thought is for the 1% and only the 1%.

For the people he wants to end women's health care and contraception. To all the women he promised to protect a woman's right to choose, well he lied. Now he wants to overturn Roe v Wade.

Desperately seeking Romney. Just because I lied before, what makes you think I am lying now?

For the corporations who are people he wants more tax cuts for the rich.

We are in deep doo-doo if the people are dumb enough to elect Romney. If you want another war for the poor to pay for and the rich to get more tax cuts then any republican will fill the bill including Rick Perry.

I am hoping that republicans have more brains than that but people like Spanky make me doubt it.

Kinda like the battle between Obama and Hillary in '08. It worked itself out, just like this one.

There wasn't any significant IDEOLOGICAL difference between the 2 candidates in 2008, Spanky, no democratic version of Bill Kristol, or Erik Ericson, claiming Hillary wasn't REALLY a DEMOCRAT, was there?

How do you think things are going to "work out" with Rep. Paul?

This year's republican scenario isn't the democrats in 2008, it's the democrats in 1968...What say you?

( and...Put down the PEOPLE mag!)

Spanky, I've noticed you like to point to polls that show Romney besting Obama, though just by a few points, in a hypothetical match up. (And he is the only Republican that does so.)

Looks like some gullible Republican voters saw those polls too and that's why they voted against their gut, in order to nominate someone they hope is electable. "Romney it is," they said, "the Independents will vote for him!"

Oh, the joy for Democrats! For one thing, the only thing polls show right now is that American voters like to give challengers a chance, and of all the Republicans, Romney looks the most like a central casting President. Exit polls of NH voters, who have heard Romney in person, show only 31% of Republican leaning Independents chose him to go up against President Obama. Romney is a seriously flawed candidate, in so many ways, and if it's obvious to his fellow Republicans, who don't really like him, it's going to be obvious to the Independents.

Amy, you got it on the "I told you so". What I don't get is why they waited until Iowa to bring this subject up. They had 13 debates before the caucus but they barely laid a glove on Romney.

I think that, as much as I disagree with Gingrich on many things, that he recognizes how destructive "vulture capitalism" is to the country's economy and people. However, pompous Gingrich is, I think he gets it; then throw in a personal grudge. As for Perry, he's following Gingrich's lead on this one.

Phinephancy, I am glad you had a good discussion with your grandaughter. Civilized discussions on the problems this country is facing should be important. I am very disappointed by the polarization in our country. We have more in common as Americans then the damn media wants us to believe.

Jody---you are giving Gingrich credit for caring about the 99%---I'm not sure it is that but, rather, his own ambition. Howard Fineman had a scathing view of Newt & his sense of self last night that makes me think this is all personal. I do think Newt probably wishes he'd thought of it sooner.

Phine, nice strawman argument in your post 20.4 by diversion.

AmyB - And obama is without flaws? How droll...

Steeler:

What is up with you liberals and the word "scathing"?

Everytime someone writes/says just the opposite of the conservative view, you liberals hollar "that is a scathing report"....lol.....most of the time it turns out to just be an exageration.

Would you call someone in here calling Obama's policies illigit, a scathing review?

scathing [ˈskeɪðɪŋ]

adj
1. harshly critical; scornful a scathing remark

2. damaging; painful
scathingly adv

Collins
English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged © HarperCollins Publishers
1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003

I posted this above

http://www.kennesaw.edu/pols/3380/pres/1980.html

There are other sources.

Romney does not have the "helped defeat our candidate" baggage that Reagan had. Moreover, his enthusiasm level is well above the eleven percent Reagan garnered.

I'm seeing a democratic talking point here.

It ain't working, folks.

Obama shelved in 2012.

As Romney soars, conservatives squirm

Many of these activists see South Carolina's Jan. 21 primary as their last best hope of stopping Romney by consolidating in a united front, but many acknowledge they have yet to figure out which of his conservative rivals to rally behind and which should get out.

The tension is exacerbated by deep divisions between two GOP wings: tea-party groups yearning for a pure, small-government conservative, and evangelicals who want a loyal social conservative.

The Romney conundrum will be on the agenda Friday, when about 150 evangelical leaders huddle at a Texas ranch. Likewise, the subject of consolidating conservative opposition to the former Massachusetts governor is expected to be a major point of discussion among about 500 attendees at a tea-party convention this weekend in Myrtle Beach, S.C., where speakers will include Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum.

Many social conservative leaders still seethe over the party's experience in 2008, when evangelical Mike Huckabee won in Iowa but the base didn't unify, and Sen. John McCain locked up the nomination early.

"We made a terrible mistake in 2008," said Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2017206104_evangelistea11.html

It's is possible that it IS too late, and that neither Newton nor Santorum are strong enough candidates to be a real threat to Mitt's nomination, but there is still a LOT ABR of money out there for SOMEONE, especially if Mitt doesn't show well in SC.

Meanwhile, Jeb watches from his lay-z-boy and smiles and says hmmmm...

And Yogi says "It ain't over till it's over..."

If Jeb Bush were going to run, he'd have declared already. Those waiting for that particular side show are going to be sorely disappointed.

There are several good articles on Republican disdain for Reagan-I posted a link to a poli sci article, but there are plenty of others. That field was also quite large, and featured one candidate calling Reagan's economic policy vision "voodoo economics".

I believe he went on to be Reagan's running mate.

The DNC has done a yeoman's job as the Greek chorus bemoaning the lack of coherence on the GOP side. I am finding the crocodile tears hilarious.

I've seen this movie before. I know how it ends- with a landslide for the GOP candidate.

Obama shelved in 2012.

Raging Bull won the Best Picture Oscar in 1980...Great flick, De Niro Best Actor...but

This isn't 1980

The Obama sycophants predict a landslide for him too, and they also think they know how this movie ends.

There are no hostages being held in any embassy I know of.

and (sorry NoJoe, but it just cries out to be my 3rd here)

I knew Ronald Reagan and Mitt Romney is NO Ronald Reagan...;-)

That aside, the dynamic is so different this time, It's like you're a Catholic in Germany in 1530 and telling me that everything is the same for the Church as it was in 1514...

No one knows what will happen for the next almost 11 months, not even me, and like you i tend to be right all the time and know practically everything lol

Nor do these guys, but they're Conservatives, so not projecting a liberal bias on their scenarios, coming from different segments of the party, and make their points...

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

A Solid Win That Came at a Price

By GERALD F. SEIB

Which is the more important outcome, the fact that New Hampshire solidified his status as unquestioned front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination, or the fact that New Hampshire is where the Pandora's box of bitter attacks over his tenure running the Bain Capital private-equity firm was opened?

So it is significant that New Hampshire became the place where the Bain narrative came under attack not by liberal Democrats but capitalism-loving conservative Republicans. It is hard to know whether Mr. Romney shrugged it off because the attacks don't really register with voters, or because he happens to have had such a solid core of support with New Hampshire's voters and such a long history of working the Granite State that they couldn't dent him there.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203436904577152820194293782.html?mod=WSJ_WSJ_US_News_10_1

The Battle of Bain Capital

By Michael Walsh

Kudos to Yuval for this trenchant observation about the great Bain battle, which I think gets at the heart of what makes some conservatives uneasy about Romney's record there:

But it has revealed two problems that conservatives who have risen to Romney's defense and the Romney team itself will need to address. The former have too easily treated finance as the entirety of capitalism, and so have needlessly made both the defense of finance and the defense of capitalism more difficult. And the latter have too easily treated Romney's Bain experience as the entirety of the case for his election, and so have needlessly made both the case for Romney's Wall Street work and the case for his candidacy harder.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/287707/battle-bain-capital-michael-walsh

Newt Gingrich: 'Crony capitalism ... is not free enterprise'

"Criticizing specific actions in specific places is not being anti-free enterprise," the former House Speaker told a crowd that packed a banquet hall here in upstate South Carolina on Wednesday, rejecting Romney's suggestion that questioning his record as chief executive of Bain Capital was tantamount to attacking free enterprise.

"And crony capitalism, where people pay each other off at the expense of the rest of the country, is not free enterprise," Gingrich said. "And raising questions about that is not wrong."

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-newt-gingrich-crony-capitalismis-not-free-enterprise-20120111,0,2756433.story

Divide and Conquer

By W. James Antle, III on 1.11.12 @ 6:09AM

The path to defeating conservative insurgents who seek the Republican presidential nomination.

In 2000, Bush the younger beat a candidate to his left, John McCain. But he also left in the dust Forbes, Keyes, and Gary Bauer. Buchanan bolted the party and Dan Quayle didn't even make it to the Iowa caucuses. "I whupped Gary Bauer's ass in 2000," Bush would later recall to a surprised speechwriter drafting the president's remarks to the Conservative Political Action Conference. "So take out all this movement stuff. There is no movement."

As arrogant as this may seem, the 43rd president may have a point if things continue along the current trajectory. Republicans keep nominating candidates who create vast unfunded entitlements and grow the federal government once in office. Many of them have little connection to conservative principle even before they receive the nod. Yet few qualified conservatives are in a position to challenge them, leaving the task to talk radio hosts, former members of Congress, and House backbenchers.This history seems likely to repeat itself after yesterday's New Hampshire primary.

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/01/11/divide-and-conquer

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

And it's never too late at a BROKERED CONVENTION, is it?

Jeb can wait for the call sitting in the laz-e-boy. I like Jeb, if one of the brothers was going to be President for 8 years, it should have been him. We all got screwed on that one.

Dangerfield, you're an entertaining guy.

That said, you're part of the Greek chorus- quote as many "conservatives" as you like.

I could find reams of them tearing out their hair in 1980.

Are there hostages? No. Nor was the START Treaty in any way as dangerous as SALT II. Still, Reagan was called a war mongeri for opposing it- turns out most of the electorate agreed with Reagan,despite the hysterical ratings from the granola crunching, nuclear holocaust fear mongers.

We won the Cold War. No bombs. No mushroom clouds. And no bloody SALT II treaty, either.

This economy is far, far worse than the economy in 1980- but, if you read the link I sent you, you know Obama's script. He's going the Carter route- prescribing more government programs at a time when polls show the highest level of distrust in government since- well, ever.

I will not equate Iran threatening an American citizen with death to the Embassy hostages, but one cannot escape their saber rattling. More ominous is the situation in North Korea- and Obama cannot keep peace in his own White House.

Obama won the last election because he made himself, by his own words, a blank screen. He was all things to all people- its Plouffe's modes operandi for winning elections. Worked so well for Obama, he tried it as an export for Britain's Labour Party.

It will work as well for Obama as it did for Gordon Brown. He has a record- not to put too fine a point on it, but it stinks.

The parallels between this election and 1980 are unmistakeable. All that remains to be seen is whether the media gives a lot of attention to Johnson, (remember him? He's running in the Libertarian primary), or they succeed in getting someone else to play the role of John Anderson.

Ask Jimmy Carter, GHW Bush, or John Corzine how well those third party candidates assist the relection efforts of the incumbent.

I'm not going to change your mind, or your tactics. You will have exactly the same effect on me. That said and done, have you heard from Mixed Bag? I do miss his comments.

dangerfield,

The whole "firewall" or "line in the sand" scenario's never seem to play out well for those who employ them, does it?

Interesting. How sure are you on Bush 2?

Phine, George would like their bomb first and ask questions later policies.

Ideology,

Ah, that explains Bush 2. Good choice(s)

Bush 2 would ask Dick Cheney who to support.

ideology, that's food for thought. Agree except I think Ford would support Huntsman who is a more realistic modern conservative. Bush 2, Romney all the way because they are two peas in a pod on taxes and trickle down. Although Bush 2 was a born-again Christian, I don't see him supporting the radical religious views of Santorum; he might think about Perry just because he's from Texas.

I just read your justification for the Bush 2 selection, good points; hadn't thought about bomb first, ask later.

Steeler, good one!

Da Noid,

I do believe the damage has already been done. He might consider looking for work in another field other than elected office.

How many terms can the governor of Texas have?!

Da Noid, too late for Perry. His debate performance and complete lack of knowledge has already been absorbed by Texas voters. He'll need to find another line of work after 26 years of living off the government he claims to dislike.

Since Papa Bush endorsed Romney, Perry probably has an axe to grind against the Bush family. Rick will stay in, just to further aggravate those who did not endorse him.

These two families haven't liked each other for a long time.

I think Perry should work in the fields, since that is where he created the most jobs. Live amongst them like they have to for a while, work with them for what they make an hour, how's that make you feel? Big accomplishment for a leader? The dark ages were tough, I don't think Perry can survive any longer in what he took Texas back to.

Perry needs to get in his best shots before he's gone. Might win him some of that 'redemption'.

It is the hope and prayer of many of us Texans that our fellow voters have now been able to see Perry's shortcomings and true colors in this presidential run. We truly need some new blood in the governor's office after so many years of Bush/Perry!

Bethie---I was curious so I went online to look and saw that Texas is one of a few states that has NO term limits on its governor---would explain support that Perry got from inside his own state!

Perry could get one of those "high paying" jobs at McDonalds or perhaps as a greeter at WalMart. It's a job. It doesn't matter if you can't support a family on what they pay. Just shut up and get to work.

If someone were out there telling lies about Romney, I could see the rest of the Republicans trying to shut him or her up. But it seems to me that Perry and Gingrich are pointing out the truth about Romney's record at Bain, the record he has said is a reason to vote for him. Do they think if they ignore this it will go away?

Pat, is that what he did really? Your such a dumba$$ you'll probably vote for the Candy Man again next go around. Gotta keep those welfare checks and foodstamps coming your way.

JFK###s, yep that's exactly what he did, and if you don't see it then YOU are the double dumba$$!

Ever see the movie Pretty Woman?

Mitt Romney = Edward Lewis

The goal of Bain Capital was not to create jobs. The goal was to make money. Any jobs created were a by-product of the goal of making money.

Think of the equation from the other end...

How many new businesses did Bain Capital create?

The answer is none...they just bought other people's ideas.

RINO Romney Is the Least Electable By PETER FERRARA on 1.11.12

And his economic policies would be warmed-over Bush Sr. and Dole.

I just love this! Keep up the good work!!

I love seeing the conservatives trying to eat eachother up. This can't be good for them. The GOP will be split between the moderates who will vote for Romney and the extremists who will vote for Paul. Obama will cruise to victory against the split GOP. The more they eat each other the more ammunition for the Democrats. They are listening and paying attention.

And Huntsman doesn't have "real world experience"? I'd say his experience abroad gives him an edge over Romney.

Real world experience means real American experience. Watching Chinese grovel in the dirt doesn't apply.

But hanging out in France, pretending to try to convert a Catholic Country to Mormonism (laughing as I write this) DOES equate to real world experience, right Joey?

You do know who formed the EPA right?

The same Wacky Peacnick Lib who negotiated an end to the War in VietNam, who passed the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts, not to mention creating the Social Security Insurance (SSI) Program...;-)

What a LIBERAL!

It may be okay in the world of capitalism, but not what we need for a president. This background along with all other Romney's negative is exactly what Obama wants to run against.

Yes Dahly,

There is a lot of fat to trim in Washington. Thick as whale blubber it is.

And President Romney is the one to do the trimming. I back him 100%.

Naturally some will have to suffer from this necessary process, but this is the wake up call to all true Americans.