A Cain endorsement means NOTHING. It's over for Newt unfortunately.

How do you think Cain's endorsement went over with the Mrs? Does she agree that we should be backing Mrs. Homewrecker for the White House?

Santorum saw a five-point increase after the debate. He was also seen as the "true conservative" in the race -- 38 percent said so versus 18 percent for each Romney and Gingrich, and 16 percent for Paul.

It makes you wonder what Palin and Cain are being promised by the Gingrich campaign. Trying to cast Gingrich as the "anti-establishment" candidate is nothing short of ridiculous. Gingrich epitomizes the establishment.

SI

I recall someone on MSNBC reading a statement from the Obama camp after Gingrich did well in South Carolina. I don't know if it was David Axelrod, but the statement went along the lines of - We would love to see President Obama debate Newt if he were to get the nomination, however, we have see that once Newt gets a lead, he can't keep a lead.

Newt is toast. If he had been a serious candidate from the get go, he may have been able to do real damage to Mitt. But Newt was never too serious until he realized Mitt isn't that popular within his own party. But by then it was too late - especially when he talked about going to the moon.

It makes you wonder what Palin and Cain are being promised by the Gingrich campaign. Trying to cast Gingrich as the "anti-establishment" candidate is nothing short of ridiculous. Gingrich epitomizes the establishment.

Newt might have been the establishment candidate in the 90s, but it is obvious that Romney is the establishment choice in 2012. Maybe you missed it, but the entire right wing media did a pile on Newt starting on Thursday morning trying to destroy his chances for a nomination.

I am a big fan of Ron Paul and his ideology,a couple things bother me though one is his age although he appears to be very healthy. Another concern about Ron Paul is trying to visualize him as an effective president that can deal with congress,somehow I just visualize him irritating everyone and nothing getting done,maybe I am wrong? Mitt Romney I see as presidential and as a very intelligent businessman with executive experience in the private and public sector and a good man,but ideology wise I see him as more of a big govt. guy than Ron Paul and that is not good imho. So what to do? Well at this point I have to go with the guy who could beat Obama and be an effective president and in my opinion that is Mitt Romney.

but it is obvious that Romney is the establishment choice in 2012.

Greg:

That may be true, but if you were really out to back the anti-establishment candidate, wouldn't you back Santorum or Paul?

SI

That may be true, but if you were really out to back the anti-establishment candidate, wouldn't you back Santorum or Paul?

Rather hard to say. While only one of them is currently in Congress, all of them with the exception of Romney have a long history in Washington, so Romney would have the most claim on being an outsider. Even though Romney is from outside Washington, he still has a long history of being involved in politics.

If I had to pick an actual anti-establishment candidate, it would be Ron Paul, but that's because he isn't really a modern day Republican. He changed parties (I believe he used to be a Libertarian, but I could be wrong) so he could run as a Republican this year and get more exposure in the media to express his ideas.

Newt has always been a Republican and based on the past four days, it has become blatantly obvious that the Republican establishment does not want Newt and they are willing to say and do anything to stop him. I thought they were only going to go after him for a day and would have stopped after that horrible performance in the Thursday debate, but it continued on Friday and into the weekend. Romney still has his intimidation squad of members of Congress following around Newt and trying to coop his campaign events.

If I had to pick an actual anti-establishment candidate, it would be Ron Paul, but that's because he isn't really a modern day Republican.

I agree. While I personally am not a supporter of Ron Paul, he also better represents the tenets of the Tea Party. That brings me back to my original comment.

SI

The GOP reminds me of that ad on TV for people with COPD: You have an elephant sitting on your chest that does not lest you breathe, and it's just sitting there, obstructing anything that you want to do.

What an appropriate ad for a horrible disease! Contgratulations to the Pharmaceutical companies for such a good representation!

The GOP, may be coming to it's senses; Romney is the candidate that can beat the democratic coalition, Gingrich is way to far right for the American people if this holds up , you will see a Romney/Christe ticket, that will also take the Senate our experiment with far left socialism was a disaster.

I used to think I'd vote Romney over Obama. That is no longer the case. He has shown through his company's lobbying of Congress to pay lower taxes than middle class Americans that he doesn't give a damn about the workers, only about his own wealth.

Ron Paul 2012

MSNBC should re-name Meet The Press to the John McCain show!

Interesting how Gotcha Gregory conceded the show to him...

MSM pushing the Willard agenda at it's finest, although, a touch to blatant for my delicate taste!

Even though I know Romney would eventually win the primaries, having Newt linger around made it fun. Newt casted Romney as Vulture Capitalist, made him release his Tax Returns showing a little 14% tax rate etc. If Romney had already won Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, none of this would have happened.

Glad to see the selfish morons in GOP cannibalizing each other.

The press is boycotting Newt. Romney is courting the MSM. Pretty hard to win when you alienate the people who are the ones who get your message out.

Paul/Rubio 2012 !!!!!

Interesting how Gotcha Gregory conceded the show to him...

Never cared for David Gregory, he is no Tim Russert. I would have much rather seen Brian Williams get Meet the Press, but I guess going from weekdays at 6:30PM to Sunday morning would be a demotion.

Romney has long been the inevitable candidate because he's the candidate of the big business class. They run the Republican Party as they always have, using Cultural Conservatives, small government Conservatives, defense and law enforcement Conservatives, xenophobes, and fringe groups like the John Birch Society crazies to build the voting base necessary to win elections.

Now that's more apparent than ever before...how will all those other groups react now that it's SO OBVIOUS they've been used?

Feisty, I read somewhere last week that the reason MTP has more Republicans on is because Democrats "aren't entertaining".

This is what it has come down to. Entertainment.

I have read quite a few articles this weekend about Bill Maher's program Friday evening. Maher said Republicans are inventing an Obama that doesn't exist. What a pity the MSM goes along with it.

Instead of debates, they should give give Gingrich and Romney each a pillow case filled with horse $hit and allow them to fight it out to the finish before the cameras and a live audience.

The American people must have a really short memory if they vote Newt Gingrich into office. This man is such a hypocritical liar. Some where in America there has to be a better option for the Republican party than these clowns, hell, I would vote for Bozo over Romney or Gingrich.

While it looks like Romney has a lead in the polls, we need to be reminded that polls are often incorrect. The establishment republicans are ecstatic over any poll showing Romney with a lead. Florida is such a diverse state with many different localities voting in many different ways. There are democrat strongholds and republican strongholds. In the democrat strongholds those that aren't democrat tend to be more conservative and those areas would vote more for the stronger conservative, which I think is Newt.

I'm wondering if Newt has more up his sleeve. Did he throw the biggest guns at Romney too fast? If Newt can't tame Romney's plastic smile and find some way to counter the dollars Romney has, Newt will go to the convention but he may not carry the votes. Newt lost Virginia already and they haven't even had their primary yet. Not sure how many delegates in Va, but Newt won't get any there.

Feisty Red,

Are you actually being critical of your cheerleading liberal media? How about a shot at Diane Sawyer?

I think that Cain's endorsement just about sewed up the nomination... ...for Romney. It is too bad for Gingrich that he could not just ask Cain to keep quiet. I am happy to see Romney leading since he is the only one in the current GOP field that has a chance at beating Obama, Gingrich has no chance at all. Romney is moderate enough to draw the independents and conservative democrats who are fed up with Obama. Gingrich is too far right to draw these constituencies and his far right base is no where near big enough to beat Obama. With Romney as the candidate the split will be no more than about 5% in the popular vote between the candidates one way or the other. With Gingrich, Obama would win reelection in a landslide of at least a 10-15% popular vote difference. This country can not take 4 more years of Obama and his policies, so I certainly hope the Romney gets the nomination.

Catydid - I'll bite. In your perception, please explain to me why you feel Newt is such a liar. I'm really interested in seeing what you have to say.

This poll was before the 9-9-9 endorsement! Gingrich/Palin 2012! To the Moon and beyond!

A little ironic humor on a Sunday is always appreciated.

Catydid; (hell, I would vote for Bozo over Romney or Gingrich); if you vote for Obama you'll be voting for BOZO!!

Catydid - I'll bite. In your perception, please explain to me why you feel Newt is such a liar.

brianb I'll step in, if you permit.

1. Newt Gingrich has stated that his work for Freddie Mac was in the capacity of a "historian", for which he was compensated hundreds of thousands of dollars in a single year. I can't come up with a reason why Freddie Mac would hire a "historian", or why they would pay him such an exorbitant fee, except for his Washington D.C. connections. Connections and access to the people in power is the essence of lobbying.
2. His stance on Libya. On March 7, 2011, he stated on Fox News that the correct policy of the United States would be to enforce a no-fly zone in that country. On March 23, less than two weeks later, and after Obama had initiated just such a policy, his exact words were: “I would not have intervened.” -The Today Show, March 23.
3. His explanation regarding his censure by the Republican-dominated House of Representatives in 1998 as a Pelosi-type, partisan attack.

He is not even a particularly clever liar. He just mouths these obvious falsehoods with suave assurance, and a surprising number of voters are completely taken in. Why? I do not know.

..and I'm not even interested in his serial polygamy and the shambles he made of multiple marriages.

If I had to pick an actual anti-establishment candidate, it would be Ron Paul, but that's because he isn't really a modern day Republican. He changed parties (I believe he used to be a Libertarian, but I could be wrong) so he could run as a Republican this year and get more exposure in the media to express his ideas.

He's a Constitutionalist/Libertarian, believe me it galls us that he has to run as a Republican just to get the message out.

He's in excellent health so his age isn't a factor for me, in fact he's (twice) asked the other candidates if they'd like to join him in a 25 mile bike race, they've all declined.

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL

This is what it has come down to. Entertainment.

How far have we fallen as a country, when we have been reduced to this!

I see where now that David Axlerod is on - Gotcha Gregory finally woke up and is his usual combative self!

STFU David & let him answer your questions...

One Chris Matthews & his constant interruptions is more than enough to go around!

Amen! It's the main reason I can't stomach watching ANY of the news channels and prefer to read it instead, the constant shouting over each-other and interrupting is rude and accomplishes nothing.

Florida Republicans voting for an old rich white dude from the Northeast. Yeah, that sounds about right.

Hello all, despite the media reports positioning Gingrich and Romney as the only two options, it's important to understand how the delegate process works.

Of the 2,286 total Republican delegates, 1,144 are needed to win nomination.

In five (5) States: Virginia, Missouri, Ohio, Tennessee and Illinois, Gingrich and Santorum are not even on the ballot. That’s 564 delegates that they cannot get.

After South Carolina, only 59 delegates have been allocated to the 4 candidates. Mitt Romney has 39 of those. This means Santorum or Gingrich has to pick up 1,144 delegates from the remaining 1,683.

Let’s say that Paul only picks up 20% of the total number of delegates–I happen to believe he will do much better–but let’s pick 20%. That’s 457 delegates for Paul. Add that to the 564 that Newt and Santorum won’t have a shot at (not on ballots) and now there are 1,021 delegates that Santorum and Gingrich have no chance of getting.

Subtract that 1,021 from the total 2,286 and you’re left with 1,265 delegates. That means that Gingrich and Santorum, one or the other, would have to pick up over 90% of the available delegates to get the nomination. So, essentially, we’re down to Paul and Romney. A vote for Gingrich and Santorum is a wasted vote! A vote for Paul is not a wasted vote and may well mean that the next President of the United States will be a man that, for the last 30 years, has never broken a promise, compromised his principles or waffled his position on an issue. A man that still believes that the Constitution of the United States is THE law of the land and that the protection of our individual liberties is the primary reason for the Federal government.

Florida Republicans voting for an old rich white dude from the Northeast. Yeah, that sounds about right.

Florida definitely isn't South Carolina. Lots of snow birds from the rust belt and northeast. Also a large portion of the population is northeasterners that have migrated there. (I lived in Florida for a year and a half at one time) If you could somehow smash Texas and New York together, it would result in Florida.

Bill Maher did mention on his show that Republicans are fighting an Obama that they have made up. Take the idiot Republican Congressman on his show that night saying that Obama is 'gutting' the military. Bill tried to point out that Obama has raised the budget on the military every year for the last 3 years and has only reduced the budget 1.6 percent for this year. How exactly is that 'gutting' the military. Of course, the illustrious Congressman had nothing to say about that. And...that is the problem. They make things up about the President that never hold water with facts. All I heard from Fox News after the President placed on hold the pipeline plan was that he 'vetoed' the pipeline and how horrible that was. Of course, they never acknowledged why....and that it is not vetoed but put on hold until a legal plan can be put together. We, as Americans, just want all the true facts and not political rhetoric. How are we supposed to accurately vote if all the politicians keep spewing lies and incomplete truths?

@ BB Newt lost Missouri, also. He is not on the ballot here.

If you can not organize (run) a campaign, then I do not want you run the country.

wow peopel are you blind,they both,i mean really wtf are you people smoken,ronpaul should of won,but our @!$%#en @!$%# is riged,and the news is so bias,they wont show @!$%# about ron paul,@!$%# both these guys,one fat pile of @!$%#,the other none caring rich mormon,like really people are you just stupid,or do you not mind the media feeding you bull@!$%# allday,th eouted ron paul who won,but they people here dont say @!$%# about it,@!$%# both these guys in the face with a dirty penis,i'm gonna vote for obama cause atleast ,he is somewhat trying to do new @!$%#,well anyway,you people are foolish and blind

Oh, hell. I wanted Newt.

anthony - you are the reason Ron Paul won't win. Most people know that crazies follow Ron Paul.

3. The censure was a witch hunt. 84 charges dropped, 1 administrative concession. Newt wasn't fined and he voluntarily stepped down. Washington politics at it's finest.

BB - how do you explain this statement from Newt's own mouth?

Exactly one month before yesterday's vote, Gingrich admitted that he brought discredit to the House and broke its rules by failing to ensure that financing for two projects would not violate federal tax law and by giving the House ethics committee false information.

Witch hunt? When he admitted to lying?

Wasn't fined? Then how does one explain this? Is a penalty somehow not a fine?

The House voted overwhelmingly yesterday to reprimand House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) and order him to pay an unprecedented $300,000 penalty, the first time in the House's 208-year history it has disciplined a speaker for ethical wrongdoing.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/govt/leadership/stories/012297.htm

heh. seems like the republican party's campaign to sink newt's candidacy has succeeded. you see, they finally realized that gingrich is dangerous for the country, but most importantly, their party.

@ BB Newt lost Missouri, also. He is not on the ballot here.

If you can not organize (run) a campaign, then I do not want you run the country.

In my opinion Newt was never seriously running for President, which is why he isn't on the ballot in many states. He was using the publicity and exposure to sell his books and videos.

So far this cycle there have been a series of anti-Romney wave candidates that would surge in popularity for a few weeks until some event derailed them. The surge would then move to the next candidate. In late November and early December when Herman Cain fell apart, it was Newt's or Santorum's turn. It happened to be Newt's, so Romney went after him in Iowa. The Newt surge was short lived due to Romney and the next candidate in line to benefit just days before the Iowa caucus was Santorum. The Santorum surge did not carry over to New Hampshire. There actually was another anti-Romney candidate surge in New Hampshire with Jon Huntsman, but it came too little, too late. When Huntsman got to South Carolina he decided to suspend his campaign.

Well Newt didn't appreciate the attacks from Romney in Iowa. Newt was out for some revenge. He tried to get on the VA ballot, but came up short. We saw the aggressive Newt in South Carolina and he won.

I can only guess with everything that has happened over the last four days, Newt must be pretty damn pissed. Unless he REALLY self destructs, I see him going all the way to the convention out of spite trying to deny Romney the majority delegates he needs to get the nomination.

It was a year prior to my birth so I don't know much about the 1980 Democratic primary, but it sounds like Newt is in the role of Ted Kennedy and Romney is in the role of Carter. Obviously there are vast differences in positions of these individuals, but will the 2012 Republican National Convention get as nasty as the 1980 Democratic National Convention was?

@!$%#

Can anyone out there point me to an English class or a dictionary where they teach the use of the word referenced above?. I believe it is an adjective, put I cannot find it listed anywhere, much less locate a definition. Just trying to keep up with new English words so I can make sense of these posts.

Here's my analysis so far:

The GOP faithful have shown over and over for six years now that they really would prefer any other Republican (except perhaps Huntsman) to Romney. There is a 25% ceiling that he can only break with "cloistered" support --- has a home there, has a large Mormon population, or is more moderate than the average for Republicans. So Romney can break the 25% barrier in places like New Hampshire and Florida and Utah, but can't do well at all in states like Georgia or Texas.

Romney's problems are manifold: That he is a Mormon will work horribly against him in all but a handful of low-population states with significant Mormon populations. In other "red" states, I believe his support will be weak at best because a significant part of the electorate will not vote for a non-Christian for President. Romney also had the distinct disadvantage of a history as a very moderate Republican who governed in a very liberal state. And then there's the issue of Bain Capital, offshore-pass-thru accounts and Swiss bank accounts. While there is probably nothing patently illegal there, it leaves a bad taste in the mouths of many of the faithful. What it will come down to is that Romney pays an effective tax rate below 14% and advocates measures that would drop it to nearly zero. This gives consevatives heartburn.

Newt, on the othe hand simply has too much baggage. Serial adultry. Undeclared lobbying at Freddie Mac, flirtation with populist racism, and just plain arrogance and unpredictability add up to much more than an Achilles Heel.

But, even if Gingrich, loses to Romney in Florida, all he really has to do is stay in the hunt. The February primaries and caucuses are pretty much meaningless. And Romney will do well in February. But this will give Gingrich to focus his attention on the March primaries where he can do very well in states like Virginia, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia where Romney's religion will come into play against him. And wins there would set Gingrich up for Texas in April.

Santorum will likely fold in February. The primaries and caucuses are not worth the effort and he will fade badly. His only real shot at anything would to be as a Vice-Presidential candidate and Cantor is currently pulling strings to undercut him there.

My guess is that Romney will be the eventual GOP candidate, but not until after April and Texas has spoken. But he will emerge as a damaged candidate with the impossible task of convincing the most conservative Republicans that he would represent them.

As a candidate against Obama in the general election, Romney would be subjected to relentless attacks that can not only be truthful, but can even be quoted from the mouths of Republicans. Be prepared for lots of Democratic ads with Paul and Gingrich bad-mouthing Romney.

And there is still the issue of money. While any Republican candidate can bring in millions in large contributor contributions, especially with the SCOTUS position that corporations and individuals through corporations can donate unlimited amounts of money without their names ever being disclosed. But so can the Democrats. And in addition the Obama can bring in millions in tiny contributions (under $60) that the GOP cannot. And these small contributions have another effect. They give the voters some skin in the game and virtually guarantee a base level of turnout. Obama's team is a master of getting "micro" donations.

From my seat right now it looks like it will be one of the dirtiest campaigns since the early days of the country and that Obama has a clear edge currently that is likely to improve as the economy goes into the summer. But things like Iran, a major economic crash in Europe, or some completely unforeseen issue could derail Obama in a heartbeat.

N0V. 5,1998 Newt Gingrich resigned from Congress the day after he was re-elected.

He left Congress, not just the Speakership.

The day after he was re-elected.

saxon

... our experiment with far left socialism was a disaster.

Other than in the fetid, I mean fertile imaginations of the right-wing nut job coalition:

When did that alleged experiment take place?

RedDev - You challenge me over the stupidest things. By stupid I mean that you use words and information out of context. Newt said that he brought discredit to the house by failing to insure. STOP. Failing to insure is human error, not some egregious act of loathing, low down despicable form of treachery people like you want to attribute to Newt. He didn't lie. He made an administrative error... actually it wasn't he that did it, it was his attorney. You really need to find out what actually happened, you are making a fool out of yourself RedDev.

It wasn't a fine. Read the words. Show me the word "fine," Newt prearranged this. The news story has it wrong. It wasn't ordered, nor was it a fine. Wanna find out the real truth, read the censure report page 94. Newt agreed to help pay the legal fees to prove that the IRS had nothing on him. He wanted to have his name cleared of the other false charges. The liberal press in Washington had it all wrong. But, you can continue believing the lies... you are predispositioned to do that anyway. Do yourself a favor, stop posting crap and look this up... it's all out there. Why do you think Romney hasn't used this against him??? - THINK for once.

1. You don't know what his capacity was for Fannie and Freddie. No one has stepped out to claim Newt wasn't a historian so your lie theory is only your opinion. 2. A no-fly zone is not what Obama did. Obama attacked Libya with us armaments. We lobbed missiles into the country. A vast difference in the two things. There is so much disconnection between the two, your perception of a lie is a little skewed. 3. The censure was a witch hunt. 84 charges dropped,

Brian, in repsonse:

Number 1 - I doubt even Newt's mother would hold to the "opinion" that Freddie Mac, a government sponsored, privately held reseller of mortgages, would have need of a professional historian, whose doctoral dissertation was entitled, "Belgian Education Policy in the Congo: 1945–1960", especially one who was denied tenure in 1978 and left his original post after 4 years.

Is Freddie Mac branching out to mortgage marketing in the Congo??

And if you believe that any organization is willing to pay hundreds of thousands a year for the services of a "historian", I would say that your are overly credulous.

Number 2. A no-fly zone which does use military force against any and all attempts by the targeted military to put planes in the air, is no better than an empty gesture. I'm sure such a highly compensated historian as Newt realizes this basic fact; it just doesn't fit into his political agenda.

Number 3. As witch hunts go, Newt's 1998 censure by the Republican-held House was remarkable in its near unanimity. By an overwhelming 395-28 vote, the House decided to both reprimand him and to fine him the not inconsiderable sum of 300,000 dollars. Yet to Newt & yourself, this was a partisan witch hunt.

Nice mental gymnastics.

If you are willing to accept any facile, but hardly creditable explanation given by this shameless, self-serving politician, then you'll never be convinced that he has ever told a lie. Sorry, I'm not quite so gullible.

Your response....?

wow peopel are you blind,they both,i mean really wtf are you people smoken,ronpaul should of won,but our @!$%#en @!$%# is riged,and the news is so bias,they wont show @!$%# about ron paul,@!$%# both these guys,one fat pile of @!$%#,the other none caring rich mormon,like really people are you just stupid,or do you not mind the media feeding you bull@!$%# allday,th eouted ron paul who won,but they people here dont say @!$%# about it,@!$%# both these guys in the face with a dirty penis,i'm gonna vote for obama cause atleast ,he is somewhat trying to do new @!$%#,well anyway,you people are foolish and blind

Ron Paul has a better chance of winning the Democrat nomination then the Republican nomination. Ron Paul is too socially liberal for Republicans and too fiscally conservative for Democrats. Ron Paul knows he cannot win the nomination, he is only doing it so he can get a platform to express his ideas. Maybe you don't remember 2008, but Ron Paul has had a much larger voice in 2012, it just isn't resonating.

There are Conservatives, Libertarians, Blue Dogs and Liberals. Ron Paul is a Libertarian. The reason Libertarians feel all alone is because the Conservatives are sitting 3 seats to the right while the other three are sitting next to each other. So much for the double date. The Conservatives are off doing their own thing.

RedDev, dman ..... I googled the Ethics commitee report (yes i'm bored) and BrianB is correct. There is no mention of a fine in there. The $300,000 was a reimbursement of the cost of the investigation. Gingrich chose to fully reimburse the investigation which was not required by the ethics committee report.

dman - I'll respond by saying that 1 - opinion. 2 - not true. 3 - You need to research this. You are definitely wrong.

So, Florida is now big time for Romney. What does this mean for the "true" conservatives and the teabaggers party? Done, through, kaput! The American People have heard the tea party and the conservatives. They have seen their true colors. They don't want anything more to do with them.

Don't you wish, rednawt?! Don't believe everything the MSM whores tell you.....and watch what happens in the Senate and House elections in November.

I vote for whoever does the Right and Just thing BECAUSE it is the Right and Just thing to do.

I DO NOT vote for those who do what is Right and Just because it "happens" to be politically/financially/personally advantageous to do it.

All I can say is, 4 years and this is the best you guys can come up with?

Thank you BigATC! I did my homework on this before. I didn't believe the first story I read about it so I looked deeper. I found out a lot more than just the info on the reimbursement. I remember when this happened and I also remember the press excoriating Gingrich. No wonder he has such a hard on for the press.

Also, the most direct and obvious clue is the fact that Romney hasn't used this against Newt. Romney's team knows if they do, they will be shot down.

Ron Paul Libertarian Idiocy

From Veterans Today Newsletter

Friday, January 27th, 2012 | Posted by Eric L. Wattree

Ron Paul and Libertarian Idiocy

BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE

Ron Paul is a typical demagogue. He specializes in combining fact with fiction, and pointing out everything that’s wrong with all of the policies that are contrary to his agenda. Then he claims that his irresponsible solution is a cure for all of our problems, which is an exercise in pure fiction. Paul is quoted as saying the following:“The most basic principle to being a free American is the notion that we as individuals are responsible for our own lives and decisions. We do not have the right to rob our neighbors to make up for our mistakes, neither does our neighbor have any right to tell us how to live, so long as we aren’t infringing on their rights. Freedom to make bad decisions is inherent in the freedom to make good ones. If we are only free to make good decisions, we are not really free.”

Paul’s entire premise is flawed. Total personal freedom was clearly not the intent of the founding fathers. They had the good sense to recognized that a society, or a civilization, as it were, is defined as a “GROUP of people who have joined together to pursue a common interest or goal,” and they clearly set out their intent in the preamble of the United States Constitution, which reads as follows:

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare [not just make Ron Paul happy] and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

Thus, if Ron Paul doesn’t like the rules we’ve set up to “promote the general welfare,” he has the freedom to move to the wilderness and not live among us. But according Ron Paul’s philosophy, he thinks he should have the right to pee against the wall in the middle of Times Square during rush hour, and the government should be precluded from stopping him. Because you see, according to Paul’s philosophy, and his flawed reading of the United States Constitution, that should be his inalienable right, since he’s not hurting anyone else.

So in essence, Paul wants to have his cake and eat it to. He wants to take advantage of the benefits of living in an ordered society, while not having to adhere to the rules that make it a society. For example, he contends that the civil rights laws that prevent him from refusing to serve certain groups in his restaurant abridges his right to private ownership. But on the other hand, he has absolutely no problem with the fact that the group that he bans is forced to pay taxes that support “his right to private ownership.” If his business catches on fire, he’s going to expect the banned group’s tax supported fire department to come put it out. And if he’s robbed, he’s going to expect the group’s tax supported police department to come to his aid. But the fact is, he can’t have it both ways. If he’s not willing to adhere to society’s rules, he can’t expect to take advantage of the benefits of living in an ordered society.

Paul also wants to abolish the Department of Education, which is essential to maintaining a “more perfect union.” His philosophy also dictates that we should simply “trust” corporations not to grind up rats in our ground beef, or pollute our air and water. He says, “Just let the free market handle it.”

Well, that sounds like a plan, but we saw how the free market handled the Wall Street fiasco, didn’t we? The free market created it, and we paid for it – dearly. The only thing free about the free market is the freedom of ruthless and greedy capitalists to take advantage of a naive and unsuspecting public – and then they tell us we’er un-American if we complain about it.

Thus, Ron Paul’s philosophy represents the rantings of a selfish, unthinking, greedy, and totally irresponsible lunatic. Therefore, if he wants total personal freedom, it’s well within his grasp. He can vote with his feet and move to the wilderness. Then he can pee against any tree in the forest at will – but he shouldn’t expect us to come to his aid if a snake decides to latch on to his pecker. That’s the price of total freedom.

Eric L. Wattree

BB - BigATC

MR. COLE: It was the opinion of the members of the subcommittee and the special counsel that based on the facts of this case as they are currently known, the appropriate sanction for the conduct described in the original Statement of Alleged Violations is a reprimand and the payment of $300,000 toward the cost of the preliminary inquiry.

When the ethics committee says a payment of $300k is required to settle the inquiry, how is that not a fine? From the reference above, it hardly seems that Newt just happily said oh, thanks for the reprimand and here is $300k for all your hard work. Spin it anyway you want, payment of 300k was part of the terms of censure.

I don't care how many points Romney is up he will never ever get my vote. We don't even know who the real Mitt Romney is he flips so much and will say anything. He makes me sick. He is to much like Obama. We don't need another one. He's also a lot like John Kerry he was for it before he was against it. He's such a joke. Oh and Ron Paul there are no words for that looney tune.

I can’t vote for someone that changes his mind to fit who he’s talking to with the issues at hand. Your answers are shallow with insufficient thought given to the problem it’s a broken promise it’s the equivalence to a lie. His problem with the methods that his company Bain works under, is also disturbing loading a company up with debt to bankrupt the company you acquired and leaving the bank holding the defaulted note, didn’t that bank also have stock holders that lost value in their stock? You know when someone is out of touch when he says that he created 100 thoughts that pay an average of $9.25 an hour and expect you live on that, I don’t know anyone that can live on $19,240.00 per year without help.

Now he claims that he believes in immigrants do to his father being born in Mexico, his grandfather was illegal in Mexico. There is no paperwork showing that he entered Mexico legally and was a wanted man in U.S. what a hypocrite. A vote for Romney is a vote for fraud, broken promise, a way to enrich himself and his friends.

Corrections - Notes!

Seattle Indie - Palin suggested to ONLY South Carolina voters that they should vote for Newt "to extend the primary". It pays to fully comprehend what someone actually is saying.

Pat Boston

Newt is toast

In Florida, Yes. Nationwide No. By March, if he doesn't make changes, the opera lady may reach for the lemon juice.

Brian

we need to be reminded that polls are often incorrect

Yes, marist is not one of the better ones and add to that NBC pulling the strings.

These polls have been favoring Romney by 4 point than his actual take

Gingrich numbers have been under 4 to 4 higher than he has been doing on election days.

Santorium has been 4 - 8 points lower than what he actually gets.

The numbers on this one makes Santorum look very interesting. He has consistenly gotten 4 - 8 points higher than the poll numbers attribute to him. With Santorum up to 16 his actual number may be 20-24 and growing - just like Iowa. A second place or very close third place finish could be the ticket for him in turning the corner.

Think about it - Santorum is moving into contention void of significant air time.

Dman

I'm not a big fan of Newt, but this is the bottom lines on Newt for the Ethics Charges

What he was reprimanded for was the failure to properly file the documents in his ethics cases to the committee. He agreed because he was at fault to pay the $300,000. This is the actual document that shows so. http://ethics.house.gov/sites/ethics.house.gov/files/House%20Report%20105-1_1.pdf

BTW all 84 charges were dropped. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/govt/leadership/stories/101198.htm

And because the committe did not charge him, they turned him over to the IRS for possible Income tax evasion. After three years of investigation, the IRS ruled his course a-political, educational, and did not promote any candidate or party. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/govt/leadership/stories/gingrich020499.htm

There is one more thing. The ethics charges were all filed by one man - his 1994 opponet for his seat http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/gingrich/report/part_i.htm

secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity,

Posterity includes all future generations, which includes not only the unborn, but those not yet conceived.

Thus Roe v Wade was a abomination that violates the plain language of the Constitution.

Abortion is murder any way you look at it. Where are the leftists that are always screeching about "science" when it comes to identifying a human fetus as a unique creature with a life and DNA of its own and putting the matter beyond any doubt or argument--a fetus is a human being. The arbitrary killing of a human being is murder.

The Democrats so love to pat themselves on the back and salute themselves for being "compassionate" and "caring for the disadvantaged" are, every one of them, co-conspirators in the genocide of the unborn.

Nothing that the Nazis did was as evil as what the Democratic party is doing with their support for abortion.

They kill not only a whole generation of human beings, they kill our future. Why is there a shortage of labor in the country so that we need a massive flow of immigrants, to the point where the Democrats are, more than willing, eager to look the other way at illegal immigration? Because of the millions of what would have been the strong young generation of today that have been systematically murdered by the Democrats and their government-funded abortion providers.

The Nazis did nothing anywhere nearly so evil as that which the Democratic Party is doing with tax dollars today, murdering "our Posterity" to deny them the "Blessings of Liberty," not to mention the pursuit of happiness, not the mention the LIFE that is first needed to enjoy the other two.

Democrat=evil person

This is the way it will be seen on the Day of Judgment, when they will not be allowed to have a voice to contradict the truth because their tongues will have already rotted away in their mouths.

Carrie

Your source is bad.

Santorum is on the Ohio Ballots Statewide electoral votes and on all but 3 of the congressional distict races.

Santorum is on the Missouri Ballot - Gingrich is not.

Santorum is not on the Ballot in Tennessee and will not be qualified for all of it's delegates in a write-in campaign.

In Illinois, he will not be on all of the ballots.

Virginia's pettition system is probably unconstitutional. For a candidate to get on the ballot the candidate has to get at least 400 signatures in each congressional district. To accomplish this task they are required to collect them using only citizens of each district. Furthermore Virginia does not permit write-in candidates.

John, keep your moral indignation to yourself. This is America, we have the right of freedom of choice and right to privacy. Day of Judgment? Religious nut. I will stand before my God and he will greet me with open arms, liberal warts and all. My god is weeping with your righteous indignation, judgmental bigotry and hate. I think you should go pray to your hateful God and hope he doesn't kick you to the curb.

I looked up the particulars on the Marist Poll. People polled were

45% Democrat

35% Republican

20% Independent

The reality is that there are more republicans than democrats in florida - the poll is a snow job!

Let me sum up my feelings in two words: Newt Sucks!

The Devil,

"Newt Sucks!"

What I'd like to know is how Newt thinks he is going to bring down the deficit, reduce taxes, and build a colony on the moon at the same time. It seems to me that such an ambitious project as building a colony on the moon is calculated to increase the deficit; not shrink it. It would cost mega-bucks to do that, and where does he think it's going to come from.

Unfortunately Florida is a prime example of what is wrong with the American political system-----it all boils down to who has the most money and who can scream the loudest. What a sad state of affairs (sorry no pun intended) this country is suffering from.

It would cost mega-bucks to do that, and where does he think it's going to come from.

Grandma's pension that he's going to tax and her social security and Medicare which he's going to cut. Good times ahead for the mega rich if he gets his way.

Dman

I'm not a big fan of Newt, but this is the bottom lines on Newt for the Ethics Charges

What he was reprimanded for was the failure to properly file the documents in his ethics cases to the committee. He agreed because he was at fault to pay the $300,000. This is the actual document that shows so. http://ethics.house.gov/sites/ethics.house.gov/files/House%20Report%20105-1_1.pdf

DB Akron - I did look at your link, and I agree that the charges or faults found with regard to Newt Gingrich were somewhat ambiguous. However, my point to BrianB, is that to characterize a resolution of a Republican-held house, particularly one carried with a 395-28 vote, as a partisan witch-hunt, as Gingrich did, is a lie.

On his other points, how Gingrich could expect President Obama to declare or enforce a no-fly zone, without use of our Military is a conundrum I cannot solve. Neither can I understand how on March 7, he could advocate declaration of a no-fly zone in Libya, and less than two weeks later, say, quite simply "I would not have intervened.", without one statement of the other constituting a lie regarding his true beliefs on the subject.

Lastly, my characterization of Newt's explanation of the fat consulting fees paid to him by Freddie Mac as a lie, is more than an opinion. It is, simply, the most rational interpretation of the facts known. It is barely within the realm of probability that mortgage resellers might, conceivably, have use for some historical research. But it is totally beyond belief that they would pay a college professor hundreds of thousands of dollars per year for this work.

If something walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck, then odds are, it is a duck, even it says otherwise.

John: a small point but one you've obviously missed. The US Supreme court, not the "democrats" has ruled that women are included in the US Constitution's right to privacy clause, which means despite all of the foaming at the mouth, no matter who gets into office, women are not going back to back alley abortionists. After 20 plus years, perhaps its time for you and your Taliban wannabees to at long last face facts that women are not subservient to your dictates...and are actually afforded all of the rights afforded you in the US Constitution.

I would like to offer the suggestion that we should keep looking at the fact that (to my knowledge) very few Republicans who served in the House with Newt when he was speaker have come to his defense on either the ethics charges or on his leadership. The silence is deafening and I don't think it is because there is a huge groundswell of support for Romney within the party. So, why?

HERE'S SOME KNOWLEDGE ON OBAMAS BLUEPRINT FOR ECONOMY

Wake up

You will have to admit Romney has the best looking hair cut.

As for the right answers...................?

No matter how it shakes out in the fall.......we're still in a mess!!! Hang on to your hats America!

"999 + Crook = Womanizing"

I remember when this happened and I also remember the press excoriating Gingrich. No wonder he has such a hard on for the press.

So, Brianb, while you were doing your research, did notice the part regarding the overwhelming vote by a Republican House in favor of issuing an official reprimand for Newt Gingrich?

If so, how does that sort with his statement that this whole episode was merely a "Nancy Pelosi's ethics witch-hunt" [http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/20/10201597-gingrich-foes-fight-to-remind-gop-of-ex-speakers-ethics-woes]? How about a total misrepresentation of the facts, more commonly known as a lie?

Newt Gingrich is scarcely alone in being a known, Washington liar. The phrase "lying politician", is so commonly that use of the two words together is redundant. We all remember Bill Clinton's emphatic assertion that he "did not have sex with that woman", or, former Idaho congressman Larry Craig's statements regarding his arrest in a airport washroom in Minnesota.

But Newt's lies , regarding his private and public ethics, regarding his actual views on public policy are so devoid of any trace of inner integrity as to seem remarkable even in Washington D.C. If the issue is the building of a mosque near ground zero in New York, leave it to Newt to test the political winds and declare that if Muslim nations do not accord Christians equal opportunity for worship, the Bill of Rights amendment regarding freedom of religion do not apply to Muslims in the U.S. If Obama seems hesitant to commit U.S. to the support of the Libyan uprising, then Newt Gingrich is in favor of imposing a no-fly zone. After Obama declares such a policy, Newt declares this is a big mistake. The man makes Mitt Romney seem consistent, which I would not have thought possible.

As to his work for Freddie Mac, which he characterizes as historical research, I don't believe that you believe him. The explanation is simply ludicrous.

same ole ...same ole...we lose ...the rich win...

John-3078515 YOUR A NUT JOB!!! You ARE the reason that Obama will be elected again. Way to make yourself look redicilous! you've studied obviously!!!

Barack Obama is trying to make the US a more socialist state

The Telegraph
Mon Jan 30, 2012

Barack Obama is now putting the United States squarely a decade behind Britain. Listening to the President’s State of the Union message last week was like a surreal visit to our own recent past: there were, almost word for word, all those interminable Gordon Brown Budgets that preached “fairness” while listing endless new ways in which central government would intervene in every form of economic activity

The Telegraph
Mon Jan 30, 2012

It's funny how MSN is ignoring the story of how Obama has been declared ineligible to be on the ballot in Georgia because of his citizenship. Highlights from the court hearing, all admitted into evidence, all under oath, all verified:

- His SS# was issued to a Connecticut man born in 1890

- Obama's SS#, per Homeland Security, does not pass E-Verify... it comes back as fraudulent

- Obama's birth certificate does NOT match the birth certificates of other people born in the same hospital on the same day as Obama. Documents experts testified it is a forgery. And a bad one at that! White around the letters shows obvious photoshopping.

He also ignored a subpoena to appear, and his lawyer also did not show. That means that any appeal will be based on the facts introduced into the record at the hearing. By not having at least his lawyer appear, he forfeited his right to dispute those facts.

I know, I know, you guys will scream tinfoil hat or something. It's hilarious really. Like when Woody Harrelson's character in the movie 2012 turned out to be right all along.

Seriously, google it yourselves. It's no joke.

Poor Obama. All his stories are about to unravel.

Popcorn!

(Apologies to the other posters in this thread, no doubt my comments will get the thread collapsed by the cowards who can't stand people that don't agree with them. Google it though, it's all true.)

Let's see how the Dems from Illinois, the ridiculous redhead home state, had to increase income taxes 65%, the Dems increased corporate taxes 47%, the city of Chicago Illinois has a 9.75% sales tax. The Illinois bonds have been downgraded again to A2.

AAA is highest, then AA1, then AA2, then A1 and then we get to A2. Florida's bond rating is AAA. Florida has no income tax and no corporate tax. Businesses are fleeing Illinois due to the lack of qualified professionals that want to live there, the super high tax rates, increasing property taxes and decrepit economy.

The three major corporate businesses have just warned Illinois if they don't get tax relief for themseves and their workers, they will leave Illinois. Property taxes have been raised. The state now has decreased the time it takes to fire a school teacher from two years to 3-4 months. Remember that Illinois is the bastion of unionism and Florida is a right to work state. Easy to fire bad workers and replace them with better ones. Remember while Illinois is trying to fire the unionized workers, it has to pay them for not working.

All forms of compensation have been reduced. The Illinois unemployment rate is just under 10%.

Daley and his bunch must have been consulting the Ridiculous Redhead. Or is it vice versa. Wasn't it the Ridiculous Redhead who was saying she wanted higher taxes?

Oh yes, Illinois is going to try and sell 8.75 Billion dollar of bonds to avoid default on the 6 Billion dollar bonds it had already issued. In simple terms, Illinois will have to find between $500,000,000 and $600,000,000 of interest to pay for the new yearly interest on these bonds.

Aren't we all glad that the Ridiculous Redhead from Illinois is going to have a hell of a lot less disposable income being a democrat and living in Illinois.

Now Florida doesn't have an income tax and it doesn't have a corporation tax and it has a Republican government and its bonds have been upgraded to the highest rating of AAA. The interest rate on Florida bonds is going down!

Would that have something to do with better fiscal management by the Republican Administration in Florida and no income taxes and no corporation taxes?

It takes a real genius to live in Illinois.

I'm a Union member in the private sector and my company sets records for profits almost evey quarter, like 10s of billions. Also, I love the city of Chicago, to visit anyways.

Feisty? Useless, her and Beverly cut-n-paste waste more space saying nothing than anyone else here. They're so hateful and mean too. I don't like David Walker that much either but at least he has an original thought now and then. Still, freedom of speech and all that, right? It's ironic really to be defending her right to free speech, when her and her crew spend thier time collapsing posts from people who they disagree with. Still, I personally believe in freedom of speech, regardless of what others do. Que sera sera.

Newt is just a @!$%# sandwich, and you don't even have to take a bite to find out.

ALL OTHER THINGS ASIDE regarding Newt Gingrich, he is the ONLY person ever to be hit with ethics violations in congress and he resigned because of them.. Even if you agree with what he says, isn't this one thing enough to make it clear that he's not fit to be the President of the United States?

There's not much integrity, and lots of corruption in politics these days but that Newt Gingrich has been seriously considered as President of the United States of America by ANYONE goes to show how F***ed up things are in this country. I really, really, really want a good Republican to go against Obama, so that I can vote Republican, but I cannot vote for Newt Gingrich.

Kyle I think Newt's a scumbag, but the ethics violation inquiry cleared him. He paid the cost of it, 300k, which he was not required to do. Then he resigned to make a ton of loot from fannie and freddie.

Google it if you don't believe me.

Alil the article here: http://www.washington post.com/wp-srv/politics/govt/leadership/stories/101198.htm (remove the space between washington and post) from the washington post does say the charges were dropped but he was hardly "cleared".

A quote from the article:

""The committee believes you have been adequately informed and cautioned on Rule 45 issues and anticipates full compliance in the future," said Rep. James V. Hansen (R-Utah), the panel's chairman, and Rep. Howard L. Berman (D-Calif.) in a letter to Gingrich."

Basically, they knew he broke the rule before, but at the time of investigation he was found to not be breaking it.

He dragged the investigations out, fighting tooth and nail until they finally decided it wasn't worth it, it sounds like. Again, hardly "cleared".

Please, this is just one instance of his corrupt politics he has an indisputable track record of bad ethics, dishonesty, and a worse than usual case of "say whatever I can to get a vote". By comparison Mitt Romney looks like a naughty cat that at worst poops on your neighbour's carpet every year they watch him while you are out on vacation.

He paid the cost of it, 300k, which he was not required to do.

I disagree with that assessment. I do not know what enforcement powers the House of Representatives has to ensure payment of fines, but it was the House which imposed the fine, not Newt who just decided to reimburse them for the cost of the investigation.

But all of this is immaterial to my original point, that Newt's characterization of the whole process as a partisan witch hunt is unsupportable due to the fact that his party, not the Democrats, were in the majority, and by the fact that the reprimand vote passed by a margin of 395 to 28.

Newt is far from unique in being a lying Washington politician. But he does outdo most of his peers in this regard, both in the quantity and scope of his falsehoods. He also tells a fair number of lies which are just simply an insult to the listener's intelligence. Even most Republicans realize this, which is one reason his Presidential campaign can not sustain any sustained lift in this race. Deep down inside, even his supporters do not trust him.

Life and Liberty "Defender"-

Well at this point I have to go with the guy who could beat Obama and be an effective president and in my opinion that is Mitt Romney.

You should change your moniker. If you're willing to vote for anyone other than Paul, then you are not defending life or liberty. Paul is the only one fighting for these. Myself, I am not willing to cast a vote for anyone other than Paul, because my beliefs are grounded in the principles of life and liberty.

If Mitt and Newt have support of the Tea Party, I am truly disappointed that I proclaimed myself a member of the Tea Party. Going back to the initial spark of the Tea Party movement; limited government and decreased spending, I'm shocked that either of these two would get the support. They are both big gubment decepticons.

(Apologies to the other posters in this thread, no doubt my comments will get the thread collapsed by the cowards who can't stand people that don't agree with them. Google it though, it's all true.)

Not at all, Alil, I enjoy watching the the Right prove on a daily basis just how crazy and unhinged they've become.

Please more details of your Birtherism!

Obama has no baggage? Really? I wonder why? Maybe, because nobody knows where he is really from. That's kind of funny, huh? None of his college classmates can remember him. He won't release his college information. His SS card has 30 aliases and is from Connecticut where he has never lived. Alena Kagen was his lawyer to prove all of his citizenship fights and is now on the Supreme Court. Wow. Not one girlfriend has come forward to say what a great guy he was. Then our wonderful, worthless media continues to cover for this POS.

Personally, I think Gingrich is a very smart guy and could out debate the Telepromter-in-Chief any day of the week. But look where having great orators for president have gotten us so far. So, Gingrich's baggage and all the favors he will have to repay does bother me. So does Romney's flip flopping, liberal, moderate, BS. I have never given much thought to Ron Paul, I guess because the media and the establishment don't care for him and won't give him the time of day. However, I have been listening to him lately, and I believe, and apparently alot of others are coming around to his way of thinking. We are in a huge mess right now and we need somebody like Ron Paul in the White House. I do think Jethro Bodine would be better than Obuttwad, but I think the best of what we have is Ron Paul. I do consider myself a Tea Partier too and can't stand to see the media and a few of the fake Tea Party organizations trying to make real Tea Partiers think Gingrich is a Tea Party candidate. The only Tea Party candidate left in this race is Ron Paul.

Help save the country - Tea Party 2012 and beyond!!! This includes all races, local, state and federal. God Bless the USA!!!!

Seattle Indie - Palin suggested to ONLY South Carolina voters that they should vote for Newt "to extend the primary". It pays to fully comprehend what someone actually is saying.

DB:

Actually, since South Carolina, Palin has been ramping up her support of Gingrich. She is continually lobbying for him on her facebook page as well as in every interview that she has. Maybe before you "correct" the posts of others, it would be a good idea to get your facts straight.

SI

Obama has been declared ineligible to be on the ballot in Georgia because of his citizenship

If it's true, it just proves that a bunch of anti-American dirtbags have control of the state government in Georgia.

GOP: Once the Party of Lincoln, now the Party of Jim Crow.

I'm surprised none of these anti-American goofballs has called for Secession.

Obama has been declared ineligible to be on the ballot in Georgia because of his citizenship

On Easter Sunday, Christians around the world will celebrate the Resurrection of Christ.

while bigots in the Republican Party celebrate the resurrection of Jim Crow.

Obama has no baggage? Really? I wonder why? Maybe, because nobody knows where he is really from. That's kind of funny, huh? None of his college classmates can remember him. He won't release his college information.

Ooooohhh, look!!! A birther, a species noted for their small cranial capacity and thought to be extinct since 2011 when Obama long sought after, long-form birth certificate.

Listen to it's plaintive cry, "nobody knows where he is really from.", or "he won't release his [fill in the blanks]".

I wonder how this one survived so late into the winter. Must be the mild weather.

Oh how the Republicant's love their hate, bigotry and greed! OH, and they love their poster child Mitt Romney! Elect this guy and you can guarantee the end of the middle class (which today is actually "working class") and the rise of the Plutocrats to epic heights. I've been a long-time democrat and progressive supporting the rights of the (generally) uneducated working person struggling to survive while also being manipulated by big money to vote against their own interests (i.e. Republicans). However, it's come to the point where it is soooo obvious that Republicans are greedy rich old white men trying to screw the little guys that I won't feel sorry if Romney wins and finally destroys the middle class. The truth is my family does just fine under Republican tax policy... I just don't want to live in a country full of homeless people begging me for a buck. I suppose though that democracy demands that people get what they ask (vote) for!

"women . . . and are actually afforded all of the rights afforded you in the US Constitution."

This lie is precisely why you Democrat leftist apologists for abortion are such incorrigible hypocrites: all of those rights are systematically denied to every woman that comes into being before she is flushed into a biological waste container after being murdered by her mother and her mother's accomplices before that latent "woman" can be born.

It is illegal to destroy the EGGS of an endangered species of turtle. Thus you have no defense at the Last Judgment, you intellectual imposters! You have already condemned yourselves by admitting that a turtle EGG is a potential turtle, and the killing thereof does damage to the survival of the species.

If that argument is then denied in order that you may justify the killing of a human being with a beating heart,

you only prove the great lengths to which you will go to deceive yourselves. Even you know that you are killing human beings when you abort a child.

How can you hope to escape the damnation of hell?

How? Nevermind your sophist rationalizations for legalese mind games, with fraudulent human judges.

When you stand face to face with the Last Judgment, how will you do THAT?

With what argument will you defend yourselves against the MILLIONS OF VICTIMS that will be STANDING THERE FACE-TO-FACE WITH YOU to testity against you after the resurrection of the dead, WHICH WILL INCLUDE THEM?

Tell THEM that you had the sense to know it was wrong to kill an endangered turtle's egg, BUT THAT YOU COULDN'T SEE THE APPLICATION OF THAT REASONING TO A HUMAN BEING LIKE THE ONES THAT WILL BE STARING AT YOU THROUGH THEIR COMPLETELY INNOCENT EYES and seeing nothing other than the vile thing that you are.

Oh wow, I'm so sorry that I'm late to the party.

A sitting Judge in Georgia is hearing a case where a sitting President may not be eligible for the ballot based on his citizenship.

Don't you think that's HUGE news?

How come it's not getting any coverage in the mainstream media? Money?

I invite you all to see the hearing for yourself on youtube, if you can stand it.

Sure sure, I can hear it now, racism, tin foil hats, mothers basement.

Lols.

See the hearing for yourself in it's entirety. I trust you're minds are all strong enough to withstand any jedi mind tricks, or slanted right wing text on the screen? (there is right wing text on the screen in some places)

View. Review. Admit Obama Fails.

View the hearing, decide for yourself what ACTUALLY happened. PLEASE!

It's in 6 parts.

part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOcpn-E_JAY

part2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDOml8NqZqE

part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvIHMZmlwAg

part 4: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-CzIpm5vWQ

part 5: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-o2M4Pszv4&context=C33ca0dbADOEgsToPDskKOOsakDBcA9UQdDamuYmOV

part 6: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2OrGv7zKTM&context=C3f62039ADOEgsToPDskIJEUY9HeqHtuW_f4GLV75i

Responses:

Kyle, no disagreement. Like I said, I think he's a scumbag.

Dman, seriously, he volunteered to pay it, he didn't have to, look it up. Probably because he had some cushy fannie/freddie job lined up for millions.

John B. - We have spoken before. You are not somebody I feel is a worthy adversary. You are too emotional and less logic based than most. This can be a strength or a weakness, depending on how it is weilded by the user. In logical debates, it is an exploitable weakness. You say nothing that detracts or takes issue with what I am saying, although I'm sure you think that it does. Watch the tapes! (PS John, I'm sure you're life of emotion is much more fulfilling than a life of logice could ever be. Enjoy that!)

TheOvelord. - Lols at you. You have been sold a bill of goods. Your hatred makes you blind. Remove the blindfold! Reach out, touch things. SEE! THINK!

Commonsense I can't even type that with a straight face. Your Race Card has been declined. Do you have anything else you could use?

I personally recommend parts 4 and five, as they are especially damning to The President. But watch them all, enjoy!

Popcorn!

Look, an entire flock of Birthers!!!

Riddle me this, Bats@*tman -- NO ONE disputes that President Obama is the legitimate son of an American citizen, which would make him AN AMERICAN CITIZEN. So what's the point of your Birther paranoia?

dadel,

He was going to charge them $3000/seat for the hop from Orlando to West Palm. I would boycott that too!

Morning phancy - Wanna know what I think? Even if Romney takes Florida, the primary is not sewn up. It's only state 4 in the progression. There may be a lot of delegates in Florida, but there are still 46 more states that haven't voted yet. Discount Va for Newt, but the game is afoot still.

It appears as though the media is calling the entire nomination process for Romney, but they've been doing it since day one. There's not a person alive that can convince me that the press isn't left, and they shape things to their own liking when it comes to elections. Journalism is completely a sham in this country. It used to stand for something but today, they are a disgrace.

BB,

I must admit the Gingrich campaign has a lot of his supporters confused. He flames out at the debate and shoots himself in the foot with the press covering him. It is, now this is just my thinking, what I like to call the "Ted Kennedy" syndrome. Teddy had several chances to go for the presidency and would do something to sabotage his chances. Was this a psychological thing because of his brothers, I can't say. But Newt seems to have something that happens to him whenever he is almost to the finish line.

Just a thought to consider.

You are wise beyond your years phancy. You and I must be close to the same age group. I'm a little more outspoken but you have a tendency to bake your words with plenty of seasoning.

It appears that you may have struck a chord with the Ted thing. Maybe Newt isn't a finisher. In construction that's ok, but not in politics. I was hoping for a more resolute Newt this time, but it's truly possible he can't change his spots. Newt has the potential, but maybe not the deep seated inner desire. I guess we'll see.

BB

Thank you for your kind words. I do believe we are probably in the same age bracket (although being a woman, I am staying 29 forever!)

I have been spending more and more time reading and thinking about this election. This, to me, is NOT the big pivotal election that many seem to think. I believe 2016 is the big one. There is still too much fallout on the worldwide recession and we need to see how it plays out. The European Union, China, India are people to watch. What will happen with Iran. Maybe by 2016 we will start to realize how inter-connected we all are, and that will influence elections. Maybe even change the two parties.

heh what is it with 29? My mother is fixin to turn 29 for the 30th time on 13 Feb lol

Myself I choose 30 it's a nice even number, I'll be 30 for the 7th time come Aug.

I also agree with you that 2016 is going to be a biggie.

That's OK phancy - You stay 29 forever. I'm sure Mr. phancy likes it that way. Although... being a man, I know that women in their 40's to 50's awaken to a different outlook. We won't go into that though... I am, after all, very opinionated... LOL.

Whatever, the outcome of this election may or may not hopscotch the two parties. If Obama does in fact win, 2016 will most definitely be a defining election. I wonder if they chose the 4 year election cycle based on leap years to give the candidates 1 extra day to campaign... LOL.

My dear mother, once she reached a certain age, decided that she would start deducting one year from her age, then deducting a year from mine! (Always have loved that woman)

I just see so many changes happening so fast in the world that I feel this election is almost a caretaker type of election. 2016 is when the time to see which candidates and party is willing and able to really move in the 21st century.

You know, for a Sunday afternoon I am being pretty philosophical. Goodness, what is up with that?

You've been egged on... LOL. We all have those moments... when our brains present outreaching and deeper meaning ideas. The funny thing is, we can't control when those times occur. Sometimes I try to dig deep and all I come up on is rocks. Other times, it clicks and good dark soil comes out. Maybe it's what we eat. Last night's dinner may have produced in you some great thinking points. Wasn't it scrooge who said to the 1st ghost... "you may be a fragment of an underdone potato?" What did you eat last night? LOL!

Romney has no biz running for presidentas the man is much too out of touch with the needs of the people. And on top of this he is only running to fulfill His daddy's wishes and agenda and that is a very poor reason to run be elected as The President of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

haven't we had enough presidents in the past 20 years running for presdient to fulfill Daddy's wishes---actually correction in Bush's case it was to fulfill Mommy's wishes and because he was so out of touch with the majority of people BUSH failed the people miserably. Do we need another out of touch wealthy man as Commander in Chief???

Sorry Mitt but no you cannot lead a country from Golf Club!

BB

Yesterday was hot dogs and fig newtons (I kid you not, fig newtons). However, today's Sunday dinner was blackened mahi mahi with rice pilaf and yeast rolls. And I plan on baking a cake later today.

Silly.......................................isn't that what we have now?????

Nice phancy... Last night I cooked a pork picnic leg (not smoked) in the crock pot along with diced tomato, diced zuchinni, diced green pepper and diced onion. I let it cook for 6 hours to get it nice and tender. I served it over rice. I tend to undersalt my food. I cook like this and I have dinner for 4 nights. Last week it was chili. I do all sorts of things in my crock pot. It's so easy. After the prep, all it does is cook. I'll break up the week with various things.

Did you blacken the fish?

There's only one way to judge who best fits the role of president and it's this. What did your parents teach you about values? Did they teach you to play fair? Do your fair share? Share your belongings with others? Or did they teach you to cheat, let others pull the load and to hoard what you own?

The key operative in this election is the reversal of fine old American values taught to us by our parents. No matter how much the greedheads try to invoke the goodness of their greed, it won't happen. No matter how much politicians act in bias fashion for one group of Americans over all others, it is too transparent to ignore. No matter how much money mighty moguls pour into our campaigns, they still must contend with "We The People". Because they know to continue to ignore the great unwashed masses can lead to mob rule, the only thing they ever live in fear of.

In the privacy of that voting booth, we are never more powerful as Americans. Vote with the values your parents taught you and you'll never go wrong.

BB

I sure did. My own pilaf recipe too. (I wanted fried grits and fried green tomatoes - but Mr. phinephancy just won't go there with me)

A carmel/apple cake is my big project for tonight.

phancy

That's great! While I love tomatoes, I don't like them fried... Eggplant, yes, tomatoes, not so much. I haven't had a cake since Christmas. I don't bake them only for myself... cuz that means I gotta eat it all by myself too...

I was hoping to head back into Florida this week, but I'm still not sure when I will be doing that. The project still has a couple of things that need to be finished up and it doesn't look like they will be taken care of until we receive some specialty underground water pipe. I wanted to spend some time at home before going to my next assignment.

WE t C, who cares, except for you if Newt is Pissed off? Just what makes you think Mitt, the flip or is it the flop, would win in Nov, with or without the Newt hurting him? Really, do you really know how the average person in this country thinks?

Your circle of people maybe all for a GOPer/tea bagger in the White House. I can understand that, but I am asking you, plain and simple, do you know how people outside of your circle really thinks? My circle of moderates haven't made up our minds yet, but we all agree the clowns that are running against Obama are just that, clowns.

Why are you giving Obama a second term? Believe it or not, unless you come up with a real viable person, your toast. You don't have to believe me, nor does anyone else. I am just stating what you are stating, from the info of your little circle, and my little circle. Get out of that circle, and ask other people. It might surprise you. And yes, I have done that, and right now, Obama will win hands down with the clowns you got running against him.

do you really know how the average person in this country thinks?

Yes, I am an average person in this country. And poll after poll shows most of Obama's policies when looked at without spin (like socialism, obamacare) rank in the 60% range or greater.

My circle of moderates haven't made up our minds yet

If your circle were really moderate they would LOVE Obama, almost every policy he has is moderate by defintion, coming from a real progressive I know.

Why are you giving Obama a second term?

Because of the choices I think he has earned it, he may be a moderate but at least he is a moderate left leaner, not some nut job from the right.

Well, Obama's policies get a 60% without spin, and the tea party policies get a 90% without spin (balanced budget, equality, tax reform, etc.). I would say that Obama is behind then.

What?

Balancing the budget isn't a policy. How you balance the budget is.

So show me how the tea party wants to balance the budget and we'll see if your "fuzzy" math holds up.

Tax reform? Obama's ideas on tax reform (equality and fairness) far out poll tax cuts for corporations, nice spin though.

As for equality, well I am glad the tea party supports Gay marriage and the repeal of DADT, good we agree on something.

Balancing the budget is policy. Should I say be fiscally responsible? Paying for what you spend? Having a surplus? Running massive deficits is policy as well. As far as balancing the budget. How about this. If you cut federal spending Clinton levels, we will compromise and get rid of the Bush tax cuts, (even though that would be a huge burden on the poor and middle class). I would bet that would get a 90% vote from tea party members. Obama doesn't have any ideas on tax reform. He talks about it equity and fairness, but he doesn't follow through on anything. It is simply political rhetoric to get votes. Heck, most of the deductions that the corporations and rich are taking right now were written by democrats. In fact, Obama has proposed many difference tax cuts for corporations. The difference is that republicans want a fair and equal tax system without loopholes, while the democrats want lots of loopholes so they can dictate policy. As for Gay marriage and DADT, social issues are beliefs and not based on logic, on either side.

As for Gay marriage and DADT, social issues are beliefs and not based on logic, on either side.

You said the tea party is for equality, so answer the question. Do you support equality for all or just straight people?

How we balance the budget is policy, simply wanting it balanced is not. Returning our country to pre-Reagan ideal of fairness and opportunity would balance the budget.

We could be European about it (like Romney and Newt) and cut, cut, cut...but then we would see stagnation in our economy like Ireland and England

Or we could do what Clinton did, and Obama is trying to do and use use the revenue side to spur re-investment and expansion of the economy here at home. Thats policy...

I find this panel very narrow minded. I am so sick and tired of the Mitt Attacks. What are you all jealous of Mitts wealth? If so then why dont you all do something with your lives and better yourself like get a better education and work hard. Mitt worked hard for his money like Obama and all the other rich Politicians from the Democrat/GOP. I DONT SEE ANY POOR PEOPLE CREATING JOBS OR HIRING PEOPLE. OBAMA NEVER CREATED A JOB OR RAN A BUSINESS. Second Newt is a Washington insider and I for one am so tired of the same old politicians being put back into office, thats why this country is screwed up. USA needs a outsider who is business smarts. Not some cheat politician who has no morals or values or integrity like Newt. I wouldnt tust Newt as far as I see him and that goes for Obama who lies and feeds voters BS . Obama and Newt are more progressive then Mitt. I rather vote for someone who is in the middle then someone who is to far to the left or right.

Depends what you meant by equal. Take gay marriage. Right now the law is equal. You are allowed to marry anyone you want of the opposite sex, as long as they are not married. It applies equally to everyone. As far as DADT, that is a logistics issue in my mind. I think we would all agree that it would be wrong to have these teenage men and women share the same barracks and showers because of the uncomfortable situation it could create. If you place a gay person in the same barracks with a bunch of strait individuals, are we not creating the same issue? If they had a barracks all to themselves, it wouldn't be as much of a problem in my mind (but that could create other problems). Are you for affirmative action?

You are right, we could do what Clinton did.......cut, cut, cut. I would love to see that. Spending went way down under him and he even passed a few tax cuts. The Europeans have figured out what has to be done much faster than us. The revenues are not the problem (we are set to have the largest revenue in history this next year), it is the spending and the promises that are made. We simply cannot afford this. It is difficult to take right now, but it protects the future. The deficit spending is going to destroy the future to ease our pain right now. Just like a family might have to cut eating out, a vacation, lattes at starbucks, maybe even cable and cell phones if they have problems. It hurts, but it best for the family in the long run. Keeping everything the same and buying it with the credit card could destroy the future though.

Clinton was good. Obama is no Clinton. The facts are this as stated in the article:

55 percent -- said they wanted the nomination fight to be over quickly. Forty-three percent said they would like to see someone else run; just 52 percent said they were satisfied with the current crop of candidates.

What this is actually says, using plain English, is that the GOP voters want this obligatory process over now so that Romney can actually focus on Obama. Yes, the sooner Romney starts the real campaign the sooner the people of America will see the difference between a man that ran corporations and one that never held any job in the working sector.

OBAMA NEVER CREATED A JOB OR RAN A BUSINESS.

Bush did and we saw how that turned out...

Depends what you meant by equal.

It means equal dude, if you want to marry another free citizen of this country you can. By putting gender requirements on it it makes it by definition UNequal. So you are NOT for freedom and equality, cool that your belief, but don't pretend to be.

The Europeans have figured out what has to be done much faster than us

Right, and the economies that did that (cut, cut, cut) are stagnant and in the crapper, that's what you want? You are right we can't afford this, if by "this" you mean unfunded medicare prescription mandates, 2 wars of choice and the lowest top tax rates in 100 years...

What are you all jealous of Mitts wealth?

For the record, not jealous of Willards wealth. Just disgusted that he doesn't think he needs to pay back the country that provided him the opportunity to make that wealth. I am upset that he thinks he can run for president and be so unpatriotic he protects his money in Swiss bank accounts and the Cayman islands yet wants to raise middle class taxes.

Yes their economies are in the crapper, but they are building a foundation for the future. Simply ignoring the problems and borrowing more debt doesn't fix anything. How much longer until people refuse to loan the US money without much higher interest rates. Use some logic and reasoning. We do not want to cut spending to get out of this mess. That doesn't work. We need to cut spending so we don't created the next mess. You have a point with the wars, but the medicare thing is a stupid point, unless you think the democrats are even worse. They complained that Bush didn't spend enough. We had Bush bad and democrats worse. Bush was hammered by conservatives on that. We also have the lowest bottom tax rate in the last 100 years, and the lowest middle rate.

As far as the equal thing goes, the law applies to everyone. And you I can't marry any free citizen I want. I can't marry any males, I can't marry anyone under 16 and I can't marry anyone who is already married. The law is applied equally to everyone.

We the corporations? Bush made mistakes but at least gas prices and food prices were alot better for us middle class then Obama. At least Bush didnt ram down our throats Obamacare which Obama lies on that. Our premiums all went up and now we are paying the price for it. Obama keeps on spending our tax money on foolish green energy programs that cost us $$$$$$$$$$$$ which have failed. Bush was wrong on Iraq I agree but he was alot better then Obama. To be spiteful I hope the gas price rises to over $4.00 which food price will go up even higher and it will be under this BS PRESIDENTS WATCH. I WILL LAUGH MY BUTT OFF TO YOU OBAMA LOVERS.

I can't marry any males, I can't marry anyone under 16 and I can't marry anyone who is already married. The law is applied equally to everyone.

Seriously, by putting in gender restrictions the laws are no longer equal. All MEN can vote used to the law, it applied to all men so it was equal, except women couldn't vote. Just admit you're a hypocrite and move on, you want to control the behavior of consenting adults that is NOT equality no matter how you spin it. Fine, thats your belief just don't pretend it is equality.

Why can't we marry married people, who gave the government the right to control adult behaviors? Can a someone enter into a contract with two other people who already entered into a contract?

Minors are not free citizens, they can't vote, can't serve, can't sign legal contracts which is what marriage is. So by talking about minors that makes me think two things, one you don't understand citizenship and freedom of adults, and two you are thinking about marrying 16 year olds... ewww.

I hope the gas price rises to over $4.00

I do too, the real price of gas should be much higher, demand will decrease and alternative markets will open up, surprised you don't support the free market. Gas prices are artificially low due to constant corporate welfare and oil subsidies you and I are paying for. I would much rather feed some poor children with foodstamps than subsidize a company who is knowingly destroying our environment. You?

I WILL LAUGH MY BUTT OFF TO YOU OBAMA LOVERS.

Obviously you lack reading comprehension skills, I do not love Obama as stated numerous times. He has been way too moderate and instituted or continued too many republican polices (see tax rates) for this country to progress into this century. BUT, he is sure as he!! better than any republican option.

We are the corporations said: If your circle were really moderate they would LOVE Obama, almost every policy he has is moderate by defintion, coming from a real progressive I know.

Um, do you really believe Obama's policy's are moderate by definition? Do you think the stimulus was moderate? Let me assure you, it wasn't. Bail-outs aren't moderate either. Using executive priviledge to initiate the Dream Act isn't moderate at all.

Calling Oblama moderate is such a joke. Look at his first 2 years with the Dem congress. Just imagine how much further left he will jump in a second term when he doesn't have to worry about getting the independents for re-election.

piegan,

To be spiteful I hope the gas price rises to over $4.00 which food price will go up even higher and it will be under this BS PRESIDENTS WATCH. I WILL LAUGH MY BUTT OFF TO YOU OBAMA LOVERS.

So to be spiteful, you want America to fail just to unseat the president?? you wonder why America is going down in a basket... the teapublican mentality. Cut of face to spite your nose. How foolish.

You teapublicans are just somewhat not thinking sometimes. ala.. our "#1 job is to make Obama a 1 term president" how's that working out for you turtle-face, i mean Mcconnell, I mean Piegan?

Brian and Jack,

Quick civics lesson for you:

Stimulus was 40% tax cuts which is what Bush did when he sent us all checks 12 months earlier. Real liberalism would have been all direct spending on infrastructure, education and the commons (parks, libraries etc) like FDR did. Obama's stimulus was a compromise and too small, the definition of moderate.

Tax reform was the extension of Bush's tax cuts, and a payroll reduction that limits the amount put into the SS fund. Not really progressive, actually quite republican as they loathe public SS trust. Moderate

Healthcare reform was based on the republican idea of personal responsibility and modeled after Romeny's reform which itself was based on a republican bill proposed in 1993 to counter Clinton's employer mandate. Socialism would be single payer (which I support), liberal would have been the public option, moderate is the Individual/employer mandate and regressive would be turning it over to the states so we can have a race to the bottom like credit card laws.

Repealing DADT wasn't done without a military impact study, in other words it was done with moderation. Progressives would have just axed the whole idea and been truly free. We still don't allow same sex marriage which Obama is against, real moderate.

Wars, torture, secret prisons, and Patriot act all still in effect...moderate

Wall street reform weak and ineffective as it doesn't include a privately funded bailout account because of moderation

Dream Act is of course very moderate, even Reagan granted straight amnesty for 3 million illegals, all the dream act does is allow children who have been raised citizens the chance to prove they can become citizens without returning to a country they don't remember...moderate

Shall I keep going or do you want to provide some evidence to back up your claims that he is liberal much less socialist which he is most definitely NOT

When you are too gutless to even present a budget due to the insane amount of big government spending - You are a liberal.

When you present a budget that is absolutely so far detached from reality that you cannot garner one vote from your own party - You are a radical socialist.

We the corporations: When all else fails, revert back to Bush. That wasn't even a good deflection.

I commented on your remark about moderation. You come back to me with Bush stories? I'm not playing that game. Defend Obama with his, in your opinion, acts of moderation. If you can't, then the obvious truth is, Obama isn't a moderate.

Let me add one for good measure: Adding $7 trillion to the national debt in 3 years. How in heavens name is that moderate?

Tunde Akins- You got it bro, I feel this country will never get better as long as stupid voters keep voting for these BS Presidents that feed YA garbage. Hey, to all of you VOTERS hows your HOPE AND CHANGE?

Bob and Brian,

Even when presented with an actual argument you continue keep your cheetoh covered little fingers in your ears singing la-la-la...real mature.

We the corporations: When all else fails, revert back to Bush. That wasn't even a good deflection.

Show me where I blamed bush? Referencing Bush to give you context about moderation is not blaming, I know its hard to actually think about something but you should try.

Defend Obama with his, in your opinion, acts of moderation. If you can't, then the obvious truth is, Obama isn't a moderate.

Uhhh, if you had an attention span or reading ability longer than 1 sentence you would see I did

Let me add one for good measure: Adding $7 trillion to the national debt in 3 years. How in heavens name is that moderate?

Seriously?

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo5.htm

Took office debt was $11 trillion, now almost $15 trillion. Yes its a problem, yes we need to do something about it, yes the tax:gdp ratio is the lowest in 70 years....hmmm

But its obvious you can't read, can't form a coherent argument to justify your hate, and can't even count (15-11 is 7?) so I am sure there are some muslims you can go harass somewhere where facts don't matter.

We the corporations, maybe you have some facts skewed. Obama entered and the debt was $10 trillion. He just requested another $1.2 trillion. We are at $15.8 trillion now. Irregardless, he has borrowed the most money of any president, in the shortest time. That's not moderate, that's insane! He isn't for reducing the size of government, in fact he want's government to get larger... and it will if Obamacare kicks in. That isn't moderate. That too is insane.

We can see you slurp Obama, but you really need to tell the truth. Your attention span is only centered on Obama... anyone challenging you automatically becomes the target of your foul mouth and irrational behavior. You still haven't answered the charge that Obama is a moderate.

Do you know why? Because YOU CAN'T. He's not a moderate, has never been a moderate and will not turn into one. Now stick that up your attention span.

Brianb,

You still haven't answered the charge that Obama is a moderate.

Wow, wow wow, how clear can "we the corporation" be in post 3.18.. and you still ask the same question... you know you didn't even address the post 3.18, which he factually tells you why Obama has been a moderate.... when he says "Even when presented with an actual argument you continue keep your cheetoh covered little fingers in your ears singing la-la-la...real mature"... you then very well proved him right with your very next post.... wow, just wow. do not quit your day job, sir....

We,

Cheetoh?

Anyway ...

"yes we need to do something about it, yes the tax:gdp ratio is the lowest in 70 years....hmmm"

Too stupid to know the difference to know the difference between tax and revenue ... revenue as a per centage of GDP?

Regardless, Obama's 10% difference between revenue and spending as a percentage of GDP is the worst since funding WW II.

Something needs to be done? Yea .... get rid of the big spending socialist / statist in office and let the economy grow.

Obama has about 5 trillion to debt so far and is asking for another 1.2 trillion. Most insane spending in history.

I could waste my time ripping your little "civics" lesson to pieces but the botton line is that the radical Obama is creating a socialistic / Eurpean style welfare state.

The amount of money handed out in direct payments to individuals has increased 600 billion / 32% under Obama and with his insane budget .... if it would have passed .... would have added another 500 billion by 2016 -WHERE IT WOULD ACCOUNT FOR 2/3 OF OF ALL FEDERAL SPENDING!

According to the Census Bureau, 49% of homes now have at least one person on federal benefits!

More than 46 million Americans are on food stamps - UP 44% SINCE OBAMA TOOK OFFICE!

Corporate welfare has exploded .... quadrupled in the energy sector alone!

And you call Obama a moderate ... what an insipid imbecile.

BrianB...You want to try and explain why out of 7 Big Business who helped themselves to TARP only 2, Citigroup and Bank of America paid back their loans by 2009? You want to explain why huge bonuses were given to CEOs who took over $180 billion in TARP funding?

Example: in 2009, a $10.5 million package was approved for Robert Benmosche of AIG, a TARP recipient, which also included $3 million in cash. It was President Obama whose ARRA put a cap on the amount these pigs could get in salary if the government bailed their companies out. It was TARP under Bush that ignored all of these payments of huge bonuses, salary increases and perks. NOW....make a comparison.

We the corporations?

I used to come here and argue logic and facts with some of the people here about a year ago... until I quickly realized how fruitless that can be... it just doesn't make sense... it's sorta like a family member I have who's a republican - you tell them facts about politics and all that comes out of their mouth is the same old tired republican talking points with zero facts or logic - sometimes I look at them and wonder to myself "did you just listen to what I said?", and then I stomach myself to realize the answer is a big fat no...that's sad and frustrating that a lot of Americans don't care about America or what's happening to our political system. When you talk debt, over 90% of Americans do not know what it is or how we got here.... more than 50% don't know the difference between debts and deficits.

What you have to come to the conclusion is that you can't just show them the light... you get to a place where there is some peace... some people for whatever reason have decided that using their cranium/mind is just not for them - but rather regurgitate what they heard somewhere else - whether based on facts or not - it does not matter to them.

I could waste my time ripping your little "civics" lesson to pieces but the botton line is that the radical Obama is creating a socialistic / Eurpean style welfare state

Go ahead and try, every factless argument begins and ends with "i could waste my time but...." good luck

More than 46 million Americans are on food stamps - UP 44% SINCE OBAMA TOOK OFFICE!

Yes, because a result of trickle down economics is an ever growing lower class, after the disastrous 10 years and the increase in poor people I would expect foodstamps to go up and I for one support feeding hungry children, sorta wierd you don't.

And you call Obama a moderate ... what an insipid imbecile.

Not only do I call him that, but I support it with actual history and you come back with wanting poor kids to starve and insults...really who is the imbecile.

But by all means show me where Obama has been an actual Liberal, or even remotely socialist. I am still waiting?????

Most Americans will refuse to work to exist to make the rich richer and exist to work so money only flows upward. Is there anything more ridiculous than that in a democracy? If only the 1% have a shot at opportunity, how is that fair?

Their money isn't theirs if they got it from consumers, employees or taxpayers. That's money earned through the hard work, time, money and efforts of others. This is the thing the 1% want you to forget as you go through your meager existences working till you drop while they erode your paycheck to a barely living wage.

If you question nothing else in this next decade, question how much of the taxes you pay benefit the rich and Big Business and not you. Remind yourselves it is NOT your responsibility to help in any way Big Businesses to be eternally profitable. Profit is their responsibility. Not ours.

Cut them off of the landfill of tax breaks and let them do what they tell us to do: Earn it on their own without our tax dollars helping them stuff their bank accounts.

ewent - you're delusional. If Obama put a cap on the amount of money those who used TARP funds CEO's and executives could make, why then did they claim an average of $5 million in salaries last year? AIG's CEO took $10 million. Look it up. Your hero says and does things he never enforces. Some leader. Obama's salary cap was $500K annual salary AND bonus.

Tunde - 3.18 didn't show anything moderate. So wow, wow, wow, wow back to you.

Sheessh ..... Obama, as a senator, was graded left of the self avowed socialist Bernie Sanders in 2007 and you call him a moderate?

Of course he would have never have been elected as that, moved to the center to get elected and has governed as socialist / statist since then enacting the greatest entitlement in US history, taking over the auto business, taking over college loans among many things. Has circumvented the will of the people and usurped Congress by executive fiat from implementing cap and trade to immigration and has crippled business with massive regulations - 5,230 pages of Dodd-Frank alone.

More Americans dependent on government than anytime in history ... exactly as he wants.

Anyway, stick your head back in your colon and have a good day.

Graded left of Bernie Sanders by whom, Bob? Without that little detail your just yapping.

And as far as Dodd-Frank is concerned, the entire economy crashed because deregulation turned Wall Street into a giant casino. Do you really think some return to common sense regulation of this important industry isn't warranted?

College loans? Private lenders were making profit on business for which the American tax payer held all the risk...does that seem right?

Cap and trade? Since WHEN do we have cap and trade?

Bob: you know, hysterics don't change the facts: Anyone who tries to seriously claim that the guy who helped rescue the most traditonal institutions in the US from the financial brinkmanship of the Bush debacle is a "socialist" either doesn't know what a socialist is or is just a completely reactionary wing nut. (I'm talking wall street and the major banks, not to mention the auto industry.) This is why you are losing independents, losing moderates, and just plain losing: it is clear you have none, nada, no, zip ideas...only obfuscation, ridiculous charges, fear and hate as weapons.

To ewent:

You forgot JP Morgan Chase. Their early TARP repayment cost Chase $1.1 billion causing the 2009 2nd quarter dividend to stock holders to drop $0.27 per share and Chase didn't even need the money. Google Jamie Dimon TARP fox business.

.

Seattle Indie - Palin suggested to ONLY South Carolina voters that they should vote for Newt "to extend the primary". It pays to fully comprehend what someone actually is saying.

DB:

Actually, since South Carolina, Palin has been ramping up her support of Gingrich. She is continually lobbying for him on her facebook page as well as in every interview that she has. Maybe before you "correct" the posts of others, it would be a good idea to get your facts straight.

SI

I watched every GOP debate to date. I watched the Jacksonville debate live and have re-watched it twice; I’ve followed each candidate closely and watched their actions rather than words, prior to posting my thoughts here. Fundamentally, I see the top two contenders as Romney and Gingrich; with only Mitt Romney as the right choice; and here is why.

I have complete respect for Ron Paul. However, he comes across as a "Rambler"; he doesn't stay on point. The Obama Campaign would decimate Ron Paul as old, senile and "over the hill". I would hate to see that happen to Ron Paul. He is a fine Congressman, and has given much over the decades to this country. Additionally, the real issue with Ron Paul is he is two "Black and White"; this is not a racial issue. It is a monetary issue. Yes, America has huge problems that need to be addressed beginning with a 16+ Trillion Dollar National Debt. Ron Paul hasn't learned to pick his battles. He would cut everything at once nationally and internationally to correct the issues. This would send shockwaves through the nation and our international allies depending on America's strength. Ron Paul's thoughts on changing Washington and protecting the Constitution are wonderful. My worry is he would try to change too much too fast; and do more harm than good. No... Realistically, Ron Paul would make a wonderful Presidential Advisor; or even a strong Vice President to be used as an alternative/economic decision making force. But, Ron Paul is not the person to have the final Presidential decision making power.

Rick Santorum, where to begin... Rick Santorum is a candidate of integrity... I get that. Rick Santorum believes passionately in his platform. I get that. However, Rick Santorum is too "green" in the Political Arena still. Why? He can't control his emotions. Obama would eat him for lunch in a debate, when Rick Santorum allowed his anger and frustration to get the best of him. He showed that in South Carolina, he showed that in Iowa, he showed that in New Hampshire and now, in Jacksonville, Florida. Rick Santorum came across angry and frustrated in the Jacksonville debate. This fact underscored his message. Rick Santorum doesn't have the political and financial campaign to take Barack Obama on and that would lead to an easy win by Barack Obama. I believe Rick Santorum needs a little more mentoring in the political arena and he will be a GOP force to be reckoned with in the future. But, this is not his time or his election. I believe prior primaries and the polls are showing that; he needs to stand back and bow out. This is not his fight anymore.

Newt Gingrich... I find him an oxymoron. I don't know which Newt to believe today. The other candidates were correct regarding Newt's platform. He does go to each state and tell the constituents there exactly what they want to hear to win votes. I've seen it in the media, in newspapers, in interviews, etc. This begs the question: What length and what promises would Newt Gingrich go to for the GOP Nomination and Presidency, and once secured would he make good on promises, or would we have another "empty promise Obama" on our hands? What I find most disturbing about Newt Gringrich is two things:

a) He made such a fuss regarding Romney releasing his tax returns, which effectively showed about 40% in taxes and charity donations. I can live with that. However, Newt Gringrich only released one year of his personal income tax return. He didn't release the two returns for his holdings companies, in which he is the main stockholder, owner. CNN has reported Newt Gingrich's combined wealth makes him much wealthier than Romney. Plus, Gingrich's campaign is bankrolled by Sheldon Adelson, the 8th Richest

Man in the US, a Las Vegas Casino Magnate. How can Gingrich say is for the GOP working poor when his actions show he is the Gaming Industry's puppet?

b) Newt Gingrich talked about faith in God during the Jacksonville, Florida Debate. Doesn't faith in God also go to a man's integrity? Newt Gingrich has run a hideous under the table smear campaign on Mitt Romney's faith. Yes, I have family who live in South Carolina, Newt Gingrich talked Highway repair to the media and spread "faith poison" at his outdoor events. I find this double standard disquieting. Newt Gingrich was hitting South Carolina "bible Thumper" fears to secure the win. This brings us back to Newt Gringrich's integrity... This man has been married, what 3 times? Okay, a man makes mistakes; I don't hold that against him. What I find disconcerting is the fact, he had an affair for years with his then mistress Calista, told his ex-wife to deal with it or he would divorce her. No, Newt Gingrich didn't have an open marriage with his former wife, to have an open marriage both need to be having an affair. That is something only Newt Gingrich was doing with Calista. Newt Gingrich divorced his former wife, and married Calista. I am happy he has found a companion he can finally be content with. However, this whole scenario raises an integrity issue in my mind. If a man can't be trusted to respect the vows of marriage he took; how can Newt Gingrich be expected to hold the Oath of the Presidency with any degree of trust?

Overall, there is more to Newt Gingrich than meets the eye and it doesn't all appear to be good news. One must remember Newt was a politician, Washington Advisor/Lobbyist/what ever and Speaker of the House for what 30 years. Newt Gingrich is part of the Washington problem that the country faces today. He didn't always remain loyal to the GOP party and he was censored as Speaker of the House. It doesn't matter if he challenged that and overcame it; the fact his party had to do that in the first place speaks volumes... In recent years, Newt Gingrich has sided with Nancy Pelosi on Obama policies. It has been reported since the Iowa debates, that Nancy Pelosi has information on Newt Gingrich's years as speaker, which will be used as an "October Surprise" in the Obama Campaign if Newt wins the GOP nomination. However, what is most troubling is the Obama Campaign and Obama Supported PAC Campaign has been running Pro-Gingrich/Anti-Romney ads in Florida to assist Gingrich's campaign. I find these troubling two ways: the Democrats are attempting to manipulate the outcome of the GOP nomination in their favor; and, the Obama Campaign sees Romney as the larger threat to re-election plans... No, when everything is weighed and balanced. I couldn't sleep well at night with Newt Gingrich as the GOP Nominated Candidate or potential President.

This brings me to the final GOP Candidate... Mitt Romney... I've gone back and forth several times over this. However, I come back to one undeniable fact... Romney has integrity... Something we are seriously lacking in Barack Obama. I have sat back and watched this man endure double standards that the other candidates haven't endured. I have watched this man attacked because of his faith, his hard work and earning a living, his integrity, etc. the list goes on. Mitt Romney has stood tall, with resolve and refused to "cow to pressure". I find that remarkable. On the issue of faith, Mitt Romney has shown more integrity than Barack Obama. Why? You want to know the difference between Obama and Romney. Romney has never hid from his beliefs, nor changed his beliefs to win elections. Romney has openly stated to the world "This is who I am, and what I believe"; now let's get back to work."

Obama on the other hand claims to be a "Christian"; however, his actions and foreign loans to Muslim nations speak quite differently. Obama openly announced to Egyptian Foreign Minister Gheiet in June 2010, that he was a practicing Muslim. This interview announcement was carried by many Middle East and European news media; it was just American News Media that downplayed and didn’t report these statements by Obama. Personally, a Muslim President holds no terror for me. What I find reprehensible, is the lying to the nation and Obama's own Democratic Party members. Why? Being a Muslim wouldn't have won Obama the White House. Not after 9/11 and not after Saddam Hussein and Bin Laden. Anyone who thinks differently is kidding themselves or living in denial. What does this say about Obama's character?

Romney has been married to the same woman for what, 30-40 years. This proves Romney can finish what he starts. Washington is a mess and throwing a lifetime politician as Gingrich, back into the mix, won't change a thing. Sure, Mitt Romney made a few political mistakes along the way, which is the learning process. The difference between Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich... Mitt admits his mistakes, learned from them and moved on positively. We need a Leader that is strong; firm; ethical; faith based; understands how the economy works to get America back on the right track; fair minded and will honor our Constitution, the way the Constitution deserves to be honored; and isn't a lifelong Washington Bureaucracy Politician. Surprisingly, at the beginning of these debates, I thought Gingrich or Perry would be my choice.

However, I now understand why the Obama Campaign and Democratic Party don't want a Presidential Debate "Showdown" with Mitt Romney. Mitt Romney is the one candidate that can call Obama out; and show Obama to be the "Smoke and Mirror" President that he is. Gringrich has too much baggage, Santorum is still too green, and Paul is just too all over the place. No, “I don’t want for more years of President Obama promising “Change” and the only real thing changing is the increased National Debt. This election comes down to two things, folks: (a) we are at the edge of an economic abyss, do we continue down Obama’s path and become a 2^nd world nation whose citizen’s are dependent upon the government for everything. (b) Do we keep our Declaration of Independence and Constitution or allow Obama’s judges and his governmental control policies to shred what residual personal freedoms we have?

It is time for America to take America back!…. It's time to get behind Mitt Romney, folks!

A hamster could do better

4 million jobs created? That is some fuzzy math.

Rob,

So you're saying Republicans aren't smarter than a hamster? Cause they totally trashed the economy...

Put,

Prove me wrong then, find the numbers and math that isn't...22 straight months of job growth with the last 8 over 200,000...go ahead

We....As yourself this. Unemployment started at about 7% with Obama. If he created 4 million jobs since he took office, wouldn't unemployment be lower than 7%? Use some logic. How could have have created 4 million jobs and have unemployment higher than when he started?

Unemployment started at about 7% with Obama.

I should stop talking to you right here because your lack of knowledge is quite funny. The unemployment rate in February 2009 (Obamas first full month) was already 8.1% and rising. January 2009 LOST 750,000 jobs and has decreased to 0 and begun to grow up to and including today...if you can read a graph here you go

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_11/026490.php

How could have have created 4 million jobs and have unemployment higher than when he started?

If you can't answer that yourself you have NO reason to lecture anyone about math

The number of people eligible to be counted as unemployed is growing faster than the growth of the number of people employed. Even with 4 million new jobs created, the ratio isn't getting better. Obama's policies can't reasonably be blamed for the trend which was created for him by GRAMM-LEACH-BLILEY(R) and Goldman Sachs.

So in Obama's first month, he lost 750,000 jobs and it decreased to 0. I will give you that. Even if it was 8.1 at the end of February, unemployment is still larger than that. It is statistically impossible for 4 million jobs to be created and have unemployment increase to even 8.2%. (Unless we had a massive amount of population growth, which didn't happen).

Here add these up. I bet you don't get 4 million created from January 2009 til today. You also might want to note that since the republicans took the house in 2011 it has been pretty positive. Much, much better than full democrat control of the prior two years. In fact over the past 20 years, the worst 2 were when democrats had full control.

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

since the republicans took the house in 2011 it has been pretty positive

Silly tea drinker...Do you really think reading the constitution helped the economy? Do you think economies turn around in 1 month? Any sane person understands that the polices (see stimulus) take time especially fiscal policies. You want to give credit for something starting day 1...ok then. Since day 1 of Obama's term we have 4 million more jobs than the last day of Bush's.

We.....it simply isn't true that we have 4 million more jobs than Obama's day 1. Look at the facts please. I know that is often difficult for some people. If you look at the non farm payrolls from the BLS in the link provided above, you will see that we lost 1 million jobs since March of 2009, one month into Obama's presidency, or are you going to dispute the BLS and say that they are 5 million jobs off.

Taken from

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 200,000 in December. Over the past 12 months,
nonfarm payroll employment has risen by 1.6 million.

Thats 12 months...imagine 3 years ago today we were LOSING 750,000 a MONTH thanks to republican trickle down, tax cut and spend policies.

BWAHAHAHA!

Arguing over numbers? Has any one looked at the latest GDP?

Fact is, President Obama IS doing a good job - particularly considering the obstruction he has faced from a lazy, do nothing Congress, and in comparison with the eight years before him. True history & facts - don't lie.

That is the domestic front; lets throw in foreign policies/accomplishments too and it appears CLEAR that President Obama is doing pretty well in his position as Head-Of-State.

Now, in the recent SOTU address, he asked for co-operation and support from citizens to continue the positive trend. Are any on here unwilling to do that and rather HARM America instead?

Speak up.... display YOUR patriotism (or lack thereof.)

Putting America First...Which "America"? The richest 1% America? The Big Business profit protected by Republicans America?

Right wingers are growing too long in the tooth to hold much validity these days. They are like vampirical cretons who are only happy when they are in total control of everyone else. Get a clue mein herr...Most Americans have already moved on from the devastation of the Gloom and Doom Bush Era when all things were dark, dastardly, deceptive and demonizing.

Americans will always hold to the values of fair play, sharing the load of work to be done and equal opportunity. Rich asses have one and only one value: money. That's about as pathetic as it needs to get.

All you repuklicans are F'in idiots trickle down economics has never worked. The reuklicans when in control of any government F**k crap up so bad. The dems have to spend money to turn things around. Our free trad agreements is destroying this country period. Both parties like them because they get money from corporations. Give a guy a decent pay check and watch the country turn around. All the repuklicans want to do is take from the middle class(whats left) and give it to their rich buddies. Like it says in the bible, its easier for a camel to go through an eye of a needle then it is for a rich man to go to heaven. Can't wait to see the look on there faces when they are denied HAHAHAHA. The money will be shifted to the righteous. Keep on being greedy all you rich bastards.

PutAmericaFirst: Your numbers are way off. Obama has created over 2 million jobs in 2 1/5 years...that's about 5 times the net number George Bush created in his 8 years. Bush was handed a surplus and turned it into a huge deficit with out of control spending, and that didn't even include (on the record) the two horrific wars he launched and then kept off the accounting books.

Here's a fun fact for you;

More jobs per year were created during Jimmy Carter's term in office than during the George W Bush administration.

@ WTC:

I guess I do not understand your math to get 4 million jobs created. According to this wikipedia site () which sourcs the BLS, at the start of President Obama's term in Jan 2009, there were 133,563,000 jobs, and through the end of September 2011, there were 131,334,000 jobs.

That would be a net loss of 2,229,000 jobs since President Obama took office.

Really, Tom? Haven't been able to find that site you want to use to claim as authority, so I don't really know what it says. Wonder where it went?

So what did the latest GDP indicate? Any idea at all?

Thought not.

Who do you think will be 'buying' the presidency when Obama plans to raise $1billion? Probably like last time, he will get a lot of money from Wall Street and from people he plans to pay back later with tax dollars in 'investments' like Solindra, Fisker, and the Stimulous.

Phoney Rich Snob??? How bad of him to have earned money. Did you pay any taxes last year? Are you on welfare?

Kevin Thinking....President Obama's campaign funding came from individuals who were determined not to allow the rich to buy the presidency. Check the facts. It's easy to do. All you have to do is go to the government site for elections. You'll find in black and white exactly why your post is a fat lie.

Borne, no doubt, out of the fruitless hope that the rich and Big Business can still ride that Gravy Train while the rest of Americans stuff down the BS.

Ewent

I have checked the facts. A lot of money came from people who work on Wall Street.

He also gets money from big business that he in turn allows to have waivers on Obamacare and from big business that he later gives loans / funds to.

Kevin, try doing a little thinking about how THIS narrative squares with the parallel narrative that President Obama is destroying the financial sector with Dodd Frank and destroying the ability of business to create jobs with Affordable Care.

In most cases you'll find the Conservative Movement making competing, mutually exclusive arguments at the same time. This is no exception.

When the primary comes, can we end the buying of votes and see who wins without the money. No more super pac, no more town hall meetings, no more commercials, no money buying your vote. It shouldnt be this way. Its broken. Its BS. No way should a corporation give tons of money to persuade or help the president. ITs whats wrong with the system. I vote for a penalty of anyone giving money to either part. And that money going directly to the deficit! It could be done but they wont do it, its much to ethical and right.

they are stimulating the economy

Let them WASTE their money. That's money is going back into the economy and helping Obama get reelected.

the star pupil from the US educational system appears

Jack...Grow up. All Americans who earn more than $10,000 a year at any job pay taxes. You can drop the lies and contortions. Now...about that welfare BS in your post. There are more men and women in American prisons at a cost of $26,000 a year per prisoner than there are families on welfare at a cost of $15,000 for a family of 4. Not a bad deal for a miser or stingy creton who'd throw people to the curb and step over them so all that moolah the rich earned won't be noticed as the chief reason so many are out of work since 2004.

When Mitt Romney pays only 15% in taxes on the billions he's earned as a venture capitalist whose major clients are all wealthy enough to afford his services, and he managed to put tens of thousands of employees out of work each time he sold one of their companies, your post is more Republican rich justification of greed.

Mitt Romney doesn't give back what he took from the system. That's the American way.

They pay taxes, but get the money back in refunds due to deductions etc.

Obama is leading Biden? I guess that makes sense since Biden needs to be led as Vice President. Obama needs to teach Biden how to read the teleprompter and stick to the script.

Kevin Thinking...Right winger opens mouth and inserts that giant size foot ...as per usual. If what passes these days for Republican presidential candidates is their best, all I can say is, "why bother?". You've got Gingrich with his unfortunate Wandering Richard disease and inability to make a serious commitment. Then, there's the King of Venture Capital Romney all ready to start the Big Business bailouts the rest of us will end up paying for and a Libertarian in Ron Paul who never mentions how much funding he's getting from the Americans for Prosperity, a group of ultra rich NIMBYS who can't abide the sight of the deprecational poverty their greed created.

How about getting some of the real Republicans out there? Oh...that's right...some of them are women and we all know a woman smarter than a male right winger Republican neocon is anathema don't we?

Ewent,

I sure hope you have a solid job that you can keep working for someone. Because you have no sense of what it would take to develop and build a lasting business.

Dr. Ron Paul has been ostricized by his own political party as a right wing liberal extremeist. Americans know who controls information flow in this country and should understand why he is rarely mentioned by the news media. Our political system needs a major overhaul, but it appears that most Americans are not up to the challenge. They are more prone to be led as sheep to the slaughter.

Thanks for that acknowledgement, not all of us are blind. As a Paul supporter, I'm interested in how Obama supporters are so blindly following their Democratic leader. I understand the other Gop candidates are frightening, but Obama, seemingly nice guy and great family man, is obviously not the President he promised to be. And the Republicans can't be blamed for all his broken promises. Obama is the Commander in Chief and that title carries quite a bit of power that he didn't use they way he said he would. And the power of veto was never once used which should have recently been used to stop the NDAA.

If it's all about beating the GOP, I don't think Obama and his supporters have anything to worry about, only Paul can garner the support of independents, youth, and disgruntled Obama supporters needed to win. I think MSNBC knows this, which is why they are one of the most negative at reporting on Paul's campaign.

is obviously not the President he promised to be

I know, he promised to be a progressive and turned into a moderate who constantly advance once republican ideas like a private insurance mandate...

only Paul can garner the support of independents, youth, and disgruntled Obama supporters needed to win

As a disgruntled Obama supporter I will tell you there are things that Paul is for that I support, but here are things that are just down right scary and hypocritical. His stance on Choice alone disqualifies him in my view, Freedom is NOT a state issue.

Obama had to support the mandate. It would be impossible to force insurance companies to cover preexisitng conditions without a mandate. Republican voters did not like the idea at all, and many lost their offices because of that idea.

Actually, the *real* progressive thing to do would have been to go with a single payer system. Had he not been trying to play nice and just forced it through when he had the majority to do so (kind of like the right is accusing him of doing anyway) a lot of people would be much happier. Single payer works pretty well for veterans. I should know, I am one.

Terry......He forced what he had through. There was no playing nice at all. The republicans didn't stop the single payer, that was the democrats. He couldn't even get his own party to do that. Single payer works well, but it will always run out of money in the end. It is even happening with the veterans. They are talking about reducing the medical benefits or making you contribute more. It simply will not last.

Freedom is a GODLY issue, and the path we choose will dictate our future. The federal government is usurping state and citizen rights, with legislation such as the Patriot Act, which would qualify as both scary and hypocritical, especially if one believes that our country was founded and documented via the Constitution. The recent ratification and signing of NDAA exemplifies that Act and serves to further erode our freedoms. Federal agencies are now becoming the watchdogs. I would advise everyone to read the Communities Against Terrorism flyer which was distributed by the Colorado FBI. If it doesn't scare you, I don't know what will.

Freedom is a GODLY issue

Uhh no, freedom is a completely secular humanist issue, god is the lack of freedom.

President Obama didn't play nice and force healthcare through. It was one of his intended campaign objectives that if you recall was brutally attacked by Republicans who get graft from their HMO cronies. Republicans like Boehner and McConnell who get the lion's share of their campaign funding from Big Insurance and HMOs who hold Americans hostage every chance they get.

The Republicans never wanted healthcare reform of ANY kind. If they did, Gingrich wouldn't have led the charge to dismantle any hope of such reform when Hillary Clinton presented a plan. Had that been allowed to go forward 22 years ago, healthcare in the US wouldn't have become the most expensive in the entire world. Once again, just like with Big Oil, putting mass delay on the issue only exacerbated it.

You're joking? The racist, bigoted, isolationist who is considered such a loon by his own colleagues, he's never even passed a single piece of legislation in his entire career? You're AMAZED he STILL can't carry a single state in a nationwide election despite his rabid small band of merry men?? Yeah, just amazing....

AP when you say things like "Racist bigoted isolationist who is considered a loon by his own colleagues" you need to back that up with some facts. You just sound like a moron.

Watch this:

"Mitt Romney believes that 9/11 was a conspiracy how you can you vote for him????/"

See what I did there?

I'm concerned with the deficit. But I don't support any other GOP candidate but Ron Paul. You can't argue that he has ever been for the deficit.

You left off the most important part of the sentence- "in a growing economy". It makes all the difference in the world.

Suppose you earned $50,000 a year. Your company is growing, and you have every confidence that when new hires are made, due to your performance reviews, you will be promoted and get a $20,000 raise. You have a mortgage of $100,000- twice your yearly income. Once you get that raise, the ratio of debt to income will drop precipitously- therefore, once that promotion comes through, you plan on remodeling your kitchen.

Now, take a similar scenario- your company is not doing so well. You're worried that you'll have a job in a year's time. You still planning to pull the trigger on that kitchen remodel?

The problem with Obama's spending is that it is far put of control- he does not even bother submitting budgets that pass the laugh test- and the RATIO of the deficits is far too high compared to GDP. Incidentally, I was against a lot of the Bush spending- Obama is far worse, so why would I support his spending?

The debt is scheduled to go over $16 TRILLION when this next cap is lifted. He inherited $10 trillion. How on earth he managed to add that much in three years is beyond me- and, I suspect, beyond him. He is breathtakingly incompetent with the nation's money, which is the beginning, middle, and end of why he will not be re elected.

Obama shelved in 2012.

Sally.....Deficits don't matter, when they were 1/10th the size. I could say that it speeding doesn't matter if someone is going 5 mph over, but when they are going 70 in a school zone instead of 25, it matters. Besides, why doesn't it matter to Obama. He said it is unpatriotic of Bush to have deficits like that. Since he is much worse than Bush on the issue, does that make him incredibly unpatriotic?

NoJo, perhaps you can offer up a coherent plan. As you do, remember that both sides of the argument must be dealt with or nothing will pass. I am interested to know.

ps ... good morning

SallyAnn,

Deficits don’t matter until the country runs them year after year and they turn into a mountain of debt that damages our ability to compete and we spend valuable tax money paying the interest.

IMO it will take at least 40-60 years of continuous budget surpluses to pay down the National debt.

In 1945 our debt was at 125% of GDP and by 1980 the debt was paid down to 37% of GDP and we were on track to pay off the debt by about year 2000. When the 1980 recession hit Reagan cut taxes and increased spending and by 1992 the debt nearly doubled to 69% of GDP. By the end of Clintons Administration the debt came down slightly. After about 2003 the debt increased sharply as the annual deficit increased every year to where today it is once again back to 100% of GDP.

In summary, given any one budget a deficit or surplus does not matter – but the year after year trend does matter.

Deficits don't matter. Obama had to run up our deficit to get us out of the mess that W left us in. It's the only thing other than Obamacare, which will make some freeloaders pay for their healthcare, that they can cry about.

But what's funny is how the Republicans are falling in line with their leaders. No sense of direction or moral compass at all. Backed Cain and even Gingrich for a while. After Gingrich won SC an went ahead in the polls nationally, the Republican leaders even came out attacking Newt. So they changed their minds. Just like a bunch of sheep. Mascot should be a litle lamb instead of any elephant.

111......Obamacare doesn't make freeloaders pay for their own health care and we don't need to be running up the deficits like this year after year. Government deficit spending isn't fixing anything, it is simply masking the problems and it will make things worse in the future. Think of it as 2005 in the housing market, except when this bubble bursts, it will be much, much more painful.

Good morning Ideology,

The economist known as "Dr. Doom" (he predicted the 2008 crash) has said that the world economies will not really improve in this decade. He also stated that we have to stop putting our focus on Wall Street, banking and housing and move our focus and investments in to manufacturing - making things again. That, and cutting the deficit is the only way we can move forward. And he wasn't just talking the US but all world economies. I will try and google and find the article, but it was an interesting read.

It was on TODAYonline.com. The article was about Dr. Roubini "Fall out from Financial meltdown will last decade, says 'Dr. Doom'"

Dr. Doom has also predicted other crashes that did not happen. I do agree with him on this issue though. Because our government and others are spending so much and it is obvious to any sane person that it can't continue, we will have to cut back. When we cut back, that will create shrinkage and limit growth until government get back to something remotely close to balanced budgets again.

It amazes me how a candidate the represents what has brought down our economy can be the front runner in the Republican party. But people tent to vote as they are told.

What might cause this to be a lengthy recovery is the looming and ballooning world wide sovereign debt bubble. All governments are printing cash at a revved up rate in an attempt to slowly deflate this bubble. How China reacts when viewed with its looming crash to 5% or lower GDP may well tell the tale. We are all in the same boat and even the US cannot afford to jump ship.

Ideology,

What do you think will happen to the Eurozone? Dr. Roubini did not sound very optimistic about them.

Phine, none of the scenarios are pretty. If the big boys like Germany could figure out how to let Greece crash they would. One way or the other I would expect the Eurozone to restructure itself with very tight controls on financial risk taking. I do not foresee that there would be a wholesale dumping of social programs such as medicare. One of the things they will not be able to economically afford is an adoption of the American model which would double health care costs.

So, you don't see a break up or downsizing of the countries in the Eurozone, Ideology? It has been a thought that has been going through my mind. And what part will Great Britain play in the future of the Eurozone?

I can see Greece leaving and a few of the eastern European countries with it and possibly Finland joining a Scandinavian group along with Denmark. Portugal and Spain could be set adrift to seek stronger ties with South America. Ireland may bury its hatchet with England and tie itself closer to them, there is a growing desire amongst the Irish to leave the Euro.

Ideology, I think the next few years are going to be, as the press puts it, "game changing". We are all so intertwined and I do think that people will finally be waking up to that. How will that effect governments and elections, I don't know. But, in my mind, for all intents and purposes, the 2012 election is just one that keeps us above water. 2016 is the year to watch.

PS Twinkle toes is now getting email and phone calls from his fans! Too funny!

To my mind, the reason the GOP field is so weak this cycle is that the smart ones realize that there is not much they can do about the economy. The old models and projections for recovery no longer apply.

He's a dancing Que ... um? King!

Ideo-Phine: Personal views on the Eurozone is that G.B. will never join, and the biggest reason is the City of London which is corporate owned (they actually have voting rights in parliament). That influence would be lost if G.B. joined the EU. I believe they have convinced the population of England that joining the EU would mean a loss of identity.

That being said, I really doubt the EU will lose members, rather, I think that the funding will be found to shore up Greece, Italy and Spain. The IMF is ready to step in and help locate the money. If anything, I think they will gain membership, further strengthening the financial position of the EU. The non-performing countries will probably have strict rules thrown their way to shore up the financial mess. Leaving the EU means losing any/all protections and starting their economies from scratch.

Just my 2 cents, but hey, I am no politician nor an economist. But I do have Euro friends, so I base my evaluations on discussions with them.

Those older models are being applied now more than ever......ideologyspoilstheview....

RedDev ... agree with you about the UK. All the rest is speculation on both our parts.

bigbenalaska

Those older models are being applied now more than ever......the old models are getting a lot of oil to keep the gears turning. The new models are being stressed tested, sovereign debt is a bubble unlike all others.

ideologyspoilstheview....they just had Japans economy , with a 200% + GDP debt..dilemma on the news......the "credit crisis" is a great name for it .......as we and others work our ways and habits from credit .....we will be better off....

I think we are going to find out in the long run that the old models do not work. But, that means a lot of people will have to change their mindset - something that governments find very hard to do.

From my very Engilsh son-in-law, the family back home is VERY glad they didn't join up with the EU. They like being an island.

And twinkle toes needs a few lessons from the granddaughter before becoming a dancing, er, king. Right now he is more a dancing bear.

Good morning phine....well , good afternoon where you are maybe....

Over borrowing is just what it is......nothing but looking for trouble....

The E.U. did what we did ...the real estate bubble thing.....over pricing and easy money...

So here we sit and now the E.U.......no difference....

Japan is heading to the same crisis right now....

We need to break away from the old models of economics and try thinking of something new. Something outside the box. However, not being an economist (wonder how much fun they are at a party), I have no idea what.

And a very good day (solves the time difference) to you big ben! How's life in the great state of Alaska today?

Just don't go out to long and everything is just super.....

Now on the economics thing.....we should all simplify and live within our money (or funds) to equal math...

And just remember 1+1(still)="s 2

If you can't afford it , don't buy it....with all the best to you......(phine)

bigbenalaska

I am of the mind that the real estate bubble alone would not have caused such extensive damage. I feel what did cause the damage was that mortgages were turned into exotic financial pieces of paper by the banking industry that no longer had any relationship to housing. The financial industry turned what was a pimple into a boil. They exhibit no qualms in going there again and are pleading for a return to the good old deregulation argument.

ideologyspoilstheview........"Beautifully put"....thus the cause.....all along the ride of those papers , money was made....underwriters...mortgage brokers..title agencies..ect...

Once the bubble popped , the looser's were the ones stuck with the home...like playing "HOT POTATO"..

The big winners , were those who sold those homes high....and held out with their gains....

And if I may add something to this mix about future economic problems on the horizon. It is not just Wall Street, banking and housing - we have to look at the future of energy, water and food production. These are all real problems that have to be addressed and will put even more of a financial burden on governments.

Phine .things will get better...and probably much better....it's only like an economic pulse...pressurizing , up and down.....right now we are at low pressure....

Our GDP can pay off our debt easy....I'll guess about an 8 year possibility...

Phine, bigbenalaska is in reality part of Canada ... lots of resources, clean water and air, good fishing and hunting. What do you say Bigben ... want to join up? We both have much of what the rest of the world lacks in aces.

I love Canada...ideologyspoilstheview...our world has many beautiful places...I really like to ride Montreal's Underground Metro......and lot of good looking girls.....

"Go New England Patriots"........oooooooops

Ideo - agree 100% on the housing bubble. We have had these before and they have never crashed the economy to the extent of the last one. The reason the economy crashed was not the housing bubble, but it was the instruments held by the shadow banking system and the marriage between Main Street banking and Wall Street banking. Few people are willing to recognize the distinction, and fewer people are willing to admit that stronger regulations kept these bubbles minor in the past. It was dismissing these regulations that allowed the economic implosion. (Great series on this if you access the new Moyer's web site - http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/index-flash.html)

BBAlaska - credit is fundamental to a growing economy. If business had to pay as it goes, every business would fold. Same is true of the government. There would be no housing or automobile markets, and indeed, no consumer markets if we had to pay as we go. We would spend all our income saving for the house and paying daily living expenses, meaning nothing would be left over for the iPads, translating to no Apple business. I am not saying unfettered access to credit should be allowed - we need responsible use of credit, which for the most part we had until deregulation of the banking systems for exploitation of corporate finance).

Phine - The work paradigm has been discussed extensively over the past several years as the recognition that 'work' has changed (our crashed economy has squelched the discussions on this topic). Our current 'work ideology' (for lack of a better term) is regulated and structured around a manufacturing/production oriented environment. While we can fight to bring many of those jobs back, it will not employ the entire workforce. We must have new definitions of what the definition of 'work' means. Unfortunately, we are once again letting the corporate world define those, much as they did in at the turn of the century. What we have is a litany of low paying, go no-where jobs, and a handful of highly paid sales, senior management jobs, with very little in between. Remind you of Gilded Era, Robber Baron Age?

Bottom line is we need to start making things again. It is the only way to get things going. And yet, there are so many twists and turns to this it can make one's head spin.

I am also waving the white flag of surrender on this Sunday afternoon's topic of the economy. My brain is tired. I need a little Bach, Beethoven and Mozart to get me back on track.

Good plan phine ... I will slip on some Verdi or Puccini

Ah, the opera. I do love it. However, I need the soothing that only one of the masters can bring. Maybe a nice Chopin concerto.

Elmer Fudd for Secretary of War (makes about as much sense as anyone else on your list)

Next thing Mitt will say is "trusts are people too, my friend". Between the flip flopping and the looseness with the facts, how can anyone believe anything Mitt says?

Steeler Fan...As a former Republican, I can tell you that Republicans are experts at double talk. So "trusts are people too, my friend." actually means Romney will get the Supreme Court to grant the same "freedom of speech to "trusts" as the Supreme Court approved Corporations to become individual voters with the right to pour tons of moolah into our elections. The problem with that is this: A lot of US corporations are NOT owned by American citizens. So, in effect, you now have foreigners influencing our elections.

I live in Florida too, Raymond. Rick Scott was not convicted of anything and you are abviously still crying in your milk over your Democrat girl not winning. She was so far up Obama's rear when he was here that it was sickening; not to mention how she got caught, on tape cheating, during the debate. You are doing the same thing to Scott that people are doing to Newt. They, both, were convicted of nothing, yet, you want the perception out there, as does the media, that they did. Shameful!

You just validated the primary reason that America is failing as a country. When people who live within a system refuse to "VOTE" in the system that will ultimately dictate their future, they can moan and complain, but they will eventually come to regret their lack of initiative. When the political cronies gut Social Security and Medicare, these seniors will wish they would have voted. Voter turnout is abysmal in this country, and yet I hear people constantly complain about political injustice, while most of them never bother to vote. Even if you don't agree with either candidate or either political party, you should do as I do, and "WRITE-IN" your preferred choice. It may not change the outcome, but you will exercising your basic rights. The problem in this country is that people are giving up their Constitutional Rights without question and expecting government to lead them in the right direction. They are being led as sheep to the slaughter.

Prety cool tired ol guy. I do the same with many of my Republican neighbors The biggest reason I get for them voting Republican is racism. Actually had a few come right out and admit it. Working, even union, people voting Republican in a middle class neighborhood.

Tired old guy;

My mother must be in your coffee group. She spouts the same racist reasons for not liking President Obama. She is also retired, living on Social security. She actually seems to think that Romney or Gingrich will "go to bat" for her.

What is worse, she misses GW Bush. She thinks HE did a good job. Excuse me now, I think I will go vomit....

Tired Old Guy,

Thank you for that citizen journalist report of your coffee group. Unbelievable...

Can't wait for the report next week on their views on religion.

Ok, I know this isn't the point but what's up with "his wife is uppity"? I mean, is there anything but racism and hatred motivating this particular group of insane fools? (Thankfully, they're just not making old white racists the way they used to in this country.)

The "uppity" comment came from a self-identified "born again evangelical christian" - ironic thing is that she has a black son-in-law.

That's what we're for :)

I agree, the grossly misspelled words and bad punctuation sometimes trumps one's attempt at appearing smart....

Not if the independents and students have anything to say about the lack of CHANGE in the last three years. Even Steve Jobs wouldn't vote for Obama again if he is alive by what he said in his biography. A poll of Harvard students showed majority of students don't believe Obama deserves a second term.

Now i know you dont know what you are talking about because you actually bought and read the Steve Jobs book. Pitifull. Take a look around you. Obama WILL win. Its gonna happen.

I see 8.5% unemployment. I see record foreclosures. I see 15% black unemployment. I see 35% increase in food stamp recipients. I see $6 trillion added to the national debt by the end of 2012. I see a nation more divided than three years ago. I see more corporate bailouts. I see we are still fighting a war in Afghanistan after three years of Obama. I see more Halliburton no-bid contracts. I see billions in solar energy bankruptcies. I see gas prices doubling since Obama took office. I see students graduating and moving in with mom and dad. Should I go on?

Yes please.

man I miss George Bush

HAHAHAHAHA That was awesome. Definitely gave me a good laugh.

I see Obama renewed the Patriot Act. I see Obama extended the Bush tax cuts. I see Obama kept Gitmo open. I see the worst oil spill ever in the Gulf after the Obama administation gave BP an exemption on an environmental impact study in 2009. I see Obama admitting that shovel-ready jobs were not so shovel ready afterall and then laughed about it. I see he is asking for another $1.2 trillion increase in the debt ceiling. I read on MSNBC two weeks ago that the Obama administration is supported by big corporate money just as much, if not more than Bush.

how about that gun running operation into Mexico?

Go on.

I see Obama speaking at Solyndra, declaring it a model of success five months before the plant filed Chapter 11. I see Obama promising to raise electricity prices by closing down coal-fired power plants. I see Obama promising three more nuclear power plants at the 2010 state of the union and no follow through. I see Obama closing down Yucca Mountain nuclear waste storage facility as billion have spent. I see Obama blocking the Keystone pipeline where tens of thousands of shovel-ready jobs can be had. I see Obama putting a moratorium on offshore drilling. I see Obama allowing guns in our national parks. I see the San Joaquin Valley is a desert after the Obama administration shut off the irrigation water.

I see the future of the country and the world, and I see it in the Book of Revelation.

And after ALL of that road warrior, he is still going to win. Sorry to break it to ya but he will win. Sorry.

Road Warrior.........And the single fact that makes all your points irrelevant........Corporations sitting on more cash than ever before while all those things you mention are going on. Couple that with the single-minded focus of the Republicans to do ANYTHING to impede Obama, no matter the damage to the country, and just about all your points turn into a negative for the Republicans.

Do you think this country is going to elect an elitist flip-flopper to tip the scales even further towards the 1%?

I realize it worked for Bush, but I believe the country has had a serious reality check since 2004.

Road Warrior: you better not be depending on independents this time...they're leaving your front runner in droves (dropping another 20 points in just the last two weeks). Despite the right wing hysterical rhetoric, a majority of voters are actually going to be looking at the record. All that socialist nonsense spewed by the far right comes up against reality...the Bush recession is over...the banks are still operating and doing quite well thank you, the automotive industry the Republicans so wanted to have fail is alive and doing quite well, Obama has created 5 times the number of jobs in two and a half years as Bush did in 8, one of the two wars Bush so stupidly rushed this country into is now over and the second is being wound down, Osama is gone, Khadafi is gone and look what your front runners are offering...The end of social security and medicare, the demonization of all people not of white skin, or who had the misfortune of selecting poor parents, and a return to you are on your own medical care, back alley abortions, and LESS in taxes for the wealthiest Americans (and perhaps a new war with Iran if we're "lucky"??). Not...even....close. You're going to win an election with the wealthiest nominee ever to run for the Presidency, as we emerge from a recession?? You're going to win by convincing the nation that the party of no change, no hope and let em eat cake needs just one more chance? Geez, could your hapless party be any more pathetic?

I promise you this, if Newt or Mitt is the primary candidate against Obama, Obama will win again. Its the truth. They are both retards while Obama can actually articulate stuff. Not saying I like Obama, because i'm a Ron Paul fan. But Mitt and Newt are retards.

Matt, major, MAJOR WORD.

Obama will win again. Its the truth.

"Truth" can only be validated after November 6. In the meantime, it's speculation, just as it was when the liberals said Carter could not lose against the likes of Ford and Reagan in 1980. Reagan won 44 states.

Just sit back and watch.

Unlike you and so many of your liberal Dems, royal, I will not be sitting back and watching. I'll be working. You should try it.

Jack- childish.

Jack: seriously?? You must be one of those three chin Republicans who think sitting around thinking great big thoughts watching others get things done is what's really called "work".

There's a reason Mitt Romney is the only Republican (besides Gingrich) in recent memory to have net negative ratings nationwide and still be considered a front runner. He's lost 20 points with independents just in the past two weeks in two different polls. There's a reason Republicans are in trouble and it sure isn't because no one knows who their candidates are.

A couple of things.......first, republicans have never turned on educators. They simply wanted to ensure that we didn't have to go bankrupt paying for government benefits. Anyone who could do the math with teacher, actually any public sector employee, pensions and benefit plans can see that they will collapse the system without reform. Being responsible to ensure that we could honor our promises to teachers was twisted into disliking education.

Second, the 13.9% tax Romney pays is higher than 90 to 95% of the population. It is the effective tax and that is figured out after all deductions. Most people get that confused, lump in FICA, unemployment, state taxes and even 401K contributions when they come up with their tax rate. The average family that makes $100K pays about 6% in taxes. Those offshore accounts have been a part of the tax code since WWII and are no more stealing than someone taking a home mortgage interest deduction or student loan deduction. JKF also took advantage of those same tax breaks.

Not that many of these moonbat posts are worth reading, but especially, if a post starts with the

"I was a Republican until...", you know it is BS from the get go.

"try Romney for treason"...a bit over the top, even for the zealots in MSNBC land

I have nevr been able yo pay less than 15%, and I normally pay about 28%. This year, It looks, so far, like more. If Mitt paid his fair share he could put a whole school in operation every year, not even counting the money he hides in the Caymens.

If I pay my fair share, I have to live on ~60,000/yr take home. If he pays his fair share he has to live on ~15,000,000. I would love to pay $6,000,000 a year in taxes and have to live on $15,000,000.

It's all about fairness. The rich have been getting the good deals for a decade now. Don't see the jobs that the Republicans say we'll get by keeping taxes low n the rich. I saw them before W gave them a tax break though. Kill the Bush tax cuts!

Hey Tony,

I run a 20-person, $5 Million dollar a year IT company. I pay about $3 million in in wages, and another $1 million in Federal, State, SS, and FICA taxes on my employees. I spend another $750,000 in operating costs satisfying hundreds of government regulations.

I myself gross $250,000, and after $100,000 in mortgage, business, and charitable contributions, my final tax load is $33,000, or $12% of my gross.

You want to call me a traitor as well?

Romney paid $3M in Fed taxes, probable another $1M in State taxes, gave $1.5M to the church, and anothe $1.5M to other charities. Democrats could use alot more traitors like Romney.

heck businesses can't even survive that receive money from the govt(Solyandra), tax the rich and they take their money elsewhere, no incentive to invest.

111.....I am glad you make so much money. That puts you in the top 10% if you are a single individual. You still probably don't pay 28%. It is statistically impossible to do that, even if you don't take any itemized deductions. If you make 90K and take the $10 K of standard deductions and exemptions, you only pay taxes on 80K which would be $16K. Or about 17.8%, not 28%. If you are paying that, then you are just donating money to the government.

but that is only income what about his possible capital gains he earned during the year?

NYTony

OK, first off, I find all this in fighting rather amusing. I was a Republican until they turned on the educators....

For this statement to be accurate you would have to of been a Democrat from the get go. The Republicans have never been on the side of education or educators.

Romney the tool. One thing for sure, he does pay his fair share in my opinion. He donates a lot.