Of Course he has nothing to say. He only has something to say when the economy is worse.

Un-patriotic jack-arses... wanting America to fail so they could win an election. I'm serious guys, this border's treason.

Not to mention the fact, most economists say that the roots of an economic recovery is partly psychological - when people feel more confident they start to spend more - and Republicans have been bleating doom and gloom since Obama's inauguration. If anyone slowed the recovery, it's those Republicans.

I noticed that, it seemdd like Obama was in office for an hour and they were shouting things like "HE HASNT DONE ANYTHING GOOD AMERICA IS DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMED"

Newt just needs time to think of a new insult.

"We did not create Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac so rich guys like Mitt Romney and Goldman Sachs could make money," the speaker said.

You'd know a lot about Fannie and Freddie wouldn't ya, Tubbo?

This batch of GOP morons has to be the most insidious group of hypocrites I've seen in decades. They truly do NOT want the country to get back on track, just so they can win an election. Pathetic -- especially when they toss claims out about the President regarding how he should be "working" than "trying to get re-elected."

Yeah. No Republican president EVER did campaigning while in office. Ever.

Interesting to note: Reagan, during his first three years, saw unemployment rise ABOVE 10%, and just like Obama, saw it drop in his forth year, after a series of tax hikes, which helped win him reelection. Yet NewtBornBaby wants to bill himself as a "Reagan Republican"... yeah, sans the smooth, and the willingness to raise taxes AND cut spending at the same time.

I love how the GOP fools distort history -- from Reagan to Jesus, they're pros at it.

When you're entire campaign is based on negativity and how rotten the incumbent appears you better hope things stay down. If not you have no ammo, idea's are all based on someone else's failure. Hopefully things stay bad if your a GOP sheep, otherwise, Obama will remain in office.

We should cheer Newt up. He can still build his moon base, just while he isn't president, and with money from his buddies in the private sector.

Newt just wants to go to the moon so he'll actually weigh less on a scale.

what a joke this guy is.. how does anyone really take him seriously?

Feisty

Give Newt a break - he never learned to read without moving his lips, so it takes him quite a long time to get through a report, especially if it has got some three or four syllable words in it for him to struggle over.

The historian is waiting to rewrite history...again.

Can't comment because you haven't seen them??? How about IF the numbers were at such & such, what would you think?

B-dee, B-dee, B-dee, That's all folks!

I do not know how Gingrich can consider himself an historian. To be one and believe the right wing rubbish that he does means that he didn't study it too thoroughly or his compassion / study of it is faulty. This person is so devoid of any decency that any persons considering voting for this disgusting creep should be ashamed of themselves.

Gingrich had no comment on January jobs figures in morning event

He , Romney, Saintorum, Boehner and other are going to have to come up with way to destroy the economy to make Obama look bad in the public eyes. It's going to take time, but more time when Obama has to try and fix all the bush and Cheney's wars they created and tanked the economy by creating all these wars. Then Obama has been fighting with the repukians from day one as president in trying to fix the economy. Every attempt he has made, the repukians and congress are shutting the doors in his face. However, the little steps Obama has made in improving the American economy is now becoming more and more noticeable, and the repukians will have to figure out a way to stop it, or to try and steal the glory of job creations to try and win their nominee in the 2012 elections.

You can't fix or clean up the mess in one day or one year that Bush and Cheney created while in office.

Obama is doing the best he can with what little support he has from those in the White House and Congress.

Newt Gingrich holds no office, and given his past record is not a viable candidate for President nor for the same reason should his opinion be valued on any matters.

“Obama is big food stamp, he's {Romney] little food stamp but they both think food stamps are okay,” Gingrich told the crowd, which had a couple hundred people in attendance. “I don't think food stamps are a future for America.”

Excuse me, but answer me this Batman, while the economy was crumbling starting in 2008 (when I lost my job). How were people suppose to eat without food stamps, sleep, clothe themselves without unemployment? Newt & the other guy is part of the problem, not part of the solution, none of the Republicans have a solution - its just blah, blah, blah. I for one am better off than I was 4 years ago - as I was a 99'er.

It is not surprising that there has been some improvement in the economy since the republicans took over the House. The people feel better believing Obama and the progressive democrats don't have carte blanche to do as they please. What most people do not realize is progressives control both political parties. With the help of their propaganda wing (the MSM) the progressives seemingly have the presidency locked up for at least the next 4 years. After all whether it is Obama, Newt or Mitt there will continue to be a progressive chicken-hawk globalist as president. Just as there has been since Bush I.

Are you ready for the war with Iran? It is coming. We are being conditioned for it as I speak. Look at all of the "news articles" and opinion pieces warning of the "evil" intentions of Iran. Not only are they now claiming Iran is within seconds of having "The BOMB" (when 7 months ago they estimated Iran was at least 5 years away from doing it) but there is a story out today claiming Iran is on the cusp of developing an ICBM capable of reaching the U.S. mainland.

Come this spring expect to see a false-flag operation designed to make it appear that a retaliatory attack on Iran is a Just and Nobel action. It will be used the same way the sinking of the Maine in 1898 provided the impetuous for the war with Spain, the "attack" on the Liberty required our joining in WWI, the "surprise" attack on Pearl Harbor that demanded we enter WWII, the "attack" on the Maddox in the Gulf of Tonkin was used to justify for our entering into the Viet Nam conflict and the events of 9/11/01 gave us the desire to go to war in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. These were all false-flag operations designed to gin up support for going to war.

The President's policies arrested the free-fall that the previous, Republican administration plunged our nation into. His policies arrested the free-fall practically the moment he signed the Recovery Act.

http://www.barackobama.com/jobsrecord

The President's policies not only arrested the free-fall, but over his first year in office shrunk the rate of job loss from 800,000 per month, as Bush left things, to less than 50,000 per month. Not only that, but the President's policies went on from there to add jobs back into the economy for a full year before the Republicans took back the House, and if anything the Republican take-over of the House has suppressed the rate of increase in job growth, due to the obstructionism that Republicans not only engage in but boast about.

Not to mention the fact, most economists say that the roots of an economic recovery is partly psychological - when people feel more confident they start to spend more

That is an absolute fact, and it's becoming more apparent to the majority of American taxpayers, you know, the Americans who pay the country's bills, that Obama will be a one term President, which only causes their confidence to soar.

Given that the President beats Romney in a head-to-head battle, that's pretty clueless.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html

At best, you can claim it is a wash, but that doesn't serve your vacuous claims.

Consumer confidence is a major concern, and truly the best and only way the Republicans can win is to keep brow-beating the American public into thinking things are getting worse, while they're really getting better.

http://www.barackobama.com/jobsrecord

It's not really going to be a campaign on the issues: The Republicans want to favor too few voters for that to work out their way. So they must necessarily make the election into a batter of vitriolic rhetoric: Can they dupe enough people into believing the horrible things they say? Maybe. The support they've got already shows that otherwise reasonable adults are ready, willing and able to be deceived.

Reminds me a little of Germany in the 1930s.

Romney's going no where if he is clueless about the poor like he "attempted" to explain in the interview. Obama will rip him to shreds!!!

To coin a phrase....."Newt is soooooo yesterday".

Hasta la vista chubbo.

I can hear Newt now, the jobs have improved because of Ronald Reagan's trickle down theory... Had nothing to do with president Obama...

The Do Nothing Congress are probably confused, for they have done everything possible to cause this president and the country to fail... No Drama Obama, takes a licking and keeps on ticking...

"We did not create Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac so rich guys like Mitt Romney and Goldman Sachs could make money," the speaker said.

Yeah, because you're just so poor right Newt? *shakes head*

Damn... it's so sad to see that the Repubnuts can't get their head out of their A$$E$. You truly walk around in your own la la land with Gnewt and the other toads! Obama will be re-elected... get used to it! :-)

OBAMA/BIDEN 2012!!!

We did not create Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac so rich guys like Mitt Romney and Goldman Sachs could make money," the speaker said.

I think Newt forgot someone there. Newt (who is a rich guy) appears to have forgotten that he made $1.6Million off of them.

Newt vs. Romney, just differnt flavors of hypocricy.

yep and who wants this guy as potus?

national emergency will his line work?

no Loren he won't and I'm not even a Republican, nor am I a Democrat. I also won't "get used to it" y'all hired a pool boy to fix your roof, he didn't do a good job, if anyone needs to get over it, it's you.

Gingrich, you are a disgrace. Not only to America, but to the entire historical buff community (including me). How can you forget that food stamps and social welfare have kept millions from becoming poor. And I don't mean developed country poor. I mean undeveloped country poor. Gingrich fails to notice that deregulation of the housing and financial markets caused the recession, and that the Bush tax cuts and wasteful foreign adventures in godforsaken lands (not social spending, which by the way is a small portion of the budget) caused this deficits. And that the trickle-down economic policies of the Reagan years, plus the neglect of our roads and schools have INCREASED economic inequality in our nation. Investors are investing enough; we need to let the MIDDLE class prosper now. I say remove the Bush tax cuts, put the highest income tax rate at roughly 45%, reform the tax code, re-regulate the economy, invest more and reform education and infrastructure, and maybe nationalize or mandate healthcare. Then we promote incentives like a better educational system to bring businesses back, and tax companies that leave our nation, instead of giving breaks to those that send jobs out of the country. The way to make our nation better is not small government, deregulated industries, or starting a race to the bottom. We need to invest in the things that made us prosper, like a good education system, low-cost colleges and healthcare, strong safety nets, and a tax code in which EVERYONE pays a FAIR SHARE. No more tax cuts, especially for the rich. We have had enough of them prospering while the deficit balloons. They've had their moment in the sun. Now it's the middle class' turn to prosper.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

PROGRESSIVE POLICIES 2012

DOWN WITH TRICKLE-DOWN ECONOMICS

DEMOCRATS 2012

EVERYONE PAYS THEIR FAIR SHARE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

CLASS WARFARE MY ASS

WaltDIS

Reminds me a little of Germany in the 1930s.

I was actually thinking more along the lines of Russia circa 1917 or so..... the Russian Marxist revolution?

You have to remember something the collectivists are in power now, not the fascists.

PS: in all the swing states, Dr Paul beats Obama or is tied with him......

I'm comfortable labeling Romney and Gingrich as fascist or at least fascist-adjacent. So either of their ascendancy would indeed parallel Germany in the 1930s.

Obama is a liberal, which is exactly what we need right now, after the damage done by right-wing reactionaries for eight years, and in light of how utterly perversely self-centered and greedy the Republicans are these days. Right-wingers have gone so far extreme that they've lost all sense of perspective and cannot tell moderate right, from moderate left, from far left. Regardless, with about half of the House and about half of the Senate members of each of two parties, no one is in power now.

Paul is a novelty. He won't win the nomination, so it's pointless to even discuss him.

Egilman please explain to me why we waste our time?

I completely agree with you, Walt. Those two are literally supporters of an oligarchy. Why the hell would tax cuts for the wealthy stimulate growth???? A smaller tax on investments might work, but it hasn't necessarily helped the middle class. The middle class spend more than the rich, so it is more logical to keep taxes on the wealthy higher to fund tax cuts on the REAL job creators (the middle class). DEATH TO THE GOP!!!!!!! Let us return to the ideas of FDR and equal opportunity. Why would we give the GOP (who started the recession) power when we have seen the benefits (economic recovery, job growth) of our current leaders (minus the Tea Party extremists in the House and Senate and their GOP overlords)??? Let us throw off the yoke of right-wing oppression and enjoy the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness AND the right to a fair shot at living the American Dream.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

DEATH TO THE FASCIST RIGHT 2012

DEMOCRATS-AMERICA'S LAST HOPE 2012

AMERICA 2012

1SGFitzsWife4ID

Egilman please explain to me why we waste our time?

Well, looking at it scientifically, WE could be crazy, but I doubt it since we can recognize when our compatriots of the other persuasion are suffering from The Dunning–Kruger effect...

Looking at it practically, we could be eternal optimists but I doubt it because we are experienced enough to give some credence to Murphy's Laws...

In reality though, we are just plain Americans who believe in our country and all it stands for right or wrong....

I think that sums it up pretty good.....;-)

Hi Thomas,

Go to your account settings (it's right under 'My Column') on Newsvine - you are able to add or change your avatar there!

Thanks for the kind words... neighbor! ;o)

Anytime! ;o)

They all look like they got served a turd sandwich today. Boehner couldn't get the words out, even with Cantor stabbing him in the back. Amazing how grudging they are when it comes to seeing good news for Americans.

feisty & pedestrian --- right on. i was surprised old newts couldn't pull a lie out of his rrrr's that it was all due to the tax cuts or what the repugnants did. even that old snake wasn't quick enough to come up with the right lie that sounded plausible for reich wing consumption.

Boehner's tan mainly comes from all them turd sandwiches he's gotta eat from Cantor and the Tea Party.

u doing good Fiesty. umake me proud as an American!

u doing good Fiesty. umake me proud as an American!

Thanks Richard - do NOT give up the fight!

Feisty and i don't agree on anything but I will say when she's not spewing hateful comments, she does give the good fight.

Blingrich is such a freakin jerk...

I guess this is how he'd respond to good news in a debate too without all his talking points tele-prompt inputted on his brain???

If I was a Republican Newt makes better conservative talking points than Mitt does, that's because he is a true Reagan Republican, Mitt is talking like he thinks he is.

Or he will take responsibility for the job growth. Probably the history he gave to Freddie Mac for the 1.6 million dollars. That must be it.

Probably he'll take responsibility in some way - claiming he scared O into action or some such bull @!$%#e. Blingrich is sooooooo delusional - I really question his stability at this point. Did you hear him comparing himself to Brad Pitt the other day??? lol

Probably he'll take responsibility in some way - claiming he scared O into action or some such bull @!$%#e.

So true. Actually though, I think he was trying to say Brad Pitt resembled him. There's enough hot air in that statement to get him half way to his moon base.

To truly see how assinine the tea-gop RWNJ's are, go the the link below, look at the graph, then sit back and listen to them spin and twist and lie and "explain" what it really means to fit the RNC-TEA platform planks:

http: / /www.barackobama.com/jobsrecord/embed

Now, how can they and Newt be so slow after seeing this?????

And on Blingrich saying Spanish is the "language of the ghetto"!! Hey Blingrich, Spanish is the language that will kick your a$$, a$$hole!! He reminds me of some freaking Nazi insisting everybody learn German...geezoflip!!!

I don't know how much credit the GOP will give him. They had nothing but criticism and insults when he took steps to stop our economic freefall which was actually done pretty quickly. One of the reasons they probably doubled-down with there opposition to everything.

I hope the unemployment rate drops to 7% by May and that will shut Hannity and O'Reilly up for good and all their junk "experts". The Republicans will be in a big tailspin if that happens.

lol Paul 7% is still too high don't you think? Now if it drops to 4% we'll talk about it.

It's an improvement from when the recession started it's nasty beginnings back in 2007 and by late 2008 we were asking what a Depression would look like in modern times.

Newt's afraid to fart - he might soil his boxers.

I like his 4th wife, she would have a different look for a first lady.

Old news. What happened was one worker padded the books. The campaign got to the bottom of it. The guy did it on his own. One of the Virginia rules is that only Virginians who are residents in the district can collect signatures in that district. This guy volunteers, goes out and returns with more than enough signatures. What on earth does the campaign know if they are valid or not when people being paid by Newt cannot participate?

Since you love the democrat version - here is the rest of the story on Virginia. The candidate is required to turn in a minimum of 400 signatures per district. If the candidate has enough total signatures required in the state and fails to get the minimum in just one district the candidate is barred from being on the ballot anywhere in the state. Then of course Virginia does not accept write in on the primary. One word here - unconstitutional!

BTW Vid - this occured at least 3 weeks ago and the story given by the campaign was shown to be legitimate.

Oh, yes, the court Perry filed the suit in said Virginia provisions for a primary are probably unconstitutional - but he wasn't going to do anything about it.

DB--If Newt can't run a campaign in his home state, how is he going to run the country?

Very good point. But sometimes geniuses can't do detail very well, is that a good excuse???

Respect

Actually it was closer to 700,000 per month. Now can you explain how losing 375,000 per week is better than 700,000 per month?

slodon ---- republican new math?

The GOP has gone so far to the right that the truth is now liberal. So how can they tell the truth? They don't.

mr

No. Just pointing out facts. OK. We can use 850,000. Now can YOU explain how 375,000 jobs lost per week is better than 850,000 per month???

Now remember that the FIRST TIME UNEMPLOYMENT CLAIMS are JOBS LOST. The 375,000 is the 4 week average. I'm working from memory here may be as low as 350,000. So I say again how is 850,000 per month better than 350,000 per week???

Slodon, can you read or hear? The number you're quoting is applications for unemployment, not job loss numbers. And when Obama was sworn into office it was over 800,000 LOST JOBS a month. In fact there were over 800,000 jobs lost per month from July 2008 up until he was sworn in. And job loss in the hundreds of thousands started in 2007. You are far off from pointing out facts.

Monthly Job loss 2008

---

Jan +13,000

February 2008 -83

March -72

April -185

May -233

June -178

July -231

Au -267

sept -434

Oct -509

Nov -802

Dec -619

Jan 2009 -820

4.35 million Jobs lost

unemployment rate jan 2001; 4.2%

unemployment rate jan 2009; 7.8% , +3.6%

unemployment rate jan 2001; 4.2%

unemployment rate jan 2009; 7.8% , +3.6%

The unemployment rate January 2007 was 4.6%. Let's do the math. From 2001 through the end of 2006 when the democrats were not in control of Congress the unemployment rate went up from 4.2% to 4.6%, a whopping 4/10 of 1 percent in 6 years. In the 2 years the democrats controlled Congress the unemployment rate went up from 4.6% to 7.8%, let's see, that's only a 3.2% increase in 2 years.

If one is implying that the increase in unemployment is solely the republicans and Bush's fault that's just as disingenuous as saying the republicans and Bush had nothing to do with the unemployment increase. Bottom line, both parties and both of our last two Presidents are at fault.

What your analysis doesn't explain is the avg. Joe consumer was at an all time high in personal debt and this was the major engine that started the decline, people had to quit borrowing for housing, credit card, auto loans, the general public was saturated in debt. way over it's head which was an on going thing the last 30 years was the major development that slowed the economy down not any individual in the office of the President.

This economy can be blamed on consumers who have unresponsible finances, way too many of us both Republicans, Democrats and Independent spend on borrowing wat past a healthy debt load and everyone paid for it. I also don't agree that you can't blame Bush, Bush's domestic policy or lack there of has much to do with it- 8 years of NO domestic policy.

Fact Check: Dubya came into office with the largest budget SURPLUS in history. He left office with the largest budget DEFICIT in history. Unemployment made the largest gains in history while he was in office. The gap between the ultra-rich and the poor & middle classes widened more than ever before while he was in office. The country's economy was utterly and totally ruined under Dubya, and there are still people who want more like him in office? God help us!

The main problem I have with the GOP (Greed Only Party) is that they want to take more away from the middle class, give it to the already rich, and the only thing they're campaigning on is defeating the incumbent! Not one of them, Romney, Gingrich, Paul, Santorum, or any of the others who have dropped out have EVER said they had the interests of the common American people (that means middle class on down, since there are more of them than there are the wealthy) at heart. They don't give a rat's rosy red rear about the average American. They only want to defeat the incumbent. That is not putting America first.

How can they claim to love America, when they clearly don't like Americans?

socialcapitalist
unemployment rate jan 2001; 4.2%

unemployment rate jan 2009; 7.8% , +3.6%

The unemployment rate January 2007 was 4.6%. Let's do the math. From 2001 through the end of 2006 when the democrats were not in control of Congress the unemployment rate went up from 4.2% to 4.6%, a whopping 4/10 of 1 percent in 6 years. In the 2 years the democrats controlled Congress the unemployment rate went up from 4.6% to 7.8%, let's see, that's only a 3.2% increase in 2 years.

So.... Democrats are responsible for the increased unemployment? Please Point to the specific legislation that got past 122 filibusters by the seante minority repubs, got past Bushs' veto pen and caused the country to go into recession by the end of 2007, and caused the exploded Bush economy in his last 2 quarters of 2008, because thats what congress does, pass laws, and the presdient implements them...you wont find such a law made that crashed the economy because there is no such law...There also was not bad loans sold that went south after 2006....the economy crashed when the loans sold...entirely under the republik majority reset and adjusted and all those non asset backed junk products traded on wall street were discovered to be toxic. Guilt by proximity is a typical right wing plea, but they never say just what law passed by the 110th congress caused Bushs' improvised explosive economy

If one is implying that the increase in unemployment is solely the republicans and Bush's fault that's just as disingenuous as saying the republicans and Bush had nothing to do with the unemployment increase. Bottom line, both parties and both of our last two Presidents are at fault.

While Bush is not solely to blame, he is the one individual mostly to blame for it...the president controls the federal government and its regulatory agencies, which sat by and watch the Banks and thrifts and wall street firms "self police" themselves into oblivion. Not One bill to regulate lending was allowed to be brought to the senate floor for a vote . Republican Mike Oxley worked with Barney Frank to get a regulatory bill passed, where it was promptly shelved by Frist, reportedly at the behest of Bush. He did the same with Chuck Hagels senate Bill...never offered for a vote. The right claims somehow that Frank stopped this in the house and Dodd in the Senate, yet neither is true as the house requires only a bare majority to pass bills and if the Senate leader shelves them senators don't have an opportunity .

Bushs' last 3 months in office, 2.24 million jobs were lost....momentum of the crisis was building. There is zero the incoming president could have done to stave off the job losses for 2009, as we lost 9% of GDP in 08, and 12 trillion in american stock and real estate wealth evaporated. But the stimulus did keep the economy from doing a hoover(going from 4.7% unemployment to 34% by now)...No instead President Obama muted the damage, according to the right wing American Enterprise Institute;

The real economy also responded to the massive stimulus but remained heavily dependent on it. In the United States, growth during the second half of 2009 probably averaged about 3 percent. Absent temporary fiscal stimulus and inventory rebuilding, which taken together added about 4 percentage points to U.S. growth, the economy would have contracted at about a 1 percent annual rate during the second half of 2009.

http://blogs-images.forbes.com/insidearm/files/2011/08/Five-Year-GDP-by-Quarter.jpg

Don't try to make your mess a partisan affair, because it was brought on entirely by a republcan president and a republican majority. Democrats are no prize but they are light years better than republicans, and I say that only because Repubs only deliver these types of economic activities, and crow about jobs when the have a serious undeperformance in private sector job creation

Nailed it Randy...Thanks...

At the mall:

Five year old kid screaming and throwing a temper tantrum: "I want ice cream and I want it now"

Daddy: "No you have to wait til after dinner"

Kid: "I hate you...I want a new daddy"

Americans can be so much like a bunch of kids. They expect Obama to come into office and waive a magic wand and fix an economy on the verge of depression in a year or two. Meanwhile, many big corporations are sitting on cash and refusing to hire anyone because it would make Obama look good....and the stated goal of the republicans is to DEFEAT OBAMA. Not create jobs. Not encourage corporations to hire people. DEFEAT OBAMA. Too bad if you happen to be an average citizen without a job who might actually prefer to have a job than to defeat obama? How would the economy be today IF more americans would give the duly elected president of the united states the benefit of the doubt and support him for a few years before launching into attacks about his birth certificate, his religion, his wife's butt size, his choice of mustard?

Maybe someday americans will grow up and quit actiing like a five year old that wants his ice cream and wants it now. Or not.

The economy IS getting better in spite of all the hopes and dreams and schemes of the republicans that it will get worse. . Next thing you know maybe your neighbor will have a job. Or even you? And Obama will still be president. How awful.

So the above dissertation, I hate when there so long, I have to try to understand the logic of you people would explain why back in 2007 the treasury cut all of us $1425(unless you owed back taxes) with instructions to go out and spend it on "consumables", because the Bush administration knew then the economy was on a cyclic downward trend and tried to thwart it by getting us to go out and spend. The problem was in a Wall Street article about 60% of Americans paid off debt with it. Which these individuals did not do their patriotic duty and spend it on flat screen TV's and down payments on cars, so on and so forth.

-Charles-

Fact Check: Dubya came into office with the largest budget SURPLUS in history. He left office with the largest budget DEFICIT in history.

Because 9/11 and Katrina never happened right?

Newt would even debate them in the rain, and nobody likes to deal with the drizzling '' Mitts."

speaking of singing - Mitt couldn't carry a tune in a BUCKET

The size of the stimulus package was always far too small. It should have been eight to ten times bigger and extended over three or four years. But, as you say, the Republicans wanted Obama to fail and many Democrats in the House were more concerned about their own re-election that doing the RIGHT thing for America. Pity. Term limits would have minimized that hang-up.

david --- that's what i was thinking. i guess they hate good news. it's hard to put a negative spin on good news, thus newts silence.

Amen brother!

My thoughts exactly! I was wondering how Mr. Gingrich's supporters would respond to comments here -- and nothing! It's almost disappointing.

They're all regrouping, seeing how Fox will spin this for some good hater comments.

Bethca $10,000 there is a real mope fest in freeperville tonight...

Don't underestimate the lengths that rightwingnuts will go to in order to win the election. They might be quiet now, but we have not heard the last from them. If you think they were hell bent on destroying the country just to beat President Obama, then hold onto your hat - nothing like the fury of a desperate Teabagger.....

Agreed! Don't forget to vote to get all your Republican congressmen or senator out this November.... That way the the Repubs that remain will have to work together or face the consequenses..!!

Nan and Avefenix? In fairness, it wasn't just Republicans who opposed anything our President tried to do. There were more than a few 'Blue Dogs" contributing as well.

We should focus on electing people who are commited to progress with careful thought and clarity of purpose. Those who opposed the President these past few years deserve to be voted out and I hope a good many of them go away. But I also believe we need to stop with the political BS, roll our collective sleeves up and focus on healing our country.

We are ALL Americans....it's time to put the partisan crap asside and work toward the common good for our entire country.

Superb, JT!

The fact of the matter is this: Anyone who votes to 'get someone out of office" means that their only interest is to get INTO office. Why? So they can enrich themselves. Put the people in office who have clearly, passionately, and definitively stated what they are going to do to help the average, common American citizen. I have never voted a party line, not once. I never intend to. I vote for the guy who is going to help the average, common, regular people. Anyone who is so wealthy they couldn't make a living off of $30K a year doesn't get it anyway. These guys drop that in a month, and could care less. They do not understand the day-to-day life of the average American.

Alan......go away.....your attitude is part of the problem.....you and your buddies can't stand to see an improving economy. If you and the tea folks had tried to help....not tear down.....maybe you would feel better about the news...losers all.

alan --- i guess that's the difference between us. i like good news and you like bad news. i still think you could be the life of the party with a case of beer and a 1/2 bottle of jack under your belt. cheer up we really don't hate you.

If indeed people are gaining employment it is a good thing. I just don't see that happening. In reality I see the unemployment rate going down largely because people are dropping out of the labor force.

What we need is a real economic recover based on investment and capital. What we have is an Obama, Congress, and Ben Bernanke fueled deficit spending disaster in the making. All that spending does is mask the even greater disaster of our economy which is our total debt load of over $50 trillion.

Thank you Mr. Potato Head.

Would someone please make a real counter argument to my points?

Alan, it's difficult to argue with an idiot....

What point dushbag?

You guys must have been in the debate team in high school.

The total number of Americans employed actually went down last month. The government is deficit spending $1 trillion a year or over 6% of GDP.

You're obviously unfamiliar with Bush's numbers during his last four years in office. Obama is contending with trying to reverse a trend that started years before he came into office, all while reversing a economy that was in freefall.

Alan
Yeah the BLS warns specifically of reading into those numbers , they are incorporating corrected census data between new data from 2010 with the old 2001 data;

The adjustment increased the estimated size of the civilian
noninstitutional population in December by 1,510,000, the civilian
labor force by 258,000, employment by 216,000, unemployment by 42,000,
and persons not in the labor force by 1,252,000. Although the total
unemployment rate was unaffected, the labor force participation rate
and the employment-population ratio were each reduced by 0.3
percentage point. This was because the population increase was
primarily among persons 55 and older and, to a lesser degree, persons
16 to 24 years of age. Both these age groups have lower levels of
labor force participation than the general population.

Data users are cautioned that these annual population adjustments
affect the comparability of household data series over time. Table C
shows the effect of the introduction of new population estimates on
the comparison of selected labor force measures between December 2011 and
January 2012. Additional information on the population adjustments and
their effect on national labor force estimates is available at
www.bls.gov/cps/cps12adj.pdf.