Of course they did Amy. The big issue for these states is that there are very few "rich" folks there and a whole lot of poor. Unfortunately, most of the poor have little or no education, and will vote based on race and or religion.

In Florida, Romney won where all the transplants live (wealthy, country club types at that).

Newt may be smart but as other republicans have said about him, he has lots of ideas but most of them aren't good ones. Nothing more annoying that Newt Gingrich constantly telling people how smart he is; I have "grandiose ideas", etc. One thing about past presidents, both republican and democrat, they didn't go around talking about how "grandiose" their ideas were. President Obama doesn't go around telling people how smart he is, his actions and words speak for themselves; neither did President Clinton or President Reagan. Anytime a candidate, like Gingrich, has to brag about his intelligence makes me question the notion completely.

Jody,

I really don't think Newt is as smart as he thinks he is.

I second that!!!

I think Newt's actions have shown he isn't as smart as he thinks he is. We can't get our s--t balanced on Earth and he wants to try doing it on the Moon? How about using all that money to improve current infrastructure? Must be nice to live in a constant state of disillusion, I'm sure he and Trump would get along great.

I get more annoyed every time I hear mention of evangelicals in POLITICS. Wasn't there an article written recently showing the wealth gaps in each county for the US? If I remember correctly, the gaps in the south were far larger. I wasn't really that surprised...

Personally, I don't think Newt's as smart as he thinks he is either but he is not dumb.

Ideology,

As a woman, I can say it is true, we do have a tendency to fury when scorned or slighted. AND we have a long memory about those kinds of incidents. GOP best pay attention to that fact while worshiping at the feet of the Almighty Rush and all those woman-hating legislatures.

"I am learning to say y'all and I like grits,” “Strange things are happening to me,"

Mitt is becoming an uneducated, poor, evangelical Christian right before our eyes! That is very strange.

Forrest,

Wonder if he has to take a shower after saying all those things? He cannot REALLY believe what he is saying.

I.Q. is nothing if it isn't coupled with common sense. Integrity is a nice option also.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzc7OMwjt8w

Go Romney ... somewhere else

The guy constantly contradicts himself so there is no way to know what it is that he believes. It must be okay for Mormons to lie. If he was Catholic he would be in the confessional for like a month, he would need a team of priests, it would be more akin to an exorcism than a confession.

A vote for Romney is a vote for.......what? His platform completely eludes me.

For me it doesn't matter !!!

Pub or Dem: There isn't a true statesman or president among them !!! We are forced to pick the best of the bottom of the barrel. All who run are bought and paid for in advance. We really have no clear choice.

bob

i dont think gingrich is dumb. quite the contrary, in fact. he figured out that he can leverage dumb people to his personal and financial profit.

dumb? no. dishonest charlatan? oh yes.

Rob in ma-3189632

In Florida, Romney won where all the transplants live (wealthy, country club types at that). -- Phine

I can tell you, the wealthier communities in Maine voted for Romney, -- Amy

The big issue for these states is that there are very few "rich" folks there and a whole lot of poor. -Fuzzy

The world outside his limo must be a scary place for him. -- cbrown

Who knew there were so many rich people in America. Two major polls show Romney beating Obama. How can that be if his only supporters are the rich?

Obama probably thinks the same way as the posters above. It explains why he is driving this country and it's people into bankrupcy. He figures it will garner him more votes.

A vote for Obama is a vote for the poor house

Really? Because I am doing better now than I was 4 years ago.

@bob1/28

neither parties are perfect, i agree with you. what i dont agree with is that they are they equally as bad. as long as independents keep pretending that the correct solution is to be non-committal so they can criticize one side for purposefully wanting to do the wrong things, and the other side for trying to do the right things but failing, just so they can claim they hold the intellectual and moral high ground, they are equally as liable for the failure of our politics.

start paying attention. both sides dont do it. they are not equal, not comparable, not contrastable. not the same.

Rob in ma - only in your mind!

Bob Jones - really - that's the best ya got?

Duh... He doesn't win where the crazies are over 50%.

For this we needed a study?

Funny that they left out the biggest factor, liberal vs. conservative. The states that Romney has won are pretty liberal, and that doesn't count the dems crossing over to vote in the repub primary.

After reading this article, listing to the news pundits and paying attention to the figures I have to ask; when did making $100,000 per year put you into the "wealthy" category?

Don't get me wrong, this is not a Romney moment ($400,000 in speaking fees and he say's that's not much money), but depending on where you live (suburban, metropolitan, rural), what the median income is in your state (they vary from region to region) and of course how many people in your household ($100,000 for one person versus two or more persons) and you can see how $100,000 may not mean the same to a person living in New York city vs a small suburban town in say Des Monies, IA.

Point being, last year during the arguments over changes to the tax code everyone was using the figure of a couple (as in two people filing jointly) making $250,000 or an individual making $200,000 were the cut off points and by association these people were deemed to be the low end of wealthy. Now according to the press anyone making over $100,000 now falls into the definition of "wealthy"?

Not that I would vote for Romney anyway but pluezzzzzz, people making $100,000 and up are hardly in the same financial class as Mitt Romney. Hell, Santorium and Gingrich are closer to Romney's income bracket than a person making $100,000.

So, why is the media pushing the $100,000 as the low end of the wealthy spectrum?

witch, wasn't it Romney accusing dems of crossing over and voting for Santorum?

@witchrunner

you must be the only person who thinks romney winning in liberal states must be spelled out. because, you know, its obvious that he isnt going to win the conservative, foaming-at-the-mouth racist gun loving bible thumpers.

Dumb FUX (1.14) Willard is now on record for having ate cat fish for the second time in his life!

For "having ate catfish"? Surely you know better. Pretty embarrassing on the smart meter but it does go with the icon nicely.

zaruski: You do prove that having a college degree is no sign of intelligence. A lot of people should be suing their colleges for failing to make them more intelligent. The education is obviously lacking. From your post, it's clear that you haven't even learned basic punctuation let, alone logic and reason. Can't come up with a clearer rational for being liberal other than calling conservatives names? Of course, we've been hearing for 4 years how one must be racist if they disagree with Obama. That's the best argument the libs have made for supporting his re-election. But, then again, with the economy in the tank, 4 wars and record deficits, trampling the Constitution, stimulus spending that created no jobs, let alone keeping the unemployment rate below 8%, well..... calling others racist is the best you have to go with.

I'm sorry kids, but I'm not sure I understand this story.

Ok, so ALL the indicators point to Mitt's disappointment in Mississippi and Alabama tomorrow States where the GOP electorate are even dumber and poorer than Okie Dixiecrats. Which, by MSNBC's reasoning should indicate a Santorum landslide.

But they go on to say....

IF Mitt DOES manage a victory it will be swell?????

Wha????

LUUU-CEEEE! YOU GO SOME 'SPLAININ' TO DO!

Obama/Biden 2012

As usual you have it all wrong. Most republicans do.

Logic and reason is on our side, including the evidence that despite republican obstruction Obama's policies have worked. Of course, republicans as soon as Obama was inaugurated said they were out to make him a one term President. This has never happened to this degree before. What's the difference? He's the first black President.

The economy is much better than when Obama took office. Look at the GDP which has sustained gains each and every quarter since Obama was elected. Unemployment is down overall, as are jobless claims. The DOW is around 13,000 much higher than when Obama started.

In short, claims that the economy is in the tank are just plain wrong. Obama never said he would keep unemployment below 8% go to politifact.com or factcheck.org and see for yourself.

We have a lot to go with unlike the Republican candidates, none of which have an answer to the economy and all their plans raise the deficit.

witch, neither the current crop of GOP candidates or yourself are conservatives. They are either neo-cons, aka wing nuts or libertarians. The republiCON party has pretty much kicked all traditional conservatives, labeling them as "RINOs"

Zuraski,

neither parties are perfect, i agree with you. what i dont agree with is that they are they equally as bad. as long as independents keep pretending that the correct solution is to be non-committal so they can criticize one side for purposefully wanting to do the wrong things, and the other side for trying to do the right things but failing, just so they can claim they hold the intellectual and moral high ground, they are equally as liable for the failure of our politics.

start paying attention. both sides dont do it. they are not equal, not comparable, not contrastable. not the same.

Just thought I'd comment as an independent... I am not happy with the leadership in either party - they all spend too much time and energy trying to score political points instead of trying to do what they think is best for the country. However, it is important to note that there are significant genuine philosophical differences between the parties - and these are often at the root of the disagreements (instead of politics).

Concerning economics and the Democratic ideals, they sound nice (ex: workers rights, helping the poor, etc.), but I think the net result of those policies hurt the economy and drive companies out of the country. The Republican ideals don't sound nice (less regulation, less government assistance), but I think they can often help the economy by encouraging businesses to stay or grow in the US - and they also push individuals to become productive members of society by reducing the safety net. By the way, I am a fan of a safety net and a level of regulation (as is 99% of people in both parties), but too much safety allows people to become complacent and I know far too many people on government assistance that don't really need it.

As to social issues, I do not want government involved in my personal life - so I largely side with Democrats over Republicans on these issues.

Getting back to your post, I am not happy with many positions taken by both parties. But, I disagree with your assertion that one party is ultimately trying to help and the other party is not - I think that is just party bias creeping in.

eric -- took a long time for the race card to show up. why do you insist on referring to President Obama as the first black president. He is the 44th President, color makes no difference to most but it sure comes up a lot here.

Though I do recall Leader Reid commenting back a few years about: his "light-skinned" appearance and speaking patterns "with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one."

I guess race has been an issue with the democrats for some time now.

witchrunner

From your post, it's clear that you haven't even learned basic punctuation let, alone logic and reason. Can't come up with a clearer rational for being liberal other than calling conservatives names?

As opposed to the "logic and reason" of the conservative party....

All women on birth control are sluts.

Rape babies are a gift from God and you should accept that gift.

We demand smaller government by putting MORE government in your marriage, bedroom and sex-life.

Marriage is a religious sacred institution, even though the origin of "marriage" is traced back to a non-religious societal institution (Code of Hammurabi), and the government contract represents a business arrangement with no religious influence whatsoever.

We must cut spending, but do not cut the military (one of the leading spending costs) or oil subsidies.

The economy is our focus, so the first thing we will do is attack Planned Parenthood.

We need to get rid of all regulations on businesses, all of them... which includes child labor laws preventing companies from hiring 5 year olds, minimum wage laws that prevent companies from paying $0.05 per hour, building codes that prevent the building you are in from collapsing on you, vehicle safety regulations that make sure you car is not a flaming cage of death, food safety laws which make sure that baby formula does not mutate your child into a toxic abomination, and environmental laws that restrict companies from dumping all of their toxic pollutants into our air and water (who needs to breath anyways). All regulations need to go.

We are against our hard-earned tax dollars going to something we do not like. However, we expect everyone else to pay for the things we do like, regardless of their personal feelings on it.

And my personal favorite...

We are against paying into the welfare entitlement, so we want to ban abortion and increase the number of welfare babies we pay entitlements to. Yes, we want to increase the population of welfare, even though we are against welfare.

You are right, witchrunner... all of those conservative platforms exemplify the highest level of logic and reason. (insert face-palm image here)

Seriously--can we get beyond this myth that Newt Gingrich is a brilliant person? He's not a dummy, assuredly, but getting a Ph.D. and Emory and then FAILING to get tenure at West Georgia University does not make you brilliant. It makes you pretty average, as far as History Ph.D.s go. Please.

You know I can't recall any liberals saying that disagreement with the President makes you racist. I only seem to see that particular argument being made by conservatives. Odd, isn't it.

Now, if someone is being racist when talking about the President, which happens all the time, well, there you go. Don't complain when you get called on it. You'd have to be INSANE to try and suggest that only liberals bring up his race in context.

I think the best argument for supporting his re-election is watching the Republican primaries. If that doesn't show you there is a very real difference amongst the options you'll have in Nov, you need to get your eyes and ears checked. The parties are NOT the same. How many line votes in Congress, or even more frightening your local legislatures, will it take to prove that?

witchrunner - you DO understand Romney was only running against the Republicans in those states, right????? When he goes up against Obama it will be a different story - even in the states that have gone Republican in the past!

Obama/Biden 2012

Interesting that so many people fuss about Romney not being truly a Christian. Who cares who accepts the "Nicene Creed". If you ask me that is what is wrong with religion today. Too much blowing smoke and fussing about unimportant details...all for the sake of justifying ones viewpoints.

The more important question is who is a cult and who is not? As far as I am concerned, any religion that is exclusive, encourages blind faith, teaches its followers not to trust themselves but rely on the religious heirarchy for the answers on how to live, breathe, etc. and spends enormous amounts of time preaching sermons that are mainly designed to perpetuate itself as an institution...these are cults.

So who is a cult? Muslims, Catholics, Southern Baptists, Evangelicals. Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Moonies, and the list goes on. Can't trust any of them.

marie -- do you believe in a supreme being of any sort?

Indieparty

Congratrulations.... nailed it.

Why the constant need to insert the word "evangelical" if front of Christian ? Does that make the liberal spinmeisters writing this crap feel like they have categorized something ?? Furthermore, Chris can put out four thousand words about the Nicene Creed, but I would suggest to you that only Catholics would have any real understanding of what it means to them.

You might as well analyze the lint in your navel .... or the "toejam" inside your socks. At the end of the day, it really doesn't matter because the Catholic population in the South is rather small compared to the rest of the country.

Whether Romney is Mormon is irrelevant. Southerners will vote for a conservative candidate they feel is trustworthy and will not try to grow government at every opportunity. That sure as hell leaves Obama out since he fails miserably on both points.

Navy Patriot - Indieparty did INDEED nail it! Well done Indie!

jim1455434 - could not be further from the truth. Well educated Southerners will do as they did in 2008 and vote for Obama. If you'll remember he carried a number of southern states. President Obama is much better at keeping his nose out of women's business and is certainly more trustworthy than Mitt Romney could EVER be. They see past the smoke screen Romney throws up every time he changes his mind. They understand you cannot trust Romney from one day to the next AND they don't want religion in our politics. They have more sense!

marie -- do you believe in a supreme being of any sort?

Over here! Over here! Ask me! Ask Me!

no. And I think anyone that does is a loon. Though they are entitled to.

I'm tired of exit polls and only look forward to the EXIT of the GOP ....

Captain, @1.4. You say you can't recall liberals crying "racism" for disagreeing with Obama? You haven't read this site very often then. There are examples even today of such.

I've been called a racist here for disagreeing with him. If anybody here knew me, my family or my ethnic background, you would know why I find that so laughable. I would have to hate myself, my ancestors, my kids and grandkids if I were to be prejudiced based on ethnicity and skin color.

Bottom line is there is REAL racism in this country that needs to be addressed; I know that from a very personal level. When people throw their FAKE race cards because they have no counter to a discussion , THEY'RE the racists. And, they do HORRIBLE damage to the cause of eradicating racism.

Ron @1.39. Please tell me a piece of legislation passed by Republicans that intrudes in your "personal" life. Seems to me the Dems taking over your health insurance, for one example, are the ones taking over your personal life.

mj, you're exactly right.

I will vote for Santorum when the GOP primaries come to Illinois. My wife will vote for Romney. My guess is Romney will win the nomination and that is ok with me. I don't like the media or the " Establishment Republicans" to tell me whom to vote for. I like Santorum personally and I like his core conservative principles. I think Romney has a great tax plan and I admire his business acumen and success.

We will both vote for the GOP nominee in the fall, and I suspect nearly all conservatives and moderate conservatives will as well. Do you really expect Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, Kansas, all these hard red states to vote for Obama in the fall? The battle will be in Michigan, Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Colorado, New Mexico and other "swing" states. The fact that Romney has done well in large swing states should give Obama pause.

Far too many people were fooled in 2008. Some conservatives stayed home because they did not like McCain. That will not happen this time.

2012 will be a referendum on the failure that is Obama: 4 years of trillion dollar deficits. $4.29 gasoline today in Chicago. 4.5 million FEWER Americans employed than 4 years ago. 8.3% unemployment. ( Even sympathetic reporters don't see the rate going down before November, many feel it may go back up). Housing is still a disaster. We have no energy policy. Government takeover of healthcare.

Enjoy your smugness now liberals. Given that Americans know what we now have, there will be substantial opposition to your guy. Once the dust settles and the scrapping is over, look for a unified party that will take back the country.

@ StillSeeking Sanity #1.46,

Basically you have distorted the truth. Outside of a narrow win in Florida, the South was pretty solid Republican.

Again you sneaky little attemp to label those as voting for Obama as well-educated is an arrogant slap in the face to all "well-educated" Southerners who did not vote for the vagueness of "hope and change", who did not vote for an inexperienced U.S. Senator mostly on record as voting "present".

For everything else there is Mastercard because Obama sure as hell cannot present s federal budget proposal that is anywhere close to reality. Well-educated, Southern Cpa's know Obama is a financial moron.

a unified party that will take back the country

Where did your country go?

You're right, the GNOP wants to take this country back... all the way to 1892!

Real Americans want to see this country move FORWARD!

The fact that Romney has done well in large swing states should give Obama pause.

Good luck with that!!!

Willard has managed to alienate every voting block with the exception of angry white men!

In other words, the tea bagger base! ;o)

@Chris-

Interesting notes. But if anyone wants to see just where Romney comes down on the subject of religion- just remember his speech at Texas A&M in '07- "Faith in America".

Here's the link- it's worth another read. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=16969460

Hey folks, back on after a week in the time out corner. The mods didn't like my comments about Rush Limbaugh. It's funny that guys like Bob Jones can spew insults at other Viners and get away with it, but hey, it is what it is. Anyway, Romney is about as welcome in the south as a late season blizzard. He will never bring the party of NO together, so Gary 420 take your reality pills and get ready for four more.

jim - what results DID you watch??? You just out and out lie! North Carolina, Virginia, and Florida were carried by Obama and McCain narrowly won in 5 other Southern states. Your IGNORANCE is showing!

"Romney’s wins have all come in places where voters were more educated, wealthier, and less evangelical."

Eduicated is an interesting idea for romney voters..would have to ask them if..they have looked at how many times he has changed his view of everything to get votes ? HAs anyone really checked what he claims for truth and being factual ? From what I have seen so far...all of those running on the republican side have made claims that missewd the truth areas...or at least stretched them pretty thin. What i find interesting is that in any of the debates we havew seebn so far..not one comintator has had facts in form of him or her to verify what these clowns claim as truth. And that should be a requirement of any debates coming up and into the presidential elections from both parties. In reality...not one of the republicans running have come up with a real jobs agenda..sorry, but cutting more taxes for their wealthy friends will not create jobs..it has not in the past and will not now.

ivan, NC - NC is well educated and voted for Obama in 2008.

jim - for the record the well educated voted against a man who didn't think the country had a problem with it's economy then two days later "suspended" his campaign to work on the economy. We didn't vote for someone who picked Palin (really?????) to be his running mate. We voted for the man who was smarter and still is. We voted for a man who is working to fix the mess - the quagmire Bush/Cheney created. We voted for the best then and the man who is still heads above the competition!

Marie, they are all cult members, in fact the original Christian's were members of a Gnostic Mushroom Cult who use to eat shrooms and talk to god.

Most of these cults believed that people outside the cult weren't fit to live, they all lived by a doctrine of indoctrination or extermination. Old Jewish texts have actual laws that were used to justify the killing of Christians, Pagan, Zoroastrians and so on. I know this is a wingnut video but he goes into the very early laws that condemned Christians to death for preaching in Jewish controlled landshttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zlUGAaKu-c. The Catholic Church would be nonexistent today had they not used the indoctrination or extermination model. All the wealth they have now they stole from other people around the world who they thought were "pagans".

Today if it wasn't for so called Christians of all denominations as well as the Jews having the Muslims to hate they would be at each others throat I promise you that. These people can't pretend to be "God's" chosen if there are other groups out there pretending to be "god's" chosen too, so sooner or later each religion will try to either convert or exterminate the other, leaving us sane people caught in the cross fire.

Mormons believe they are the only ones who get to become space alien gods so if elected he will push his religion just as Santorum would push his down our throat. Any candidate who even mentions his religion while on the clock should be fired and all benefits taken away.

The number 1 and number 2 questions I would like all Republican candidates to answer:

How is your tax plan different than George Bush's trickle down economics tax plan?

(Given that your tax plan is very similar to Bush's and that is the reason we are in this mess) How is returning to that tax plan going to create jobs or help the economy?

"I am learning to say y'all and I like grits,” Romney said Friday."

The Wall Street Journal quoted Romney while Romney was in Mississippi, as saying he likes "cheesy grits".

I'd bet Romney never met a grit before he arrivedi in Mississippi, and then only "pretended" to taste some.

He's "learning" to say "y'all", so he thinks he's "connecting" with Mississippians?

Obama / Biden 2012

Sorry, Rob, but once again you are spouting right-wing drivel. Obama may be trailing to Romney in two polls, but three other major ones back him up or at least give a tie. Check (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html). And frankly, the race is somewhat tipped in Obama's favor, although by a slim margin. Romney must do two things at the same time; campaign for independents and moderates WHILE uniting his increasingly right-wing party. Obama just has to go for the independents and the moderates; the liberals are mostly pro-Obama, and to be exact he is a pretty moderate president. It won't be that hard. But there is still the economy and gas prices, which will play a major role. I predict an Obama victory, but it ain't gonna be easy.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

dirt #1.51

Here's five.

• Vaginal probe in Virginia
• North Dakota defending people who commit a crime in the defense of saving a fetus in abortion (can be construed as a defense of abortion-doctor killings).
• DOMA.
• Patriot Act
• Blunt-Rubio amendment.

Need I say more???

"Nine states where Romney won -- and exit polls are available -- showed the average Romney state is a place where 51% of GOP primary voters are college grads...The average state Romney lost included 48% college grads,.... Alabama and Mississippi are even worse than those numbers for Romney.......\In 2008, in Alabama, just 42% said they were college grads,"

Gee, I thought the Liberals try to portray GOP voters as 'not very bright', but those percentages of college grads are far higher than the general population, which has a 30% college graduate rating.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Of course, we should remember that one of Obama's key groups that voted for him in 2008 was 'high school dropouts', where he scored a margin of 63% vs only 35% for McCain.

Romney must do two things at the same time; campaign for independents and moderates WHILE uniting his increasingly right-wing party. Obama just has to go for the independents and the moderates; the liberals are mostly pro-Obama, and to be exact he is a pretty moderate president. It won't be that hard. But there is still the economy and gas prices, which will play a major role. I predict an Obama victory, but it ain't gonna be easy.

There is one more thing you are not taking into consideration... Ron Paul.

Romney not only has to get the indies and moderates, while keeping the extremists, but he also has to fight the Republicans supporting Ron Paul. There is a good chance that Paul will still run in the general, under a 3rd party, and he has gained a lot of support from Republicans who are disenfranchised with their party.

As it stands, Obama is showing a much stronger front while the GOP is seeing their voters splinter into different groups. I would not expect every Republican to rally behind Romney, given the distaste many have for him.

In fact, with the GOP splintering between the extreme-religious right, the libertarians, the establishment, and the moderate right-leaning... I would be surprised to see them all come together behind one person in the future.

roy wilson ---- what you eatin out there boy! hmmmmmmmmmmmmm. sure smacks of grits and catfish. i happen to like cajun catfish. i can almost taste the grease on my fingers.

ROY WILSON-336103

Time for school again?

Gee, I thought the Liberals try to portray GOP voters as 'not very bright', but those percentages of college grads are far higher than the general population, which has a 30% college graduate rating.

The percentage of grads can be higher than the average in a state, but if there's only 16 of them, that doesn't do much for your point, does it?

Of course, we should remember that one of Obama's key groups that voted for him in 2008 was 'high school dropouts', where he scored a margin of 63% vs only 35% for McCain.

So 63% of dropouts were smart enough to see that 4 more years of what they got for the past 8 wasn't going to work... sounds pretty smart to me!

Gee, I thought the Liberals try to portray GOP voters as 'not very bright', but those percentages of college grads are far higher than the general population

Oh Roy...

Liberals do NOT portray you as that, your kind does that all on their own. Need I remind you...

Wanting people to go to college makes you a snob.

Universities are liberal indoctrination camps.

Going to college turns you into Obama.

College students should not vote because they don't have the life experience.

Those are all quotes from Republicans. So don't blame liberals for the retarded comments coming from your own party.

marc 2 ---- watch the series "swamp wars". i think this portrays the average teapublican. a group of inbred degenerates that are led to the polls to vote. they arrive via "the short bus".

Concerning economics and the Democratic ideals, they sound nice (ex: workers rights, helping the poor, etc.), but I think the net result of those policies .... The Republican ideals don't sound nice (less regulation, less government assistance)....

Somebody wake Ron up. He's been asleep for the past 20 years.

Those are not economic "policies". They are mindless philosophical underpinnings. The modern GOP goes in plenty for government assistance for rich people, and the part about less regulation is absurd. Open a history book. Plenty of regulations on the state and national levels can be pinned on GOP politicians, especially recently.

While I agree that both parties look too narrowly to their 'base', since 1990 it is the Democrats who are more likely to be practical. Since 2000, the GOP is almost certain to be blindly dogmatic when it comes to politicis and completely hypocrtical when it comes to economics.

After all, it was Ronald Reagan (Republican) who TRIPLED the national debt in 8 short years.

It was Bill Clinton (Democrat, aided by a divided Congress) who restored federal budget surpluses.

And it was rubber stamping George W. Bush (with Republican control of both houses) who again DOUBLED the national debt in 8 short years, deliberately turned a federal surplus into a deficit, abandaned "pay as you go" principles, created massive, new federal bureaucracies, and left a legacy of inadequate tax revenues coupled with massive federal outlays for unfunded wars, Homeland Security, unfunded expansion of government-paid for prescription drugs, and so on.

In spite of that, during Bush's reign over one million dollars (on average) was given to every rich family in America.

But now the GOP has learned it's lesson?

Fiscal conservatives my ear.

This guy is a flip-flopper and a liar. He will become anything he thinks the voters want just for now.

Of course he is. He is a politician. You can go through candidate this year and last election cycle and find where everyone of them have changed positions. By the way, it looked like the link you provided didn't quote him on wanting a mandate. I only saw where he was suggesting giving tax incentives.

Sorta like Obama, eh, J. Richter. You know, like taking PAC money, closing Guantanamo, the Patriot Act, etc., etc., etc.

@ Steven Rennie: Kind of hard to not take PAC money when everyone else is doing it. Santorum may be running a much more civil campaign than Romney, but Romney's hideous overspending is blanketing the airwaves and literally giving him wins. Even though Santorum is much more fiscally conservative than Romney.

As far as Guantanamo goes, the President did try on a few ocassions to close the prison, however, Congress refused to allow it, since they would neither allow it's occupants into American prisons, or allow the US Government to move them to other countries. Can't blame the President for Congress being filled with a bunch of pussies.

The people over at RedState should start subscribing to the Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/mitt-romney-and-the-individual-mandate-a-highly-misleading-dnc-ad/2012/03/11/gIQATACV6R_blog.html?wprss=rss_fact-checker

Four Pinnochios. I think that's some kind of record.

That Red State is talking their stuff from a DNC campaign ad is simply idiotic.

Do they believe that the party that gaveus Pbama is suddenly an advocate of the truth?

Lies backed up by cropped tapes. Good stuff.

Thatnks and a tip of the hat to the WaPo. They deserve it.

J. Richter - Show me one politician that hasn't changed his position. Are you going to tell me that in your entire life you've never changed you're mind on anything. This whole thing is getting ridiculous. The reason we have so many lying politicians is because we demand they lie to us. Our elections have become nothing more that "What are you going to do for me" with politicians that have no choice but to tell you what you want to hear.

Steven Rennie, repeated once again for those who missed it the first 100 times. Congress refused to fund closing Gitmo; taking PAC money because the SCOTUS Citizens United ruling in 2010 means both sides will play by the same rules. As for the Patriot Act, can't disappear soon enough but I'm not the President and I don't see those daily intelligence briefings that might make me think otherwise.

just like Odumbo right J.Richter?

There is a difference between changing one's mind on an issue, having a position evolve and being a flip flopper like Romney. Romney changes his mind depending on what direction the wind in blowing; he often changes it within hours as he did recently--he was against the Blunt-Rubio amendment and immediately his staff issued a statement that he was for the Blunt-Rubio amendment. Maybe Romney's problem isn't that he's a flip flopper, he just has no core; he doesn't know if he is for or against anything until he sticks his finger in the air to see which way the GOP winds are blowing.

The truth is the entire GOP has a serious case of flip/flop-itis. They were for the health insurance mandate; they were for insurance providers covering contraception; they were for cap & trade; they were for infrastructure spending; they were for reforming the health care system; they were for just about everything until President Obama supported it--then they all flip flopped like beached whales. How can republicans expect Mitt Romney, Santorum or Gingrich not to be flip floppers when their entire party is one giant one.

Consider that the current white house occupant doesn't care what people want I think I'd rather have one that at least tries to tell you what you want to hear

What are you talking about Omni? Obama ran on a platform of health care reform and he got it elected and did what he said he was going to do, except for dropping a public option.

@J. Richter,

Your are exactly right. And you can add to that that Romney was heavily involved in the GW Bush decision to include a mandate and a fine with Medicare Part D. Most people do not realize that the moment you become eligible for Medicare Part A, you are required by law to subscribe to Medicare Part D (which is actually private insurance just like AHCA.) If you do not subscribe at that time and subscribe later, you are required to pay a $5,000 fine plus your Medicare Part D premium is increased 1% a month (with no cap) until you do sign up. Romney and his RomneyCare staffers were instrumental in getting this made a part of Medicare Part D, which benefitted private insurance and drug companies while raising drug proces for every American who takes prescription medications.

You can also add that Romney did not originate the idea of mandated coverage or fines for not participating. If you want to see where it originated, here is a link:

http://healthcarereform.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=004189

It was a REPUBLICAN requirement proposed in 1989 by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative Republican think tank and subsequently followed by both Romney and GW Bush before Obama. The only consistency that I can find in the GOP anti-AHCA rhetoric is that both the mandates/fines that they approve of were instituted by white men.

Ron Paul is the only one that doesn't flip-flop on everything. He doesn't go back and forth on every topic like Mitt does.

Ron Paul is the only one that doesn't flip-flop on everything. He doesn't go back and forth on every topic like Mitt does.

Yup. He just consistently stays way out there in right field.

The real problem is Romney stated a position without understanding what the Blount amendment was about. This is unacceptable for a president to do.

One reason that Independents are independent is that they are open minded and not idealogical. Romney's ability to pursue winning solutions without regards to idealogical purity makes him an All-American, Can-do pragmatist.

The founding fathers were of far different political persuasions, ranging from Hamilton's opting for a strong central government to Jefferson's hide-bound individuality rounded out by the populism of John Adams.

Yet with all their widely differing views on slavery, states' rights and industrial/rural cultures, the founders gave and they took, and they formulated a Constitution that has successfully weathered a civil war and only 27 amendments for over 200 years. A triumph of reasoned compromise.

Idealogical purity leads to the insanity of cultural inbreeding. The great philosophical thinkers came from Greece, from China, maybe even England. The great do-ers come from America.

Romney (and Obama) is in the tradition of America, a do-er, a seeker of solutions, a pragmatist unimpressed by arcane discourses about how to make government the size of a bathtub, or whether contraception leads to more sex. How many angels can dance on the head of pin, Rick? Is a child taught by US tax dollars more leftist than a child taught by municipal taxes, Newt?

DB Akron,

Name a politician that hasn't taken a poorly thought out position on a major topic. I can't think of anyone that would meet that litmus test (this includes past and present Reps and Dems).

Romney Romney he's our man if he can't screw up the economy no one can !

Congratulations Eric ! You just made cheerleader for the junior high school in Chicago's hometown !!

Keep those "deep, meaningful and insightful" comments coming ...... ahh, the mind of a libbie !!!

Steven: So it's okay for the Republicans to get money from Super PACS, but because the President realized that he couldn't fight on an even battle field without doing the same, that makes him bad? Give me a break! Romney has flip-flopped so many times, he reminds me of a tuna on the deck of a fishing boat. As for Santorum, what a idiot.....he'll surely lose the woman's vote with his ranting and raving. Gingrich is smart, but he's too brash and too narcissisic (sp). Plus, in reviewing both Santorum's and Romney's so-called budget plans, it was proven that BOTH of them would run up the deficit even worse than President Obama has been accused of doing! It's beyond me why ANYONE would vote for either one!

chris @2.11, spoke like a true RACIST. Take your race card back; people are tired of these fake racism charges. It doesn't work anymore.

It doesn't work anymore.

Then why do you feel it necessary to talk about it in every single comment of yours? lol

Sure are defensive for some reason little fella!

The truth causes you problems doesn't it Fisty or Feisty or Fasty or whatever your name is !

His/Her comments are probably more than OUTWEIGHED by your frequency !! What are you defensive about ?

Dirt....do you realize that the "reverse racism" charges that you parrot from Rush were actually the main defense in the early 1970's of the KKK? Just figured you would like to know the source of your inspiration.

What are you defensive about ?

I'm sure the dirtball is capable of defending himself - he doesn't need any help from you, Gilligan! ;o)

Congratulations Eric ! You just made cheerleader for the junior high school in Chicago's hometown !!

Keep those "deep, meaningful and insightful" comments coming ...... ahh, the mind of a libbie !!!

I'll bet you're a Santorum supporter. Why that might be will be left as an exercise for the audience.

As I have told people over and over...the Bible Thumper "Pretend Christians" in the Rep Party won't vote for a Mormon.

Newt gets the less educated voters. Santorum picks them up as well.

Ahh, jim. Considering your history of spouting right-wing drivel, I'd think you'd make the greatest head cheerleader in Grand Old People (GOP) High, home of the Dumbfounded Elephants.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

I think you have it backwards. I believe it was Winston Churchill:

"If you weren't liberal when you were young, you have no heart.
If you're still liberal when you're older, you have no brain."

" He has all the Virtues I dislike , and none of the Vices I admire . "

Thats more Churchill for you .

Ahhh, good 'ol Winston... then I suppose my heart is just too big to ever affiliate myself with the GOP.

I agree with the first part of his sentiment though... there aren't many things in this world that i find more terrifying than a young Republican!

What is terrifying to me is a politician that says that "god told him this or that" Religion has no place in politics. The founding fathers did not write the constitution based on religion. Freedom of religion is huge and spelled out in the Consitution but very, very different than a non separation of church and state.

diver @ 3.4. then why did Obama say his "Christian belief" told him it was right to increase taxes on the rich?

I guess he was trying to explain to Republicans that Jesus spoke of EQUAL sacrifice and EQUAL reward. That, and he may have wanted to point out his Christian faith.

Anyway, I didn't necessarily enjoy it, but it would be a hoot to see Santorum or Romney question this!!!!

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

Right you are! Obama put an end to those wars right away, didn't extend the surge or redeploy troops. Politicians will protect our interests abroad, if matters not if they have an R or D behind their name.

So you're saying Obama will not go to war with Iran if they attack Israel or develop a nuclear weapon? Quit being naive.

There's a fine line between bravery and stupidity. Going to war when your economy is down clearly counts as stupidity, though.

When you are weak, you invite war. Once you are deemed weak, they will keep hitting you until you level them. It's just the law of the wild kingdom.

Bambette - you've obviously stepped into an arena where you are a lightweight.

Going into wars that put your economy into the toilet is not smart. Starting new ones because you have to be Rambo is also not smart. But, both are very Republican.

That brings up an interesting topic. It was admitted this weekend by WH that Obama DID say he'd offer Israel help AFTER the election. What a hypocrite and self-serving person he is!

@ StillSeeking Sanity #4.6,

So why did Obama start a war in Libya with U.S. cruise missiles ? How much did that cost our country .... about a billion dollars or so ? Libya means nothing to our security here in the U.S.

You do realize also, that wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were approved by Congress ?

jim - again reading comprehension is not your strong suit. The Libyan war was run by NATO. And, the war in Iraq came about because of Bush's lies - plain and simple.

Actually, in the Bible Belt yes he is.

You are right. Santorum won Tennessee for that very reason...Bible belt. Scary stuff.

Believing in a Supreme Being is what gives Southerners a sense of ethics. When tornadoes ravage the South (and other parts of the country as well), it is Southerners who are most charitable with their financial resources.

Liberals understand greed and opportunity while looking down upon the South with an attitude of haughty arrogance.

jim-1455434 - I love how you make things up. Northerners are just as charitable as the southerners. And, considering Romney, Bush, Koch, etc., no one understand greed as well as the GOP - and their attitude stinks!

Perhaps, one day you will actually FIND sanity. Look it up ! Southerners charitable giving is higher as a percentage of their per capita income than Northerners. But again, look it up and see for yourself !!

P.S. Wall Street is not located in the South ! You've trapped yourself again !!

jim - I'm looking for sanity in the GOP but clearly there is none to be found. I never said Wall Street was in the south - clearly reading is not your strong suit. I said greed is well understood by the GOP and names Romney, Bush, Koch. They did teach you to read and comprehend somewhere, right?????

Believing in a Supreme Being is what gives Southerners a sense of ethics. When tornadoes ravage the South (and other parts of the country as well), it is Southerners who are most charitable with their financial resources.

you think so? I feel mighty charitable when my tax dollars go to support all of the social causes the states in the south refuse to pay for.

You're lucky what you say isn't true because if the big northern industrial cities didn't fund your poverty, there would be people starving in the streets in places like Mississippi and Alabama.

My thought is never to pay attention to a poll in March, wait until late October. Too much can happen between now and then.

I don't think the polls mean much until there's a definite GOP nominee.

What the Republicans should be more concerned about is that they seem to be voting for the person that they WANT to be the nominee (Santorum), rather than the person who CAN win the general election (Romney). The Democrats used to do that (think of McGovern and Mondale) until they learned better.

The economy is recovering slowly. But unevenly. There are still quite a few states that are really really bad shape. Iowa on the other hand is doing pretty good. Our home values haven't changed much. Jobs can be found. Our soldiers are coming home. We are fairly happy. Other states have lost everything and are left wanting.

Look what the unions have done to Detroit. The results are now apparent for all to see.

Look what the unions have done to Detroit. The results are now apparent for all to see.

You're becoming a poster child for mouth with no brain attached.

What this should read is look what Generous Motors did to Detroit. The results are now apparent for all to see...

I have to say this reminds me of the time Daddy Bush went to the store to buy socks and was astounded by the scanners in the check out line.

Don't ever tell me GWB was not a rich east coast brat.

"Romney is better than that weird phony Santorum"

Anyone is better than Obama who mostly voted "present" as U.S. Senator. I guess he figured it would be hard to criticize his voting record ..... when he didn't vote.

jim-1455434 - been listening to Fox again haven't you? That myth has been debunked over and over. My guess is you're still a birther, too!

@ #8.3,

I sure hope you are not a gambling man ..... by now you would be broke .... probably wearing a barrel like the old cartoons ! Speaking of cartoons, what's "Joe, the gift that keeps on giving" Biden doing today ?

Maybe one day, you will find sanity.

He voted present 129 times apx 3% of his voting record, So while it is not a lot it does make one wonder why someone who was elected to a position to represent his constituents would abstain from representing them.

jim - will never find sanity in the new GOP. How sad that a party has disintegrated into the small minds it now is. Pathetic really.

Actually, the Liberal elite are the ones that have screwed up many minds in college. You know the type - they go to academia as a student, get their mind polluted, then graduate & attempt working in the real world. After getting their nether regions thoroughly kicked, they dive back into academia as a Grad or Doctoral student, then into a teaching slot.

All the while - teaching things they've never done to impressionable minds willing to listen...

Homie D. Clown - your moniker is PERFECT for you. The only people who've messed up minds in college are the far right that are afraid of even their shadow! They want to put women back 100 years because a smart woman is clearly a problem for a Republican man. Yep, I'm still Seeking Sanity in the GOP but none to be found!

And you moniker is perfect for you as well ! We hope you actually find sanity pretty soon !! The depth of your replies is an "opportunity for improvement".

If the "far right" as you claim is afraid of their shadow, as you claim. what does an extreme leftard like yourself fear ? Are you afraid mainstream U.S.A. will reject Obama as they did in November, 2010 ?

jim - no sanity to be found in the GOP but I keep thinking it might happen. Then I read comments by Republicans like you and I find that is probably not going to be the case. 2010 was a result of the "we're for jobs" lies the GOP told then when they got into office they began to work on women's issues; religion; anything but jobs. We won't forget and I think even the moderate Republicans - few left - will not be fooled by the lying buffons the far right is running. And, for your info - I'm a registered Independent who has voted Republican in the past - when the party was respectful. But, until they get some integrity I won't be voting for the GOP again. But of course, an extreme rightie like yourself doesn't look for integrity in his party - just control over everyone's life. Pathetic!

Now you can go ahead and sling more barbs - I'm signing off. Have a life to live and I've wasted enough time with the likes of you.

All the while - teaching things they've never done to impressionable minds willing to listen...

Like evolution and stuff, right?

Source, if you please. I would like to read the entire article.

Care to cite your source - if you have one?

Bob, you're from Virginia, so why would we listen to someone like you that has a governor that forces women to get an ultrasound before getting an abortion (and with not a trace in the law about the baby daddy!). Your gov is slick, but sleeeeeezy.

MartyinLA: Planned Parenthood does ultrasounds before abortions. And in case you missed it in civics class, a governor only signs legislation that has first passed the house and senate. Surely, you learned that along the way, right?

Googled one of the quotes...here's what I found...

www.liveleak.com/view?i=74c_1296844461

My flaw with the conclusion...does "highest graduation rate" really translate into "most educated"?

He's quoting a yahoo on Yahoo!

Planned Parenthood does not force women to have ultrasounds before abortions. The Virginia governor signed the bill, after saying he would not support it.

The actual voting preferences in these states are much more determined by the popularity of the local republican hierarchy, and whichever candidate that hierarchy is pushing, rather than other considerations. Extremism in these states is and always has been a tribal trait. Education and wealth notwithstanding.

How does that work? If poor people tend to vote democrat, wouldn't the whole of the south be blue then....?

nitro, the poor people that think the government only takes care of the "other poor people" tend to vote republiCON.

Actually, low information voters tend to vote for Republicans. That is a fact.

@nitrot150: It works just as the logic implies. Poor white people, especially poor ignorant, white people wish to look good and obedient to their uppers, and will generally do whatever it takes to please them. When the south was democratic they conducted themselves the same, at least until the southern democrats allowed intergration and the voting rights act. Then these ,um, people, wishing to remain pure, ran right into the arms of the waiting republicans. These people don't process information very well.

Job1

I'm have trouble finding anything that corroborates your statement that "low information voters tend to vote for Republicans" is a fact. Could you please tell me where that came from. Please don't cite some liberal blog but give us all some legit proof unbiased of this.

Thanks

"Hey Bob, I agree with you 100% that most uneducated voters from Virginia vote for the GOP/TB's"

@REB#11.13: Go to the US Census website. Track the states of the old confederacy. Track the educational and income levels of those who call themselves caucasian. Go all the way back to the election of Ronald Reagan. Now, check the precints and counties where these people vote. No matter where you look, you will find this pattern continues to trend higher. Fact now, its not just in the old confederacy states. Takes a while, but if you really want to see it you can. Ignorant poor white people who vote, nearly always vote republican. Not the same with blacks and other minorities though. White welfare recipients, meth heads, etc. love calling themselves republicans. Fact, without these people, I doubt the tea party could have ever amounted to much at all.

Thanks Mac but not really what I was thinking of as a litany of FACTS.

You said - "Ignorant poor white people who vote, nearly always vote republican. Not the same with blacks and other minorities though."

Does that mean that ignorant poor blacks and other minorities nearly always vote Democratic?

What about northern, midwestern and western states? Does the same logic hold in those places too?

You see what I mean about facts and not drawing potentially wrong conclusions to support a weak argument?

Reb-1013231: Your line 3. Yes, in all areas.

Your line 4: Same logic. To lesser degrees in midwest and northeastern states relative to poor ignorant whites. Probably due to osmosis. Balance of educated to ignorant is generally equal or greater.

Boy oh boy do I ever agree with you. Greed, greed and more greed. And Santorum is a complete nut job.

They are making this soooooooooooo ez for Obama. Would like to hear more honest discourse on the real issues.....

The real, honest discourse?

Like Obeyme doesn't know what he's doing? Like how the Dems want more handouts to trickle down so that they can keep their voting segment intact?

Again Homie - your moniker fits you to a T

Lol @ Homie.

Democratic "Trickle Down Economics". Take from the wealthy and it will trickle down past the middle class straight to those who "need it most".

No investing or work necessary (except for the rich people.)

Who would have thought that being successful in this country would become a curse.

Well, Raff, taking from the rich and giving to the poor isn't good, but its much better than "Trickle Up Economics," where tax cuts that are given to the wealthy stay in the wealthy and let them assume more control over the economy.

And the concept that the rich should pay their fair share makes the right think that success in America is a curse??? Man, how brainwashed and senseless can you get???

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

Oh come on Freshieee, you know as well as I do we can RAISE taxes until we are blue in the face, and they will always find a way around them. I say get rid of the FINES for not paying your taxes/evasion/fraud and just throw them in a prison for 6 months. No special treatment other than maybe minimum security and No computers, no T.V and Two phone calls a day.

Get them to pay the current rate first, then you can reason that raising the rate will actually do some good. It makes no bleedin' sense to raise taxes before you eliminate the cuts. Obama should have just told the republicans to stuff it and that he would get his other wishes without their help. That man has the power to obliterate the republicans just by letting the middle class cuts expire bc the repubs are being unreasonable. If we really wanted to keep them, we just let our little republican representative know we are not happy with them for trying to BRIBE the president that way. And thats how Obama should have made it look, LIKE BRIBERY/blackmail, bc it was. But both parties do it and therefore they are both GUILTY. But your boy Obama is sure ticking me off lately, and he might have, MIGHT HAVE made me slightly more willing to POSSIBLY vote for him again, if he had just swayed them to let Texas keep her VOTER I.D Law. Such a simple thing and yet a good preventative measure, I do not want to have fraud happen before we stop it. That makes NO SENSE!!!

So hows it going, Freshieee?

Freshieeeeeeeeeeeeee.....

That's why I am in favor of a graduated flat tax system. No loopholes, just pay your percentage and be done. No refund checks, no IRS bull$h!t. Pretty simple and it would boost the gov't tax revenue.

So by your estimate, if I become independently wealthy by making good choices with my money and investing, not using credit and build my wealth that way, I should pay more? How dumb are you? And what is the wealthys' fair share? Tax the wealthy at 100% and you still couldnt cover the debt spending for this year. If you want to tax more, tax EVERYONE more.

Okay, I gotta a lot of posting to do, so I'm gonna answer Raff first:

Raff, I am not necessarily sure about the benefits of a graduated flat tax system. If what I assume about it is correct (progressive in nature, each bracket pays a higher percent), it sounds like a plausible system. My doubts about it are that you don't offer any economic incentives. Granted, loopholes are not good, but there ought to be some tax incentives for people to do things. People will do something when they have an incentive for it; I'd buy a house if the government would give me a tax break. There are numerous tax incentives that help the economy; like the ones on donating to charity or buying a house. In my opinion, I'd do away with most of the tax expenditures in the system while keeping ones that are actually proven to help the economy in a significant manner.

And yes, by my calculations, if you become wealthy with your investments, you should pay more. Why, you may ask??? Because with power comes great responsibility. Nowadays people with money have a great amount of influence in Congress because of lobbyists and campaign donations. In addition, nowadays only wealthy people can run for office in anything above the local level. So, naturally, as people gather more power, there must be checks on that power. Taxes are one of them. And besides, a progressive tax system is probably one of the best systems possible. The lower classes don't make as much money, so their tax rates are lower, and the rich make more money, and so their rates are higher, but smaller in proportion to what they make. 10% to a person who makes $20,000 has a bigger impact on their lives than 10% for someone making $1 million. And to be fair, if we hypothetically taxed the rich at 100%, the rich simply wouldn't pay the tax and protest. But if they did pay it, we would probably reduce the deficit considerably. Raising the rates for the wealthy back to 39.6% (instead of the current 35%) and increasing the capital gains tax would earn perhaps $800 billion over ten years, about 10% of cumulative deficits. So increasing it much more would cover the deficit spending over this year. And in case you haven't checked any of my deficit proposals, I say repeal the Bush tax cuts FOR EVERYONE.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

Texas Gal

Technically, there is no major problem with the IRS telling people to pay their taxes, because most people who can already due. The problem is with LEGAL loopholes in the system that allows people to pay a lower rate. If you reform the tax code, you could make it legal-proof and then have the wealthy pay higher effective rates than what they do now. But raising the rate would technically raise the effective rate, as the number of loopholes would stay the same but the amount in taxes needed to be paid would rise. And unfortunately, Obama cannot tell the Republicans to stuff it (as much as he and I would like to) because the GOP controls the House. He couldn't even do it when he had both chambers, because the GOP would filibuster it and stave off the bill from passing. And technically, the GOP held hostage the unemployment benefits along with the tax cuts. If he let the tax cuts expire, the benefits would too and our economy would flounder.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

And as for your concern on Texas' Voter ID law, technically it would endanger the rights of minorities, particularly Hispanics. 11% of Hispanic voters, or about 300,000 people, don't have a Voter ID, and so they wouldn't be able to vote. And the state of Texas was extremely negligent in helping these people because one third of the counties in your state have no facilities to help them, and they would have to pay hundreds of dollars just to exercise their basic rights as an American. Is that really necessary??? Tell me how bad voter fraud is in Texas. Probably isn't that high. In Wisconsin they passed a harsh voter ID law, and not even 1% of the votes cast in the past 10 years or more were fraudulent. And the suspicious part about it is that it seems to be targeted especially at minorities who tend to vote Democratic. Now this may just be coincidence, but it seems doubtful. In addition, doesn't requiring a voter ID sound just a little like literacy tests and poll taxes??? It does to me, mainly because the laws seem to impact minorities (particularly Democrat-leaning minorities) more than the majority. It would be a lot harder for the Justice Dept. to condemn Texas if they had tried to help minorities get ID cards in a less expensive and more efficient manner. But Texas didn't. Even with their surplus they couldn't build more facilities to help minorities in those counties??? That sounds a little suspicious.

I'm doing relatively well anyway. Responding to commentators left and right. Just waiting for the election. I am more terrified of the 2012 election (not because Obama won't win, but because it will be a nail-biter) than of spiders and mosquitoes. Hope to see you again on the vine!

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

And yet this is a state which passed in state tuition for illegals children. Not real popular bc we did that but hey we support them and are trying to help them. Perry was getting bashed by Demos for doing that!! He took some major heat by passing it and I was totally cool with it. But I am all for an identi-chip to provide ID and maybe a nice little lost and found benefit (I am a mom) and have also been a victim of attempted identity theft and the only thing that stopped it was an awesome cashier noticed a guy using a card with a feminine name on it, asked to see his ID, he said I was his wife and the cashier said, 'sorry sir, but if you can not prove this is your card, you can not use it'. He started to get mad at her and a nice security guard stopped to ask if they needed help. Anyway cops were called and it turned out that was the FIRST attempt to use the card, so I did not lose anything but gained a new respect for anyone asking to see my ID when I use a card or write a check. It just makes sense in this day and age of technology and fraud to have an ID and to insist anyone doing business has an ID. So yes, I still think they need IDs to vote bc they need them to protect themselves from other injustices. However, we should do something about getting them those IDs, even if it is just a temporary station set up, people should not have to pay hundreds of dollars just to have ID.

I used to work in a nursing home and we originally did not ask for IDs of people being admitted bc well it just seemed rude for families to have to look for moms/dads I.D in such a time of distress. Then we had a call from another local nursing home requesting verification of a deceased bc they just so happened to have a living same name. Now we had to report deaths in the facility to the state of Texas and you do this to basically end the use of the S.S number and other things. When we did that it set off an alarm to the states system bc someone else was using the same S.S number and name to get govt nursing home benefits! So we had state reps all over our facility and we were not even a govt assisted facility, all private pay, so it was a none issue of fraud for us, but we got pulled over the coals for not requesting ID and when they asked the family of the deceased why they did not have ID for mom, they said it had been lost years before and since mom could not drive they never thought to replace it. This was a major crack in multiple levels of the govt bc they never applied for S.S benefits for their mom, they had loads of money and so she was just another person living in their house, claimed on taxes, never verified, etc. God it was a mess, so many failures to verify info and identity. So while the state was working on making it mandatory for ID to be presented in each and every nursing home admittance, we started requesting ID anyway and only ran into a few more who had lost it but never had one complain once we told the short version of what happened. This decision led to one family finding out granny liked online sex stores, comic book stores and California psychics. Dunno the whole story on how our asking for an ID led to a credit check but it did.

I tend to like elders so I could tell you more horror stories bc the elderly love to talk but for now just vote for more temporary ID stations to be set up or hey there is a new job, 'personal identification consultant', coming to an elders home near you. See add that to you budget proposal, lol, its not bad really when you think of the identity theft that could be avoided.

P.S I too am sweating this election junk, I really hate Romney, Newttie and Santa. Still like my boy RP, he won't win though and will retire making me very depressed bc I think we need him representing us in anyway he can. :( Nice weather here though, BLUEBONNETS, yeah finally!!

Nice to hear everything's good in Texas. Here in Cali everything is hot but good enough.

As for the ID, personally I don't oppose it, at least I didn't a while ago. Now, I'm not so sure. I mean, minorities are at a disadvantage with this law because many of them don't have an ID and they are VERY expensive to get. Not only that, but some have to drive 100 miles to even apply for one because one third of all counties in Texas have no facilities to help these people. And you have to admit, this could be an attack against Democrats because it mostly affects Democrat voters. Whether that is a coincidence is anyone's guess, but there is no denying that it will affect the DNC. Which seems right up the GOP's alley. I don't know, but if they had at least TRIED to address that problem the law wouldn't sound bad. But they didn't. I am all for fighting fraud, but not by endangering people's right to participate in their government. And who knows what might happen if these ID laws get passed??? Maybe the Democrats could be defeated solely because of them. I don't know, but those laws aren't much help if they prevent people from voting.

No, President Obama does not "morph" to every situation; anyone can research his views of the past and see that many of them remain consistent. Can't say that about Gingrich or Romney. Most presidents do, however, make decisions to meet whatever the circumstances are and change when circumstances require adjustment. That's not flip flopping, that's just common sense.

Jody -- you are wrong. Obama morphed into GW Bush...

Krell, how did President Obama morph into georgie bush??? (I cringe, even typing his name)

@Diverdown1 Obama = Bush - Same government intervention in the private sector, same government bailout the wealthy, same wars, same Federal Deficit Spending, same Grow Government, ONE TRILLION PLUS PER YEAR DEFICIT SPENDING by Obama, increasing what BUSH DID, Obama no answers for the fiscal future, Obama, immediate gratification, Obama, play "kick the fiscal responsibility" can down the road.

BUSH/OBAMA = NO ANSWERS, CLUELESS - divide America and conquer!

diver -- President Obama has kept the tax cuts that used to be known as the Bush Tax Cuts, now the Obama Tax Cuts once his signature was applied;

President Obama extended the Patriot Act;

President Obama raised the debt ceiling President Obama said President Bush demonstrated a failure of leadership when the debt was raised in 2006;

President Obama has increased the national debt in 3 years by nearly as much as President Bush did in 8 years (This is what Candidate Obama said about 4 years ago -- The problem is, is that the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion for the first 42 presidents – #43 added $4 trillion by his lonesome, so that we now have over $9 trillion of debt that we are going to have to pay back — $30,000 for every man, woman and child. That’s irresponsible. It’s unpatriotic.

President Obama is raising the debt faster than President Bush -- Bush in 8 years -- $4,909,994,747,205.59; Obama in a bit over 3 years -- $4,890,174,675,235.82

there is more, you may want to research

Gee - let me Google that for you...from Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Born_again_(Christianity)):

In recent history, born again is a term that has been widely associated with the evangelical Christian renewal since the late 1960s, first in the United States and then later around the world. Associated perhaps initially with Jesus People and the Christian counterculture, born again came to refer to a conversion experience, accepting Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior in order to be saved from Hell and given eternal life with God in Heaven, and was increasingly used as a term to identify devout believers.^{[citation needed]} By the mid 1970s, born againChristians were increasingly referred to in the mainstream media as part of the born again movement.

One could be raised up in a Christian church, accept Jesus as Savior, be baptized, and not necessarily "qualify" as born-again. There are many denominations in Christianity that profess belief, but not the consuming, devout fever of belief most commonly attributed to the "born again".

Remember the "Jesus freaks" in the 70's? Classic born-again...

There are over a thousand different Christian religions, and there is considerable disagreement on just about everything except "Jesus Christ is our savior". Some insist that certain rituals be performed, like baptism, others claim you merely need to "accept Jesus". There are even disagreements over just what "being born of the spirit" means. So there are lots of self-proclaimed Christians that don't claim to be Evangelical or "Born Again".

"Born again" and "Evangelical" are two categories of Christians, there is considerable overlap but they're not exactly the same - one could be Evangelical (spreading the gospel) without being "Born Again", and one could be "Born Again" without being an Evangelist, but most Evangelicals also claim to be "Born Again".

THamm...I have yet to have met a "born again" or an "evangelical" that truly behaves in a Christ-like manner....so that makes it pretty easy. Neither of them are christians.

Reading some of the comments by liberals here, it must be true that ignorance is bliss. When you stereotype a whole group of people in a region as being "low information", "uneducated", "meth heads", etc, etc, you TRULY show your ignorance.

How about I say all Democrats are lazy ass, welfare taking, whining, unmarried baby mamas and daddies? Do you think that would be fair? No, it wouldn't and I would never be so stupid to classify "all Republicans" or "all Democrats" or "all Independents" of having certain traits.

thamm, don't try to talk about something you don't know about.

Am I the only one to notice that, in the states with a larger percentage of uneducated people, there is a larger percentage of born-again/evangelical christians? Dirt - I think this might be a clue as to why the teabaggers (which obviously had nothing to do with the economy or finances) are considered to be ignorant and low-information voters. It is because they are.

I will vote for whoever the nominee is - be it Romney, Gingrich, Santorum, or even Paul. Anyone but Obama is my mantra.

If you are cheering for the USA, why do you want to return to the failed policies that almost destroyed our economy?

GoUSA.......how could u even think about voting for Santorum......not that you will get the chance. He is certifiably nuts. Whatever happened to separation of Church and State? The GOP would never support Sanitarium, he is devisive and cannot even begin to appeal to the right or middle. Personally, he totally creeps me out. I would probably think highly of him if it was 1312 instead of 2012.

Santorum is a Christian version of Ayatollah.

Make your own decisions. You must be a man because Romney's plan for women does not include her being able to make her own decisions.

When Romney and all the rest of the republican nominees signed the person-hood amendment pledge they announced to world that their only intentions are to make women into second class citizens.

You have been lied to so much you have everything the exact oposite. Romney may win with the brain dead but not with any women who thinks for herself.

Romney thinks it is his right to tell women if they can have birth control or even to terminate a pregnancy caused by rape. How is that making your own decisions?

Republicans sure do have a funny ideal of freedom.

VOTE---Obama/Biden 2012

Americans First: You are simply repeating the left's ideas. Romney has not said that he wants to control access to contraception. For that matter, no one who is vying for the GOP nomination has said that. The only people who have brought up contraception is the left.

Every woman in my family has stated that they will be supporting Romney if he is the nominee.

Ruken: Santorum has not stated that he would force his religious values on anyone. His voting record clearly shows this. Why are you so afraid of someone who is openly Christian?

Julia: The separation you speak of puts the onus on government to not interfere or endorse any one religion. There is no onus on individuals. People of faith are citizens as well and are free to serve in government. And furthermore, the president can only sign or veto legislation that makes it through the House and Senate. He (or she - someday hopefully) cannot create law by fiat. Clearly, you must have slept through civics.

Ruken: Santorum has not stated that he would force his religious values on anyone. His voting record clearly shows this. Why are you so afraid of someone who is openly Christian?

Openly? Try hypocritically.

He is an embarrassment to every single right-minded Catholic out there, including this one.

raddave: I disagree with you. In my opinion (as valuable as yours), it is the policies of the left that will destroy this nation. Government is too big and too overreaching. There is no reason or justification for the federal government to mandate what insurance companies must cover. Insurance is not regulated at the federal level - it's regulated at the state level.

In my family, there is no need for prenatal coverage. Why should I pay for it? There is no need for contraceptive coverage. Why should I pay for it? I don't need doctor's visits for routine care covered as I can afford to pay for that out of my pocket. Why should I be forced to buy insurance for that? Catastrophic coverage is all my family needs - why should we be forced to pay for the rest?

Ruken: Right minded? So, if someone disagrees with you they are wrong? You sound like Obama.

Ruken: Right minded? So, if someone disagrees with you they are wrong? You sound like Obama.

I am alluding to the fact that an ape could get higher SAT scores than most of the religious fanatics that vote for Santorum.

Go..."Anyone but Obama"??? Really??? Of course that means, given the opportunity, you would gladly vote for Chrales Manson. Pardon me if I think that's creepy and wouldn't take your advice on how to feed my cat, let alone on who should run the country.

GoUSA.....have I hit a nerve? When a poster responds to another with a put-down (sleeping in civics class), there is an admission of anger. You are totally entitled to support and vote for the candidate of your choice, as am I. Why the comments on the pres vetoing or signing bills into law, and not by fiat? I never made mention of that process at all in my post.

People of faith, as well as those who do not have THE SAME FAITH, can and will continue to serve in public office. I choose to vote for the "servant" who espouses REAL values and a working comprehension of the real issues. I do not want Sanitarium in my bedroom, in my faith, in my uterus, or in the White House. There are many paths up to the mountain top, Go, and if it was a Buddhist running his mouth off about Buddhism as THE ONLY WAY up that mountain, and that same person was running for president, think about how that would affect your thinking process.

Go USA, you must have been sleeping through the last decade when the policies you want to bring back caused our economy to tank. Insurance is regulated at the Federal level because it is interstate commerce. How do you know no one in your family is not going to need prenatal care or contraceptive coverage? Why do you "conservatives" now oppose an insurance mandate, when during the Clinton administration "conservatives" offered it as a alternative to a government insurance plan?

Until Obama, all insurance was regulated at the state level. There is no authority in the Commerce clause for the Federal govt to meddle insurance or health care.

Not all conservatives supported that during the Clinton administration. In fact most Conservatives have NEVER supported Federal involvement. Don't confuse Republicans with conservative. Most Republicans are not conservatives. I left the GOP in 1971 because they were so liberal.

“It is very certain that [the commerce clause] grew out of the abuse of the power by the importing States in taxing the non-importing, and was intended as a negative and preventive provision against injustice among the States themselves, rather than as a power to be used for the positive purposes of the General Government.”
– James Madison, Letter to Cabell, February 13, 1829

That the encouragement of Manufactures, was an object of the power, to regulate trade, is proved by the use made of the power for that object, in the first session of the first Congress under the Constitution; when among the members present were so many who had been members of the federal Convention which framed the Constitution, and of the State Conventions which ratified it...

To say nothing of the clear indications in the Journal of the Convention of 1787, that the clause was intended merely to provide for expences incurred by particular States in their inspection laws, and in such improvements as they might chuse to make in their Harbours & rivers with the sanction of Congs., objects to which the reserved power has been applied in several instances, at the request of Virginia & of Georgia, how could it ever be imagined that any State would wish to tax its own trade for the encouragement of manufactures, if possessed of the authority, or could in fact do so, if wishing it?

http://tinyurl.com/ycduj8d

To quote Thomas Jefferson,

“For the power given to Congress by the Constitution does not extend to the internal regulation of the commerce of a State, (that is to say of the commerce between citizen and citizen,) which remain exclusively with its own legislature; but to its external commerce only, that is to say, its commerce with another State, or with foreign nations, or with the Indian tribes.”

Here are the limits. Congress may regulate the channels of commerce (e.g. highways, canals, rivers, airways) that cross state lines. They may regulate which products can traverse those channels. They may regulate the how carriers transport them (e.g. trucks, boats, planes).

Anything else is beyond the original meaning of the Commerce clause. Not the in-state manufacture of them, not the in-state distribution of them, not the in-state labor that produced them. That is all reserved to the state (see 10th Amendment).

There is very little difference between the TWO PARTIES in the US.

BOTH POLITIACL PARTIES are bought and PAID FOR, and, NEITHER is offering solutions to the economic mess America finds itself in. NEITHER.

If one wants to argue other points, such as keeping religion out of government, womens rights, birth control, or allowing each person to choose for themselves versus the government mandating decisions for themselves, there is some difference in the TWO POLITICAL PARTIES.

The Federal Government does not belong in individuals lives as much as it is. Choosing a President based on personal choices, such as womens rights, religion, is ignoring the economic problem facing ALL AMERICANS.

It is the economy!

raddave

Romney is not BUSH.

OBAMA continued BUSH'S POLICIES.(that is why so many people that look and study the economy are so upset) OBAMA is a extension of Bush, same bailouts, government intervention, deficit spending, no plan, equals a welfare state that America has become, dependent on food stamps, welfare, unending unemployment, growing government, and the Federal Government SPENDING ONE TRILLION MORE A YEAR, than it brings in! BUSH/OBAMA - the same!

Please explain how electing Romney has anything to do with Bush/Obama and their policies.

Romney will change course and bring back jobs, Obama has no idea how to do that, wasn't 3 plus years of Obama's experiments enough proof! Obama has no answers for America, other than spend, spend, spend.

MtMike - how very easy for you to dismiss women's rights as unimportant. Clearly not a woman, right? Let's start tramping on men's rights and see how quickly they become important.

Romney is no one I want running this country. He is only good at sending jobs to China. Maybe he should run for something there.

seeking sanity, where does the Constitution say that having your contraception for FREE is a "right"? On that point i find it SO interesting to see liberal women saying they don't want the Repubs in their "bedroom" or "uterus". But, they sure the hell want government in their bedroom to PAY for it. What hypocrites.

also, where does it say that the government is going to MAKE me buy something? Guess the SC will decide that soon.

And, when did Romney send jobs to China? Please provide a source. We do know for a fact that pres' buddy Jeff Immelt and GE send THOUSANDS of job out of this country. Why aren't you on his cased, seeking insanity?

MtMike...perhaps you should do a little bit more homework. Would you mind explaining to us what Mittsy's "proposed budget" would do to the debt and defecit?

Shockedanddisgusted

Romney is addressing the budget, tax code, debt and deficit! That is something Obama and the Dems have not done.

Obama and the Dems HAVE NOT HAD A BUDGET during Obama's term, and they ARE COMFORTABLE, bankrupting America to the tune of the Federal Government SPENDING ONE TRILLION PLUS A YEAR more than the government brings in.

Look at local State Budgets, because the Federal Budget is so out of whack, and this Obama "economic recovery" is a joke. So many states (and cities, like Stockton, CA) are on the verge of economic collapse, the list is not pretty!

So...MtMike...manufactured, talking point tirade against the Democratic Party and President Obama aside...would you mind informing all of us what Romney will do to the debt and the deficit? (a nice way of saying, "Quit your babbling, Chicken Little, and explain to us exactly what Romney's "proposal" will do for the debt and the deficit")

I know what it will do; add $3.4 trillion in debt and increase income inequality in America. No more tax cuts; it's time we RAISED taxes ON EVERYONE and stop buying the voters with tax cuts.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

@ Shockedanddisgusted

There ya go, this is something you on the LEFT AND LIBS just ignore,

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/mitt-romneys-latest-tax-plan/2012/02/22/gIQApNKZTR_blog.html

Why anyone would think Obamanomics and the Federal Debt and Deficit do not matter is beyond comprehension. America is CTD (cirlcing the drain) and America is leaderless with Obama, who has no plan, no way to communicate to anyone who disagrees with himself and is dividing this country.

You do realize, Obama's campaign speech of Raising Taxes on the Wealthy will not effect the Federal Debt and Deficit and Obama has spent 3 years in trying solutions which all failed, what it took Bush 8 years to do to the deficit, Obama matched in 3 years. Obama is simply a worse Bush! Divide and Bankrupt should be Obama's Campaign Slogan!

http://www.suntimes.com/news/huntley/7805758-452/obamas-faulty-math-higher-taxes-for-rich-just-doesnt-add-up.html

http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2011/08/15/would-taxing-the-super-rich-raise-much-revenue/

This debt below is as much Obama's doing as "blaming Bush". America needs leadership, answers, and a plan, not divisions, do it my way or nothing gets done!

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Well, mtmike...apparently you seem to think that everyone likes having smoke blown up their bum as much as you do. Are you capable of providing specific information as to what Mittsy's little plan will do for the debt and deficit?

Shockedanddisgusted

BOTH POLITIACL PARTIES are bought and PAID FOR, and, NEITHER is offering solutions to the economic mess America finds itself in. NEITHER.

At least Romney is offering a plan that can be addressed!

Obama and the Dems HAVE NOT HAD A BUDGET during Obama's term, and they ARE COMFORTABLE, bankrupting America to the tune of the Federal Government SPENDING ONE TRILLION PLUS A YEAR more than the government brings in.

Look at local State Budgets, because the Federal Budget is so out of whack, and this Obama "economic recovery" is a joke. So many states (and cities, like Stockton, CA) are on the verge of economic collapse, the list is not pretty!

The vote is simple:

Vote Obama (the social worker) = food stamps, welfare, endless unemployment, growing government, a ONE TRILLION plus budget gap and no solutions. One Obama term should prove that Obama likes the results (as does Wall Street) of the NEW WORLD ORDER, and EMERGING ECONOMIES!

Romney = a chance for change, a plan that can be tweeked and a chance for America to be competitive.

Truthfully, America is CTD, as neither political party is making the difficult decisions necessary to fix the American economy.

Keep believing the Obama Kool-Aid, that the American Economy is on the path to recovery, ignore the Federal debt and deficit, ignore that state budgets are collapsing (as well as cities). But I would suggest you also prepare for war in the streets in America, when the Federal Budget collapses and the government handouts that can not be paid for end.

Yep, you just keep drinking the Obama Kool Aid and banging the drum for Obama that the government has all the answers, Greece did, the hell with personal responsiblity, we will just rob our neighbor until none of us have anything!

Obama DID offer budgets AND a deficit reduction package, mike. Did you not know about that??? The president has offered budgets every year, which could have also been "tweaked." But the GOP said no, and the Democrats chickened out because they didn't want to look bad. The problem with tweaking Romney's plan is that most of the shortfall is probably going to be covered by more cuts. That is what's wrong with Congress. The GOP doesn't compromise ANYMORE; they demand 98% of what they want and no less. NO LESS. Where the hell is the compromise in that?!?!?!?!? Obama OFFERED a FAIR deal that would reduce the deficit over 10 years by $3 or 4 trillion, and it was mostly cuts with a touch, just a touch, of revenue increases. But who said no?? BOEHNER AND THE DAMN GOP!!!!!!!!!!! They said no because it violated their no-compromise-on-taxes pledge with Traitor Norquist.

Romney doesn't want to change or reform anything, not even entitlements. He says "oh, we'll let the free market take care of seniors," even though that will DESTROY them!!!!!!!!! When will he and the rest of you right-wingers learn that there is NO FREE MARKET. It's controlled by corporations and speculators that jack up the prices to make a profit while leaving the consumer hanging. If Romney is elected America as we know it is TOAST. So F*** you, Romney. F*** you Santorum. F*** you, GOP, for your stupid, uncompromising, extremist, and treacherous acts which have practically DESTROYED AMERICA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They have destroyed the US with tax cuts for the wealthy, supply-side economics, and deregulation. But no more. No more will be buy into "lower taxes," or less regulation, or "less government." Screw that. Come November this nation will rise again from the ashes and reassert its strength. We will come back from the brink and figure our our own destiny, and finally vanquish the right-wing scum that almost wiped us out. You'll see; wait until the GOP collapses, and America is flourishing once again. Just wait...

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

DEMOCRAT CONGRESS 2012

DEATH TO THE FASCIST EXTREMIST GOP 2012

He used grits because he didn't think he could use the trees are the right height again as it already becoming a joke.

Who is the bigger ass; Mitt or the voters who support him?

JEM,

Is that like the chicken or the egg question?

I thought that Santorum was the Mormon, not Mitt. Either way, neither of them are my vote. Both have mentioned God in their plight. Keep religion out of politics. Look at Sharia Law. That is what happens when religion and politics are bed fellows. Mark my words.

Royal: Shhh, or they'll baptize you.

Diver, then you shouldn't vote for obama either. He said his "christian principles" told him it was right to increase taxes on the rich. (And, that does show he doesn't know what Jesus said in that realm. Jesus said a man who does not work does not deserve to eat. Now, Jesus did say to help those who CANNOT or are UNABLE to work.)

Hey Royal -

So much for the liberal base being religiously tolerant. You know what they say "Pride goeth before a fall." Thats where Obama is headed....DOWN.

Hey Raff, just sit back and watch Obama win. Thats all you need to do.

If that happens, then I get to blame people like you if/when this country fails.

I want this country to succeed now and forever but not at the cost of making my son pay back for the mistakes of a failed community organizerrrrr.....I mean president.

Kick the can down the road, mantra of the Democratic party.

ABO 2012

Wow, Raff. Are you actually going to try to convince anyone that Mittsy, Newt and Ricky-poo do not have personal issues with pride??? Religious tolerance ends and being a good American begins when the line seperating church and state is crossed as the teabaggers have so deceptively done.

The only "down" President Obama is going to go is in history - as the man who saved us from financial ruin despite the lies and obstruction from the wacked out fundamentalists that have taken over the Republican party. I'm sorry that having a successful President leading a soon to be successful United States offends you and the other baggers so much.

No need to try and talk to Raff. He is just a hater and haters lose in the end.

Excuse me? I am an educated Floridian. I find your comment offensive. I don't know which side you are on, but you discredit that side with saying such things.

Florida is all over the place politically. It varies widely from county to county.

I know Mad - problem is, Florida has so many people coming down from other places who treat Florida like a rental home - they don't want to invest in the place or the future of it's people.

They just want to take their own enjoyment of the place and then leave the mess for others - the ones who care enough to be emotionally and financially invested in where they reside.

But believe it or not, University of Florida and Florida State are ranked high for their academic programs and that's where the natives go.

but, Katheryn, that's can be because the liberals have pronounced over and over here today that ALL people from the south are uneducated, stupid people.Why on earth would you need colleges and universities if ALL people in the south are so ignorant and uneducated?

oh dirt! Ha! Growing up in the South, those yankees never did say what their political affiliation was.They just said they were better.

And college does not necessarily equate to educated.

The MSM didn't change the rules, try the Republican Party running the caucuses and primaries. The MSM only reports it. Take your complaints to the Republican party in each state and the RNC.

If you read my comment, it says that the results were not reported accurately by the AP. The Republican Party reported the numbers to them.

When the mass media in some foreign countries serve as megaphones for the rhetoric of their government, the result is ludicrous propaganda. When the mass media in our country serve as megaphones for the rhetoric of the U.S. government, the result is responsible journalism. – Norman Solomon

Any you think obama is sincere?..Too much kool-aid my friend! ANYONE BUT obama IN NOVEMBER!

Blame the voters; not the candidate.

McP: So you can regurgitate wing nut talking points. We've heard it all before ad nauseum. Please give instances of Obama insincerity. And if you got if from fox, limbaugh, hannity, palin, boehner or any of the other wing nut talking heads it is no doubt wrong.

Actually Time for Truth....It came from MSNBC and CNN who have atendency to lick Obama's lying ass every time he speaks...which is incessantly.

No, the Cadillacs are real, and where he lives the trees are all the right height, he truly believes that the Caymens are our territories. He reminds me of the old roosters you see swinging back and forth over farmhouses.

@ #21.4,

It's called the "hind-lick" maneuver. Talk about his singing ability, talk about what Michelle is wearing to the ball ..... but please don't ask him any REAL questions about his absurd budget proposals !

Jim-1455434 - more regurgitating the ignorance from the far right. Doesn't that EVER tire you?

SeekingSanity -

Just like how the left HATES it that people would vote for anyone but Obama....that's funny, because guys like Samuel L Jackson only voted for Obama because he is black. Not saying Sam L is a racist, but ALOT of people say and do dumb things, just like your Campaigner in Chief.

RafftheGreat - no one I know voted for Obama because he was black. We all voted for him because he was heads above McCain. We'll vote for him again because he is heads above the buffoons the GOP is running. Now I do know people who didn't vote for him solely because he was black. Pathetic.

There are ALOT of people that voted for Obama just because he is black. Im also pretty sure that they didnt care for what he stood for, either. Just like there are alot of white people that will only vote for Mitt or Rick because they are white.

If you think that racism isnt present in the polls on both sides, then you are more naive than I thought.

Lady Jag,

I guess they think since we talk a little slower we must be slow. Ah well, we know better. BTW, are you a Jaguar football fan?

I am so tired of these candidates talking down to the voters, like eatin' grits once makes a difference to the South. They think people don't THINK, or know they're being manipulated and "handled". I really think the solution this year is a moratorium on voting, period. The Government is so corrupt at this point that only a huge "no turn-out" at the polls would make them listen. I say, skip the whole process in protest, til it gets fixed.

Lady Jag, it's no different from their comments about Iowans during the lead up to, and after the caucus; it happens every four years.

I don't know phine - when I was younger I was accused of being from the north because I talk and walk fast,but I can roll out that "southern" when it suits me! ;~))

Just don't break down in Mississippi, Alabama or Louisiana, especially if your skin ain't white.

Think of the USA as being a giant gene swimming pool; the deep South is the shallow end.

Katheryn,

Ya'all can stop on by anytime. I will fry up a mess of catfish with some fried grits and green tomatoes on the side! (All said in my best southern drawl).

Herb,

Your comments truly depict the liberal mindset ! Libtards seem to think the South is just like the old Hollywood movies ! Of course, when Rodney King was beaten by L.A. police, the lamestream media showed film clips of the South in the sixties. It keeps you guys from understanding the reality of L.A. It keeps you guys convinced of your self-appointed superiority.

P.S. There is no "deep south". The "deep" was created by those weather people in New York who are still convinced New York is the center of the U.S. LOL !!

Actually, I grew up in the south then moved north. I can tell you there are "hicks" in every state. Region doesn't dictate intelligence.

Jim- The GOP talks down to the South as much as Democrats do. It's not a party issue.

With the exception of Ron Paul; none of the candidates would be much of an improvement over Obama as they are all war mongering banksters.

The only thing that would make Romney better than Obama is that the anti-war movement is a bit more affective with a republican in office than a democrat.

Polls tend to be pretty accurate. The only caveat is that they are only a snapshot of the time they are taken. They don't mean much until just before the election.

The war against Islam, as you put it, will continue for a long time. Allah wouldn't have it any other way. That is the reality of the situation. Ron Paul is really a great candidate except for his naive view of ineternational relations. That being said, he would be a much better president than this clown obama. And really that isn't saying much. ANYONE BUT obama IN NOVEMBER!

Allah wants us to fight a war against Islam?

I do not believe that simply because I believe there is a reason Muslims hate the US more than Brazil.

Ron Paul recognizes that our militarist foreign policy involves blowback and tends to do far more harm than good. Do you really think the tension between the US and Iran is not in part because our CIA overthrew a democratically elected president of Iran back in 1953 so that the Shah could be put in his place? Do you really think US support for the Saudi government is unconnected with the anger Arabs have against the US?

Government meddling is the reason Muslims hate the US more than Japan.

Just move off of oil already so we can give the Middle East the proverbial finger and move on with our lives.

I thought the Core values was ask what you can do for your country, not ourselves.

It was Ron Paul who offered Americans the best chance at restoring our nations greatness. Romney will ensure our nation goes bankrupt and becomes another third world he11 hole. Our children deserved better.

Ron Paul only offers to bring us to a time prior to WWI. He does not offer to bring back greatness.

Rad, I think that would be best after you have provided for your self and your family. It isnt necessary for the government to provide as much when able bodied people provide for themselves. That would leave more for the truly needy not the people a politician convinces that they are poor......

Romney has no solid core values, he has no solid opinions, he's whatever he wants/needs to be that fit the moment or the occasion. the only thing he does seem to value is himself and his money.

Neast, Maybe somone who realizes the value of money would be a better leader for our country after the past 4 years?

Neast, Maybe somone who realizes the value of money would be a better leader for our country after the past 4 years?

Uh what?

You think someone that made millions by vulture capitalism is the leadership our country needs to recover from a recession?

Ruk, Yes, Romney has alot of experience turning around failing companies. I think that translates well to our current situation.

Actually Romney has experience in taking companies, chopping them up and selling them off to make them appear to be profitable. BTW, what happened the last time we had a "businessman" as President?

Rad, I assume you mean George Bush. Had the liberal Democrats on the banking committee listened to Bush during his first term and reformed Fannie/Freddie's mortgage problems we would be in better shape today. I think even Barney Frank realized after the melt down he made a mistake not following thru on Bush's requests.....

I think most Americans are greatly alarmed at how far we have moved toward an entitlement based society in the 3 years since Obama took office. It was obvious from the election of 2010 that America voted based on those concerns. The result, the waste of Stimulus II was averted. Mitt Romney probably offers the country the best chance of more Americans returning to our core values of asking what we can do for ourselves first before asking what someone else should do for us. Thoughts?

UAWPleeeese. Just how have we moved toward an entitlement base society in the 3 years since Obama took office.

Socical Security, Medi-Care and unemployment insurance have been around a lot longer than 3 years. All of these are things that we pay into as part of a social insurance program not as a complete giveaway. Otherwise, he has done more tax cutting than actully giving money away.

Bill, I was referring to the UAW bail out, extended unemployment checks, Obamacare's added entitlements, The $20 billion he extorted from BP and entitled to the gulf residents, The $800 billion that obama distributed thru Stimulus 1 and entitled to various voting blocks, The $25 billion the obama administration extorted from the banks for robo-signing and entitled to delinquent borrowers.

Thankfully Stimulus II was blocked after the elections of 2010. I think a better leader would be able to get more people back to work with the jobs currently available.

Bill - UAW doesn't use reason he uses the Fox and GOP talking points with nothing to back them up.

Obama/Biden 2012

What the F***???

UAW, in case you didn't hear, one of BP's oil rigs EXPLODED in the Gulf, killing 17 crewmen and polluting much of the gulf. That cost the Gulf states billions in lost economic growth. BP (like Exxon in the Valdez spill) paid reparations to them.

Extended unemployment checks have kept this economy afloat. They enable those looking for work to sustain themselves financially. Apparently, in your mind, we should let them sink for "American values." Isn't it an American value for people to help one another??? And isn't the government controlled by the people (excluding Super Pacs)??? So it makes sense for the government to help people. The stimulus SAVED the economy, so unless you want to see beggars on the curb and people jumping off the Empire State Building like in the 1930s I advise you to quit complaining. In 2010 America made the biggest mistake by electing dozens of fresh Tea Party congressmen who knew NOTHING about negotiation. They screwed up our credit rating AND our economy with their "my way or the highway" attitude. It will be a great day in America when 2010 is reversed and SANE people are elected into office to boot out those Tea Party idiots.

So go ahead and complain about our so-called "entitlement society," but know that there are tens of millions of Americans who work for a living and will continue to work. They worked hard. They deserve some sort of protection.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

November, 2012, end of the 2010 mistake.