You may remember during last year's recall election, when the state of Wisconsin GOP ran fake Democratic candidates to confuse democratic voters. This year, Governor Walker (R) and Lt. Kleefisch (R), and four WI GOP state senators are facing recall.

And once again GOP is running more fake candidates - forcing primary elections (to be held on May 8), thus causing the winners to face off in a second election (on June 5).

According to election attorney Jeremy Levinson, it is illegal to falsify declaration of candidacy. Form GAB-16 "specifically requires a candidate to state that their candidacy is 'representing' the political party for which the primary is to take place. This statement must be made under oath."

Wisconsin GOP got away with it last year, even though felony election fraud is punishable by up to 3.5 years in prison. So candidacy sleight-of-hand is illegal as well as ould hat, but they're taking it out for another spin at taxpayer expense?

Governor Scott Walker and the A.L.E.C. brand of corruption in GOP state legislatures across the nation have a really, really very bad, no-good smell.

If Romney supports women,

TELL HIM TO SELL HIS CLEAR CHANNEL COMMUNICATIONS STOCK

or

FIRE RUSH LIMBAUGH

Don't let him get away with talking out of both sides of his mouth!!!

Quietly last Thursday...Governor Scott Walker (R-WI) signed ACT 219, a repeal of the Wisconsin's equal pay act.

The 2009 Equal Pay Enforcement Act gives workers a pathway to lodge complaints about pay discrimation at work, a way to pursue their case in the more accessible, less expensive circuit court - as well as sufficient time to file a discriminatory complaint.

Once again without conscience, Scott Walker nipped fair play for ordinary Americans in the bud.

Hey Bob -- What's fair? Fair is when We the People get a seat at the table.

Quietly last Thursday...Governor Scott Walker (R-WI) signed ACT 219, a repeal of the Wisconsin's equal pay act.

Glad you brought that up Backhouse,

This is from one of Walker's GNOP minions, touting "Money is more important for men";

Repealing the law was a no-brainer for state Sen. Glenn Grothman (R), who led the effort because of his belief that pay discrimination is a myth driven by liberal women’s groups. Ignoring multiple studies showing that the pay gap exists, Grothman blamed females for prioritizing childrearing and homemaking instead of money, saying, “Money is more important for men,”

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/04/09/460917/wisconsin-state-senator-money-less-important-wome/

What planet do these clowns inhabit?

Tell us again there is no war on women...

Feisty,

Gingrich should have a talk with Tim Pawlenty. Tim has paid off over $430,000. in campaign debt with help from Mitt and Ann Romney and Michele Bachmann. Gingrich should play nice with Mitt and he might cover his bad check.;)

BTW Bachmann has 1 million in her superpac. Meanwhile, the Dems will have their convention in the 6th district this weekend to endorsee a candidate to run against her in the Fall election.

Morning Feisty!

You are right about how much repealing this law affects women.

Years ago the Supreme Court said Lilly Ledbetter didn't file soon enough after the pay discrimination against her started.

The problem with conservatives is the extreme measures they have taken. Many of them have become so extreme that they can't / won't see a good idea when it's handed to them. It has caused a great many people to label anyone who doesn't fit their extreme model as a progressive liberal. The GOP is right about many things. They have a talent for pointing out problems. What they lack are solutions. No amount of deregulation, prayer, or free enterprise is going to solve our problems. On the same token. We can't tax, spend, and smoke our way out of this mess either. What we need are common sense solutions.

Well I can understand Mr. Santorum dropping out of the race. I feel it was more because of his little girl and the terrible strain it was putting on his family then any fear of Romney. I give him credit for putting his family first. Good luck Mr. Santorum, and may your family and you stay well and healthy. See you in 2016.

Now as for Romney. Whats he going to do with all those HATE ads he bought to use against Santorum? Maybe he can use them for home movies to entertain his friends and family in La Jolla Calif. while they watch the workmen install his car elevator in the house. I love it. What an egotistical snob.

Obama in 2012.

ACT 10: When R-WI Governor Scott Walker exempted police and firefighter unions from his Anti-Union law, he believed that favoring this group of workers would give him a leg up politically.

But now U.S. District Judge Conley has struck down the parts of ACT 10 that prevent unions from collecting mandatory dues & require unions to re-certify annually. Conley said that by exempting certain public unions, ACT 10 violates the equal protection clause of the Constitution and First Amendment rights:

"[The State] has not articulated, and the court is now satisfied cannot articulate, a rational basis for picking and choosing from among public unions."

Did Romney triumph the GOP nomination because he was better than he was in '08?

No. He still sucks.

It wasn't his turn in '08. Rove and the GOP establishment puppet masters decreed that Romney's turn is 2012.

Too bad he isn't up to the job.

OBAMA/BIDEN 2012

I agree Backhouse. I lived in Wisconsin during Walker's election and abuse. However, I'm not sure that I support his recall. He did pretty much what he said he was going to do. The idiots that voted for him now suffer the consequences.

Have to disagree,

Governor Scott Walker gave no indication when he was running, of his Anti-Union, anti-worker, anti-Education, more tax breaks for corporations agenda.

Feisty and Backhouse -- Excellent posts!

First Read posed some interesting questions this morning. In my opinion, Romney won the GOP nomination by default. With the exception of Jon Huntsman, the field of GOP wannabees was weak, a joke, the clown car description fit perfectly. In my years of following politics, never have I seen such a bunch of clowns and carnival barkers claiming to be presidential material.

As for Rick Santorum, yes, he probably hurt the GOP brand but the rest of America owes him a big THANK YOU for bringing to light the true vision of the modern conservative movement, the true GOP intentions; and reminding us those visions are anything but what most people want. America will be forever grateful that Rick Santorum reminded voters of just what life would be like if an evangelical, true conservative was elected. We are even more grateful that Mitt Romney embraced those same extremist views and we'll be holding him to his embrace.

Bob -- I'd prefer "We" have a seat at the legislator's table.

BTW Bachmann has 1 million in her superpac. Meanwhile, the Dems will have their convention in the 6th district this weekend to endorsee a candidate to run against her in the Fall election.

I've heard enough! Whoever this challenger is, they have my vote!

Jody, women will be holding Romney to his 'evolving' attacks on women's health:

Misrepresenting the ACA, not condemning Limbaugh's reprehensible & false comments about Ms. Fluke, supporting the Blunt Amendment and,

Saying about Planned Parenthood that provides the most basic needs of health care, "We're going to get rid of that".

Etcetera.

What I learned from the GOP race...

1. Bombing sh** in the desert is a good idea.

2. Taxes equal socialism and/or class warfare.

3. Being Mexican is illegal and they should all return to Mexico.

4. The government should have complete control over my body, just so long as they don't have control over anything else.

5. Muslims are scary.

6. Gay people are abominations and poor people suck.

7. Freedom of religion only applies to evangelicals.

8. Science and math are liberal concepts with liberal biases.

9. If a tax plan has a catchy phrase for a title, it's inability to solve the debt crises doesn't matter.

10. Fried sticks of butter on popsicle sticks are sold at the Iowa state fair.

Backhouse

ACT 10: When R-WI Governor Scott Walker exempted police and firefighter unions from his Anti-Union law, he believed that favoring this group of workers would give him a leg up politically.

But now U.S. District Judge Conley has struck down the parts of ACT 10 that prevent unions from collecting mandatory dues & require unions to re-certify annually. Conley said that by exempting certain public unions, ACT 10 violates the equal protection clause of the Constitution and First Amendment rights:

Curse those activists judges legislating from the bench!!! (Except for the radical-right idiots on the Supreme Court, of course).

Dont

You have one there. It's called an election.

The Gremlins are working hard today. I have no idea where my comment went but do hope the gremlins enjoyed their word breakfast.

First Read posed some interesting questions. In my opinion, Mitt Romney won the GOP nomination by default. With the exception of Jon Huntsman, the presidential candidates were a joke with the fitting description of a clown car. In the many years I have followed politics, I have never seen a more pitiful group of presidential wannabees. It truely was a bunch of clowns and carnival barkers plus one "let's legislate morality" guy.

Rick Santorum did hurt the GOP brand but America owes a big THANK YOU to him for exposing what it would mean to elect a far right, evangelical "true conservative" as president and it is not what most American want. Middle America should be forever grateful that Santorum told us the real goal of modern conservatives and middle America should be grateful that Mitt Romney embraced those same views--we intend to hold Mitt to those views as his own.

JAS1 -- The real pigs are in your party, sweetie. You guys are gluttons. Now get back to chugging your vinegar.

REB -- Really? Last time I looked the minute they get into office they no longer listen to us. Money speaks louder I guess.

Bob,

Bundlers are a thing of the past. Super PACS, courtesy of Citizens United ruling, are the future.

Bob in Virginia-5210392

The purpose of the "Buffet Rule" has nothing to do deficits and tax fairness. The goal is to demonize those who are successful. Encouraging hatred and class warfare is their goal.

Warren Buffet, whom the rule is named after, is the billionaire who actually pointed out the gross unfairness of the tax law to the middle class. So Buffet wanted to demonize himself? A

nd then of course, Ronald Reagan pointed out the same unfairness in the tax code in almost the same words that Buffet used, except he referred to bus drivers rather than secretaries. Sorry if JoAnnaSmith, Bill in Fairfax, and Joe HAHAHA become distraught read that their idol Saint Ronnie of Raygun was a secret Democrat plotting to make people dependent on Big Government.

Good grief, apologies for sort of reposting my comment. It really disappeared the first time and threw me out of First Thoughts completely but there it is now after I attempted to remember what I wrote the first time and posted it.

Houston! - yes drat and double drat!

Activist judge, or the 'one who disagrees with you'.

Feisty, Jody, Backhouse, kaybeetoys, NorthstarDFL and all my other Liberal friends great posts.

Feisty, sistah, yours is the bomb. You set the tone for the day. In fact, I would say for the rest of the campaign. If Noot can't pay his bills, how can he run the country?

Perhaps, Gingrich could use his excellent debating skills (LMAO) to explain that one.

@Sarah

I'm only doing this for balance

1. Libya

2. If the Buffet Rule replaces the AMT then yes. Lower revenues can only mean Class Warfare

3 Legal Immigration = Good, Illegal Immigration = Bad

4 A majority of taxpayers do not want money to go for abortion, and money is fungible.

5 So were the Occupy crowd. BTW what happened?

6 The President has the same view on Gay Marriage as Mitt Romney and Bill Clinton. Poor people do not suck. The issue is whether government help should be intended to create dependency or self-sufficiency.

7 I still have never heard how contraception is a preventative medicine and therefore exempt from co-pays

8 Only when the Buffet Rule is used as an example of math and green energy is used as an example of science. BTW Did you see the report that hybrid cars are not getting a majority of repeat buyers?

9 Simpson-Bowles, tax plan or reality show?

10 And deep-fried Turkey legs are sold at Disney...both taste disgusting, but that's only my opinion and I don;t want to be judgmental.

Dcia: Last time I looked the minute they get into office they no longer listen to us.

So true, like when they forced through Obamacare when most people were, and still are, against it.

I still can't believe any of you think there's a difference. One party wants to sail us down the river this way, one wants to go that way. They're all playing for the same team, and it ain't yours.
One of the biggest problems is that no decent man would even get involved in the game. Who would willingly put their life and family through that kind of bulls**t...what decent person, I mean. If he/she did, they'd be corrupted by the time it was all over so it wouldn't matter anyway.
It is broken.

JAS1 -- Again, money spoke louder. "We" was trumped. Glad to see the President pushing to get it heard before the Court. Regardless of the ruling, we have a problem that needs to be fixed. Maybe we can get it right with tweaking.

Really Alan,

1. What's the problem with Lybia again? I don't recall bombing Lybia.

2. Stop shouting class warfare it's silly. Why would Obama want to create class warfare against himself? The majority of the Republican party is poor as well. This is a silly GOP talking point and it makes those who repeat it sound uneducated.

3. Agreed.

4. Planned Parenthood does not use tax funding for abortions. They are funded with private donations.

5. Police, pepper-spray and officials deciding that freedom to peacefully protest was only for some (tea baggers).

6. This is a point of deep disagreement. Progressives do not want people to depend on the government to live but to have a leg up in almost impossible situations that seem to be cropping up more now than before (since the stock market plummet).

7. I can post something every day if you like about different problems that require birth control as preventative medication. Ovarian cysts today. I could go into detail if you like as well. That would be fun wouldn't it?

8. Come off it, Santorum said that Obama was a snob for wanting others to get further education outside of highschool. Really? Apples and oranges buddy. You pretend you're going to take this seriously and then you don't.

9. That's a toss-up

10. Anything fried is digusting, but that's a matter of taste.

So true, like when they forced through Obamacare when most people were, and still are, against it.

Yea! Why should I have to pay for insurance when I just go to an ER and get treatment for free! Damn government actually trying to force me to pay for a service that it forces hospitals to provide!

This is why if SCOTUS repeals the mandate, the health-care industry should sue. If the government cannot force people to buy insurance, why is it allowed to force ERs to treat those that cannot pay? This way, ERs could save money by only treating those with insurance, our insurance rates would go down for not covering freeloaders, and best of all, people without insurance that don't want to risk death would be "mandated" to buy insurance.

Sounds like an awesome plan to me.

JoAnnaSmith1

JiA: from the WSJ: The Obama Treasury's own numbers confirm that the tax would raise at most $5 billion a year.

That's different than the $50 billion my source had yesterday. That's just covers 1.25 days of deficit spending.

JiA from the WSJ: White House aide Jason Furman backpedaled from Mr. Obama's rationale by explaining that the tax was never intended "to bring the deficit down and the debt under control."

Well, that's good, because it clearly doesn't. Obama is just wasting everyones time again.

You do know the Koch bros funded outfits use that FUZZY math for the republican brain?

If it isn't clear to the Libs by now, it never will be. Obama is again dividing the nation for political gain.

So, that's why the President is beating Romney in the polls; huh?

Read this...The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science--and Reality

Science writer Chris Mooney explores brain scans, polls, and psychology experiments to explain why conservatives today believe more wrong things; appear more likely than Democrats to oppose new ideas and less likely to change their beliefs in the face of new facts; and sometimes respond to compelling evidence by doubling down on their current beliefs.

Goes beyond the standard claims about ignorance or corporate malfeasance

http://www.amazon.com/The-Republican-Brain-Science-Science/dp/1118094514

Dcia: Regardless of the ruling, we have a problem that needs to be fixed. Maybe we can get it right with tweaking.

I think the "tweak" is the Supreme Court telling Congress to start over.

Get with the program tea people Koch republicans, it's now class warfare, It's upper calss welfare. How can it be welfare when it's given to the poor, but warfare when tax dollars are given to the rich? As usual tea people Koch republicans, you can't have it both ways.

Reading over the posts on this thread, I have learned something I'd never have thought possible, that many of the people from the right's perspective, are becoming more anti-American as the election cycle proceeds. They appear to be willing to bring the country to its knees and wear it as a badge of honor.

They spread lies and half truths and are willing to believe and further twist anything the President and any Democrat may say to undermine any effort they make to help the country grow and prosper. Some of it is fueled by ideology, some by illogical hatred, some by religious intolerance and a lot by ignorance or at the very least an inability to walk a mile in someone's shoes.

Who knew there was so much to American exceptionalism. Silly me, I always considered Americans to be a generous people, to be compassionate towards those who had little or nothing or when a disaster struck be there to help out.

Where did all those folks go to? They didn't all just disappear. Are they going to let these loud angry voices of hatred and bigotry tell you what to do and how to vote, some might even call it bullying. Every change has to start with you, you decide if you want to continue to spread lies, you decide to check out something before you post a lie or a hateful thought. Not to do so, you harm not only yourself, but all those you come in contact with and the very fabric of our society.

Alan,

1. The conflict in Lybia is not equal to what a conflict with Iran would look like. If we could do in Iran or Syria what we did in Lybia, it might be worth it.

2. Paying taxes dependant on what you are capable of paying will never be class warfare. When peasents show up with pitchforks at your McMansions, let me know. Furthermore, the Buffet Rule, though not really capable of fixing the debt problem, addresses the fact that the low capital gains tax DOESN'T reward hardwork, it rewards WEALTH, and not all wealth was earned through hardwork.

3. Illegal immigration = Fear mongering...

Anyway, since we're all so concerned about following the law and none of us want to be hypocrits, we're all willing to spend $12,500 per "illegal" in order to deport them the legal way and follow the rule of law, correct? That means $12,500 x 11,000,000, equaling about two years of HLS's annual budget.

And, since we're all so concerned with the law and immigration, we know that 1996 Welfare Reform disqualified illegal immigrants from means tested assistance, right? And that immigrated here legally takes about eight years and is limited to those who have the means to navigate the beaurocracy and are already established professionals, right?

And knowing what a huge deal money is, I'm sure we've all studied up on this and know that the SSN numbers used by illegal immigrants have been ruled by SCOTUS to not constitute identity theft per se, and that the IRS assigns ITIN numbers to collect pay roll taxes from everyone regardless of immigration status, right? And that, the money collected from those ITIN numbers doesn't get claimed, ergo it is used on citizens, right? Oh yes, and that 8 out of 11 million undocumented workers file personal income taxes, right?

And, can any of you please explain to me, why this outrage isn't directed at EVERYONE who cheats on their taxes each year? Why not go after them with such veracity?

4. The Hyde Amendment prohibits any public funds from being used on abortions. Do you use a bank??? When you deposit a $20, and than return to withdraw $20, you know you're not getting that same $20 bill back right??? The loss to the bank, however, is the same. Money is fungible, math is not.

5. Was the GOP advocating for domestic espionage in regards to OWS too??? Does the 4th Amendment apply to anyone besides white men? And, they're still around, don't worry.

6. The President is pandering, I really don't think he gives an "f" about gay people getting married. Romney and the GOP, however, truly believe we'll all turn into pillars of salt. I could care less about Clinton, that was 20 years ago.

7. Because contraception will always be cheaper than pregnancy. It will always be cheaper then the complications of certain pregnancies, be they genetic or some other thing, or be they in the child or in the mother. They also treat a variety of other illnesses, cheaply. And are reliable. I'd rather pay for your protate exams than your chemo.

8. Please, explain how alternative energy is "faux" science... Than go look at Iowa, Germany, Austrailia...

9. Agreed. They should have adopted it. At least it would have been a start.

10. Agreed, both are disgusting.

JAS1 -- If true then maybe the legislator's will finally take a good long hard look at "best practices" to fix the problem once and for all.

Ruken --Spot on!

Joe HAHAHA:

At $5 billion a year in new revenue according to Barry’s own experts, it isn’t about “fairness” or the “preservation of the American dream for future generations” as Barry claimed in a speech yesterday.

Republicans got their knickers in a twist over the $500 million loss from the government loan to the failed Solyndra solar panels company. The $5 billion EVERY year that would be collected from the wealthy under the Buffet Rule is ten times the Solyndra loss, which was only a one-time event. You'd think that maybe their knickers would be ten times twistier over $5 billion, but math isn't their strong suit.

I will never understand this notion of class warfare. It sounds like complete manipulation. I would like its true meaning to be explained. Is it not hyperbole to deem the concept of asking the extremely rich to pay higher taxes "warfare"

I am honestly tired of the lying. Even if the Buffett rule is not a great solution do not tell me it is class warfare . Can anyone tell me where is this war being staged? If we are trully at war rich vs poor what has been the effects? tax cuts... ? So that would mean the poor were losing right?

Also was there not some type of pledge signed that taxes would not be raised. Which side did that? The term class warfare is nonsense. It is right up there with the term job creator. They are tools of manipulation used by the wealthy to reverse the roles of predator and victim. Sadly on some it has worked.

@MGates

1. Get your memory checked. You may have a medical issue.

2. If the Buffet rule actually produces less revenue and increases the deficit then what is it's purpose? (political talking point?)

4. Money is fungible. If PP did not receive taxpayer money then it would have less to fund abortions. Or is this another example of liberal math?

5. Oakland was peaceful? If a bunch of protesters occupied your house, how long would you let them stay and how would you remove them if they didn't want to leave? They made their point (in NYC), the rats were beginning to join them...and I mean real rats of the four legged nature.

6. I think you mean agreement. Seems like we agree.

7. Yes there are many uses for contraception. So can I get aspirin for free as it's been shown to prevent heart attack and stroke? Why are medications for chronic conditions such as diabetes, cholesterol and auto-immune not co-pay free? Do they not prevent illness? It was blatantly obvious political move, not to mandate coverage, but to mandate "free" coverage.

8. I point out again the fact that the Buffet Rule reduces revenue, and I didn't even get in to the double counting in Obamacare. As to science, in Europe where they produce a higher percentage of green energy, they would have had thousands of deaths this winter if it hadn't been for Russian natural gas. The scientific fact is that green energy does not produce the same energy as fossil fuels.

One question that was not addressed in this report was this...how much did the money spent by Romney count toward his winning ? Consider..he out spent all others running by as much as 10 to 1...its as though he were buying the presidental election for the republicans. Money counts..maybe way too much. Like it or not..all of the ideas the republicans have out to date will hurt middle class and the poor greatly...and benefit the wealtrhy..who Romney is a big part of, greatly also....The idea of trickle down economics has never worked..we saw it last with Bush and his tax cuts for the wealthy then..we also saw the huge debt that Bush put us in..we lost thousands of jobs per month under Bush..we are at least gaining jobs today..have for most of the time Obama has been in office. We have over 500 politicans in congress...none are capable of doing what they were elected to do...nor...do they even seem to try...and this is from both parties.

Gringerbread M, as you say,

When you stand back, what comes into focus are things like Crossroads spending $millions on Ads - trying to blame the President for gas prices, that spike every year under every President:

We know oil is a global commodity. No Congress, Administration or President can set global oil prices. Yet GWB's Rove and Co. wear their giant lies & spin like "a badge of honor."

YUK.

Chart showing how global prices in all countries go up and down in tandem:
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2012/03/17/opinion/sunday/0318-web-edit1.html?ref=sunday

Jody, Iowa- I unfortunately missed your weekly wrap up last Friday any way you could email it to me? Or a link to where I can find it? I don't always agree with everything but I enjoy reading it. Or if anyone else possibly has it?

Illegal Immigration. I've never understood why Democrats are so supportive of illegals except maybe for the same reason as Tammany Hall, a pool of voters (and I mean after they get an amnesty).

How does illegal immigration not affect the poorest in the society adversely. It depresses wages at the bottom of the scale. It takes jobs from the least educated. It makes a mockery of the minimum wage.

I am all for going after employers but I seriously don't understand why the left encourages illegals and are always supportive of an amnesty.

Please, explain how alternative energy is "faux" science... Than go look at Iowa, Germany, Austrailia...

because I believe we are going down the wrong path. If you want true science then nuclear energy is the only emission free source that can meet our current energy needs. But nuclear is blocked because of political reasons.

I also posted the failure of alternative energy in Europe this winter, and it was an economic disaster in Spain. All empirical evidence.

I would like to state that 'Teabagging' is done most often by people playing HALO, the video game.

When you shoot someone 'dead,' they end up watching their 'corpse' for a few seconds before they magically 'respawn' with a new 'life.'

Because you can change your position in the video game to crouch, sore winners, funny people, and general miscreants will go over to their super dead enemy and alternate standing and crouching positions to mimick teabagging the corpse. Yes, so you can add necrophiliac to this list of deviants.

Truly horrible. What is the world coming to when people teabag using video game representations of themselves. The very fabric of society is becoming undone. And you thought just playing the video game was bad enough...

MGates73

5. Police, pepper-spray and officials deciding that freedom to peacefully protest was only for some (tea baggers).

6. This is a point of deep disagreement. Progressives do not want people to depend on the government to live but to have a leg up in almost impossible situations that seem to be cropping up more now than before (since the stock market plummet).

5. Yea I don't remember "teabaggers" not being peaceful for real, I don't remember them leaving their filth all over, I cannot recall one rally where anyone was raped. etc etc...

6. It's a noble idea, but the sad truth is as history has shown it's an all to abused system that generations of families of come to live on, it should be a leg up, but for the most part it is not.

JoAnnaSmith1

Dcia: Regardless of the ruling, we have a problem that needs to be fixed. Maybe we can get it right with tweaking.

I think the "tweak" is the Supreme Court telling Congress to start over

Sniff1,

You're out of your league; Again. Your expertise is to copy and paste skewed right wing charts, graphs, and rhectoric; not THINKING!

Alan,

We encourage seeing them as NOT ILLEGAL. As humans, and affording them rights and protections, as opposed to demonizing them. That's the first step to ending what could almost be called their "slavery".

http://www.workplacefairness.org/sc/undocumentedworkers.php

http://www.urban.org/publications/1000587.html

http://www.pewhispanic.org/2006/03/07/size-and-characteristics-of-the-unauthorized-migrant-population-in-the-us/

1stWife,

5. Yea I don't remember "teabaggers" not being peaceful for real, I don't remember them leaving their filth all over, I cannot recall one rally where anyone was raped. etc etc...

Do you really think that there isn't a single rapist in the TP? You don't catch "rapist" from whatever political party or movement you become affilated with. There are democrats who've raped, republicans who've raped, libertarians who've raped... Rapists aren't attracted to one party over another, because politics has NOTHING to do with the motivation behind rape.

I mean, I caught the worst case of "Sexual Offender" this winter... What?

Derek,

PSSSSTTTT.... Your nerd is showing. But that's okay, the other day I made a Twilight reference, so who am I to judge???

Alan, I know you spoke of it yesterday something dealing with the AMT, but I am not sure I completely understand how the Buffet rule decreases revenues, I see it at worst being neutral. Do you have a source or can you explain?

The highest tax bracket is 35% correct? With some people making over 1 million dollars paying 15% I don't seem to understand how it would decrease revenue as it forces them to pay 30%

Using very basic math and not including the incremental brackets in my calculation,and assuming everyone making 1 million dollars, It would take 3 people being taxed at 30% rather than 35% to net out the effect of the 1 person being raised to 30% from 15%.

That above is a very crude math display, but I hope you get my point. First, most very wealthy probably do not pay 35% to begin with unless they have very bad accountants, also most do not pay 15% so we will end up somewhere in the middle. That even further reduces the effect of revenues lost from the removal of the AMT. Am I missing something? I am honestly just curious.

Good Morning to all!

Since my question is to Backhouse, another singular wish for a good day to you.

My question is about your first post. It seems to me that it should be fairly easy to determine if a candidate is a true deflector or an actual candidate supporting their political party of choice. What are the names of the fake democrats last year, and those running this year? I am not disagreeing with you or trying to imply anything. I'm just curious. I'm curious because it boggles my mind that the democratic party would allow a person or persons in this matter to run without first carefully checking out who they are and what to expect from them. Because certain people also have political ambitions that are primarily selfish in nature and may relocate to another state to further their cause if it failed somewhere else, I'd like to know their names (and so should others) in case they decide to move their failed cause to another state at a later date.

You had disagreed with Noah when he stated that he felt that Walker was doing basically what he said he was going to do. He made it sound like a case of "buyers remorse" (my simplistic licensing).

I guess this is what bothers me most about where politics and politicians have changed things. It used to be that a politician would tell us what their ideas were, their ideas for running on course or how they would change things; etc. I suppose because of the inter net accessibility we have now it makes it more difficult for politicians to get away with things they say (or in this case don't say). We can quickly google factual information about anything now. In the past it would be almost impossible for the average person to maintain an accurate list of what their elected officials said and did. In politics today, as in this case, politicians try to hide unpopular agendas that they favor and what the public doesn't. Then, once elected, they simply go about doing what they intended against the will of the people by saying "That's what I meant" or "I never said I wouldn't do that".

Look at this article for a prime example..." Bottom line, here’s what the next six months are going to look like: Obama and his allies will try to disqualify him, while Team Romney is going to try to make the state of the U.S. economy stick to Obama." I believe this to be true. Sad but true. Instead of each candidate saying: "This is me and these are my goals and here are my ideas for doing it", we have now been reduced to electing people out of fear or the lesser of two evils.

Politicians and the political partys should be ashamed of themselves. What was once called 'mud slinging" and not well taken by the public has become the stamp of approval in politics.

I believe that President Obama could easily be re-elected by campaigning on his achievements alone. By explaining what his goals are for the future would probably widen his margin over Romney to an almost laughable landslide. If this election were exempt from mud-slinging, what chance would Romney truly have? What has he done that even comes close to the achievements of what President Obama has accomplished in his first term? But it is not to be, so we can simply buckle our seat belts, sit back and try to enjoy what may be a bumpy ride over the course of the next 6+ months.

Bottom line is, good for you folks in WI for not simply crying foul.When elected officials fail to help the people who elected them, don't wait for the next election, force them out as quickly as possible whenever possible; in every state of the union. This is a part of how our founders envisioned our democracy should work.

And on crazy science from the left

"Buy a hybrid or die"

http://junkscience.com/2012/04/06/dick-durbin-get-a-hybrid-car-or-die/

And isn't Iowa the place where the produce all that environmentally friendly ethanol?

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18784732

Dcia: JAS1 -- If true then maybe the legislator's will finally take a good long hard look at "best practices" to fix the problem once and for all.

Not in this political climate. The Democrats had their chance, but they got greedy and sloppy. They excluded the GOP from the start and went on their own way because they had the votes and intended to use them. They rushed through some kind of legislation and twisted arms, bought some votes, and rammed through a piece of legislation no one read and no one understood. Implementation is a near impossibility as seen with the CLASS portion of the legislation. And now the SC will throw it out.

All in all, one of the major screw ups of all time.

Going forward there may be some piece-meal changes, but nothing like Obamacare. And in truth, changes for something this large should come incrementally.

Bev, thanks for the link to "The Republican Brain."

ivan -- Romney spent a boatload of money. Unfortunately he is going to have to spend way more to keep up with the Obama campaign. In 2008 the Obama campaign spent approximately twice what the McCain campaign spent. The Obama campaign spent somewhere around $750,000,000 to win in 2008 and are expect to spend nearly $1,000,000,000 in 2012.

You post that -- "its as though he were buying the presidental election for the republicans."

In my opinion, that would suggest that President Obama bought the 2008 election for the democrats and is trying to buy the 2012 election for democrats.

Seems as though neither is interested in what is best for America.

A few thoughts:

The "Buffet Rule" or millionares tax really won't do much to eliminate the deficit. However, defunding Planned Parenthood (i.e. removing Federal Funding for Planned Parenthood) will not eliminate the deficit either. In point of fact, if the services provided by Planned Parenthood are removed, there is a very strong likelyhood that there will be an increase in the cost as additional funds are needed for SNAP, Medicare and Medicaid to cover the resulting increase in births to the poor, increased ill health, increased cancer and many other illnesses Planned Parenthood works to prevent.

The bad part of the GOP fuzzy math, the Buffet Rule might raise $5Billion (with a B) each year, yet the PP defunding will only save (initially) 10% of that figure. The increased costs from the lack of preventive care would likely be much, much more.

The Republican budget gives a handout to those earning the most while giving the back of the hand to those earning the least. It literally takes food out of the mouths of the poor and gives money to the rich. How anyone can defend this and still claim to be a Christian is beyond hypocrisy.

As to the "Veep Stakes": Mitt Romney can use the time between now and the GOP convention in Tampa to redefine himself, yet again. He doesn't have to run as a conservative anymore, all the conservatives are gone. If Mitt does select a true RWNJ like Paul Ryan, he will deserve to receive the record landslide loss resulting from such a selection. Going from main-lining crazy to deep heart injection of insanity will not win over the 20-30% of moderates who make up the independents who decide the election.

Saw a bit recently on the status of state GOP parties (was it on Rachel Maddow ?) Anyway, one of the major effects of Citizens United is that individual candidates are bypassing the state organizations in fundraising and running a campaign. The state GOP's are so disorganized that candidates for the House and Senate are not even bothering to contact them. Some are so bad that they are literally going bankrupt.

It may be that the Republican party is using 2012 to clean house of all the real conservative nuttiness. I can't believe any true American would believe that it is acceptable that we give millions more each year to people who already have millions while at the same time taking away the few dollars our most disadvantaged need to survive. The party that currently says "I don't care about the very poor" was once truly a "Grand Ole Party", maybe after this year of crazyness, it will be again.

Sarah and Alan,

Enjoying the back-and-forth.

10. Fried sticks of butter on popsicle sticks are sold at the Iowa state fair.

Um Sarah - I would have to add a sub-bullets for corndogs ..

a) while Michelle and Rick devour them with gusto, they make Marcus blush.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/bachmann-perry-media-hit-job-corn-dog/

There will always be something called 'illegal' immigrants. As long as there is a society of laws.

The difference isn't that Democrats and Republicans believe there shouldn't be a term defining someone as illegal, and therefore kept out of the country. There's a difference in the base of each party as to what should define the term, and how should current illegals be dealth with.

However, neither Democratic or Republican politicians have a political will to deal with it, and that is because it is financially in their interest to say they are doing something, but actually do nothing. As long as they can get people to vote for them anyway, they can take their corporate lobbyist dollars to let the status quo exist. Sort of like they do when it comes to trade issues with China.

I personally am against illegal immigration. However, I am also against the dehuminizing movement against it, as it only actually serves someone's political career. Well, worse, it breeds a society of hate, but you know, who ever cared about that.....

Sorry for the semi serious discussion. I know this is First Read and such nonsense has no place. Back to your Muslim Republicans versus Communiest Democrats. Please continue.

@Akeem

How much revenue would it raise? The Joint Committee on Taxation, which analyzes tax legislation, has estimated that the "Paying a Fair Share Act" would raise $47 billion over 10 years, or an average of less than $5 billion a year, assuming the Bush tax cuts expire.

That wouldn't do much to help reduce federal deficits. In recent years, annual deficits have ranged from several hundred billion dollars to more than $1 trillion.

And if the rule were to serve as a replacement for the AMT, as Obama has proposed, it wouldn't come close to making up for the $1 trillion-plus in revenue that the AMT is expected to generate over 10 years.

http://money.cnn.com/2012/04/09/pf/taxes/buffett-rule/

The issue is they would probably get more from the $1M+ taxpayer but that would not make up for what they would lose from the 500K - 1M taxpayers who have multiple deductions and have to pay the AMT. It's not even close. They make around 500B from the Buffet Rule and lose over 1T by removing the AMT.

NEWS FLASH

Allen West: I’ve ‘Heard’ That 80 House Democrats Are Communist Party Members

Flamboyant Tea Party Rep. Allen West (R-FL) said at town hall meeting last night that “he’s heard” of up to 80 Democratic congressmen who are members of the Communist Party. The entire House Democratic Caucus is 190 members, so West is claiming that almost half are card-carrying Communists. Not surprisingly, he would not name names.

http://thinkprogress.org/special/2012/04/11/462205/allen-west-80-communists/

========================================================

See, this is what I mean about today’s Republicans rejecting reality.

LOL, we'll be waiting for Republican Rep. Allen West to name at least one House Democratic Communist Party Member he saw in his hallucination.

Akeem - I enjoy your posts.

I agree - Class warfare, war on women, war on religion, all of these terms are only pushing us to an actual conflict.

Alan,

Like it or not, fossil fuels will run out. I'm not advocating that we all turn in our keys to our SUV's tomorrow, but technology has progressed to the point that we can begin making the transition off of oil/gas/coal.

I do not understand why people don't want to do this, I mean do you enjoy putting gas in your car?

Science writer Chris Mooney explores brain scans, polls, and psychology experiments to explain why conservatives today believe more wrong things; appear more likely than Democrats to oppose new ideas and less likely to change their beliefs in the face of new facts; and sometimes respond to compelling evidence by doubling down on their current beliefs.

Goes beyond the standard claims about ignorance or corporate malfeasance.

Fascinating information, Bev! Will conservatives accept it, or are their brains hard-wired to deny this reality too?

They spread lies and half truths and are willing to believe and further twist anything the President and any Democrat may say to undermine any effort they make to help the country grow and prosper. Some of it is fueled by ideology, some by illogical hatred, some by religious intolerance and a lot by ignorance or at the very least an inability to walk a mile in someone's shoes.

I agree with everything you said, GM...but you left out racism. It's the only way to explain how some otherwise intelligent people can be so firmly set against their own best interests.

We encourage seeing them as NOT ILLEGAL. As humans, and affording them rights and protections, as opposed to demonizing them. That's the first step to ending what could almost be called their "slavery".

I have no problem with employers being jailed. I want that incentive (jobs) closed. The second incentive is stop dangling an amnesty in front of them. All leaders in this country should state unambiguously that there will be no amnesty for illegals.

After that you can start putting legal incentives in place. A good start would be a guest worker program. Then you could streamline legal immigration.

while Michelle and Rick devour them with gusto, they make Marcus blush.

Red,

No one can handle a 'tube steak' quite like Marcus... ☺

I do not understand why people don't want to do this, I mean do you enjoy putting gas in your car?

No, I bought a smaller engine car. I didn't a hybrid because my wife didn't like the Prius and the rest cost too much (even with a government tax incentive). That's why hybrids are not getting good repeat buyers because you can now buy a regular car with good gas mileage.

BTW I don't think electric cars are the future as the battery technology is just not there. I think fuel cells will win...or even better we go back to living in cities and walk.

Alan,

Absolutely aggree with a guest worker program. As well as getting rid of the beaurocrasy involved in renewing green cards and visas. Many workers don't even realize they're here illegally because the process is so complicated.

When the system is the problem, you can't term the worker "illegal". That's my point.

I think fuel cells will win...or even better we go back to living in cities and walk

As do I, and I'm born and raised in Detroit. Father was a Ford exec, grandpa worked on the line, hell my sister even got married at the Piquette Plant where they built the Model T's. Change is necessary and it happens, people need to accept that and keep up.

JAS1 -- What planet are you on??? The MANDATE was a GOP idea for decades! Wake up! And don't be so sure on the other stuff JAS1, these guys have legislated themselves into a corner. A tight one. Regardless of what the outcome is, a clearer path forward will be evident when all is said and done. That you can be sure of.

Alan: If you want true science then nuclear energy is the only emission free source that can meet our current energy needs. But nuclear is blocked because of political reasons.

Nuclear energy has lost favor, not because of political reasons, but because it is not safe. Look at last year's nuclear emergency in Japan.

Fracking, tar sands oil, even oil itself are equally hard on the environment. To continue to deny the importance of alternative energy like wind and water is madness.

I think fuel cells will win...or even better we go back to living in cities and walk

This would also be a good idea seeing as we're eating fried sticks of butter, turkey legs, and the atrocity better known as the corndog.

Nuclear energy has lost favor, not because of political reasons, but because it is not safe. Look at last year's nuclear emergency in Japan.

That's because Japan decided to put it on the ocean coast in a seismically active area.

Nuclear energy is safe when people actually use their heads.

Sarah: but technology has progressed to the point that we can begin making the transition off of oil/gas/coal.

Show us a city run by this new technology. Show us a steel mill that runs off of this new technology. Show us a mall run off this new technology. Show us a sub-division run off of this new technology. These are what the transitions to the new technology will need to do to show they are ready. They aren't ready.

These new technologies are nowhere near ready to even supplement the energy needs of the country. Their cost per unit of energy is much higher than gas/oil/coal.

Certainly continue to look to the next form of energy, but don't think it's ready to power the country any time soon.

Well, ben, Dubbya's unfunded wars and his tax cuts for the rich left our nation deeply in debt. His laissez-faire corporate and financial policies sent thousands of jobs overseas and almost destroyed our financial system.

Let's put the blame where it fairly lies.

Then, let's thank President Obama for being willing to step into the hole Dubbya dug and help us climb back out of it. You should try some gratitude, ben.

JAS,

I already provided you with that, I believe last week. In fact, it was an entire state. A whole bunch of other people provided you with links too. Go look through the old threads.

I refuse to waste my time pointing out the "pretty colors" to a blind lady. Obviously you didn't pay attention before, why would I think you would do so now?

Dcia: JAS1 -- What planet are you on??? The MANDATE was a GOP idea for decades! Wake up!

Not according to their votes on Obamacare. Talk is cheap. Votes are what count.

JAS1-- Weasels, chickens and snakes don't vote. Neither do politicians when it's in their best interest not to.

Votes are what count

Not to an election loser. Just ask Democrats circa December 2000 and Republicans circa December 2008.

....don't miss out on these culinary delights...

http://www.smosh.com/smosh-pit/articles/10-ridiculous-fried-foods

Thanks Yellowdog I do enjoy reading yours as well. It is always great to read post that are neither too far left or right.

Thanks Alan, that cleared it up for me. However, what is wrong with simply keeping the AMT for those between 500k-1M? I do not see that to be too big of an issue as it can easily be fixed in a variety of ways.

If the average tax payer who makes 1 million pays 30% anyway, the Buffett rule is in no way "class warfare". Basically its using a cork to plug a hole in our tax poicy. I agree it is not an end all solution like true tax reform, however; we disagree in that I think it is correct. The threshold of 1 million I do agree is politics and setting the bar that high was simply to garner support.

JAS,

Not according to their votes on Obamacare. Talk is cheap. Votes are what count.

Who taught you logic? The process of voting for/against something, doesn't change who invented the idea. All that speaks to is obstructionism and hypocrasy.

The still came up with the idea, but they didn't vote for it because they're obstructionists and hypocrits.

Sarah, you haven't proved anything dear. An entire state is not run on wind/solar or what ever.

I refuse to waste my time with you. You put out false data. You don't answer questions poised to challenge your beliefs. You're incapable of looking up the simplest things on your own. You're a problem not worth having.

JAS,

I refuse to waste my time with you.

Meaning... I can't keep up with you and you aren't buying into my BS.

You put out false data. You don't answer questions poised to challenge your beliefs. You're incapable of looking up the simplest things on your own.

Really, please provide quotations or proof of this claim, in context of course.

You're a problem not worth having.

Yeah, that's what my ex-boyfriends say too.

Sarah: The still came up with the idea, but they didn't vote for it because they're obstructionists and hypocrits

One last time of wasting my time - Or they figured out it was unconstitutional.

Odd, this article is about the GOP and all we hear from the likes of JoAnnaSmith et al is Obama bashing. But again, that's typical of the Party of No. No ideas, just sideline complaining.

No one has learned anything they did not already know. Republican honor no longer resides within them. A completely lost political party. Ugly and dysfuctional. Leadership lacking to the nth degree. A pytiful joke and we all are paying a price for it. The biggest display of anti american freedom in the history of the country. A campaign of deciet and phony lies by decietful and phony people. And thousands of idiots to follow them. Weird bunch you republicans have turned out to be...very strange.

@JAS1

Not according to their votes on Obamacare.

That's called partisan politics at work.

JAS,

Sure, they all of a sudden figured out it's unconstitutional. Hello, McFly, are you really that naive?

Gingerbread Mamma, well said. I've never seen a party cheer a struggling economy, cheer when Wall Street falls, cheer at the idea of allowing the iconic US auto industry to go bankrupt during a near Great Depression. The right claims to have a lock on patriotism but the only patriotism I see is the words where they claim they are patriotic and I know they are not.

1SGFITZ, if you go to the top of First Read's page below their logo and just above the latest articles, you will see the word Archives second from the left. There was no First Thoughts Friday so my weekly wrap is in the first post of that day.

The average millionaire, if there is such a thing, may pay a higher tax on income but a good share of millionaire incomes is capital gains which is 15%; the Buffett rule would tax that as income as it should be at 30% minimum.

vote them all out

Owned & Operated (Full Release)

On the individual mandate. Why can't we agree that it's a lousy idea and there are better ways to pay for universal insurance.

I hope it is found unconstitutional because I don't like the idea that the government can force me into commerce with a private company. This precedent is open to abuse by lawmakers of either party in the future.

Gingerbread Mamma, well said. I've never seen a party cheer a struggling economy, cheer when Wall Street falls, cheer at the idea of allowing the iconic US auto industry to go bankrupt during a near Great Depression. The right claims to have a lock on patriotism but the only patriotism I see is the words where they claim they are patriotic and I know they are not.

Yeah right. There you were in 2008 hoping that unemployment would fall by a couple of points and the financial crisis would just end. The problem with partisans is that they treat politics like a football game, and that a win for one side is loss to the other. I personally don't care who gets elected in November, I do hope they preside over a roaring economy because that will benefit my personal circumstances. Selfish I know but a good economy is good for me...it's that simple.

Thanks Alan, that cleared it up for me. However, what is wrong with simply keeping the AMT for those between 500k-1M? I do not see that to be too big of an issue as it can easily be fixed in a variety of ways.

I don't disagree but that is not what the President has proposed. What he has proposed reeks of politics. The whole system needs reformed from top to bottom and the only politician who is advocating that right now is Paul Ryan.

Alan,

On the individual mandate. Why can't we agree that it's a lousy idea and there are better ways to pay for universal insurance

Actually we do agree on this. I would greatly prefer a single payer system, however I will accept a mandate if the choice is between that and what we have now.

Speak to the GOP on this one though, since the mandate was supposed to be a free market compromise and they screamed SOCIALISM every time alternatives were raised.

Gingerbread Mamma...you said...

(1) many of the people from the right's perspective, are becoming more anti-American as the election cycle proceeds...
(2) I always considered Americans to be a generous people, to be compassionate towards those who had little or nothing or when a disaster struck be there to help out.
(3)Where did all those folks go to?

I don't have any graphs or or statistics. I can only speak from experience...
(1) Apparently this is just a matter of perspective depending on which side you ask.
(2) Well, lots of prayers and best wishes went out in the story about the possible tsunami in India but when something bad happens in our country, particularly Texas, people post about wishing the whole thing was wiped off the map and punishment from God and such. lol
(3) They're still here, I know many of them myself. It's kind of like going to a "cowboy" club to see some real cowboys. The real cowboys have been working all day and are at home with their families. They're not at the club. There are plenty of good folke out there, just living their lives.

Actually we do agree on this. I would greatly prefer a single payer system, however I will accept a mandate if the choice is between that and what we have now.

And that's where we disagree. The means is important. If this is accepted as constitutional then almost anything could be passed by a future congress under the commerce clause. Even in the arguments before the SC no one came up with an acceptable limiting argument.

Do you think you would be supporting this if it had been passed by a Republican Administration and Congress?

For example, I was not for military action in Libya, and the reasoning the Administration used to justify circumventing the War Powers Act was dangerous because it can now be used by future Administrations. Today, the reasons for acting in Libya are being met by Syria but we are taking no action. There's no consistency and it just looks like politics.

Mitt Romney is about as fit to be President of this country as a photograph. I have wondered how evangelicals will ever square their dogma with that of a Mormon, enough to vote for Romney. Many will say religion doesn't matter, but nevertheless, It does. Finally It came to me. The President squares It for them. They can, and will vote for Romney, well within the tenets of their dogma, simply because of the Presidents skin color. Again, while Romney is a piss poor Presidential candidate, He will enjoy the rousing support of most, who otherwise would never have considered supporting Him, just to joyfully express their godly ordained racism. We democrats should not take the candidacy of Romney lightly. We must be about getting out the traditional non voters of democratic persuasion, and pushing them to vote. Toward that too, we would all do well to become as rough and challenging toward the republicans as they are toward us. We must not allow this facsimile of a castoff of Mortimer Snerd to be elected President, especially since we have the best Man for the job already serving since FDR. Let us be about this business with money, iron fists, and steely resolve. While we're at it, we need to clean up that gwaddamn Congress. Run the likes of Ryan out!

Oh this is fun...

What I have learned from the GOP:

1) Abortions are murder. However, if the child is born and does not have insurance to cover his/her own medical expense... "LET HIM DIE!"

2) If a woman does not want to be forcibly penetrated with an inanimate object, she just needs to "look away".

3) We are extremely concerned about rising costs of welfare, but we want every fetus to come to term, thus increasing the welfare population and the costs associated with it. Basically, we want to increase the cost of the thing we are against.

4) All Muslims are the exact same as extremists Muslims, but when a crazy extremist Christian group does something... not all Christians are the same. Our religion get's a "get out of jail free card" from extremists, while others do not.

5) We believe in "personal responsibility", except when it comes to health care and being personally responsible for our own insurance... then we do not believe in it.

6) Homosexual teenagers are barbarians, and all homosexuals are abominations according to Leviticus. We reserve the right to ignore ALL OTHER laws in Leviticus because it is part of the Old Testament and we are no longer required to follow Old Testament law... but we are still required to follow the homosexual law in Leviticus, even though we just said that we are no longer required to follow Old Testament law. Yes, we are contradicting ourselves.... but it's acceptable because we really hate those gays.

7) Poor people enjoy being poor and live in a lap of luxury. We should no longer support them. We do not see any long term problems that may arise from throwing millions of people on the street.

8) We support our soldiers... unless they are gay, in which case we will "boo" and mock you on live television.

9) We believe that tax payers fund private insurance plans because of some weird, round-about, twisted explanation of how our money is somehow spent. By this same logic, we believe that everyone should indirectly fund our decisions to have children, and all the medical costs associated with that... but we refuse to fund the decision for people not to have children, because our reproductive decisions are more important than yours.

10) Obama is a socialist and communist... liberals claim that those are competing ideologies, but we really don't know what either means. Fox News told us that he is, and that is good enough for us.

11) Marriage is like a cup of water, no matter what you do, it is still water. You can not change water into anything else, just like you can not change marriage into anything besides male and female. No one has ever turned water into something else... ever... not even wine... oh wait. (Santorum did not think that one through)

12) The more sex you have, the more contraceptive pills you need to take. This is why women that use a lot of contraception are "sluts". Each pill is a tiny sperm-blocking shield. Liberals claim that women take one pill a day, regardless of the amount of sex they have... this is liberal science mumbo-jumbo, do not believe them.

13) Dogs enjoy being strapped to the roof of a car, for 12 hours, enduring 100-120 decibels on their overly-sensitive ears, and defecating on themselves in fear... every dog loves this.

14) If taxes on the 1% are raised, every single rich American will leave the country... ALL of them. A mass exodus. Sure, it has never happened before when taxes were raised, but it will happen this time. We have no facts to back up this claim.

15) Illegal immigrants are the root of all our problems. They should all be killed with an electric fence that has a sign which will read: "If you touch this you will die." Quick reminder, we are still against the murder of fetal cells, but fully support this form of death.

16) We are against spending... except on the military. We need to continue to spend money to blow s*** up. If we stop, then Muslims will conquer us all and impose sharia law on your children.

17) Did we mention how much we hate gays? Ya... ok, good.

18) It is perfectly legal to shoot and kill someone you do not like, as long as you stalk them first and get them to trigger their psychological flight or fight response. Once you have scarred them to the point of triggering this response, you may shoot them in "self defense". It is now open season on anyone you do not like... just remember to scare them into the flight or fight response first.

19) The best experts to discuss the medical issues of women are old, religious men whose education is solely based on religious text.

20) If you do not support the same economic class of people that we support, namely the 1%, then you are participating in "class warfare". We use the term "warfare" because it denotes a more heinous act, and "disagreement" just doesn't sound as bad. Oh... same thing goes for religion. Support us 100%, or you are starting a "war" on us.

Nothing to worry about...Saturday Night Live will have plenty of material with Romney alone...business as usual. Obama/Biden 2012.

@ Sarah -

In this day and age, its not enough for cities to be run on alternative energy. Demonize me for quoting Rush Limbaugh, but he said it best when he said "If you cant get an airplane off of the ground with it, don't talk to me."

The airline industry NEEDS gas to survive until they find a proper alternative. Right now, no one is even CLOSE to finding an alternative for airplanes.

Republicans got their knickers in a twist over the $500 million loss from the government loan to the failed Solyndra solar panels company. The $5 billion EVERY year that would be collected from the wealthy under the Buffet Rule is ten times the Solyndra loss, which was only a one-time event. You'd think that maybe their knickers would be ten times twistier over $5 billion, but math isn't their strong suit.

________________________________________________

Houston: Since reality based thinking isn't a lefty liberal possibility, much less a strong suit, let me explain it to you: Solyndra wasted real taxpayer dollars repaying a Barry bundler for his campaign contributions. The taxpayers will NEVER see that money again. Everyone, including Barry, knows the Buffet Rule will NEVER pass unless Barry is re-elected, and the Dems take back the House and get a reliable 60 seat majority in the Senate. All of those things are very unlikely to happen in 2012. So there is NO $5 billion collected in any year.

The Buffett Rule is just sound bite class warfare red meat for low information Obamabots designed to further divide the country.

Nothing more and nothing less.

The Buffett Rule is just sound bite class warfare red meat for low information Obamabots designed to further divide the country.

Yea, because billionaires paying a lower rate than middle class citizens while we claim to have a progressive tax system isn't totally broken or anything.

now dont pick on poor Sarah. You and I both know that she does not use ANY fossil fuels,nor does she buy anything. She rides a horse,grows her own food,makes her own bowls,utesils etc.

The Liberal gene pool is running low. First post out of the gate and Flyeisty talks about Gingrich when the article is about Romney. What a joke.

Sequel article: "How will Mr. Obama weather the storm on his FAILED domestic and International agenda ?"

Back to Mr. Obama blaming Bush for the current GSA fiasco.

The Obama Bucks are running out.

Look, on the energy front let me say this. That don't call it God's green Earth for nothing. We must keep the delicate atmospheric balance. It's that important. I'm all for using an all of the above approach to meeting our energy needs. With one HUGE caveat. That being, we use "best practices" when tapping the resources to mitigate pollution. Even if it requires taxpayer's money to accomplish that. There is no justification for pollutants. They are very harmful. It's simply unacceptable in this day and age to suggest otherwise. We must also keep innovating to discover new sources for our energy needs as well. Too much competition not to. That's my two cents today!

Joe the reasoning you just used was terrible. Following the same chain I can claim there are no deductions eliminated in the Ryan budget. It wil NEVER pass, so many unlikely events will have to happen. Therefore there are no savings in that budget, it is just political pandering.

JoeDirt,

Yes, I also survive solely on a diet of aborted fetuses, testicles and organic brussel sprouts. Please, when does saying we need to begin to take steps off of fossil fuels constitute a need for the speaker to live "off the land" in order for it to be sincere?

Slow down on the drama.

Alan,

The slippery slope is disengenuous when it comes to the healthcare debate, because of the nature of healthcare...

There's a couple of key differences. For example, if your house floods and you don't have insurance, no one is obligated to build you a new one or replace the old, and the cost of replacing it will not be put on the backs of those who DO have flood insurance. Right now, doctors are obligated to treat you regardless, and it is inevitable that one day you will need treatment. If you're hungry, and go into a grocery store, no has to give you food and then place the price of your food on the other shoppers. It's a completely unique market.

Also, it is not inevitable that there will be a flood. It is inevitable that we will all use healthcare.

That's why brocoli and gym scenarios are off point.

Think of it this way...

1. You're not being forced to engage in commerce or buy anything, YOU ALREADY DO. Inevitably you will seek healthcare, ergo you're already engaging and not being forced to. And because healthcare crosses state lines, it is interstate commerce, and subject to regulation by the feds. This isn't about how they can regulate, it's about the effect on nationwide commerce.

2. The insurance market only works if everyone participates. That's not true for any other example you can give. The vegetable market doesn't need 100% participation, does it? If we continue to allow health insurance to be voluntary, while not allowing for discrimination against preexisting conditions the healthy people will exit the system and only reenter it when they're sick, CRASHING THE WHOLE SYSTEM.

So yes, if the GOP passed the mandate as the only alternative to our current system, I would support it and still believe it to be Consitutional.

Raff,

So because we can't fly airplanes with alternative energy, we should not take any steps at all to move off of fossil fuels in any areas?

Joe

Since reality based thinking isn't a lefty liberal possibility, much less a strong suit, let me explain it to you: Solyndra wasted real taxpayer dollars repaying a Barry bundler for his campaign contributions. The taxpayers will NEVER see that money again

That's right... that was real taxpayer money that they will never see again.

I am just glad that the GOP has NEVER wasted real taxpayer money on a project that benefited a certain company, resulting in taxpayers never seeing that money again. Thank God that has NEVER happened.

I mean, how embarrassing would it be if the GOP made a big deal about Solyndra, all while they had previously wasted billions on... oh, I don't know... let's just make something up... let's say... a war in a country that supposedly had "weapons of mass destruction", all for the benefit of Haliburton.

Can you imaging the embarrassment and hypocrisy if something like THAT happened? Well, let's just be thankful that it didn't.

Ido - oh you should not EVER be talking about the gene pool considering your total lack of anything resembling intelligence. You don't begin to comprehend what is happening in our country yet you continue to spout your stupidity almost daily. It must be embarrassing to be you!

Sarah - you are talking logically which will totally turn Alan and others off. But, well said.

OBAMA/BIDEN 2012

Indie,

The fact that there weren't any WMD's doesn't matter, they're still Muslim, which was reason enough to bomb them. (sarc)

Sarah,

Good point. I completely forgot about the GOP platform of "blowing s*** up in the desert".

At least we know they will spend our money wisely.

Following the same chain I can claim there are no deductions eliminated in the Ryan budget. It wil NEVER pass, so many unlikely events will have to happen. Therefore there are no savings in that budget, it is just political pandering.

________________________________________

You won't find me disagreeing with that.

Indie,

Come on, now, blowing sh** up in the desert is kind of our "thing". Well that and eating fried butter on a stick.

@ Sarah -

I believe in researching a viable alternative but to think that we will be completely off of fossils in the near future is ludicrous.

Battery powered hybrids are not cost efficient enough yet and they have a long way to go. Case in point is the Volt. 27 years to pay for itself and it wont run that long, not even close. I think it will be even longer before planes are off of gas.

Personally, I live in AZ and work on Davis Monthan AFB, which has a HUGE solar panel yard as well as every base house is run almost solely on solar. In places where such alternatives are viable, I believe they should be used. But I dont believe in rushing off of a proven energy source just because it is "bad" for the environment and because it is finite. I realize that oil is a finite resource but we are no where close to running out.

Do you honestly think that the wind will blow for forever, or that sun will always shine? Im sure that there are theorists and scientists out there that think otherwise.

Also, it is not inevitable that there will be a flood. It is inevitable that we will all use healthcare.

But it is not inevitable that you will require insurance to pay for it.

Or if you did that you could buy catastrophic insurance. The government's argument is that you must buy an insurance policy that meets its mandated requirements. There is no inevitability that that policy is required to pay for your health costs. In fact your costs may not even meet that policy's deductibles. You are confusing health insurance with health care.

If you accept that the health care market requires market mechanisms to control costs do you then think that having private insurance is the best way to introduce market mechanisms into the the health care market?

I don't.

Adding to Wisconsin's woes under Republican Governor Scott Walker was a recent report of the worst states for science education. Where did Wisconsin rank? Wisconsin ranked dead last.

Dead last seems to be Walker's goal for Wisconsin as Wisconsin lost more jobs than any other state in the country last year under Walker. Dead last for job creation in Wisconsin.

Things do not bode well for Wisconsin attracting any high-paying jobs any time soon as Walker's budget drastically cut spending on education at all levels.

RECALL WALKER WISCONSIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Raff,

I never said we should rush off, I said we have the technology to begin to take steps off of fossil fuels, why not use them??? Oh yes, because our politicians are bought by big money interests like oil companies.

The companies give money to the politicians, who then agree to subsidies for oil which keeps the price of gas artificially low. If we were paying for gas what it actually costs, I guarentee you, we'd be rioting in the streets for alternative sources.

Alan,

But it is not inevitable that you will require insurance to pay for it.

You're right, because those with insurance get the tab anyway. I hate personal examples, but I've used this one before...

At the age of 27, my sister literally woke up with MS. Her condition is totally treatable by a daily injection, which costs, out of pocket, $5,000/week. Now say she lives to be 80? And that doesn't even begin to look at all the other times she'll need medical treatment for other things, or tests to check on her condition.

Catastophic insurance only covers catatrophes. There are many other conditions that run the cost up. (See the above example). And the ER's are still obligated to give treatment.

Healthcare is the treatment and the commerce, health insurance is the regulation.

If you accept that the health care market requires market mechanisms to control costs do you then think that having private insurance is the best way to introduce market mechanisms into the the health care market?

If we actually had a free market in regards to the industry. We don't. It's exempt from the Sherman Laws. Also, if we didn't have "fee for service". Then yes, the free market might work. However, a single payer system would still be better.

And, once again, this entire clusterfu** is do to MONEY IN POLITICS.

Romney's likely nomination proves the GOP establishment still firmly believes in the abject failure known as the "Bush Doctrine" or "global economy" (decimating the middle class with the export of jobs or the import of ILLEGAL labor, protecting foreign currencies at the expense of our own and endless "wars and rumors of war"). The GOP establishment is just as contemptous of conservatives as many progressives are. The problem is this also describes Obama and the Democrat establishment. Too bad many here fail to understand that the word "partisan" in America has become a synonym for "useful idiot".

@ Sarah -

Agreed.

And, once again, this entire clusterfu** is do to MONEY IN POLITICS

That's the most common sense I have heard on this board in a LONG TIME!

Raff,

PS... If we no longer have the sun shining and the wind blowing, we have bigger problems than getting off of fossil fuels. :)

I really enjoy using the term clusterfu**. It's fantastic.

If we were paying for gas what it actually costs, I guarentee you, we'd be rioting in the streets for alternative sources.

It has been said before, and I will say it again... If gas were $10 a gallon, we would have an alternative fuel source option in a few years.

If gas were $10 a gallon,....

And it would destroy the disposable income of both the lower and middle income wage earners. Until alternative fuel advocates incorporate fundamental economics in their proposals they truly are pipe dreams.

Indie,

This is what I don't get, the GOP is constantly screaming "free market" this and "free market" that, but they, as well as Dems, don't ever really let it work.

Take gas...

If we really had a free market, the oil companies wouldn't be given subsidies by the politicians they bought, the price of gas would rise, which would cause consumers to demand a different product, which would lead to innovation, which would lead to investment, which would lead to manufacturing, which would lead to jobs and green energy.

See GOP, that's what you yourselves claim to want, but when push comes to shove you whine about having to give up your fossil fuels.

I don't get you. Do you want oil, or do you want a free market?

Why do we need an "alternative" fuel?.....other than the fact that Obama and the left hate how successful the oil industry is (they hate anybody who is more successful than they are). We have plenty of crude, and if we encouraged is exploitation, instead of stupidly demonizing it, we'd be fine for at least a couple of centuries.

@ Indie -

Gas is already well over $10 in Europe. Where is their alternative option that hasnt bankrupted them?

@ Sarah -

I agree with your sentiment. Harnessing alternative energy is the trick, not finding it.

And clusterfu** is quite delightful. Gives you that certain...je ne sais quoi when describing things that are FUBAR.

@IndieParty #1.113: Probably the best, most articulate, and accurate dissertation of todays right wing republican extremists I have read by anyone. I think you deserve at least, an honorary doctorate for your effort. Thank you so much for your insight and talented expressions. Best regards to you.

Raff,

It takes a true poet to fit je ne sais quoi, clusterfu**, and FUBAR into a single statement. I applaud you, my man. I applaud you.

My mother says I'm like a trucker with Tourettes Syndrome. But you might just have me beat.

Raff

It's a saying... not a scientific based factual statement. It hints at an idea, that higher gas prices will cause people to demand alternatives. Jesus Christ, why do I always end up explaining things that should be common sense?

Sarah,

If we really had a free market, the oil companies wouldn't be given subsidies by the politicians they bought, the price of gas would rise, which would cause consumers to demand a different product, which would lead to innovation, which would lead to investment, which would lead to manufacturing, which would lead to jobs and green energy.

You got it. I actually worked for a major car company a few years back, and I can tell you that when gas prices go up and consumer demand shifts, they invest in R&D faster than you would believe.

But it all comes down to money. If the consumers with money want fuel efficiency, car companies shift towards that. If consumer demand is happy with oil, companies will continue to push fossil fuels.

The extent of demand regulates the speed of innovation.

Thank you, thank you...*takes a small bow*

I know we dont see eye to eye on everything but, in reality, no one ever will.

If ALL politicians were as civil as we are, things may actually get done.

@ Indie -

All I was saying is that gas is well over $10 in Europe, has been for YEARS. What I was inferring is that they dont have an alternative source for gas in cars either. Jesus Christ, why are you so dense in realizing that I am agreeing with you....spazz much?

Well, I am off to eat some grub. See y'all later.

If we really had a free market......

Your description of how a free market works might be apt in fantasy land but still ignores some real basics. Subsidies (in this case reduced taxation as opposed to free money) would increase cost only to consumer. The greatest contributing factors to the price of a gallon of gas (as of 4/2/12) are the price of crude oil at $2.91 and excise and sales tax at $0.66. That 66 cents would increase minus so called "sudsidies". Increased production (unregulated in a "free market") would reduce the $2.91 figure (as supply increases price decreases, econ 101). Reduction in taxation would also reduce cost. Both would be a benefit to consumers (many of whom struggle with current prices by sacrificing food and other tangibles in order to pay for fuel). Added disposable income would also lead to added consumer spending in non-oil sectors of the economy and become a net benefit (the velocity of money, again econ 101).

Until alternative energy is not an economic burden to lower and middle incomes it remains an anathema to "free markets".

Wize,

Because the oil companies are given subsidies, money they don't have to pay to the government, they can afford to keep their costs lower and still make a profit.

The lower the taxes, the less they can charge and still pull a profit, the higher the taxes the more they have to charge consumers. Our gas prices don't reflect what a barrel of oil actually costs.

Yes, without the subsidies the price would increase to reflect the supply amount we actually have, ergo the demand would decrease. We'd find other means of energy.

Sarah and Indie...

The assertion that demand/want/need drives innovation and job creation is true but here's the problem...Create a job here and it's shipped off to another country. This is a fact and it's been happening for f**king decades. They harp on and on about how we neet to "create" jobe here, we don't have to "create" s**t! Just bring the other ones back . There was a time when everything that was consumed in this country was made here. Create a job and it goes overseas. This is, without a doubt, the single biggest problem we have imo.
It's kind of like (not really) legalizing drugs, tax them and use the tax money to fix stuff. Horse s**t. Will this make corruption go away? We pay plenty in taxes for the Government to do what it's supposed to do and much of it is stolen from us. Drug tax money will make no difference, will just be stolen, and we'll still have the same problems and same debt and legal drugs.

BigTex,

That one's easy to solve. As a developing country receiving Most Favored Nation status, China is not in compliance with its end of the bargin. Their tariff rate is supposed to be at 15%, but it sure ain't, and they manipulate their currency. Both of those are violations according to the WTO.

But this is why we REALLY won't ever revoke that status...

Multinational corporations like utilizing their shi**y labor standards. And we all know what large corporations have the power to do, right??? Buy the politicians whose job it is to tell China to go f**k itself. Which we have the leverage to do, because we are China's largest market. Without us, they're screwed.

As I said a couple days ago, if we can come together through the WTO and punish multinational corporations for taking advantage of China's refusal to exit the Guilded Age, we can collectively pull the shaft out of our global asses and club China over the head with it.

What we've learned from the GOP race is that Teapublicans are in melt-down mode. If it wasn't for the millions in Karl Rove's Crossroads Super Pac, they'd be toast. You can be sure the right-wing activist judges on the Supreme Court knew very well they needed to pass Citizen's United. But alas, it won't take long for Dems to catch up, as they know you must fight fire with fire. Lovely isn't it?

Our gas prices don't reflect what a barrel of oil actually costs.

They actually do.

http://energyalmanac.ca.gov/gasoline/margins/index.php

without the subsidies the price would increase to reflect the supply amount we actually have, ergo the demand would decrease

2 points:

1. Subsidies in the US have virtually nothing to do with demand or supply for oil.

2. Increased cost of fuel effects every good and service that needs fuel for production and transportation (in other words the entire economy). I am not opposed to the idea of alternative fuels. I am opposed to alternative fuel policies that create an unnecessary economic burden to our most vunerable consumers.

Lmao....... Do you actually know any Mexican undocumented workers? I do I actually showed a couple your post, they are stupid just not citizens. They laughed ...... in Mexico thats Jejejejejejeje!

That's because Japan decided to put it on the ocean coast in a seismically active area.

Uh, I didn't realize that Japan was the only nation to experience nuclear disasters, and it is news to me that 3 Mile Island and Chernobyl were caused by earthquakes. If you are gaga over nuclear, build a power plant in your backyard then get back to us on your deformed/dead kids, neighbors, relatives.

What have we learned? Well there's a song - WAR! ... and paraphrasing the lyrics ...

"What have we learned here? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!"

Raff, you posted: "I believe in researching a viable alternative but to think that we will be completely off of fossils in the near future is ludicrous."

"In places where such alternatives are viable, I believe they should be used. But I dont believe in rushing off of a proven energy source just because it is "bad" for the environment and because it is finite. I realize that oil is a finite resource but we are no where close to running out."

"Assuming the same growth rates, we would run out of oil by 2042 and natural gas by 2044." -

I don't know about you but I'll still be alive (barring serious issues) when this happens. This is scary! We should have already been funding alternative energy sources research like crazy. I worked in a science lab for a couple of years. I know that research cannot begin without money and without a desire for the research, no funding will be allocated to research for a particular renewable energy source.

Results from research take YEARS and years to pound out the bugs but the sooner we start the better this new energy source will be when it goes mainstream.

Alan, nuclear is really the best way to go when you take most things into consideration. I, however, am a tree hugger and am terribly concerned about nuclear waste. You know these reactors create waste and it must be disposed of. But how should we do it? Rocket it into space so that we can contaminate space as well? I've heard of this being proposed. It seems great on the surface but the ramifications are too great. We need something else (besides the danger of nuclear) so lets jump in and find the next new energy and be ahead on the market.

Alan,

Do you honestly think that the wind will blow for forever, or that sun will always shine? Im sure that there are theorists and scientists out there that think otherwise."

What about hemp oil converted to bio-diesel? It's properties are quite good for production today.

http://phys.org/news205599757.html

Of course the neanderthals opposed to marijuana legalization continue to stand in the way of progress.

I also like hydrogen fuel cells.

Both alternatives are cheap, available today and won't cost taxpayers $500 million like Solyndra (among other failures).

@ MGates -

Do you have a link to a credible source claiming we will be all out of oil by 2042? Not denying your claim, just want to see it proven.

Joe HAHAHA

Since reality based thinking isn't a lefty liberal possibility, much less a strong suit, let me explain it to you: Solyndra wasted real taxpayer dollars repaying a Barry bundler for his campaign contributions.

You kooky connies seem to forget that several of G.W.Bush's money men backed Solyndra, too.

The taxpayers will NEVER see that money again.

Some investments pay off, some don't. As I always expected from the start, some of the stimulus funding would go to projects that failed, just like with any investments. But the "failed" stimulus was successful enough to still have prevented the Bush Recession from turning into the Bush Depression. If Obama hadn't acted there would have been trillions more dollars evaporating from the US economy.

The taxpayer money lost on Solyndra is insignificant compared to the $5 billion that the Buffet Rule would bring in, and that's admittedly a small amount compared to the $80 billion per year that ending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy would bring in.

Everyone, including Barry, knows the Buffet Rule will NEVER pass unless Barry is re-elected, and the Dems take back the House and get a reliable 60 seat majority in the Senate. All of those things are very unlikely to happen in 2012. So there is NO $5 billion collected in any year.

Sez you. Policy proposals like the Buffet Rule are put before the voters so THEY can decide. That's kind of the point of democracy, not that you kooky connies like it very much.

The Buffett Rule is just sound bite class warfare red meat for low information Obamabots designed to further divide the country.

The "class warfare" meme is just a soundbite for Romneybots and other kooky connies. As Warren Buffet pointed out truthfully, the class war is over and his class won.

sarah (1.132) -- you said -- "Oh yes, because our politicians are bought by big money interests like oil companies."

Politicians like Senator Barack Obama who received in excess of $900,000 from big oil?

IR -- Very nice post! You can't make this $hit up. Lies and damn lies sums it up perfectly!

The etch-a-sketch candidate.

SHAKE IT UP!!!

Great post, IR. Yet I am certain that Romney considers himself a moral, religious person. His ambition to be President (without articulating why) seems to take over everything.

David Letterman had a funny line last night---he said that as a Mormon, Romney would get to have several Vice Presidents.

Excellent. Dana Milbank sure hit that one out of the park. IR, the quotes were terrific and emphasized the article.

Mitt Romney is a serial liar but he is also a serial sinner according to his own faith and just about any other religion. One thing that has bugged me during this primary is hearing those like Romney, Santorum, Gingrich and the rest preaching their moral and religious superiority then lying through their teeth during their speeches. I still say Romney is nervous on stage fearing the bolt of lightening strike from above.

The tea people need to read and understand the "ten commandments" espsially the 1 and 9.

Thou shalt have no other gods before me

Is that an Obama quote?

Obama will go down as the worst president in the history of history ....

Maybe even longer than that ....

Obama out in 2012 ....

WOW Skup, you need to find a good church and attend this Sunday.

Your opinion bigbenalaska, how ever misguided it is.

Obama/Biden 2012!!!!!!!!!!

Obama will go down as the worst president in the history of history ....

Obama will be historic .. Bush owns the 'worst' title.

RedDevPS - they only call Obama the worst to try to deflect from George W. Bush who we all know is and will continue to be the worst President of our lifetime. And, President Obama will be among the best after his 2nd term.

Obama/Biden 2012

You're traveling through another dimension, it is a dimension as vast as time and space and as timeless as infinity. It is the murky ground between light and shadow, between science and superstition and it lies between the pit of a man's fear and the height of his ambitions. It is a journey into a heinous land whose boundaries are that of fear and loathing. That's the sign post up ahead...your next stop... the Romney Zone.

Submitted for your approval...Anytown U.S.A.; only marginally troubled by the toil and roil of the outside world, however two years into the Romney presidency one can see something is fundamentally wrong. Numerous wars over declining resources that serve out-moded technologies have withered the national treasury. As a result, Benjamin Franklin's post office system is dismantled, and private correspondence is a thing of the past. Only roads that serve high priority military bases and industrial manufactories are maintained , meaning most other roads are impassable by modern vehicles. This is a moot point however, as the world's response to our military aggression has caused the prices of external energy and commodity resources to become exorbitantly high; as a result, people with horses and to a certain extent motorcycles do any traveling. The economic consequences are such that most citizens have replaced their lawns with "True Freedom" gardens, which allows them to supplement their community protein rations, which are provided by the federal government on a faith-based distribution system. Health care is extremely rationed, as most health professionals are busy conducting trans-vaginal probes to ensure that America's next generation of warriors are cared for to proper military specifications. And as always , it never applies to the esteemed care-takers of Anytown, the job creators, those captains of Industry, the unmakers of Nature and the artificers of woe, the One Percent.

This is a dimension of dementation. It is an area which we call the Romney Zone.

Actually, Benny, President Obama is currently ranked at #15 among US presidents while George W. Bush is near the bottom at #39. Read 'em and weep:

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2010/07/02/survey-ranks-obama-15th-best-president-bush-among-worst

why yes, all of obama's friends are anti american blah blah blah. you're right, as always. ROTFL.

Obama also has trouble relating to the average American. That's what happens when you've spent most of your life around left-wing, anti-American elitists, preachers and domestic terrorists

And John Boehner plays golf with this guy ... another guilty by association elitist.

ah, damage "knows" that "most lefties silently agree iwth wright". lol. How about using your mind reading ability to tell us what the winning lottery numbers are. ROTFL.

I love your ego in knowing what others think!

x

veremontguy - Ignore Damage. A better name for him would be Demented but - you get the picture.

The Activist - Romney is totally out of touch with the average - and above average - American. Frankly, even most 1%ers can't relate to him. He is wooden; cannot speak well; cannot talk about issues; he is just totally out of touch. My guess is he will be more than happy to go back to his life where he doesn't have to associate with the "common people."

Well, Damage, with all that "pocket pool" you've been playing I would have thought you would notice the cracks in those crystal balls of yours by now. Boo hoo, maybe you can get a pair of teflon replacements for your pre-existing condition.;-)

Obama/Biden 2012

Having a wife and a mother is not supporting women in general, Einstein. Sheesh.. Adolf Hitler had a mother too..

I think Romney should refuse to come on NBC EVER because MSNBC not only EMPLOYS a person who is encouraging racial hatred and violence

Unfortunately for you (and Romney?) the national debates will probably be televised on NBC.

I didn't know Brian Williams stirs up racial hatreds.

Romney supports women. His wife is a woman. I believe his mother was too. Could you possibly be pissed that your RUSH boycott and attempt to get him off the air was a miserable friggin' failure? Yeah. I think so.

A perfect example of the sort of thinking we are up against this fall. Sheesh! No rocket scientists to be found here. GOP'ers just seem to think women are illiterate and stupid.

As for Rush was there anyone who really believed he would be taken off the air? Is that what he has been saying? What a joke! A pretty unrealistic goal as he is the lifeblood of most talk radio stations. However I go out of my way not to shop at any of his advertisers and always have. But dittoheads would likely crack up and go completely bonkers without their daily fix of Rush.

Go ahead, give this man 500 hours of your time a year. He will rot your brain into grey applesauce. From that statement about Romney and women the effects are already pretty clear.

Nice post voxrationis!

You have so much power why don't you fire him? Oh yeah he works for himself idiot.

You liberals just can't stand it when someone disgrees with your retoric.

What have we learned from the GOP race? We've learned their candidates are for sale to the highest bidders; they have no ethics; they have no plans; the GOP hates women; the GOP hates minorities; don't even get me started about their feelings about gays; the GOP hates everyone who isn't white, male, and embittered like them. We've learned if the GOP wins the country will go backward by about 100 years. We've learned that if the GOP wins women will have no say about what happens with our bodies. We've learned that if you don't believe in the Christianity that the far right preaches (hatred, intolerance, etc.) you will have no place in our country. We've learned that war is not only tolerated but wanted. We've learned that if we want our country to survive we have to make sure the GOP doesn't win in November!

OBAMA/BIDEN 2012!!!!

seeking -- For sale to the highest bidders?

President Obama holds the dubious distinction of spending more money than any other presidential candidate, almost twice what McCain spent.

This was achieved after he and his spokesman intimated that if McCain would do public funding Obama would as well. Even the venerable NYT reported it this way.

But in the end he broke with tradition (first major candidate to reject public funding) and went on to raise in the neighborhood of $740,000,000 to win (buy?) the presidential election of 2008.

Now we hear that $1,000,000,000 will be needed to win (buy) the 2012 election.

Guess you are right -- Obama -- for sale to the highest bidders.

Just like Reagan, George Bush was able to work with both sides of the isle. That is something Obama hasn't been able to do and isn't likely to accomplish if he accidentally gets another 4 years. I think America is ready for a better leader in the White House. We've had enough of Obama's war on responsible Americans...

Jody -- Oh the irony of it all! I think someone should pay "W" to keep talking. ; )

We liberals were kind of sad yesterday to see Rick Santorum depart the race but we were cheered up by George Bush's appearance. In the short clip I saw on the news, he said he had written a book even though people didn't think he read them (who believes he actually writes his own books?) and he complained about the Bush tax cuts being named after him.

I had started to feel kind of sorry for George Bush---to have attained the pinnacle of American politics only to have made such an utter mess of it----but seeing him reminded me of all the harm he caused to so many people that it will take years to repair. And the Republicans want to put all the blame on President Obama. No wonder Romney never brings up "W".

Someday maybe George Bush will write a book about his policies regarding Iraq. I'm certain the families of the 4,500 servicemen and women who died there would be interested in reading it.

Bruce--that is what I was thinking last night----bad enough that families endured separations, the money wasted on the war that could have done so much good here at home, the people injured and/or suffering from PTSD but the absolute worst is the people who gave up their lives based on his lies. How he can show his face in public with that smug grin is beyond me.

In his speech yesterday, former President Bush talked about enjoying mountain biking but hating it when a "one-legged veteran" beats him. This is an example of what I disliked so much about Bush; his inability to connect with or see the reality he inflicted on so many and then trying to joke about that reality. Talk about insensitive to not just Veterans but to the fact that it was Bush/Cheney who so willingly started an unnecessary war before finishing the first one and cost the limbs and lives of thousands of American military personnel.

I think America is ready for a better leader in the White House.

What America is ready for is better leadership in Congress. When congressional leadership announced on day one that their #1 and only single goal is to make the president a one-term president, that means to Americans, eff you .. we don't care what is good for America, we only care about what is good for Republican politics. Americans lost everything that day in 2010.

Well said Red!

UAW Pleeeeeease - George Bush didn't work with everyone and is certainly not someone anyone should hold up as an example of good leadership. The buffoon from Texas put us in this tailspin. The best thing he can do is go stick his head in the sand - which he is sooooo good at doing - and let the world forget he exists. He was and will forever be the worst President of our lifetime. He is beyond stupid and ignorant. He was stupid, ignorant and arrogant to boot. Bringing him up just shows your total lack of connection to the real world!

I love it when armchair soldiers like Bruce and SF talk about the people that died fighting in OIF. Keep in mind that when you enlist in the armed forces, you know exactly what you are getting yourself into. To those that enlisted even after it kicked off? If you thought realistically that you would never deploy while serving in the armed forces after 9/11, then they should have never joined up. You whacked out libs use these brave men and women as a talking point against politicians and politics you dont like. Dont forget that the war in Iraq was a bi-partisan approval.

Fortunately, we have the brave people, like me, that willfully joined up fully knowing that we could pay the ultimate cost for your freedom.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and predict that Obama beats George Bush in 2012. Obama's blame everyone else strategy plays out well among liberals but it's not finding much of an audience with the rest of America who is looking for a better leader......

RafftheGreat - if you actually served, thank you for your service. But your comment that people who signed up knew exactly what they were getting into is just not true. At no other time in our country's history has a soldier been deployed 3, 4, 5 and even 6 times into a war zone. We have had more brain injuries during these wars than ever before. We have more PTSD than ever before. And, we have a higher number of soldiers committing suicide. That anyone would devalue these numbers and these soldiers is deplorable. We have not done our duty to them and - no - they did not have a clue what they were getting into. No one did.

UAW Pleeeeeeeease - I believe YOU are the one who brought up Bush in your earlier post so stop whining about me posting back about him. When you can't post intelligently you begin to whine. We HAVE a better leader - President Obama - who will continue leading until 2016. Get used to it!

I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

If you dont know what this is, this is the oath of enlistment into the Armed Forces. Notice the part where it says:

and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

The order of the President was to go to war in Iraq. So, immediately, you obviously have no clue about what that oath means. Also, blindly enlisting in the US Armed Forces for no other reason than to just have a job is folly, as well as expecting not to deploy. The business of the Armed Forces is to go to war, so naturally, everyone that enlists has a pretty damn good idea what they are getting themselves into.

I enlisted in the Air Force 2 years after the 9/11 incident fully knowing that I could deploy and be killed or injured in the line of duty. I do it to help make sure our country is safe and maybe pass on our democracy to other countries. I believe that most everyone else that serves does so for the same reasons.

I dont discount what the guys on the ground go through. It is difficult. It is stress on the family and on the individual. The guys fighting on the ground do a tough job. How you dont know that you may deploy 2 or 3 times in this day and age is just plain ignorance.

If you dont want to deploy but still be in the armed forces, well friend, you are sh*t out of luck, because that's what we do.

RafftheGreat - 2 or 3 times maybe - but 5 and 6 is unheard of, until now. And, sorry but Air Force is not like the Army or Marines who are boots on the ground. Not like you didn't lose people but you rarely had to see them blown up before your eyes. Sorry your arguments don't hold merit. We have asked more of our men and women in uniform these past few years than ever before and that is unheard of. Plus, at no other time have we sent our National Guard troops overseas. These wars have taken an unprecedented toll on our men and women. No one enlisting had a clue it would be this bad.

Plus, over 50% of the men and women on the streets, homeless, are veterans who came back to no jobs or could not assimilate back into society. We have failed the very people we should be going out of our way to help. We as a nation need to be doing more.

I know what you are trying to say, but you don't know anything about the way we deploy, so your argument has no merit either.

Please believe that those who deploy once or twice and dont like it dont get out after their enlistment is up, then it is their own fault that they keep going.

You refuse to see things logically, and choose to be blind to the truth.

2 or 3 times maybe - but 5 and 6 is unheard of, until now.

Yes it is unheard of. Because, like I said, if you don't like deploying, then ride out your enlistment and then GTFO.

Deploying, it's what we do. To believe otherwise is just sheer ignorance.

Plus, over 50% of the men and women on the streets, homeless, are veterans who came back to no jobs or could not assimilate back into society. We have failed the very people we should be going out of our way to help. We as a nation need to be doing more

On this, I could not agree with you more. Now, more than ever, we need to help our veterans as they return home. I apologize that I am not too literate on FR and getting URLs to stick, but look up IAVA, Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America. They are doing alot of good work on Capital Hill trying to help our Vets.

RafftheGreat - you have no idea what I know about the way troops are employed - totally NO idea! And, you refuse to see anything logically which is your problem - not mine. Your ignorance or resistance to the truth is truly troubling.

Ok. That is your opinion and I know that I am right. How is it not logical to stay out of the military or not re -enlist if you dont like to deploy. Also, you can't claim to know how the military employs its' resources without having first served at the level I am at.

Besides, it's only partially about how the troops are employed, the majority of it is enlisting in the first place and re-enlisting after serving multiple combat tours.

And if you are an older veteran, thank you for your prior service. Bottom line is that you know nothing of the culture of the military today other than what you read on MSDNC and CNN.

RafftheGreat - in your mind you are right. And, that's it. Again, you know nothing about what I know and it shows with your arrogance and lack of consideration that another opinion might hold water. Not an older veteran at all.

Claiming you know anything about troop deployments means nothing unless you can prove it. I work as a Unit Deployment Manager. How about you?

What's funny is that you claim that I am arrogant and have a lack of consideration...

in your mind you are right. And, that's it. Again, you know nothing about what I know and it shows with your arrogance and lack of consideration that another opinion might hold water.

Hypocrite, much?

Hi Nash!

I saw a clip where Romney actually said that President Obama is the one waging a war on women with his management of the economy. And he seemed to be serious about it. And he seems to think we will fall for it.

I think he should eliminate the middle person and nominate a corporation for VP. They are people, after all.

You've got a point there Steeler Fan . . . I got a funny feeling that the Koch brothers are going to be President and Vice President in a Romney administration whether they are on the ticket or not. After all, they are using their financial "voice" to pretty much run much of the country right now . . . and they pretty much own the Supreme Court . . . that is quite a bit a power in the hands of two people . . . kind of makes a mockery of the very concept of "representative democracy" . . . but strangely, the "freedom" crowd is okay with it.

I got a funny feeling that the Koch brothers are going to be President and Vice President in a Romney administration

Good point Nash!

Remember Grover Norquist's comment at the CPAC convention?

King Grover stated they don't care which candidate wins as long as that person is able to sign what it put before him!

Can you say Puppet Masters?

I have decided that the GOPer politicians deny they are waging a war on women because they simply do not recognize women as being of importance; they really believe women should be home and they only tolerate them in business because the law says they must. The GOP politicians really do not think a woman should want to be anything more than a wife and mother; they really think women want as many babies as possible. Therefore, the concept of denying contraception or forcing women to have unnecessary ultrasounds, mandating women to do as the men say does not compute as being a war on women in their twisted logic little minds of these extremist, far right politicians.

The GOP is stuck in the 50's. They think I Love Lucy, Father Knows Best, and Ozzie & Harriet are reality shows! They haven't gotten up to "That Girl" and Rhoda and Bea Arthur yet! That will take another 20 yrs. or so. In the meantime, ladies, ignore them and remember what they have tried to pull this past year.

Most of it was geared to take your mind off of the real problems of the country. They don't want you asking that if they repeal the ACA what will they replace it with?(same non policies we had before) or how will you deal with high gas prices?(since this increase in prices happens every spring) What are your plans for Medicare and Social Security(privatize; remember GWB wanted you to invest in the Stock Market just before it fell) Why do oil companies need subsidies?(when they are drilling more than ever before) and why hasn't anyone questioned the closing down of refineries with no replacements or failure to update current ones when they are getting these huge subsidies.

They felt women were too feeble minded to think beyond the trigger points? If they create controversy over gender items, so you will not look any further into their NON programs. If anyone is creating class warfare it is the REPgTEAS who are all looking out for themselves and the H**l with you.

REMEMBER IN NOVEMBER! and don't allow them to obfuscate the real issues with double-speak!

I will take 1950 over the current Orwellien 1984 situation.

US-No Big brother here. 1950 would suit male WASPs. Get with the program and donate some of your speech to your favorite Luddite.

Ron Paul doesn't have a chance. If Romney and Newt both dropped out he still wouldn't win in a general election. So go ahead and throw your vote away if you wish.

All politicians lie, they tell us what they think we want to hear. If someone ran and was honest they would lose in a landslide.

It's all about the money!

So go ahead and throw your vote away if you wish.

Diamond, "throwing your vote away" is what happens when you vote for any regular GOP or DEM candidate for president. It's what happens when you vote for Obama and actually expect him to fulfill a campaign promise of ending the wars in the ME and closing Gitmo. It's what happens when you vote for a Republican who's just going to spend *a lot* more money than the Dems did, as W Bush did when he replaced Clinton.

THAT is throwing your vote away. If Ron Paul isn't president, and it seems clear now he won't be, then the loss is everyone's. I would never vote for anyone outside of Ron Paul this cycle as I don't care which of the others makes it in. A lot of silly Republicans are angry with Ron Paul supporters because of that, but that's just due to their own shortsightedness and partisan cheerleading they've been brainwashed since childhood to engage in, as though "Republican" and "Democrat" truly mean anything different.

Ron Paul is the best candidate for pres this country has seen in 100 years or more, probably. While he may retire from the political scene, his message will not.

except its not 2008 and dems weren't fighting against an incumbent president and the advantages that has. And obama hasn't had other candidates throwing mud at him this year.

Efforts to compare this to 2008 are inane...or hog wash if you prefer. :)

o.k. genius....then please tell us what the standard might be...for wrapping up the primary nomination before facing a sitting President in the general election? Ostensibly, Romney had this wrapped up after the Wisconsin primary, early April...it was just a matter of time before Santorum dropped out. In 1992 and 1996 it was late March before a presumptive nominee had been chosen by the respective parties. In 2004 it was early March for Kerry. But maybe you have other non inane information?

I'm not sure i'm a "genius", but I DO know that comparison to 2008 are silly because its not the same set of circumstances. I thought that was obvious..but apparently not to you.

its not a question of "the standard", its a question of the fact that given that it was apparent from the beginning romney was very likely going to win anyway, the longer non viable candidates stay in the race, the more money and time is wasted by romney, and the more dirt is provided to obama.

for example: "Even among Republicans, 23 percent maintain the primary season has given them a less favorable opinion of the party, versus 16 percent who say it’s been positive.

In addition, 55 percent of respondents – including 35 percent of Republicans – believe the Democratic Party does a better job than the GOP in appealing to those who aren’t hard-core supporters. Just 26 percent say the Republican Party does a better job on this front."

I'm glad for the chance to help educate you!

On paper, Romney had this thing wrapped up before it even started.

Unfortunately for him, elections aren't won on paper; they're won in the hearts and minds of the American voter. And in that race, Romney is still trailing badly - even within his own party.

It'll be interesting to see how many votes Santorum gets here in Pennsylvania on April 24th. Here's a guy who got tossed out of this state by 17 or 18 points in his last senate election - he lost his own county by 30 points! - and he's now officially no longer in the race at all. On paper, he shouldn't get a single vote - he's a proven loser and Pennsylvanians just plain don't like him very much. And yet, I'm betting he still gets a significant percentage of the primary votes here. And every single one of them will be from a Republican voter still fervently praying for Anyone But Romney.

Well, ceo---one difference between 2008 and the 2012 primaries. I always supported Senator Obama but at the end of the primary campaign I had come to have a profound respect for Hillary Clinton and would have been proud to cast my vote for her. In fact, I hope I do have a chance to vote for her in 2016. I haven't heard any Republicans say anything similar about the 2012 race.

VTguy - Has this primary battle taken more of a toll on Romney than candidates from other primary battles?? If so....show how you make that determination. Romney wrapped up his nomination at aproxx. the same time that other candidates did for 1992, 1996 and 2004. The fact that he is facing an incumbent had little to no bearing on his primary effort, other than to provide a target for criticism when not dealing with a primary competitor.

As far as your two examples.....so what??? It means nothing.

I'm glad for the chance to help educate you!

When I need a lesson in driveling nonsense....I'll look you up.

This Primary battle caused Mitt to go so hard right that the woman's vote is lost in November. His need to endorse the Ryan budget will cost him the senior citizen vote. His immigration comments have cost him more of the Hispanic vote. Tough Primary.

yeah, troops out of iraq was political theater. And the stimulus was political theater. And the afghan surge was political theater. And obamacare was political theater.

You're brilliant! ROTFL.

Don't forget, killing Bin Laden was apparently political theater too! Haha, so sad Kannin.

right..you can disagree with what obama's done..but he's done things, and arguing its all "political theater" is silly.

I love seeing the haters on one side claim that all his accomplishments are destroying the country..and those on the other side saying he's done nothing. They really need to get their hate straight. :)

On the other hand, the Republican House and the filibuster mad R's in the Senate have done exactly what to improve the economy?

VTguy: Troops out of Iraq followed almost to the month, a schedule set up by the Status of Forces of Agreement negotiated by the Bush Administration and the Iraqi government.

The stimulus was/is a giant boondoggle/slush fund designed to reward political contributors in the way of kick backs (Solyndra, UAW). It has done very little to stimulate anything...except the political aspirations of the left.

The Afghan surge (another Bush policy i.e. Iraq surge) has been hindered by the absurd "rules of engagement" implemented by the Obama administration.

Obamacare.....another government entitlement program that will be grossly in the red in a very short time. Not to mention that it is probably unconstitutional.

ceo: I see you've COMPLETELY MISSED the point. As I said in my post just 2 above yours..you can DISAGREE that obama's accomplishments are positive..but they ARE accomplishments..not "political theater" as claimed originally.

I see you lack reading comprehension. I recommend remedial classes.

and don't forget the GNOP / Boehner promising jobs..jobs..jobs..WHERE ARE THE JOBS BOEHNER?

GNOP - don;t believe in facts...."THEY CAN"T HANDLE THE TRUTH!"

VTguy - The only point you have is at the top of your head. Your definition of "accomplishments" seems a bit skewed. But I keep forgetting that from the perspective of the left...a negative affect can be viewed as an accomplishment. Like spending trillions of dollars with very little to show for it....it's the spending that is important.

We now have learned that if the Republicans are elected to our Federal Government Legislative offices in the Nov. election we will be electing the Bush Wackers back into power. Why you ask? Because if you look at who is running the show you will see Carl Rove's face all over it. I have to ask is that really what we want? Is that the answer we need?

The birth control issue was brought up by a democrat and Romney refused to be baited into a no win situation. Santorum expressed his Catholic beliefs. I don't agree with him, however I believe he has the right to express them.

Since women represent over 50% of the population nobody running for office would wage a war against them. The War on Women is a liberal LIE!

They aren't going after birth control, they and many other Americans think people should be responsible and pay for their own birth control. If the drugs are needed to treat a medical condition, their insurance will pay for them. Otherwise people should pay for their birth control themselves.

Diamond60: please explain how these proposals and laws do not amount to a war on women:

In AZ, the state legislature is proposing that insurance companies allow employers to decide whether a woman can receive a medical perscription based on whether the perscription is for contraction or for another purpose.

In VA, the state legislature proposed requiring women who wished to have an abortion to undergo having an internally inserted vaginal probe for an ultrasound, even though established medical practice indicates that there is NO medically necessary purpose behind the requirement.

The Republican House has proposed laws ending funding to Planned Parenthood, where many poor women obtain mammograms, cervical cancer screenings, and other women's health care; and removing a requirement of including contractive medication from insurance.

The whole Rush Limbaugh incident, deciding to call a woman a slut because she advocates having health insurance cover contraceptive medication.

Rick Santorum, a leading GOP Presidential candidate advocating against any form of contraception and against any form of pre-natal testing or care AND Mitt Romney failing to say that Santorum was wrong.

That's just a few off the top of my head, but I'm sure that there are many many many many more.

If the drugs are needed to treat a medical condition, their insurance will pay for them.

You just summarized Sandra Fluke's argument and how this is currently not the case. Catholic institutions won't provide coverage for birth control, medical condition or no.

Diamond 60-- Does 60 refer to age? I suspect you have a vested interest in not mentioning Viagra and Cialis.

Chas: We all know they are covered by insurance. No question there!

Gilboagirl and Chas - yep the white men got their programs covered, didn't they?

"its the economy stupid"...I highly doubt that scotus ruling against him will hurt him for much longer than killing bin laden helped him.

Now, his LEGACY will be endangered without obamacare, that is true.

BOTH parties strategy is "divide and conquer' (and has been for awhile). Lets see how many people in BOTH parties fall for this not-so-new line of bs.

Is Romney going to fix the issue however? I never heard him say he was.

Maybe now that it's clear he's the nominee, we can get some straight answers as to what his platform is.

Wishful thinking? Perhaps.

"half the country" is on "freebies" (like food stamps) because of the Great Recession has dumped lots of people out of work, and really hit the income of lower/middle class, thus qualifying them for more aid, and because of tax changes over the years under many presidents.

what percent of people were on 'freebies' under bush? for example: "At the NYT, Bruce Bartlett points out that between 2000 and 2008, during the presidency of George W. Bush, the percentage of filers who paid no federal income tax rose from 25.2 percent to 36.3 percent. During this time, Bartlett says, Republicans added a significant child credit to the tax code, resulting in a rise in nonpayers."

and remember, people who don't pay FEDERAL INCOME tax are paying payroll taxes, state taxes, etc.

this isn't really a democratic problem.

During this time, Bartlett says, Republicans added a significant child credit to the tax code, resulting in a rise in nonpayers.

Which was by far the most stupid tax decision made in the last decade at least. Now we are just subsidizing people to breed.

It's so stupid.

The most far-reaching 'handouts' are Social Security and Medicare. If the Republicans think that there are no Republicans drawing Social Security or benefiting form Medicare, they are deservedly doomed.

The most far-reaching 'handouts' are Social Security and Medicare. If the Republicans think that there are no Republicans drawing Social Security or benefiting form Medicare, they are deservedly doomed.

Those aren't handouts as almost all those receiving them put into those funds through years of payroll taxes.

The Republican plan is to eliminate Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Since most of those who receive the benefit of having paid are over the age of 67, they have probably paid for at least 45 years into the system. Under the GOP plans, how dare they try to collect on the promises made to them. That would require the government to actually do what they say. We all know they GOP will not, under any circumstances, do what they say, except as to lowering taxes for the wealthy.

What a load of nonsense. Is it because you are running from the hate-monger president that you elected. He jumps at every opportunity to foment racial hatred when it is not present. He has led the hatred towards banks, Republican party oil companies, TEA Party, Fox News, insurance companies and most everything that has to do with capitalism. He is in bed with George Soros and Warren Buffett and is led by the nose by the environmentalist lobby and unions. He is killing the poor with rising inflation and his energy policy which has caused gasoline and energy costs to spike - and even uses these to foment hatred as he blames everyone but himself.

And so you look for ghosts in the other party to hide what is in front of your face in your party. Look to the comments about women who have advanced themselves in the Republican party if you want to see real hatred towards women. And god help a Black who advances in that party. Liberals are the worst racists of all and their hatred for women that "don't know their place" is legendary. And so we see you lash out hoping to deflect your own racism and hatred for women even while you support a party owned and paid for by George Soros.

He has led the hatred towards banks

One has to be amused that anyone would support banks. What a corporate bank loving slimy shill. No wonder so many Americans are poorer than ever. They pay banks to deposit their money in an institution where the institution makes money on those deposits. Then they pay the banks to make withdrawals. They also pay the banks to write checks. Then they pay the banks to get a loan. How stupid can you get? Paying corporations to make money on your money. Wouldn't it make more sense for you to make money on your money?

I don't think anyone blame's Republican Voters a large for Racism,It's the comments that come from the party's elected officials and spokes persons.When you say it you own it and it never goes away.Perhaps the elected Republican Officials don't quite understand the Internet yet. Anything you say or do becomes world property and their will always be people like me that will constantly remind the world of what they have said.Do you really think that the world is not watching the Republican attack on it's citizens? Well i have new's for you they are and your elected officials from McConnell on down are being taken word for word verbatem. No other country in the world garners the attention of the world like American Politics

If we have another moron that blindly adheres to the totalitarianism of Christianity sitting upon the silver throne of the United States Vice President, then we are all assuredly screwed. I wouldn't really be surprised if Romney makes this move due to his insatiable lust to whore himself to the socially conservative wing of the Republican party—all to buy out the fabled "vote". If Santorum achieves any sort of position of power within the United States Federal system, then we are a failed species.

I sincerely doubt that santorum was bought by the offer of the VP. There are far better candidates than him..less controversial, more appealing. Heck, its doubtful he could even deliver his own home state of PA...and he's provided a wealth of material for attack ads.

Romney desperately needs to distance himself from santorum and his views, not embrace them.

Now, did rick get something offered for dropping out? maybe...ambassadorship? Promise of future support (and the implied threat of no support otherwise)

Anyone is better than Joe Biden.

well, biden is pretty useless, but I wouldn't go that far. Palin, for example, would have been a scary choice..would YOU want her owning our nuclear arsenal if mcain died?

Watermoon,

Okay.

Politician X, and Politician Y. Where X= Santorum and Y= Joe Biden. Santorum is unapologetic in his act of whoring himself to the Social Conservatives, whilst Biden is unapologetic in his act of whoring himself to labor unions and the "worker's cause".

Santorum is intelligent and able to speak in coherent sentences - even if they sometimes make one disagree with him. Biden is a moron!

i'll take a harmless moron over an intelligent scary person (I'll even assume for the sake of discussion that santorum is intelligent..which is yet to be proven I think).

vermont guy--Santorum was smart enough to take welfare money from Pa. to send his kids to school in Va. So there!

Inane progressives are far worse than any conservative.

Feisty Redhead is once again the first one posting.

Jaysus!!!

Not another one! lmao

Is she a Newsvine editor that is trying to taint the discussion?

You tell me.. toots!

I'm not the one who is concerned enough to bombard Newsvine with e-mails on some silly conspiracy theory! ;o)

Save what's left of America ....

Obama out in 2012 ....

Is she a Newsvine editor that is trying to taint the discussion?

No, just an RSS feed. Although she has managed to get a personal call out. I wonder why they choose Feisty's and Bob's questions about Romney. Both have made their thoughts on him pretty obvious.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/20/10199667-inside-the-boiler-room-potential-romney-vps

is it watermoon or watermellon at any rate think before you post you sound like a Republican

See what has happened to our beloved country these past three years and compare it to the 1976-1980 reign of the previous holder of "worst president ever,"

yeah, obama's gotten us out of one stupid war, is getting us out of afghanistan, has killed a lot of terrorists, and put a stop to the economic plummet that started with the housing bubble burst. How awful! :)

here's a clue for you - our country was headed for a bruising no matter who was president, thanks to the housing bubble bursting. Or didn't you notice the HUGE job losses at the end of bush's presidency?

vg-No they don t because there is something else going on in their reptilian brains--You could have added 3000 dead in the world trade center and 25,000 young Americans dead,maimed and wounded in the lied into Iraq war.

I find Feisty's posts partly confusing, sometimes amusing, and mostly obnoxious.

I find I don't give a rats ass what you think...

Are we clear now?

Oh boy, another Lol-bertarian. Ron Paul would be just as useless as Obama if given the chance, and his message of "freedom" is undercut by a few of his socially conservative views on society.

So Feisty, Who does one have to sleep with in order too be the first one to post on these blogs? i notice that you are so ofter getting first preference.

"Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul would disagree, but it's the reality."

It is not the "reality". The reality is that Election Fraud has been happening in every single state that has already voted. This is something ALL Americans should be concerned about. Because if we do NOT stop this illegal action, whoever gets put into the White House will not be because the American citizens chose him; but because whoever is behind this Election Fraud put him there.

1) March 26, 2012 "widespread GOP caucus fraud in Missouri".

2) "... Same scandalous vote fraud is taking place in Georgia" (The events detailed above are disturbing, not only because of the number of violations, but also due to the fact that convention participants knew they were being recorded (there was a camera set-up on a tripod) and continued to break rules with seemingly no fear. This bold behavior is indicative of individuals acting with the belief that they will be shielded from recourse by a higher authority within Georgia Republican party. This, in fact, may be the case; when we called the State Republican Party to ask how to properly file a formal complaint, we spoke to Mr. Rick Richardson, the individual who instructed Matt Brewster to violate a rule).

3) "Thanks to the proliferation of cell phones you will hear Alex Hayes, director of mainstream Republicans of Washington State, making the claim that the Romney-Santorum-Gingrich campaigns have united behind a common slate of candidates in Washington State to block the Ron Paul machine from winning the delegates. The apparent move on the part of the Romney-Santorum-Gingrich campaigns is to block citizens favoring Ron Paul from taking over the Washington State delegation to Tampa" (This happened at my Caucus in Shoreline. The King County Chairman herself handed out what looked like official ballots only they were pink. I went up and asked her what they were and she said, “these are the delegates that the GOP supports” - everyone one of them were Romney delegates).

4) "Bryan Spencer, the former St. Charles County Republican Central Committeeman and Caucus Subcommittee Chairman in Missouri openly admitted to premeditated voter fraud. Bryan Spencer, Former St. Charles County Republican Central Committeeman and Caucus Subcommittee Chairman, admits to premeditated rigging of the St. Charles County Caucus. He clearly explains how he looked at how the GOP rigged the Caucuses In Iowa, Maine, And Nebraska and took the same steps to prevent Ron Paul supporters from having their say in the Missouri caucuses".

5) "Democrats have been busy faking petition signatures, forging ballots and enlisting medical professionals to authorize fraudulent doctors' notes for liberal teachers-union operatives protesting Republican opponents."

6) "This week, four Democratic officials in Indiana were hit with felony charges related to petition fraud in the state's 2008 primary. The prosecutions are a result of the local South Bend Tribune newspaper's investigation last fall into "hundreds of county residents' signatures" forged on petitions used to put Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton on the Democratic primary ballot. At least two whistle-blowing government officials came forward to expose the forgery racket, which court documents say was formulated by Democratic Party officials inside local party headquarters. A veteran county Democratic Party chair, Butch Morgan, resigned in October over the scandal; three employees in the St. Joseph County voter registration office reportedly helped Morgan execute the scheme. Among the hundreds of unsuspecting residents whose names were illegally signed to the petitions: the prosecuting attorney in the case and a former Democratic governor of the state! Without the phony signatures, there's a significant chance that Obama would not have qualified for the primary ballot -- throwing the validity of the entire election into question". Michelle Malkin

7) "On Tuesday, a New York judge set new trial dates for Democratic officials and political operatives accused of another ballot fraud conspiracy. A first round of prosecutions against Democratic Elections Commissioner Edward McDonough and his co-defendant, former Councilman Michael LoPorto, ended in mistrials last month. The two men also face separate voter fraud charges involving a plot by Democrats to win the radical Working Families Party primary back in 2009."

Fox News Channel investigative reporter Eric Shawn noted that a whistle-blower in the case, WFP employee Sarah Couch, told investigators that her bosses "asked her to issue a Working Families Party press release that would 'point blame at the Republican Party,' and she refused to do so." Another whistle-blower, Democratic operative Anthony DeFiglio, told police that "faking absentee ballots was a commonplace and accepted practice in political circles, all intended to swing an election."

There are a lot more for both the last election and this one.

Don't you all think it is time we put a stop to Election Fraud? How can we make it safer? Go back to writing it all down, with a copy given to each of us on how we voted? This is Very important.