Bravo JoAnne!

(it took them 17 years to read 37 pages?)

The blogosphere was on this story like a pack of rabid hyena's on an antelope carcass!

Then again, I wouldn't expect them to understand 'proper context', when they have never missed a meal a day in their lives...

Former members of Bain Capital...sued for firing employees not affiliated to the L.D.S church.

"The principals of SCP, including a number of its managing directors and officers, are former partners or executives at Bain Capital and Bain & Company."

David McCurdy and six co-plaintiffs seek $5.35 million in damages from Sorenson Capital Partners for breach of contract, discrimination, promissory estoppel and retaliation. They claim they were induced into accepting salaries of $60,000 (instead of commensurate with their expertise = salary levels of $160,000 to $260,00). All were managers at Care Senior Living from March 2011 to February 2012 after signing five-year contracts, with the promise of raises.

Religious discrimination complaint: "During their tenure with defendants, plaintiffs learned that SCP strongly favored hiring, employing, and doing business with other members of the LDS Church...made comments about religion and questioned the beliefs of plaintiffs and other employees..."

Complaint: http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/04/17/LDS.pdf

N.B. - Bain Capital, recently at the center of vulture capitalism & corporate raider reporting, was co-founded by Mitt Romney in 1984. Romney's retirement agreement with Bain Capital pays him millions of dollars in income every year. Thus far in the Presidential primary he has released only one year of tax returns. Romney receives circa $57,000 per day in dividends and interest.

"If you don't have any fresh ideas, then you use stale tactics to scare voters. If you don't have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from."

That's an Obama quote from his 2008 acceptance speech at the Democratic convention. Four years ago, God's gift to the nation contrasted his hope and change message with the stale approach of a downtrodden Republican party that was flirting with irrelevance. But today, the shoe is on the other foot. Now Obama is the candidate who doesn't have a record he can run on. And now Obama is the candidate who blows smoke like social Darwinism or the war on women in a desperate attempt to convince voters to run away from the other guy.

Ah yes, what goes around comes around. And what's coming around these days is a concerted attempt by Obama and his henchmen to talk about anything besides the pathetic economic recovery over which this president has presided. And when absolutely forced by the (rare) journalist who presses the issue, our man offers a litany of excuses that purport to explain why it's not really his fault that the recovery hasn't picked up any steam. Good grief, whatever happened to the quaint notion of presidential accountability?

So come on Mr. President, it's time stop your whining. Man up, look the American people in the eye and acknowledge your failures. At least that way you might earn a modicum of respect even as the Republicans put you out of your electoral misery. So stop your dithering and speak the truth, we know you can do it if you try:

The buck stops here and I didn't get the job done…but please vote for me anyway.

"North Carolina is the convention state, thus ensuring that any problems or controversy there will be magnified"

Yup, I'm sure the media will make sure things are magnified!

How are things going in Florida politics?

And NOW we come to find that Obama EATS DOGS!!!!

'eats' or 'ate'?

Choose your words with more precision.

JoAnne in PA

All good points JoAnne although I believe Miss F from Roselle brings out the ugly in every one of her posts. Just my opinion but if you read them it's name calling, exaggeration, word parsing and in many cases just plain BS all aimed at repressing what could be good debate.

Get your plumbing fixed for all of the showers you'll need to take.

Cheers, JoAnne, excellent post!

Damage123 -

Thanks you - I couldn't have asked for a better illustration of my point.

Middle America does NOT take kindly to foreigners habit

Yea, we're definitely an intolerant bunch.

Beautifully said JoAnne. If you listen to Republicans/supporters/politicians and most of the media, you will find it painfully obvious that none of them care about the plight of the poor or working class.

This is the America of today and has been slowly drifting that way for over thirty years. Most of the media just looked the other way and put Reagan on a pedestal.

As long as they got what they wanted, they didn't care about anyone else. Funny how a lot of them overextended their credit cards and bought homes they couldn't afford. And now blame President Obama.

We are one big mean spirited irresponsible nation.

Romney was in I believe Pennsylvania and evidently the people he sat with said that taxes needed to be raised and how important education was.

From what I saw, he was a most uncomfortable presidential candidate trying to connect with them and failed miserably.

For lefty libtards only:

Most interesting. Yesterday, a poster named Thomas Blue showed up at First Read. I had not seen his posts before, but he put one up at 2.50 at 2:53P.M. That's rather late in the day for a post on First Thoughts. Yet, at least five lefty libtards obviously read his post because they took the time to write that they were quite impressed with Thomas Blue's post.

He wrote that he was not an Obama lover, although he had voted for him in 2008. He is disappointed with the President's performance. Such seems to be the sentiment of many of us on the left. For me, I'd like to see bankers making little rocks out of big rocks, while lodged at the Graybar Hotel. I'd like to see Dodd-Frank with big, nasty teeth. I want frackers seriously regulated. I want Guantanamo closed.

So, Thomas Blue, we know. We're with you. We really didn't expect a Messiah. That's the horse puckey of the right. Still, we know why, in many cases, the reason our expectations weren't met was because of right-wing obstruction. We know that the right-wing is willing to destroy this country based on their failed ideology. We know that the far right has overdosed on their dogma food.

We also know that we will vote for President Obama again. We know that he is in for a serious fight, and we wonder how that can be possible. How can anyone with a lick of sense think Mitt Romney offers a serious challenge? No one knows what this guy is going to do.

Several of his supporters have come here saying you can just go look at his web site. It's all there. Yeah? What's all there? Is that last week's stance or was it changed yesterday? Is he pro-life today or pro-choice? Does he really like Social Security, or does he want to destroy it with the Ryan Plan? What Mitt Romney thinks of as a foundation for his platform is what others call quicksand.

The man is a liar of the highest order. His followers, who are lining up like ducks at a shooting gallery, pay absolutely no attention to the fact that they have no idea what he is going to do. They have only heard what they want to hear. He is a Republican.

He will protect the faithful flock that loves Republican Jesus. Republican Jesus hates health care for all. Republican Jesus wants women barefoot, pregnant, and to have foreign objects shoved in their bodies. Republican Jesus hates secular government. Republican Jesus hates education.

Mitt will protect the flock that loves Gunner Jesus. Gunner Jesus hates government and wants every white male to own many guns because President Obama is going to take them away. Mitt and Gunner High Priest Wayne LaPierre know that the President has fiendishly waited for a second term to take guns away from the faithful.

Mitt will protect the flock that loves Greedy Jesus. Greedy Jesus hates taxes. Greedy Jesus says the surest way to find the path to heaven is to be rich, rich, rich. Forget that camel and eye of needle nonsense.

So my fellow lefty, libtard, pinko, commie, progressive, fascist, elitist friends, we have a mighty task ahead of us. We must get the vote out. President Obama has done a fairly decent job, all things considered. We cannot stand by and let Republicans take the reins of government. They will destroy this nation - AND that is NOT a lie.

Much has already been made this election year about class warfare. Contrary to popular belief, this liberal is actually glad that Spanky and Rob and NoJoe and JoAnna and Ben seem to enjoy the comfortable lives they have worked hard for and are now blessed to enjoy. I hope their children and grandchildren will never know hunger or disease or famine or drought or floods or homelessness. But if they ever should, I trust that these posters will find that equally amusing.

If the welfare system of the federal Government simply encompassed help for natural disasters and short-term aid to give people a hand up we would not be having this debate. Instead the welfare system has grown to include inter-generational payments, a seniors health system that will bankrupt the Federal Government, and a President that believes the Federal Government should be funding community colleges, rural broadband, mandates on medical insurance coverage, EPA regulations that are not debated in Congress, indefinite incarceration and borrowing 40% of it's budget.

What aspect of our lives are we being allowed to decide for ourselves without an incentive, or disincentive being put in place from Washington?

Obama just came on TV and my dog started flipping the hell out and barking!

Aren't you supposed to be at work?

David, none of us can deliver everything. It's not possible with today's Congress and the jackasses we put in there.

The more the left cry about what he didn't deliver, the more crippled he becomes. We've already seen it. For 3 years. It was the left who thought he would give them everything. The rest of us knew better.

Congress needs to change. That's the bottom line here.

So my fellow lefty, libtard, pinko, commie, progressive, fascist, elitist friends, we have a mighty task ahead of us. We must get the vote out. President Obama has done a fairly decent job, all things considered. We cannot stand by and let Republicans take the reins of government. They will destroy this nation - AND that is NOT a lie.

Good morning David,

GREAT!

and you ruken, are you supposed to be at work?

as for me, i am taking a vacation day

Good Morning JoAnne,

A GREAT start to the day.

and you ruken, are you supposed to be at work?

I am, thanks for asking.

Actually, Team Obama ought to be thrilled to pieces over the jokes at his expense- its something of a vacation from more sobering news.

Like initial claims for unemployment. This week's number? 386,000. The adjustment to last week's number? Up 8000- from 380,000 to 388,000. Not, exactly, a great trend.

Then, there's the scandal in North Carolina. It finally got a one line mention here- when things got a lot uglier last night.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/19/north-carolina-democratic-party-sexual-harassment_n_1437068.html

Make sure you click the link for the latest, stomach churning chapter. There are some pretty serious questions about this matter- including how and why the State Party Chairman decided, on his own, in contravention of both the law and party rules, to settle this thing on his own, in secret- and where the money came from. No one seems to know- and Parker is not talking.

He's also refusing to step down, despite calls to do so from practically every democrat that matters. Kind of makes you wonder what kind of insurance policy he thinks he has.

Every poll out this week- except for CNN- shows a tied race- and ALL of those polls show a disproportionate number of Democrats to Republicans. I can only imagine what the two camps' internal polling is showing- but Romney sure seems confident, and Obama is looking rather shrill.

Maybe he should hop aboard the Intercontinental Railway and take a trip to the Maldives. Figure out where they are so he does not confuse them with the Falklands again.

Ah, well. M
Obama shelved in 2012.

@Alan - NJ

President that believes the Federal Government should be funding community colleges, rural broadband, mandates on medical insurance coverage, EPA regulations that are not debated in Congress, indefinite incarceration and borrowing 40% of it's budget.

Government subsidies to universities are not new, and since community colleges are the cheaper alternatives to universities, I cannot see why giving funding to help cheap higher education is such a bad thing. It keeps tuition lower, lets more people get educated, which in turn benefits our nation as a whole.

High speed internet access in rural areas increases the quality of life for those living there. For many reasons, internet is seen as 'essential'. However, ISPs don't want to venture into rural areas, as the higher cost for infrastructure and lower revenues deter them.

Mandates on health-care insurance are necessary. The government can force health-care providers to provide a service, why can't they force us to pay for said service? If you are against the mandate, then you should be in support of allowing health-care providers to turn away those without insurance or a big wad of cash. Because without a mandate, the government is indirectly mandating those with insurance to pay higher rates to cover freeloaders.

EPA regulations, like many other regulations from the FCC, SEC, etc. are not laws. Therefore they do not have to be debated or passed in Congress. This is nothing new, nor is it unique to the EPA.

Indefinite incarceration is definitely a violation of human rights. Is Obama to blame for starting it? No. Is he to blame for the continuing detention of untried prisoners in Gitmo? At least partially, yes. I had hoped Gitmo would be closed, however from what I understand Congress refused to appropriate funding necessary to move the prisoners.

Borrowing money is in the Constitution. The Constitution also does not limit the amount Congress can borrow. This means in order to limit borrowing, we'd need either a law (which is pointless since Congress could just repeal said law at any point in the future) or we need a Constitutional amendment. I'd support the latter, but good luck, as it would also have to pass Congress in the first place.

FR: "The government can't afford another one to surface again anytime soon, and neither can the party that has come to represent the idea that government is at least part of the solution to collective problems – the Democrats."

Nice try FR, you guys almost stumbled on the truth. But in typical leftist fashion you accept a minor hit as a strategy to divert attention from the really big hit. Because the core issue that the GSA scandal and other episodes are highlighting is that an ideology that stands for raising taxes as part of the solution to our "collective problems" cannot be trusted to spend those tax dollars responsibly.

That reality undercuts the entire rationale of a big government approach to problem solving. Why should John Q. Public gleefully hand over more dollars to a government that repeatedly demonstrates its disdain for the taxpayers who provided those dollars? And why should anyone believe that even MORE tax dollars for any government program held so dear by the left will be spent any more effectively than they are being spent now?

The answer is there is no reason to believe such things. Nor will there ever be any reason until such time as government proves to the folks who foot the bill that their tax dollars aren't being wasted in an endless money pit administered by dolts who don't give a damn. Which leads to this inconvenient truth: the only way to guarantee a reduction in wasteful government spending is to reduce overall government spending.

That's the truth FR and their left wing pals refuse to come to grips with.

Excellent post JoAnne (as usual).

I only wish that some of our fellow posters were as educated and knowledgeable as you. It gets boring hearing the same old posters (and you know who you are) rant and rave about things they know nothing about, except what FOX NEWS tells them. Their racist and disgusting comments don't impress anyone but those who are on the lowest level of the intelligence scale.

And these people think they know whose best to run our Country. Give me a break.

Obama in 2012.

@Bill - VA

Which leads to this inconvenient truth: the only way to guarantee a reduction in wasteful government spending is to reduce overall government spending.

In a matter of speaking you're right, but you're also wrong.

The raw numbers of wasteful spending will go down, but the % of wasteful spending will likely remain unchanged. The most effective way is to attack the % directly, and not penalize legitimate spending because of a few bad apples.

JoAnne in PA:

Wow! That was very nice at 1.0. What you've brought out in the responses from the rabid and vacuous right-wingers is their utter ignorance of, and intolerance for cultural differences. They simply cannot get outside their white guy's box.

I wonder if they know that Jesus was a Semitic Jew.

Backhouse:

The Mormon cult of Christianity is notorious for its clannishness. Mormons will ALWAYS try to make their transactions within the Mormon community.

David, of course, its not possible that maybe Obama's economic policies and positions just dont/wont work and are extremely unpopular with the rest of the nation that tilts to fiscal conservatism and not lefty progressive land. Its all those obstructionist GOP that bring up budgets and their own ideas only to be denied even a vote or discussion from those obstructionist senators (oh thats right isnt Harry Reid a democrat). I know its only obstructionist if you obstruct an unpopular democratic program that via history or a view of the various guinea pig states in which they have been tried, we know they wont work. Of course you are unhappy with Obama that he hasnt even gone farther to the left which would be akin to Romney adopting all of those far right positions you hate so much. Extremism by either party is bad and your post is a great example of why we need a new president.

From what Feisty posted about Mitt's cookie problem, his get-together with "regular" Republican voters was even more of a disaster than the clip they showed on MSNBC of him sitting stiffly at a picnic table with a phony smile pasted on his face as the REPUBLICAN voters told him that maybe raising some taxes on themselves might be a necessary evil in order to fund things like education. At least those folks proved that some Republicans are still reasonable, responsible people. Too bad they'll probably all end up voting for irresponsible Mitt because they're loyal Republicans.

What is Romney's plan for the economy, health care, and jobs?

He keeps saying he will heal the economy, says nothing about health care, and says he will bring jobs back but doesn't say how.

He's great at attacking Obama, and right leaning independents are screaming for more details from Romney. Yet, we hear nothing about his plan. We do hear, "I learned from my father not to give to many details".

Well guess what, Americans want details.

JoAnne, hey there!

When the GOP are playing predatory games with the hungry and the poor, when they are intent on cutting food stamps, eliminating safety nets, medicAid, mediCare, unemployment benefits, privatizing Social Security, gutting Education and have cut 200,000 teachers most of whom are women;

And while the top 1% receive 93% of all U.S. incomes; while the top incomes have increased by 275%, and the GOP/Norquist Ryans are STILL pushing for more and additional tax cuts;

Especially now, the choice of title 'Hunger Games' for a blockbuster movie was in very, extremely bad taste.

Government subsidies to universities are not new, and since community colleges are the cheaper alternatives to universities, I cannot see why giving funding to help cheap higher education is such a bad thing. It keeps tuition lower, lets more people get educated, which in turn benefits our nation as a whole.

I disagree. Tuition has risen faster than inflation despite government subsidies. This seems to support the premise that government subsidies are actually driving up the cost of tuition for the middle-class who do not receive the subsidies.

High speed internet access in rural areas increases the quality of life for those living there. For many reasons, internet is seen as 'essential'. However, ISPs don't want to venture into rural areas, as the higher cost for infrastructure and lower revenues deter them.

You choose to live in a rural area. Why should the Federal Government support your choice. How much does it cost to buy a satellite dish as opposed to running a cable? Why is the federal Government deciding which method to use? Should we subsidize Multi-Plexes in rural areas as cinema operators are deterred by the higher costs and lower revenues?

Mandates on health-care insurance are necessary. The government can force health-care providers to provide a service, why can't they force us to pay for said service? If you are against the mandate, then you should be in support of allowing health-care providers to turn away those without insurance or a big wad of cash. Because without a mandate, the government is indirectly mandating those with insurance to pay higher rates to cover freeloaders.

I was talking about mandates to include services and procedures in policies, not the individual mandate to buy a policy in the first place.

EPA regulations, like many other regulations from the FCC, SEC, etc. are not laws. Therefore they do not have to be debated or passed in Congress. This is nothing new, nor is it unique to the EPA.

But this is

"EPA is reportedly in negotiations to settle two lawsuits that allege the agency has greater regulatory authority than what Congress provided under the Clean Water Act (CWA). The lawmakers are concerned that in choosing to not defend these cases in court, EPA is effectively refusing to honor the limits of its authority under the CWA and could subsequently use the settlements as a basis for an expansion of jurisdiction beyond the CWA's parameters."

Indefinite incarceration is definitely a violation of human rights. Is Obama to blame for starting it? No. Is he to blame for the continuing detention of untried prisoners in Gitmo? At least partially, yes. I had hoped Gitmo would be closed, however from what I understand Congress refused to appropriate funding necessary to move the prisoners.

I was referring to the passage of the NDAA which allows the Executive to incarcerate Americans indefinitely with no recourse to Habeas Corpus. From his signing statement he acknowledges the law give the Executive this right. He may forgo this power but future Administrations will not be limited by this signing statement.

Moreover, I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens. Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a Nation. My Administration will interpret section 1021 in a manner that ensures that any detention it authorizes complies with the Constitution, the laws of war, and all other applicable law.

Borrowing money is in the Constitution. The Constitution also does not limit the amount Congress can borrow. This means in order to limit borrowing, we'd need either a law (which is pointless since Congress could just repeal said law at any point in the future) or we need a Constitutional amendment. I'd support the latter, but good luck, as it would also have to pass Congress in the first place.

This is just fluff. This Administration and Congress (my post was referring to the Federal Government) is borrowing 40% of the money it is spending. That is simply irresponsible.

Bill Fairfax:

That reality undercuts the entire rationale of a big government approach to problem solving. Why should John Q. Public gleefully hand over more dollars to a government that repeatedly demonstrates its disdain for the taxpayers who provided those dollars?

So Bill thinks that instead, John Q. should "gleefully" hand over his money to crooks like Kenny Boy Lay of Enron infamy while his minions chuckle about how they're "screwing" grandma with their power supply manipulations. Of course, not all businesses are as corrupt as Enron. And not all government employees are as corrupt as a group of employees of the GSA. But life is much easier for the dimwitted if they follow Bill's simple-minded rule: "Business good. Government bad."

BTW Bill: Have any more quotable quotes you'd like to share with us from your favorite lefty lib, Kurt Vonnegut?

You know, in some parts of the world they eat cats. In others they eat guinea pigs. Just pointing this out. Some folks think eating ANY kind of meat is bad. So, can we all just chill out over all this?

According to Kirk's reply to David above, extremism by either party is bad and your post is a great example of why we need a new president.

Kirk, President Obama is the only person in this country standing between a complete wealthy take over of this country and the middle and working class. That is not far left anything.

Poll shown over at DailyKos:

Do you think the government should be doing more to help improve the financial situation of middle class Americans, should it be doing less, or do you think the government is doing the right amount to help improve the financial situation of middle class Americans?

Do more: 67
Do less: 15
Doing right amount: 14

In general, do you think the government should be doing more to help the housing market improve, should it be doing less, or is the government doing the right amount?

More: 52
Less: 16

***********

The country is behind Presidnet Obama. He needs a Congress who are willing to help Americans. Only we can give him that. This Congress is useless.

Maybe the entire government should go through sensitivity training as it relates to respect for the american tax payer. After the course, how many of them will come up with ideas on how the be more efficient?

And while the top 1% receive 93% of all U.S. incomes:

This link is for 2005 / 2008. If you have a more recent link that supports your statement please post. Otherwise I say Bullsh..t.

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/05/top-1-what-they-make-and-pay/

The top 1 percent of all households got 18 percent of all personal income and paid nearly 28 percent of all federal taxes in 2005, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The top 1 percent now pay a significantly larger share of taxes than before President Bush’s tax cuts, and also have a larger share of income.

GSA was inspired by "W" !!!!!!!!!!

Backhouse, since government assistance has risen 80% to $900 billion over 70 welfare type programs since Obama took office and I assume that Obama's economic policies will improve the economy? Hasnt that been your argument? So wont those programs need to be cut and no longer needed? Can you name me on GOP proposal that actually cuts these programs or cuts the rate of growth? If we go back to the Clinton era economy, wouldnt you think these programs would be cut by 50% even by democrats as no longer necessary? You realize teachers havent been cut except at the local level and have nothing to do with the GOP and you probably know that teacher employment nationwide has actually increased and their own website provides an additional 13% increase over the next couple of years. So again you lie lie and lie.

And this is what I found dated 2010, so Backhouse you are basically making up @!$%#, the top 1% do not receive 93% of income. Go search on wealth and see if that's true or go read a non-partisan site where some facts may actually exist.

http://www.financialsamurai.com/2011/04/12/how-much-money-do-the-top-income-earners-make-percent/

As the economy continues to recover, it’s likely that the top 1% of income earners will likely pay an even higher percentage share of overall income taxes than 38%. If things were fair, they would only have to pay 20% of total income taxes since 20% is their share of total income. Alas, the rich pay almost double what they owe.

@Alan

I disagree. Tuition has risen faster than inflation despite government subsidies. This seem to support the premise that government subsidies are actually driving up the cost of tuition for the middle-class who do not receive the subsidies.

One could also say the same thing about student loans.

Personally I could see that in there, however I also think it's the fact that many fields rely on use of technology, and the purchase of said technology is vastly expensive. There were EE labs where some meters cost as much as a house, for example.

I think it's probably all these factors worked in.

You choose to live in a rural area. Why should the Federal Government support your choice. How much does it cost to buy a satellite dish as opposed to running a cable? Why is the federal Government deciding which method to use? Should we subsidize Multi-Plexes in rural areas as cinema operators are deterred by the higher costs and lower revenues?

You don't just 'run a cable' there are other parts of the infrastructure. Also, rural communities do have businesses that need high speed internet. Expanding the reach of high speed internet does encourage economic growth, as well as increasing the quality of life for private citizens.

Also, don't compare cinemas and ISPs, they aren't remotely the same.

"EPA is reportedly in negotiations to settle two lawsuits that allege the agency has greater regulatory authority than what Congress provided under the Clean Water Act (CWA). The lawmakers are concerned that in choosing to not defend these cases in court, EPA is effectively refusing to honor the limits of its authority under the CWA and could subsequently use the settlements as a basis for an expansion of jurisdiction beyond the CWA's parameters."

If the plaintiff(s) concerned that the EPA is chronicly overreaching, why not let the lawsuit run its course?

I was referring to the passage of the NDAA which allows the Executive to incarcerate Americans indefinitely with no recourse to Habeas Corpus. From his signing statement he acknowledges the law give the Executive this right. He may forgo this power but future Administrations will not be limited by this signing statement.

Indeed. NDAA is a stain. Not much else I can say.

This is just fluff. This Administration and Congress (my post was referring to the Federal Government) is borrowing 40% of the money it is spending. That is simply irresponsible.

I'm not disagreeing, I'm just examining it from a Constitutional point of view. Either we need an amendment to force Congress to limit borrowing power (as I'm sure any law doing so would be struck down on Constitutional grounds) or we just need to elect members that will do so on their own.

For a long term solution, I'd support the amendment alternative.

Wow

at #1.44,

The definition of denial and the disinformed.

If we invested what we spent in the war in Iraq on Medicare and Social Security they would be fixed.

ruken says he / she is at work, posting as often as he / she does one can imagine that either he / she is a professional blogger maybe working for msnbc or is effectively stealing from his / her employer -- or are you self-employed?

ruken says he is at work, posting as often as he / she does one can imagine that either he / she is a professional blogger or is effectively stealing from the employer

It's my entertainment while waiting for the test suite to finish.

But thank you for your concern.

Based on my experience, although the GSA example may be an unusually large single waste of money, it is symptomatic of how our tax dollars are wasted. The more common examples include things such as contracts that mandate products/services be purchased from a specific company (ex: IBM, Oracle), and that those companies largely define how the product/service will be implemented - thereby effectively writing themselves huge checks.

I also see continual examples of inefficient use of resources such as propping open doors in one part of the building if it's too cold/hot - instead of installing climate zones, and buying expensive landscaping that has to be replaced each season.

However, I do not think this waste is specific to government - I think it's an issue with any large organization. The difference is, if a company is run this poorly, it goes out of business (unless it can get itself funded by taxpayers)...but with the government, they just increase the amount of taxes they take from us.

The only real solution I see is to reduce the size and scope of the federal government, and allow states to handle more (this also means reducing unpaid federal mandates). This will increase the state tax burden - but it should be offset by a corresponding decrease in federal taxation. Then, the state taxpayers can decide if they really want to pay for X service.

the war on women in a desperate attempt to convince voters to run away from the other guy.

So Bill in Fairfax crawls out of his tunnel to give us yet another example of his refusal to accept reality. Facts are stubborn things. Concerning the war on women by republicans I urge you to look at the legislation being introduced/enacted attacking women's rights by the far right across this country. Last count there was 200+ examples of this war on women. That not fabricated, that's reality. Man up, Bill. Admit your some in your party just don't like women. Perhaps you're one of them.

What is Romney's plan for healthcare? After an incredibly harrowing week, this concerns me more and more.

Last Wednesday - Broken thumb at the shooting range, a trip to the ER and a trip to the Orthopedic Surgeon.

Last Monday - Rear ended, totaled car, and a visit by my friendly neighborhood paramedics.

(I'm just waiting for a piano to fall from the sky and land on me. I'm advising all my friends and family to remain outside of a 15 foot radius, just in case)

Anyhoo, I went from being healthy as a horse, to being confronted with what, if not for my insurance, could be some seriously hefty medical bills. And the scariest part was the spontanaeity of it all. One minute you're fine, and the next you feel like you got ran over by a mack truck or you shot your eye out.

So please, Mr. Romney, explain to me your plan for healthcare.

And yes, Bill in Fairfax, the war on women is real. The fact that Republicans deny it's occurring and right it off, even in the face of the current poll numbers, in and of itself, speaks to their disregard of females.

I just love how MSDNC has so sublimely referred to the exhorbitant waste in the GSA as only a "perceived problem" and not an "actual" problem. Did anyone else notice that ? Geez, it had more spin than a football thrown by Peyton Manning ! They have blown major bucks on lavish parties and trips at taxpayer expense .... laughing and posting videos along the way !!!!!!!!!

Hell yes, it's an ACTUAL problem people ! They are wasting money at an exhorbitant pace while our country is up to its proverbial a$$hole in debt !! If it is only a "perceived problem", then why in the world are all the GSA heads pleading the fifth amendment with the congressional investigation ??

Meanwhil;e back at the ranch, Harry Reid's film clip shows him bragging that Obama opened the doors to trips in Las Vegas again. Maybe the Dems will send those Secret Service agents to Las Vegas for a "corrective conference" so they can at least spend their money on the whores here in the USA !

@Backhouse

I think the title "Hunger games" was entirely approporiate. It should come as a big wake up call to the American people. The third installment of the series is the only logical conclusion to the current events in this country.

WHEN WILL WE EVER LEARN?

Seventeen years ago today, Timothy McVeigh parked a rental truck filled with a massive fertilizer bomb outside the Alfred P. Murrah Building here in Oklahoma City. He lit the fuse and walked away.

McVeigh wanted to strike back at the Federal authorities for the burning of the Branch Davidian Compound in Waco, Texas two years earlier. More than 160 people died in the resulting explosion, hundreds were injured and a nightmare began for us that can only be understood by the people of New York City and the workers at the Pentagon in Washington DC.

Days of non-stop news coverage as rescuers frantically searched for survivors. More days as the search for survivors was ended and the recovery of the deceased began. Unless you were here in 1995 or in New York or Washington DC in 2001, you cannot comprehend the numbing horror of those weeks after the bombing.

So, here we are, seventeen years later and what have we learned? Nothing, absolutely nothing.

The GOP has drifted so far to the right McVeigh's philosophy of hate looks positively liberal by comparison. But it's not just the right. The left is equally to blame. You have only to look at the uncivil discourse on this vine by commentators hiding behind anonymous blog monikers to see that we have learned nothing from our collective national tragedies.

Ted Nugent fears he will be dead or in prison if Obama is re-elected and urges his fans to go to the polls and "chop off their heads" in November. Sara Palin puts sniper scope cross-hairs over the congressional districts she wants converted from blue to red. And you, each and everyone of you, continue to snipe at each other every single day and to prove what?

At the end of the day we are still ALL Americans. We need to COMMUNICATE with each other in a civil manner in order to address our problems and find SOLUTIONS, not just shout talking points and rhetoric at each other.

Give it a rest people. For one f*cking day, remember Oklahoma City and give it a rest. Remember what happens when the conversation stops, when compromise is no longer possible and when rhetoric takes the place of reality. Remember what happens when HATE replaces rational discourse.

Remember little Baylie Almon, not even 18 months old 17 years ago and the photograph of the Oklahoma City fireman tenderly carrying her lifeless body out of the rubble of the Murrah Building. One little stocking hanging loosely from her tiny foot. She would have been 18 this year. She would have been graduating from high school and looking forward to college in the Fall. Instead, she died in the rubble of her daycare center on the first floor of the Alfred P. Murrah Building at 9:02 AM, seventeen years ago today because a deranged young man found no other way to express his anger at the Federal government.

She died because people stopped talking, stopped communicating, stopped compromising and stopped looking for CIVIL ways to address the problems facing this country.

I will remember the photograph of Bailie Almon until the day I die.

I suggest you remember her as well, and tone down this senseless rhetoric. If you don't then another Oklahoma City-style tragedy is just around the corner.

"EPA is reportedly in negotiations to settle two lawsuits that allege the agency has greater regulatory authority than what Congress provided under the Clean Water Act (CWA). The lawmakers are concerned that in choosing to not defend these cases in court, EPA is effectively refusing to honor the limits of its authority under the CWA and could subsequently use the settlements as a basis for an expansion of jurisdiction beyond the CWA's parameters."

If the plaintiff(s) concerned that the EPA is chronicly overreaching, why not let the lawsuit run its course?

It's a legal tactic by the EPA. They are being sued because they do not have greater powers. By not fighting the lawsuit they can claim these greater powers in the future. Powers that were not delegated by Congress.

It's a legal tactic by the EPA. They are being sued because they do not have greater powers. By not fighting the lawsuit they can claim these greater powers in the future. Powers that were not delegated by Congress.

Yes, but the plaintiffs have to agree to settle. The EPA can make offers all it wants, but if the plaintiffs aren't interested, nothing they can do about it.

If they have such a strong case and are striving for change, why not just let it run its course?

Eric, Are you talking about that guy that went to Congress and lied to get us into Iraq, some call him "W" ? PS - He also lied to the Dem's to get their support ! "W" is now a War Criminal !!!

The phraze "Hunger Games" is being contained and used in an exciting, alluring, Action-movie Hollywood manner.

While distorting and denying the real-life realities experienced by Americans in the fallout of the most catastrophic recession in 60 years;

It serves to support the rabid victim/persecutor policies promoted by Republican/Koch/Norquist leaders - to the benefit of their very wealthy benefactors.

Sarah,

I hope the rest of this week and next week goes a lot better for you. Good luck with your injuries.

I disagree, however, with your statement that "the war on women is real". This is merely part of the divide, exaggerate and conquer strategy of the Dems. It started with Obama trying to force contraception upon the Catholic Church against their religious beliefs, and has since been twisted more times than a bag of pretzels.

The article, however, is about government gone wild ..... how much government is too much.

Pat, your questions are perfect examples of what is happening to this country as it moves more to the nanny state. Everyone will answer those questions as yes as long as it doesnt cost them any. But what happened to self reliance and personal responsibility? So is there anything preventing you from getting an education to help yourself? Why is it as Sarah said the other day that immigrants still flock to this country and the land of opportunity? Is there anything preventing you from working hard and opening up your own small business? Or would you prefer to sit back and complain about the choices YOU made and have the government provide you handouts? The government is doing plenty about the housing market and continue to make it worse. They have behind the scenes messed with the banks and the foreclosure process hoping to avoid lettling the market do its job. Obama thinks pulling the band aid off slowly is better than pulling it off quickly and letting the wound heal. You are all for economic fairness right Pat? So why does Obama think we should bail out some people who made either bad or unfortunate choices and not others? So its ok to bail out union members whether they are teachers, GM or government employees with federal funds but not the local small business owner that lost his business because the plant closed nearby or Walmart moved in or whatever situation? Why does Obama think its ok to bailout the homeowner that borrowed more than they could handle, speculated or just through unfortunate circumstances due to the real estate crisis his home value went down, but not the guy who lost his job, or his daughter got sick and medical expenses bankrupted him or just made a poor investment decision? The country is full of economic stories in which people made bad or unfortunate economic decisions and under what theory of economic fairness does he apply his standards? Clearly in his ranking union households and homeowners come first with other people's money of course but it is an interesting concept of economic fairness.

JoAnne -- Stands and applauds. Very accurate depiction. Trolls are insidious in that they lack both compassion and understanding. Selfish and mean, they represent the worst of mankind.

David -- As usual, well said friend.

So, what will NoJo lie about today? Well, it's still early...we shall see. Maybe Spanky, bOb, and Snuffy Smiff can give her some ideas. After all, bigots stick together, right?

Sarah, your car accident claims will be paid by automobile insurance.

Your shooting range accident claims will be paid by the shooting range.

As to Romney's plan- I hope he takes my advice

Allow insurance to be purchased across state lines- which necessitates the removal of all state mandates. (I had a hysterectomy ten years ago- why on earth should I be forced to pay for maternity care, fertility treatments so I will need maternity care, birth control coverage to prevent the fertility treatments from working so I don't need maternity care, and well baby visits in case one works, and the other does not?).

Legislation to allow people to buy in to their local municipality's coverage plan. You're paying for it through your taxes- why not be able to take advantage of the group rate?

Tort reform. Loser pays should end the frivolous lawsuits immediately.

Simple, effective, and fairly easy to accomplish.

Geeze Sarah!

If it wasn't for bad luck, you wouldn't have any. ☺

Feel better soon & keep your chin up!

Sarah, your car accident claims will be paid by automobile insurance.

No they won't. It will cover injuries, up to a certain amount, of someone I hit, if they're injured. That's it.

Your shooting range accident claims will be paid by the shooting range.

No they won't. Remember those pesky disclaimers they make you sign before being allowed in???

Jim,

Alas, maybe you haven't read this yet, although I do feel like I post it ALL the time...

1. To be able to sleep with a man, if I so desire, without facing scorn or judgment.

2. To have access to affordable/dependable BC and sexual/reproductive health services.

3. If I fall victim to rape/assault/harassment, to have access to justice that is equivalent to the crime committed against me and trust in my society that I will be safe if I come forward.

4. If I fall on hard times, most likely due to being a single parent (child support is surprisingly easy to dodge), to have access to reasonable programs that will assist me in regaining my feet and protecting my children.

5. To be paid the same as a male with an equivalent work/educational history, and job. Also, to have access to recourse against employers who fail to do this.

6. If I find myself scared, alone, and pregnant, to be able to make a decision that effects my body and my life. And most importantly, to have the same right to make decisions about my body and the same right to privacy as a man.

That's it. Is it really so outrageous of us to ask for these things from our society that we contribute to? Find me a Republican who's position doesn't contradict every item on this list, and I'll consider voting for him/her. Until than, don't tell me the GOP has my gender's best interests at heart.

So now I'll wait, for the GOP/TP folks to get on here and instead of just reading and listening to what I, as a young woman, am concerned about, will begin to preach to me and explain why, although the GOP's position are the complete opposite of that list, I should listen to them anyway. Because they know better then me about what I should want/need, right?

Sarah -- Hang in there girl! Wow. The thumb thing I understand. Been to the range a few times and being petite the kickback gets me every time.

Backhouse, if I am disinformed, then explain and refute? David must hate your posts because he cant stand posters who cant support their claims and then deflect and leave when called out on it at least thats what he states all of the time. But that is all you do. Alan just proved you wrong and so do I. Instead of campaigning for Obama with more lies, why not actually provide a cogent response to your claims and as to why Obama's economic policies will reduce the need for government assistance and his plans to cut them back to the level needed when times were good under Clinton? Come on you can do it.

Always enjoy reading a Feisty/Joann riddled post. Still think they're all one just person with multiple call names, and maybe a few loyal lemmings. But, the way they all continue patting each other on the back for their sophomoric inside-the-bubble blather, really starts my day with a good laugh. Thanks guys.

P.S. but seriously, if your on this thread (or any of Feisty) and want to have serious a discussion about our country's problems, you've come to the wrong place. No intelligence found here, sorry.

Fiesty,

I'd keep my chin up, but that really hurts my neck right now, lol.

DCIA,

It was pretty funny. It happened on the first shot, which also happened to be the first time IN MY LIFE, I had ever shot a gun.

Oh my God, I shot my eye out!!! Who knew I was so fra-gee-lee, (must be Italian).

Tod,

P.S. but seriously, if your on this thread (or any of feisty's) and want to have serious a discussion about our country's problems, you've come to the wrong place> No intelligence found here, sorry.

So why are you, not just reading it, but also posting? And you do realize you just insulted yourself right?

Backhouse said: Especially now, the choice of title 'Hunger Games' for a blockbuster movie was in very, extremely bad taste.

Just an FYI for those of you who have not read or seen The Hunger Games, it is a tale of the very wealthy who control their capitol and the districts around them. There is no middle class, only the poor who work in the dristricts to provide for the capitol. To further show their control over the poor in the districts they have a yearly contest called The Hunger Games. The capitol takes 2 children age 12-18 from each district and sets them against each other in a contest to death reality TV style. The sole survivor wins wealth for their family. In the following books Catching Fire and The Mockingjay, theri is a rebellion by the districts which turns into something like a civil war except it pits the poor against the rich.

This is a Young Adult trilogy. I imagine it was written for the new generation as a warning of what could be as our generation is obviously not interested in the direction this country is heading.

And Backhouse, this was an extremely apropriate title for a movie today.

Nice distortion Sarah. It is called personal responsibility. If you choose to have sex with a man, fine .... just do not expect the federal government to be responsible for the results. You and/or your partner are responsible.

Nice emotional points at #1,2 and 3 but you are trying to imply those don't exist now and I disagree.

Equal pay is about the only point you make that has much validity, and the gap on that is closing.

Sarah, maybe I just live in Utopia but all of those things are happening by me

1) I dont know any woman who get scorned for sleeping with a man and my daughters dont seem to have any issues with it including those living in the South during both Bush and Obama administrations

2) They are currently obtaining birth control virtually free and have been for several administrations

3) the country is under seige from litigation on these issues--if anything tort reform not more laws are needed

4) We currently spend $900 billion in 70 welfare assistance programs to provide a safety net for your choice to have a child as a single mom.

5) You are currently paid more than a male in most if not all professional urban jobs and when controlling for experience, title, job requirements and yes for part time career decisions, woman always make the same or more. Again in terms of lawsuits, tort reform is needed not more laws.

6) pro choice is still the law of the land but its interesting in that you want to choice to abort but you also want to there to be no consequences from your choice not to abort. You realize both are choices and there are consequences from your personal choice.

As for the gun accident. I own several and love going to the range but your question is typical of progressives. You ask who is going to pay for my health care for a decision and choice I made in which I get hurt. Shouldnt you have to pay yourself and why should others pay for your decision and choice? If you choose not to purchase medical insurance, it should come out of your pocket as we didnt cause you to choose to shoot a gun and get hurt as a result.

3)

Again,

I am taking exception to the Title of the Movie, which either did/or did not consider the realities of the fallout of the Great Recession, that showed up in 2007.

By the end of 2008, four million Americans lost their jobs, followed by 4 million more before the current Administration's policies began to go into effect.

Hollywood can use any title they want, and Title is very heavily considered in their movie profit-making ambitions.

JoAnne, PLEASE read The Hunger Games, it is one of the best books I have ever read. You will understand the hype. The movie was good too, but the book is amazing.

Kirk and Jim,

Yes, because as I said above, instead of asking me why I stand behind those positions and attempting to understand the viewpoint of females, you explain to me how they're wrong.

Because I'm sure you two know better than I, about the challenges facing women in our society, or how it feels to be one.

Thanks for the sermons, silly little me, I should always ask a man for what my opinion should be before posting, right???

Sarah -- Don't give up. I took a safety course first. My first time out the gun jammed, the guy had to come and help me out. I've only been a few times but I'm going to get private lessons with an instructor, I need it. lol

Sarah, I am so sorry to hear about your eventful week. My thoughts are with you.

I am pleased to see that it has not affected your wit and your posting skills. I really enjoy reading what you write.

"explain and refute",

The source of the lies and disinformation could be/might be why you are variance with so many here. Be will to do an experiment and try a few different sources.

Fielden,

Thanks, I've discovered that while typing you only use your thumbs for the space bar. Who knew??? LOL.

Has anyone seen Bo??????

Indonesia's president is showing up for a State Dinner. Menu items: Bo-burgers with a side of fries.

JoAnne, what a great post. Thank you.

Sarah:

Just off the phone with Jesus. He has directed me to tell you to shut up and listen to the men folk, especially the one who seems to have a crush on me. Men always know best.

Remember, Jesus is the product of a rape and as St. Rick of Santorum tells us, he was Mary's gift. I'm sure it was Joseph who told Mary to carry Jesus fetus to term.

Now, be off to the kitchen and leave the shootin' to us men.

JAS,

Don't lie. We all know they're serving Fetuses Ala King and a side of mashed Christians. Duh, they're Democrats.

David,

May I wear shoes??? And what, no crack about female drivers, lol? Although this one wasn't my fault. This one. :)

Hey Joanne,

That was some post to start things off.

Don't be so RUFF on us conservatives.

Sarah, who simply doesn't know her place, asked:

"David,

May I wear shoes???"

Yes, but only outside the home and only when properly accessorized with a color-coordinated burka.

Sarah,

I didn't dwell on telling you how you were wrong, I said I disagree. Go back and read again #1.74.

Sarah-3043284

Truly sorry to hear about your misfortunes and hope that you are fully recovered soon. However, the fact that your car insurance doesn't necessarily cover your well-being, well, it reflects the choices you made when you purchased your insurance and didn't forsee those problems as a real possibility. If you were hit by another, and they are at fault for the accident, then it is up to their insurance to care for your medical issues as well as fix your vehicle. Often your own insurance will cover these things to get you back on your feet quickly, and settle with the other insurance later-sometimes they have to take the other insurance to court to do it.

Your shooting range incident is unfortunate, but you may want to speak to an attorney, because often those "hold harmless"/disclaimers don't hold up under the laws of your state. But once again, going to a shooting range is a personal choice, and while nobody wants to think of you being injured, why should the community at large pay for your choice to visit that particular facility and engage in that particular activity? It is your right to do so, but nowhere is it guaranteed that your right to do so will be paid for by other people or the government.

As for your sex life and personal preferences......I really wish you well on all counts as it is your privelege as an adult human being to engage in these activities with other consenting adult human beings, but once again.....why should I pay for you to exercise your priveleges? And if it is your choice to terminate a pregnancy, and that is what you believe to be the best.....fine, but once again, why should I pay for that?

You see it is not a war on women, but rather an issue of personal responsibility-being willing to take responsibility for exercising rights and priveleges. We have a privelege to drive, but we have to assume responsibility for passing required tests, making sure our vehicle is operating properly, following laws governing the roadways, buying insurance to cover incidents where required as a condition of the privelege of driving. The government does not, and should not, purchase our car, our fuel, nor take responsibility for damage and accidents that might result from out being allowed to drive a vehicle. So to with your right to bear arms....nowhere does the constitution say that it will give everyone arms...if they wish to exercise their privelege, it is at their risk and their expense.

So, if a person truly wants the privelege guaranteed by Roe VS Wade, and already tested by the Supreme Court, they should be prepared to assume the risks, and the expenses-which comes to personal responsibility. Nobody is judging anyone, but rather asking for the level of personal responsibility (which includes fiscal responsibility) expected of an adult who is entitled to protection of rights under the constitution.

By the way, if you feel the Democrats actually give a rat's behind about your well-being, look no farther than our government workers, where women still earn less than men for the same work....Mr Obama can plead that he didn't know the discrepancy existed, but that also means that none of the Democratic representation in Washington saw fit to bring it to his attention either. Supposedly, the laws governing discrimination in the workplace have been in place for years and years, yet we need more laws to get what the first set of laws promised????? At what point do the laws actually apply?

4everTink -- It seems both the left and the right are making claims that the movie Hunger Games represents their view. Here is a link quoting different news outlets on the issue or whether it is a left or right story. I believe the author leans left, but don't quote me on that.

http://blogs.indiewire.com/anthony/the-politics-of-the-hunger-games-from-fox-news-to-salon-to-ebert#

Sarah,

"So why are you, not just reading it, but also posting? And you do realize you just insulted yourself right"

I'll make this simple for you, ok? When you, and all those in your silly bubble, take over a thread its good for one thing; comedy. Been there done that, waste of my time. But like I said; its fun to read.

Wish you well Sue, but common sense is mostly replaced by emotions, on Feisty/JoAnne/Sarah threads.

Screw the Hunger Games...

Read the Handmaid's Tale - this scenario is much closer to what is happening around us...

The Handmaid's Tale is set in the near future in the Republic of Gilead, a country formed within the borders of what was formerly the United States of America. It was founded by a racist, male chauvinist, nativist, theocratic-organized military coup as an ideologically driven response to the pervasive ecological, physical and social degradation of the country.

Beginning with a staged terrorist attack (blamed on Islamic extremist terrorists) that kills the President and most of Congress, a movement calling itself the "Sons of Jacob" launched a revolution and suspended the United States Constitution under the pretext of restoring order.

Taking advantage of electronic banking, they were quickly able to freeze the assets of all women and other "undesirables" in the country, stripping them of their rights. The new theocratic military dictatorship, styled "The Republic of Gilead", moved quickly to consolidate its power and reorganize society along a new militarized, hierarchical, compulsorily Christian regime of Old Testament-inspired social and religious orthodoxy among its newly created social classes. In this society, almost all women are forbidden to read.

The story is presented from the point of view of a woman called Offred (a patronymic name that means "Of Fred", referring to the man she serves). The character is one of a class of individuals kept as concubines ("handmaids") for reproductive purposes by the ruling class in an era of declining births. The book is told in the first person by Offred, who describes her life during her third assignment as a handmaid, in this case to Fred (referred to as "The Commander"). If Offred fails to become pregnant on this, her third attempt, she will be declared an "unwoman" and discarded. Interspersed in flashbacks are portions of her life from before and during the beginning of the revolution, when she finds she has lost all autonomy to her husband, through her failed attempt to escape with her husband and daughter to Canada, to her indoctrination into life as a handmaid. Through her eyes, the structure of Gilead's society is described, including the several different categories of women and their circumscribed lives in the new theocracy.

Sound familiar?

Oh, and this was written in 1985 by Margaret Atwood

Skip Nicholson -

My thoughts are with you and your neighbors in Oklahoma City today. I can't believe it's been 17 years already - it will always be one of those moments when you remember exactly where you were when you heard the news, and the pictures will haunt us forever.

Some would argue that it's a good thing we have places like this today where we can vent that anger. I wish I believed that was true. The anger here just feeds on itself from one post to the next and one day to the next, and if there's a vent to what I see building up in this country, I'm afraid I don't see it.

By the way, did anyone ever do a formal count of how many people who died that day were liberals or conservatives or independents or who had no interest at all in politics but were just trying to go about their daily lives? I didn't think so. Do we know how many of the babies and children like Baylie who died would have grown up to be Republicans or Democrats? I don't think so. In the end, it doesn't really matter.

So let's get back to the really important issues. Bo burgers and bakery cookies.

God Bless Help America.

Sarah, interesting response in that I didnt tell you the challenges facing woman nor did I put my views in place of yours but gave a nonemotionally based response. Since I have a professionally successful wife (attorney), a daughter living in Atlanta who didnt seem to have any discrimination or problems getting into an East coast private school and then business school and now a very good job. Another daughter at a southern private school and doesnt seem to be facing any of those issues you claim, I doubt very much you actually have faced any of those challenges you mentioned but use them as rationalizations for your Obama vote. But dont get mad at us when we point out factual inaccuracies.

I also notice you completely ignored the substance of our positions regarding choice and your desire to have it but dont seem to want to bear any consequences from your personal choice whether it be having a child and shooting a gun. The classice progressive view where personal responsibility is eliminated from our lives. Do you honestly think that is a great way to govern? If so, you wonder why progressives are in the minority and why Obama creates such a reaction from fiscal conservatives and mainstream america.

Sue,

why should I pay for you to exercise your priveleges?

When did I ask you to? Being allowed access to affordable care isn't the same as telling someone they have to pay for me. The GOP has been going after PP which is the number one source of affordable BC. If you're taking ACA and preventative care... Well then, because I'm also paying for you.

Or we can do it the GOP way, get rid of PP, I can get knocked up without insurance and everyone with it can pay for me anyway???

And if it is your choice to terminate a pregnancy, and that is what you believe to be the best.....fine, but once again, why should I pay for that?

You don't. The Hyde Amendment prohibits any public funds from being used on abortions. The GOP just simply doesn't want to allow us even the option. Personhood Amendments, forced ultrasounds, limiting the definition of rape...

This has nothing to do with money or payment.

So, if a person truly wants the privelege guaranteed by Roe VS Wade, and already tested by the Supreme Court, they should be prepared to assume the risks, and the expenses-which comes to personal responsibility. Nobody is judging anyone,

Either, absolutely you are judging, or you just have no insight into how these things actually work. See above.

Supposedly, the laws governing discrimination in the workplace have been in place for years and years, yet we need more laws to get what the first set of laws promised????? At what point do the laws actually apply?

No, we need to enforce the ones on the books, as well as offer up some transparency so we know when we're getting screwed.

Ah, another fine day here at FR.

So libbies want to talk about Mitt, flip-flopping, and the unmitigated glory that Obama is.

THe dog stuff is super funny, but only because the libbies we so into the Seamus story. That there just got blow'd up. Today I suspect it'll be more Nugent and certainly not the GSA.

But me, I see today terrible job numbers and the 'unexpected' drop in existing house sales. Not to mention durable good sales, and horrid GDP growth.

So how about the actual record my fine libbie friends?

Somehow I suspect you will not touch that with a 10 foot pole.

Too familiar, Feisty! Great post.

Tod-lotsanumbers:

You wrote:

"Wish you well Sue, but common sense is mostly replaced by emotions, on Feisty/JoAnne/Sarah threads."

Wow Tod, I know what you mean. Don't women just piss you off, what with those opinions and all? Next thing you know they're going to want to vote and other stuff better left to us real mean.

Emotions? Pish. Some of 'em snivel about foreplay. Whining sissies. I give 'em my best 30-seconds and they complain. I'm absolutely, positively certain you know what I'm sayin'.

So how about the actual record my fine libbie friends?

What details of the 'actual record' would you like to discuss?

Post your sources as with said details as well.

Emotions? Pish. Some of 'em snivel about foreplay. Whining sissies. I give 'em my best 30-seconds and they complain. I'm absolutely, positively certain you know what I'm sayin'.

Sex is a race I play to win. She's just a sore loser.

Kirk,

2) They are currently obtaining birth control virtually free and have been for several administrations

3) the country is under seige from litigation on these issues--if anything tort reform not more laws are needed

4) We currently spend $900 billion in 70 welfare assistance programs to provide a safety net for your choice to have a child as a single mom.

5) You are currently paid more than a male in most if not all professional urban jobs and when controlling for experience, title, job requirements and yes for part time career decisions, woman always make the same or more. Again in terms of lawsuits, tort reform is needed not more laws.

Let's start with you providing where you got this information.

Gender Pay Gap -

http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx.shtml

Cost of BC -

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/birth-control/birth-control-pill-4228.htm

Please explain how it is a pro-female political move to attack Planned Parenthood.

Sexual Harrassment/Gender Discrimination -

http://www.workplacefairness.org/sexual-gender-discrimination

Poverty/Hunger -

http://globalpovertyproject.com/infobank/women

So yes, you were sanctimonious in your post, preaching about personal responsibility at all that. Why do you think, for one second, women aren't already aware of those responsibilities and consequences.

I understand the TEA Party interest in the President's canine cuisine - since all the Republican candidates are dogs. The country is looking forward to a BBQ ParTEA.

Sexual harassment in the DNC is viewed as a scandal. Sexual harassment in the RNC is a qualification to run for President.

Congressional Republicans are scrambling to hold hearings on the GSA and Secret Service before everyone is fired. The Republicans will successfully highlight the fact that under Democratic leadership - government employees can be fired. Now, if the Congressional Republicans would conduct witch hunts for similar behavior in the military ...

David & Ruken - you guys are killing me this morning...

LMAO!

Sources Ruken? Really - you can't find today's unemployment rate, the GDP numbers, durable good stats, or the housing sales figures?

Gosh, it's almost like either this is the only website you go to, or you limit yourself to this + ThinkProgress+Media Matters.

Why I bet even the networks, and gasp MSNBC will have to cover the very bad trend in unemployment.

Yeah, seems like just last week they were saying the economy is 'getting better.'

Whoops.

Sue-3329001

Well said, well said!!!!

It is unfortunate that people like Sarah are not prepared to assume the risks, and the expenses which come with personal responsibility. They want to participate but want no risk for their actions.

Says a lot about the entitlement mentality of the left side of this debate - none of it good.

Ruken & David,

That's only after they remove the aspirins from between their knees, though, right?

Reb,

Can you quote me where I said I wanted someone else to pay for me? And then, can you explain how being allowed access to affordability and making someone else pay for me are the same thing?

Sarah,

"Don't lie. We all know they're serving Fetuses Ala King and a side of mashed Christians. Duh, they're Democrats"

and the hits just keep on coming.

Tell you what Sarah; maybe try making a coherent/sensical/unemotional response to the three logical posts above by sue, Jim and Kirk. Or maybe all of you in the bubble should try and tackle it, come on give it a go!

Spanky: THe dog stuff is super funny, but only because the libbies we so into the Seamus story. That there just got blow'd up.

NY Times columnist Gail Collins was obsessed by the Seamus story. She's had 50 articles referring to Romney's dog. The Liberals completely lost their collective tiny minds over this story.

With the new information about Obama's penchant for Canine Club sandwiches, Ms. Collins now regrets writing all those stories. Of course she does, because if she didn't, she'd actually have to maybe write some dog stories about Obama, you know, just to be fair, which she isn't.

Tod,

Yeah, I already did. Go read them. Then perhaps you can post something, anything of substance, instead of blanket insults towards posters.

Scared, little boy???

Reb,

Or we can do it the GOP way, right...

Get rid of PP (so I have neither BC nor a choice to terminate), I can get knocked up without insurance and everyone with it can pay for me, my pregnancy, and labor anyway. Then, you can toss me and the kid out into the street because we're freeloaders, sucking up those welfare dimes.

That would be the world without ACA and PP. Sound good???

Agreed Feisty. Very funny stuff from a few of the good guys today!

Sources Ruken? Really - you can't find today's unemployment rate, the GDP numbers, durable good stats, or the housing sales figures?

http://social.dol.gov/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Monthly-Private-Emp-Change-03-121.jpg

Gaining jobs.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/spending_chart_2000_2010USb_13s1li011mcn__US_Gross_Domestic_Product_GDP_History

GDP on the rise.

http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=z1ebjpgk2654c1_&met_y=unemployment_rate&idim=country:US&fdim_y=seasonality:S&dl=en&hl=en&q=us+unemployment+rate

Unemployment going down.

REB: It is unfortunate that people like Sarah are not prepared to assume the risks, and the expenses which come with personal responsibility. They want to participate but want no risk for their actions.

If you're expecting quality and affordable health care from the government, I have a GSA administration I'd like to sell you.

Well of course Obama is not responsible for any of the things that have happened on his watch; unless, of course, the things referenced are considered positive.

If you're expecting quality and affordable health care from the government

Basically every other industrialized country can have their government do it, why can't we?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Universal_health_care.svg

I'll give you a hint, it's because our country is backwards. We cannot even adopt the metric system for Christ sakes.

Here's the kicker (from my link):

Health care coverage provided by the United States war funding.

Our tax payer dollars provide coverage for those in Iraq and Afghanistan, but when the talk of doing it here comes up, everyone throws a tizzy.

Sarah, again with an emotionally charged response meant to illicit emotions rather than facts.

1) did you read my post. There is a pay gap that goes away when controlling for title, experience, hours worked, part time and job types and I think you probably know that. My wife started at the law firm at the same pay as her male cohorts and guess what her pay went down when she went part time for a child and then went back up equal to her male cohorts when becoming a partner. Your post has nothing to do with equal pay for equal work as it deals with inequal pay for inequal work.

2) Yeah you get it for free via planned parenthood. Costco provides it for 29 dollars a month and here in Illinois it is mandated to be covered for free if you have health insurance so again lets stay within the realm of reality

3) Again, there isnt place in this country in which some ambulance chasing lawyer wouldnt sue in a heartbeat if there is a whiff of sexual harassment. I never said it didnt take place, I said the remedies for it are plentiful and the last thing we need is more incentives for trial lawyers to make frivilous claims

4) Not sure I understand your last issue. I never said we dont have hunger or poverty in this country what does that have to do with it. But we also know that one of the leading causes of poverty are choices based causes right? Drug addiction, alcohol addiction and yes choosing to have a child as a single mother are all leading causes of poverty. We have a safety net in place today that provides enough assistance in which our average impoverished single mother has a dwelling larger than a middle class home in Europe, owns all modern appliances and has a flat screen TV, DVD, Wii and playstation and two cars. I think the US safety net is working pretty well and all based on the choice that person made so instead of being emotional and sanctimonius to me lets place some personal responsibility where it belongs.

Is government out of control, ABSOLUTELY! There is only on person who is ultimately accountable for this. Obama symbolizes the type of things we now see infecting every branch of government. How anyone can support this guy is beyond my understanding. Its one thing to hold a belief in what governments responsibility is and what it should look like, but another altogether when that translates to rabid blind support for someone totally unqualified to do the job. Obama has done his best, and his best is no where near good enough or what is needed.

Feisty,

Sound familiar?

Everything you and all your lemmings post sounds familiar, just not logical or intelligent. Kinda like a bunch of jr. high kids on facebook "liking" each other.

Basically every other industrialized country can have their government do it, why can't we?

Basically every other country with nationalized health care is going broke, so why can't we? Oh, wait . . . .

I'll give you a hint, it's because our country is backwards. We cannot even adopt the metric system for Christ sakes.

Yeah, that's the problem, we haven't adopted the metric system. Obama should run on that platform, another thing to divide the country on.

Obama 2012 - "We must adopt the metric system because the 1%-ers use the English system!"

Ruken, if all of those economic figures are really improving the economy and our lives, why do the democrats continue to push for greater government assistance and complain that the GOP wants to cut the level of increase in these programs. I would think that as Obama is campaigning that his policies are working he would be saying welfare and government assistance should be cut too as no longer being needed. Instead, we are hearing the big bad GOP wants to cut the rate of growth of these programs (no actual cuts of course) and people like Backhouse start complaining that they must hate women and children if they want to cut the rate of growth. Either Obama's policies are working and these programs dont need to be funded as much or his policies arent working and we need to continue to fund the safety net. Which is it?

Basically every other country with nationalized health care is going broke, so why can't we? Oh, wait . . . .

You might as well just say "I didn't click your link" and save yourself the embarrassment.

Ruken, if all of those economic figures are really improving the economy and our lives, why do the democrats continue to push for greater government assistance and complain that the GOP wants to cut the level of increase in these programs.

The only one that really comes to mind as increasing is unemployment being 99 weeks.

Food stamps, etc. are all increasing expenditures because more people actually qualify for them due to the recession.

Get rid of PP (so I have neither BC nor a choice to terminate), I can get knocked up without insurance and everyone with it can pay for me, my pregnancy, and labor anyway. Then, you can toss me and the kid out into the street because we're freeloaders, sucking up those welfare dimes.

Who is getting rid of PP? Where is this policy being advocated? Point me to one credible source that says Republicans are trying to get rid of PP. Romney has said he wants to end Federal Funding of PP. From that I presume he means the Title X funding which amounts to around $70m of the $1B PP spends. the other $270M comes from Medicaid and as that is a Federal/State payment it is not subject to the Hyde Amendment, nor can stopped solely by the federal government.

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/04/planned-parenthood/

As to free BC a simple internet search finds sites like this. Apparently, as I am single with no kids (and a male) I do not qualify for free BC but the site informed me that

Call a local health center and ask about their cost-saving programs. They'll help you save money on birth control.

http://bedsider.org/free_birth_control

So, lets stop the hyperbole. It's as stupid as this

VAN JONES: "You always have some Americans that, they don't want to go forward. 'We like slavery,' or 'we like segregation,' or 'we like women not voting,' or 'we like the environment being destroyed, we like workers having no rights, we like children in factories…'And they want to conserve, ahem, conserve, ahem, conserve the old ways.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/04/19/van_jones_conservatives_want_slavery_segregation_women_not_voting.html

Sarah,

I already told you, I'm just following this thread for fun (I'm done throwing my pearls before swine) Kirk, Sue and Jim have asked you some very telling questions, and no you have not given coherent/logical/unemotional responses. They've been kinda childish actually, but funny, so do continue.

David Walker for one who cries about keeping religion out of politics, why can't you keep the mocking of religion out of your own posts?

As I see others fawn and back slap your flowing posts and imagery I will be the oddball. You should be happy that you always seem to push the buttons. Looking for a response with your latest post, that is called something isn't it? I guess I need to learn not to respond to you.

Yeah, that's the problem, we haven't adopted the metric system. Obama should run on that platform, another thing to divide the country on.

Obama 2012 - "We must adopt the metric system because the 1%-ers use the English system!"

Holy crap. You sure know how to twist things into what they're not.

I was using metric as a point that for some reason, the United States is slow as hell in moving forward. But God forbid our nation actually adopts a system of measurements that the entire Western world uses.

Kirk -- You said:

Sarah, again with an emotionally charged response meant to illicit emotions rather than facts.

That's bull$hiit. The "emotionally charged" claim is usually thrown out when someone, especially a man, cannot counter reason. They resort to this type of name calling to try to diminish what a women says. Epic fail buddy.

Sarah,

I wish you a speedy recovery.

Divorce sucks.

Money sucks worse.

You hang in there and I know things will get better for you. You are a good person, seem be a caring parent and have a wonderful smile.

We might not always agree but you have been very civil to me, and I do have respect for your opinions.

Cheers!!

The rest of the year will be better.

Sub

Eric,

I did post an answer to your thread from yesterday. It took me awhile to get back to you on that. I think that I covered a lot.

Happy Friday Eve.

Sue-3329001 - Excellent response to Sarah's unfortunate accidents. She just simply fails to see that she put herself into these positions and now that it didn't turn out she wants us to pay for it. God forbid she gets knocked up, we will be on the hook for that one as well.

Sarah - Put down the keys, guns, and cocks until you are willing to pick up your own tab.

Government Gone Wild?

Just another reminder that our government employees have no respect for the hardworking taxpayers and that with this administration there is NO leadership or accountability.

Kirk,

I hear a lot of assertions, I see no links, sources, or sites. Your wife's personal experience means nothing. You've also yet to explain how the GOP supports my positions. You keep trying to show me why I shouldn't have them, as if you know better.

My last point, was that those "welfare" programs give the lion's share of their assistance to women and children.

Alan,

Yes or no... Would the GOP like to see PP gone? Do they support it? Yes, right now BC can be relatively affordable, the key would being relatively. However, the GOP is actively working to make it harder to get and more expensive.

If unwanted pregnancy is the issue, why not focus on men? I say, since vestectomies are reversable, the government should mandate that all men receive one at the age of 15. Of course it will have to be on your dime. Why should I pay for what is your responsibility?

Morg,

I'll ask you the same question... Where did I say you had to pay for me? Please explain how access and maintaining the programs we have in place that primarily help women, is the same as "paying" for us.

And I highly doubt, if you're a man, you want us women to, "put down the cocks".

So...

I gotta ask it.

What's wrong with eating dog? Or guinea pigs? Or grasshoppers? Or sheep? Or Goats? Or anything else non-poisonous?

It's not red meat that kills you, it's green meat :)

And just because we, as Americans, are wealthy enough to have real livestock and form a diet off of specific animals...what makes the animals we chose better than other animals?

Not a darned thing.

<Been to Korea. Ate the Dog. It wasn't too bad.

Been to Egypt. Ate the guinea pig. Better than dog.

Been to Australia. Ate Kangaroo steak. Very gamey.>

Sue (or are you actually Jim?) the GOP does indeed have a war on women.

Your extensive excuses are not a rebuttal but useless. You have failed to address the issues. The GOP does not want birth control covered by insurance (but they have no problem with the boys getting help with Viagra, etc); they want abortions denied; they want women to have to go through hoops to get contraceptives or to be able to terminate their pregnancies.

Your lies about President Obama's staff are just that - lies. Salary is commensurate with education and experience and the difference in the pay is based on that. But, you don't want any facts - just continue spouting the hatred of the far right.

I pay my own bills but I am not stupid. I know that, at some point in some people's lives, they need help. I am not so arrogant to believe that is just their problem. Reality says that any one of us could be in a position where we need assistance for a period of time. But, you don't factor that into your discussion at all.

Jim - you should just keep your mouth shut. You are a big part of the problem. As a man, your attitude about the GOP war on women is so off base it isn't even pertinent.

Sub,

Thanks, buddy!

Sue, I think the point Sarah makes t if she did not have insurance you would have to pay for her above scenario. The idea is if she broke her thumb like she said, went to the emergency room and had no insurance nor the ability to pay you would in the end pay for it. To say that providing her with insurance is you supporting her going to the shooting range and paying for her resluting injury is simply not a real argument.

Ruken

Obama just came on TV and my dog started flipping the hell out and barking!

Aren't you supposed to be at work?

And what about you, Ruken? Work much?

Ruken

and you ruken, are you supposed to be at work?

I am, thanks for asking.

(Personally, I am posting this on my lunch hour. You on the other hand are posting at 8:40 AM and stealing from your boss - as Fisty likes to say!)

Tod

I already told you, I'm just following this thread for fun (I'm done throwing my pearls before swine) Kirk, Sue and Jim have asked you some very telling questions, and no you have not given coherent/logical/unemotional responses. They've been kinda childish actually, but funny, so do continue.

Interpretation: "I'm not capable of keeping up with your level of discourse. Plus, I'm a bit intimidated."

Just a random thought: one of the major electric generation companies in our country is shutting down several of its older coal-fired generation stations rather than comply with EPA regulations to add peripheral scrubbing equipment to those stations because said regulations will raise the cost of generation at those plants well above the going market rate for electricity. This was one of the things POTUS promised us: more expensive electricity due to more expensive compliance with regulations for coal-fired generation stations.

Oh, by the way, do be sure to enjoy the brownouts and blackouts this summer because the owner has no intention of replacing the closed generation units at this time.

Oh, wait a minute, POTUS can just have another law passed that we can call OBAMAJUICE because isn't cheap electricity regardless of source a constitutionally-guaranteed right? But then SCOTUS will control the electric industry as well as the healthcare industry and so on and so forth.....until whores are a government controlled monopoly, blah, blah, blah.

Remember, all this change is for the better.

The F Readhead is on someones payroll to print such BS she injects everyday on the boards. It's the same old DemocRAT and Libtard dribble.

How can Obama and the DemocRATS be completely innocent for the country's woes?

A President and a political party would have to be completely on the sidelines and adding nothing of true value to the issues at hand if that is the case !

It is a pretty good summation of Obama and the DemocRATS leadership thus far.

And what about you, Ruken? Work much?

Indeed. Nailed out 8 bug reports this morning, now I'm glancing over a functional document for our next release and drawing up some designs.

Multitasking is a wonderful thing.

(Personally, I am posting this on my lunch hour. You on the other hand are posting at 8:40 AM and stealing from your boss - as Fisty likes to say!)

Except, I'm not. But thanks for your concern.

FR this election really should be a referendum on Obama's record and the record of Mitt Romney as well! I really am not over joyed with the selections that seem likely in November, but it has always been about performance and not popularity with me for elections. In the last presidential election I voted for McCain based on the fact that he had experience in governing more than a neighborhood watch group. The last 3 1/2 years have, in my opinion, proven the decision to be the correct one. That is not to say McCain would have been head and shoulders better than Obama, but that Obama has shown that he has very little in the way of leadership skills, and tends to flap his jaw when he shouldn't. Several times over his first term, he has made comments from the hip that were inaccurate and even hurtful to those involved. (The police for instance, when they arrested an acquaintance of his for disorderly conduct). When Democrats had control of congress and HCR was passed, the bill Obama envisioned and sold to the American public didn't resemble the finished bill he later signed, a bill that if he were a true leader he would have vetoed and sent back until it more closely resembled the vision of HCR he actually had. He groped to find answers to economic problems, always searching academia, but seldom asking advice from business. His handling of the BP gulf spill was a disaster in and of itself that cost 250k jobs and has yet to make off shore drilling in deep water any safer. Yes BP ponied up for a large chunk of the bill, but that would have happened anyway because of the large number of lawsuits that would have occurred. The largest hurdle Obama will have to face is one of his own making. It is a pile of cash 6.7 trillion dollars high that he added to the debt in his first term with little to nothing to show for it. Big government and even bigger government spending is killing our nation, and the president following his 2008 script still to this day is blaming everyone else for our problems. The one thing he seems best at is diverting the blame to someone other than his administration. Democrats, get a clue, Bush has not been president for over three years, his policies have all been acted upon by this administration and this congress! Ownership for our current state of affairs belongs to this administration! Obama's recent submitted budget was brought to a vote in the house on the same day that the Ryan budget. The Obama budget received the first vote, and not one member of the house, republican nor DEMOCRAT, voted in favor of his budget. At least the Ryan budget was passed along Party Lines. That means that even his own party does not support his vision for America anymore, if they really ever did. Pelosi and Reid saw the chance to put a puppet in the White House to accomplish long time Democratic goals to increase government and social programs, when Obama started to realize that the agenda was BS and began to engage in attempts for Bipartisanship, the dropped support for him in a heart beat. He has created ill feelings and class warfare in America. His idea for Taxing the upper 1% more is a distraction meant to keep heads turned away from democratic ineffective ideas and mass spending. If all the cuts put in place during the Bush administration were to end, that would put a meaningful dent in the deficit over the next ten years, but would mean tax increases for everyone not just the top 1%. The top 1% tax increases would only net a few tens of billions over ten years while the projected deficits total more than ten trillion in that same time frame. Government needs to shrink, spending cuts across the board need to be made, and the tax code needs to be rewritten fairly for everyone including the top 1%. These actions will never happen if Obama and democrats maintain control for another four years. As it stands right now, social programs take up 60% of government spending. (Social security=20%, Medicade/Medicare=22%,other social programs=18%) Defense is 20% of our spending, leaving the remaining 20% to be split up among education, arts & sciences, infrastructure development and repair, and about a thousand other programs. We have lost control of our pocket book to social spending. Say what you will about Bush and the two wars, but that spending is only a small fraction of the spending problems facing our government. We can cut Defense spending as was done under Ford and Carter and to a lesser extent under Bush senior and Clinton, but we will have to pay for it in the future when we may need to mobilize again. The birth of problem companies like Halliburton can be directly attributed to over zealous cuts to defense following Vietnam and the first Gulf War. Contractors took the place of soldiers for many tasks, and while on a peace time footing were cheaper, but should have taught us a lesson about prices when the shooting starts. Why is it that when business uses outsourcing the public is appalled but when the military uses it they are applauded until a war breaks out? Even with drastic defense cuts, we are still facing borrowing of one of every three dollars spent by government. That is unsustainable, and that is the gist of the conservative message. Democrats wish to dip further and further into your pockets only to return your own money to you so they can stay in power and seen as doing good for the downtrodden, but your loss is their gain.

Sue-3329001 - Post #1.90 - One of the greatest posts ever. Congrats!

The Liberals Utopian vision of a government mandated nanny state is unaffordable and unattainable. Yet they keep attempting to do so, to the tune of trillions of dollars of debt. We spend over $2 trillion dollars a year on social programs, and to the Liberals, that's just not enough. By not taking personal responsibility, the Liberals continue with their victim-hood line of defense for their irresponsible actions and behavior.

Obama 2012 - "You are all victims and I am your savior"

Kirk, Alan, Tod, Morgs, et al, your biased responses are just proving Sarah's points.

You go, Sarah!

Fielden,

Thanks. Do you have any idea how hard it is to juggle a gun, car keys, and a penis, all while typing a post, lol???

Ruken

ruken says he is at work, posting as often as he / she does one can imagine that either he / she is a professional blogger or is effectively stealing from the employer

It's my entertainment while waiting for the test suite to finish.

But thank you for your concern.

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

WOW! You have been 'entertaining' yourself for about an hour and a half! And by the way... is it fair that your employer should pay you to entertain yourself or should you maybe look around at another piece of paper on your desk and start working on that?

(Again... I am on my lunch hour, sitting at my desk... answering the phone IF it rings... giving my boss some of my personal time. Why? Because it helps him and my company. Go figure. )

Sarah - I am male, so please don't put down the cocks, keep up the good work. I will use BC so you don't need to. :-)

Saying you had a car crash and broke your thumb while immediately invoking insurance tells me you aren't exactly going to pull your checkbook and take responsibility. But hey, in today's world that is what insurance is about and that is why I pay the premiums I do.

I normally hold your comments in the highest regard although I am more center leaning. These comments were a little off the norm for you though. Insurance is made to spread costs of high cost items that we do not save money for. Insurance pays bills by reaching into a pool that everyone contributes to so in essence we are paying for your mishaps. I don't believe this is the argument you wanted to make though.

Stick to the argument of getting insurance for everyone without a mandate. That is a winner.

Sorry guys,

I warned you. Feisty/JoAnne/Sarah threads are good for comedy and nothing else. Get your laughs and move on. Leave them to their bubble and just sit back and watch them high-five each other for their goofy logic.

Morgs,

I like my vesectomy idea, how about you? :)

Saying you had a car crash and broke your thumb while immediately invoking insurance tells me you aren't exactly going to pull your checkbook and take responsibility.

I said I DID have insurance. My point was to illustrate how quickly sh** creeps up on us, and if I didn't although the car accident wasn't my fault at all, I'd be screwed with the medical bills. As it is, I'm paying through my insurance, just like my insurance helps pay for yours.

Getting insurance for everyone without a mandate??? Done. Single payer. Let's do it.

I warned you. Feisty/JoAnne/Sarah threads are good for comedy and nothing else. Get your laughs and move on. Leave them to their bubble and just sit back and watch them high-five each other for their goofy logic.

Interpretation: "I really want some attention, but I have a hard time talking to girls."

Yes or no... Would the GOP like to see PP gone? Do they support it? Yes, right now BC can be relatively affordable, the key would being relatively. However, the GOP is actively working to make it harder to get and more expensive.

If unwanted pregnancy is the issue, why not focus on men? I say, since vestectomies are reversable, the government should mandate that all men receive one at the age of 15. Of course it will have to be on your dime. Why should I pay for what is your responsibility?

If the GOP wants PP gone it is because they promote abortion as a form of birth control (and I don't mean they market it in some way). I don't think anybody would use PP as an abortion if it was medically necessary. Medicaid does provide abortions. I am pro-choice, up to around 28 weeks, but I am uncomfortable with abortion being used as birth control. But gone? What policy have they published that calls for the end to PP?

As to your next point, in what way are the GOP trying to make BC more expensive. I already pointed you to a site for free birth control. What policy is the GOP trying to implement to force up the price of BC? The mandate from the HHS to Catholic organizations is to make them give BC, the GOP has no policy to remove BC from any provider unless you know different.

Is unwanted pregnancy the issue? I don't know you just seemed to pull that one out the hat. If it is, then I say treat both genders the same.

As it is, I'm paying through my insurance, just like my insurance helps pay for yours.

Be prepared for a @!$%#storm of paperwork. Co-pays, non-covered items and medical billing mistakes.

@fielden

Why are my responses biased? Because they do not agree with your preconceptions?

Sarah,

No I do not think that we should get rid of plan parenthood. I agree that is not a position shared by many republican candidates.

I have personally either paid for some type of birth control or helped to pay for it. Planned parenthood also does many other things than just perform abortions. Abortion is such a polorizing thing. My quandry is this, I am by nature a fiscal consertitive and a socal issue liberal. You think you have it tough try balancing those things out. President Bush while in office stopped our country from sending condoms to Africa. It had to be one of the dumbest things that he did. (starting the wars was not good either).

When I heard how many abortions are done each and every year, well that was an eye opener as well. There has to be a better way. Education on sex is a good place to start. My daughter, who I love dearly being 17, drives me nuts with this. We that being the ex and myself decided it was better to pay for her to go on the pill than deal with a teenage pregency. I personally will raise her child if she did become pregnant, that is my personal choice. Yes she will have a say it in. One of her friends got pregnant at 16. What a total mess that is.

So many of these issues start with the family. Health care in total is a problem that needs a working solution. I do not feel the The national health care plan is the answer. It does kind of adress one of the issues more people paying in. It does not seem to change the real issue, which is the constant growth in cost. My first step would have been to work with the states in order to allow more competition by health insurance plans. Reward preventitive care, work to stop non emergency room visits and put some type of limit on liability.

What we need is our politicians to start being honest. We need our media to do the same. I am so tired of half the story being covered. It is funny how easy it is to find quick answers to questions that are un answered by our media and our politicians.

I come to sites like this to learn more. To try and understand. I do not watch any TV news station any more. It is a waste of time.

Well lunch break is just about over.

so once again I wish you well.

Oh yes, not that you need it pointed out, but some men are pigs.

I have never understood how a father or a mother can walk away from their children.

Sarah - A vasectomy would be great, seems to be the trend among my friends. I am a pussy though when it comes to that.

Agreed, single payer. Cut out insurance companies. All they do is skim off the top of a general fund under the guise of "you cannot do this without us."

Hey Sarah! Good morning to you and what an eventful week, eh? You had the "je ne sais quoi" on the gun range and your car got FUBAR! Anyway, I pose you a question:

The GOP has been going after PP which is the number one source of affordable BC.

If I recall correctly, cant you get affordable BC from places like Wal-Mart for $9 a month? I also hear that asprin is almost as effective. Why does it have to be PP that gets you your BC?

Also,

Can someone please explain to me how to get the outside links to post properly. Make fun of me if you will, but please post useful information as well! Thanks all!

Alan,

PP does NOT promote abortion as a form of birth control, they simply perform them. In fact, abortions only make up about 3% of the services available. This mere performance has the GOP's collective panties in a wad, and we've seen a series of steps taken to block access...

Personhood Amendments

Forced Ultrasounds

Funding to PP

Limiting the Definition of Rape in the Hyde Amendment

It doesn't matter if they're JUST in disagreement with abortion. They're targeting the number one provider of women's healthcare. The easiest, cheapest and most accessible. Why??? How does that align with what women need/want?

Sorry guys,

I warned you. Feisty/JoAnne/Sarah threads are good for comedy and nothing else. Get your laughs and move on. Leave them to their bubble and just sit back and watch them high-five each other for their goofy logic.

Raff,

They won't let you post outside links until you've been on the vine for a while.

To your question...

PP is a full clinic. I can get easy/affordable screenings, tests, BC, yada, yada, yada. It isn't just a pez despenser, shooting out contraceptive pills. That's why it's so critical. For many low-income females, it's their only source of women's healthcare.

Thanks for the info, Sarah.

What do you make of the sexual abuse scandal in North Carolina against the Democrat party, the GSA scandal?

Damage123: "Obama just came on TV and my dog started flipping the hell out and barking!"

Funny how dogs can learn behaviors from their masters isn't it? Although I do find it pretty amazing that you couldn't come to that conclusion on your own.

Sarah, I'll also be thinking of you and I hope you recover speedily. I was rear-ended a few years ago and ended up with pretty terrible whiplash (or maybe I'm just a wuss). The people that hit me had no insurance to pay for my hospital bills (and I didn't even go at first. Not until it started really hurting the next day) or the damage on the rear end of my car. This brings me to my next point.

Sue, perhaps Sarah didn't purchase the right type of car insurance but she's not asking anyone to pay her bills except maybe the person responsible for her damaged car and injuries (personal responsibility and all). Everyone knows that although car insurance is mandated (the horror! The government is making me be personally responsible!) not everyone has car insurance. SURPRISE!!!!!!! People are not going to be responsible all the time. We have to educate people (but the GOP wants to cut Federal spending on education to keep everyone dumb and voting for them because they can put their ridiculous and selfish lies in the heads of everyone they haven't educated) and have these safety nets for people who will end up costing us more in the long run if we don't.

When there are lots of homeless people on the street (whatever street it might be) property values go down and crime rates go up. We have to pay police to keep these desparate people as honest as possible. ERs get full of these people looking for a place to stay that's cold/warm in the heat/cold and you guessed it, they don't pay their bills so everyone else gets to as rates for such things will continue to increase at incredible rates with the increase in homelessness.

Sue, you said: "Your shooting range incident is unfortunate, but you may want to speak to an attorney, because often those "hold harmless"/disclaimers don't hold up under the laws of your state. But once again, going to a shooting range is a personal choice, and while nobody wants to think of you being injured, why should the community at large pay for your choice to visit that particular facility and engage in that particular activity? It is your right to do so, but nowhere is it guaranteed that your right to do so will be paid for by other people or the government."

I really take exception to this because Sarah never (as I recall) asked for anyone to pay for her medical care. I don't think you were being malicious but you were putting words in her mouth which really shows that you had a preconcieved notion about her beliefs and your mind was not open to here initial post much less a response. Why bother responding to her post if you're not going to address things she said rather than things that you think she thinks? Lets go to a replay shall we?

Sarah: "What is Romney's plan for healthcare? After an incredibly harrowing week, this concerns me more and more.

Last Wednesday - Broken thumb at the shooting range, a trip to the ER and a trip to the Orthopedic Surgeon.

Last Monday - Rear ended, totaled car, and a visit by my friendly neighborhood paramedics.

(I'm just waiting for a piano to fall from the sky and land on me. I'm advising all my friends and family to remain outside of a 15 foot radius, just in case)

Anyhoo, I went from being healthy as a horse, to being confronted with what, if not for my insurance, could be some seriously hefty medical bills. And the scariest part was the spontanaeity of it all. One minute you're fine, and the next you feel like you got ran over by a mack truck or you shot your eye out.

So please, Mr. Romney, explain to me your plan for healthcare.

And yes, Bill in Fairfax, the war on women is real. The fact that Republicans deny it's occurring and right it off, even in the face of the current poll numbers, in and of itself, speaks to their disregard of females."

Obviously, the healthcare system we're currently working with has problems. Romney doesn't like ACA (even though it's patterned after his own healthcare legislation in his home state) so Sarah would like to know about Romney's alternative healthcare bill. It's that simple.

Raff,

I'm disgusted by any man (or woman) that would use their position of power to harrass or intimidate someone. That being said, there's a difference between having a party platform that is lenient towards instances like that or denies that they're an issue, and having a douchebag within the party.

Every party, regardless of their stance on women's issues, is going to have its sh**bags. That doesn't mean the party endorses the sh**bag behavior. To me, it seems as though the GOP won't even aknowledge that sh**bag behavior happens.

Yellowdog - Mark D:

You can continue with your pathetic snivel if it reinforces your piety. On the other hand, you can take a look at my posts over time and understand that I begrudge no one their religious choices. I find the idea of an invisible spirit guy to be ridiculous. However, I have also said, I do not rule out the possibility that such a thing exists. I do not know, and neither do you.

I do not share your faith - and that's all it is - that your super being exists. I am sick and tired of hearing the sniveling that a tiny group of people who don't share this notion of invisoguy are interfering with your beliefs. To the contrary. Take a look at this link: http://smd12364.newsvine.com/_news/2012/04/19/11281271-barber-the-secularist-left-are-bullies-who-need-to-be-punched-in-the-mouth

Yeah. Those of us who want a secular government - oh how freaking evil is that? - need to be punched in the mouth by god-loving Christians. Cognitive dissonance, anyone? Those people deserve a full measure of mockery. If the shoe fits, wear it.

Sarah,

Shout out to your health and recovery as well as your homage to Ralphie and a HILARIOUS movie!

I admire your patience at dismantling the trolls rhetoric. I don't know how you do it, day in and day out. There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

Yellowdawg,...I think David Walker's sattire is pretty funny. I am not sure why it offends you. The reason sattire works is the element of 'truth', right?

Alan, I know you asked Sarah but I couldn't help myself. I couldn't post the links but if you google birth control employer you'll get a lot of hits and one is the aclu.org website that seems upset about an Arizona law that will make it legal for your employer to ask and demand proof about why a woman is taking birth control. They are also able to fire the person if the woman is taking birth control and the employer objects to it on religious grounds. They don't like it one bit. There is an interesting little clause that will make the women pay for the insurance claim for birth control as well. People should not be allowed to discriminate period much less on religious grounds. Ridiculous! Do you agree?

Sarah,

I agree with you, wholeheartedly. Although I will say that ones perception of certain people can get in the way of realizing that maybe, the GOP hates sh**bags in their party as well. They call them "RINOs".

What about the GSA scandal? (sorry for the generic questions. trying to stay on the topics of the story up top.)

lawdog - and everyone should take you seriously with all the name calling, right?

Raff,

The GSA thing is inexcusable. I mean, come on, right, does the GSA even have a purpose to its existance in the first place??? Shouldn't each department be responsible for its own effeciency?

And if you're going to drop that kind of cash, and make us all "take one for the team" so to speak, at least don't be such geeks about it. I'm talking like prostitutes and lines of cocaine, not collector's coins and team building.

Darn! I thought I could do links but apparently not. Anyway Alan, there is a law that the GOP in Arizona are trying to pass through their state senate that will allow employers to question and demand proof (of it being a medical problem) from a female employee who is on birth control which is covered by her insurance. The employer is allowed to fire said employee if they disagree with the use of birth control for religious reasons. A funny little clause requires the female employee to pay for the insurance claim for the birth control as well. The ACLU doesn't seem to like it. Let me know what you think.

The New way of looking at the Constitution, Expanding the powers of the presidency, where he rules all laws, above Congress, above the Constitution:

"Cheney's Law":

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2655260104684404687#

Watch that video movie.

Sarah,

Any company that plans a "business" trip to Vegas is usually hiring hookers and doin' coke off of their asses on that companies' dime. Not always, just most of the time.

Interesting dichotomy on how 'personal responsibility' is presented.

On the one hand, 'personal responsibility' is self-centered where the individual is responsible for themselves alone. Interestingly, the self-centered view of 'personal responsibility' still requires the government. The role of government is to prevent others from interfering with rugged individualism and the self-centered acquisition of status or wealth or whatever.

On the other hand, 'personal responsibility' extends beyond the individual - the individual has a 'personal responsibility' to participate and support society. The role of government is to enhance and extend the ability of the individual to exercise their 'personal responsibility' to their community and society.

Not too surprising that we must have BOTH in order to maintain a vibrant, healthy society where individual freedom can thrive.

You guys are arguing two sides of the same coin. It is not possible to have a one sided coin and it is not possible for one side to be larger than the other. Without the coin, neither side will exist.

For all the words being thrown around - you need to realize you are wasting your time making arguments that you cannot win - and - cannot lose. Both sides are right and wrong, at the same time.

Last Wednesday - Broken thumb at the shooting range, a trip to the ER and a trip to the Orthopedic Surgeon. If I had a dollar for every time I observed a beginner hold a Semi-auto with their thumb up the trigger and fracture their thumb when the round ejects and the slide comes forward I would be rich. It hurts, but its funny as hell to watch them scream and jump with the weapon attached to their thumb.

Fielden--I didnt show any bias at all so not sure how any of her points were proven and in fact quite the opposite. Its clear to me that she didnt prove anything but emotional charges meant to inflame passions. If she were more objective and didnt deflect and avoid responding to the questions and issues she didnt like, I would give her a few points for the good responses. Instead she avoids the bad answers and deflects. For example, I never said that I supported the GOP on any of these issues nor their party platform on many social issues. For example, I am pro choice and certainly pro woman and every issue she raised but she is unwilling to bend and discuss them objectively. Lets take equal pay, many of the progressives for example cited references to the fact when Obama was accused of discrimination by paying woman 18% less to the fact that you have to compare equal experience and job titles etc so it wasnt discrimination. Those same arguments and statistics work on the national level so stop the game playing and be honest. On discrimination lawsuits, you well know that the new laws were intended to assist the trial lawyers association and make it easier for them to file frivioulous unsupported claims in order to generate class action fees. If someone can show that a person with actual discrimination doesnt have a law or forum to pursue her claim today--no one has come forward. The problem with Sarah's emotionally charged attempt to continue to paint Romney or the GOP as a War on Women is that just because they share different views on a few issues like abortion--that doesnt equate to a war on women. Do you think the democrats and Obama have a war on private enterprise because he passed ACA, implemented a bunch of EPA regs making it harder to do business without the backing of Congress, issues tons of regulations making it more expensive and harder to business and constantly wants to tax foreign earnings which will drive more companies and businesses completely offshore? Of course not, I dont believe for a second Obama has a War on private enterprise just because he takes some positions that make it harder and more expensive for them to do business.

Until the campaigning stops and the objective observations start, dont ask us fiscal conservatives to concede anything Sarah says.

MGates--you do realize that education spending is done at the local level right? There havent been any cuts by the GOP that would have any impact on the education gap--if you want to blame someone look to the teachers unions and their unholy alliance with their democratic legislators putting a stop to education reform across the country.

By the way, under the premise of the democratics view of economic fairness--no one has yet told me why Planned Parenthood should receive a dime of federal funding. Why are they more important as a charity to use taxpayer dollars than SIDs, Cancer, PTSD, Autism or any deserving charity. Planned Parenthood should compete for charity dollars under the theory of economic fairness like any other charity.

Backhouse - Are you really so ignorant and uninformed that you don't know the movie has the same title as the book from which it was adapted? Typical liberal spewing.

Jolly

That's exactly what happened. Literally exactly. And my buddy sure as hell laughed.

Sarah, by the way, just because I disagree with you on some of your posts, I am sorry about the accidents and do not wish ill on anyone. I also wish you good luck on getting past the other issues that were indicated. Kirk

KIRK - I don't know why you and others continue to talk about a mortgage situation you either don't understand or purposely misstate. President Obama is not proposing to "bail out" homeowners who bought more house than they could afford. He is working to help homeowners who bought a home they could afford but now, because of home values that have drastically fallen (unprecedented in the history of this country) cannot get their homes refinanced into lower rates. They have done nothing wrong - they have done everything right. He is trying to help those whose incomes have fallen - through no fault of their own - be able to hold onto their home - still make their mortgage payment. You chose to post false statements about this over and over.

David Walker - Believe what you wish. I know I do. Let me share something, you know nothing about me other than what I post. However, I've learned a lot about you by seeing what you post. Call it piety or whatever, but, I believe in civil discourse, trying to see the other side regarding political, economic issues and possible solutions. I won't always agree but will listen and consider what is posted. Generally don't talk religion.

Regarding your post, when have I ever sniveled that we need a non secular government. When have I ever shown disrespect to another poster or their beliefs? When have I ever called that harm should come to non christians?

Satire or not, thanks for proving a point to the right that some on the left can be some of the most bigoted and closed minded. You know what you are and so do some of the rest of us.

Seeking Sanity--do some research will you? Of course you always believe everyone the government tells you dont you? How has that worked out for you so far? The new (not the previous attempts at helping the real estate crisis as the old government programs were all about letting the banks move slowly, extend and pretend and take the band aid off slowly and all of those programs had nothing to do with the purpose and the validity of the original borrowers ability to pay.) program is designed to bail out only those borrowers who are current on their mortgages but underwater value wise. I get that but why do you avoid the answer to my questions as to why bail them out versus anyone who has made unfortunate economic choices in life through no fault of their own? Government should provide a safety net and we do when those things happen, but when did it become our responsibility to bail everyone out regardless of fault. I asked what makes your neighbor who has an underwater but performing mortgage more needy than the guy whose small business went under because the local plant closed, or lost his job, or his kids medical bills? All of those are unfortunate economic bad things to people through no fault of their own and why arent we bailing them out?

I appreciate you being a little less personally vicious but the claim that what we are saying is false is just not consistent with personal experience and constant reporting. Read the Wall Street Journal sometime, go out and talk to people in the banking world. Your experience might be different but I dont claim that they are just false.

Kirk - I work in the mortgage industry you dolt and what you continue to post is just lies. People who bought over their heads are either in foreclosure or have already gone through it. The reason to help - not bail out - those whose homes have lost value is because this is not just a few people who are in this situation - this is a massive number and it has a direct effect on the economy of the country. Intelligent people know this. You have no common sense if you can't see the difference. But, that explains most of your posts.

You are a total moron and your condescending nature - when you don't have a clue - makes you more of one. I read the WSJ and am in the banking industry every damned day. You don't have a clue but continue to posts lies.

Alan, I know you asked Sarah but I couldn't help myself. I couldn't post the links but if you google birth control employer you'll get a lot of hits and one is the aclu.org website that seems upset about an Arizona law that will make it legal for your employer to ask and demand proof about why a woman is taking birth control. They are also able to fire the person if the woman is taking birth control and the employer objects to it on religious grounds. They don't like it one bit. There is an interesting little clause that will make the women pay for the insurance claim for birth control as well. People should not be allowed to discriminate period much less on religious grounds. Ridiculous! Do you agree?

Personally yes. Anything that allows an employer to investigate your medical history/records is intrusive. However, if the employer is paying you this as a benefit I think the law as it currently stands may be on the employers side. This one is difficult because in my view the Catholic hierarchy have an unreasonable view on contraception, but that is their right. I'm sure they would find some of my views on marriage / co-habitation unreasonable.

Again, and I know it's open to abuse, if you decide to work for a religiously affiliated organization, or if you receive your benefits from any employer, you have to accept what they are willing to pay for.

In NJ they mandated that at least one attempt of in-vitro be included in insurance policies. This drives up premiums for all. With the ACA what do you think the chances are that employers will simply drop this benefit as the cost of mandates are passed along?

@StillSeekingSanity #1.132,

Insurance is for illness, accidents and other medical mishaps. I have yet to see a pregnancy defined as an "ILLNESS", although in your ultra-liberal world I am sure you could justify any use of federal funds for all kinds of personal personal problems.

No, the government should not be paying for Viagra, especially for prisoners in penitentiaries throughout this country. Government is for the "common good" and I have yet to understand their intrusion into personal health care issues, student loans, home mortgages or to dumba$$ loans supporting "going-concern" stupidity like Solyndra.

Hey, I appreciate the personal attack and you telling me that I am part of "the problem" ..... whatever that is in your utopian mindset. Of course, if you spin more voluminous verbage there may actually be a few libtards willing to believe they have some validity.

Wow ! A lot of venom in your PERSONAL ATTACK OF ANOTHER POSTER AT #1.177 ! HOW DO YOU GET BY WITH THAT ?

jim - if you don't see there is a war on women - then you are part of the problem. But, as a man, you shouldn't even be commenting on women's issues as they don't pertain to you.

You mental midgets of the far right always want to control everyone.

Obama/Biden 2012

jim - as to 1.176 - he has reported his garbage over and over and what he says isn't even close to true. But I expect no better from him!

You're right, Alan, it's a difficult one. It just seems so odd that the GOP, who is all about personal freedoms, would try to get this bill passed... Terribly intrusive I think and shouldn't be passed. I know that employers have rights but their rights shouldn't surpass those of the individual in this case. This is a very personal thing and has nothing to do with job performance so it shouldn't matter to employers.

Imagine if you were called into your boss's office and he asked you how many times a day you pleasured yourself or had sex with your wife. This is almost the same as asking a woman if/why she is on birth control. It's none of anyone's business but their own. It should stay that way unless they choose to offer the information.

My problem is that most health insurance plans that come through employment are paid (at least partially) through payroll so these people are already paying for their coverage. I don't think an employer should be able to discriminate for any reason especially religious based reasons. The GOP seems to be trying to make this country a religious-based country where all of our laws are fashioned after Christian teachings and I don't like it. I know I can't be the only one.

Sarah,

"Interpretation: "I really want some attention, but I have a hard time talking to girls."

You've been doing a lot of interpreting of plain spoken words today. My guess is you treat the constitution with the same silliness that you do people (but that's a different discussion).

And my favorite:

"Do you have any idea how hard it is to juggle a gun, car keys, and a penis, all while typing a post, lol???"

Thus my whole point; you're not a serious adult woman, and neither are your "buddies". I enjoy adult conversations with both adult men and adult women (ladies and gentlemen if you prefer). My interpretation of your posts (both the silly and the attempted serious) are not worthy of conversation, just laughs.

bye, till the next Fiesty jr. high myspace thread pops up.

"jim - if you don't see there is a war on women - then you are part of the problem. But, as a man, you shouldn't even be commenting on women's issues as they don't pertain to you.

You mental midgets of the far right always want to control everyone."

This nugget comes to you from seekingsanity; how funny is that?

SeekingSanity,

What's the deal with jim? Is he like, slow or something. I just can't stand it. Nice rebuttal to Kirk btw! I enjoy reading your posts and any time you want to educate us about mortgages etc feel free to do so because I don't know enough about that stuff (I like to learn!).

bye, till the next Fiesty jr. high myspace thread pops up.

Myspace? Seriously? lmao

Get back to us when you realize the year is 2012.

You're sooo yesterday!!! *said in my best Valley Girl voice* little buddy!

Kirk:

I'm not going to get into a pissing match with you. I just want to know why you're talking about "illicit emotion". Really?

Come on man. How do you expect anyone to take you seriously?

The situations of ignorance & poverty are held in low regard only by those who cannot escape it.
For the majority of the rich it is to their advantage or a non issue
& for the majority of the middle it can be nothing more than a pity .
AMERICA, the GREATEST NATION that Conservatives can make it for the Corporations .

"You can't take a trip to Las Vegas or down to the Super Bowl on the taxpayers' dime."

-- President Obama at a town hall in Elkhart, Ind. on Feb. 10, 2009

It just seems so odd that the GOP, who is all about personal freedoms, would try to get this bill passed...

You will rarely find me attempting to defend the GOP on social issues, particularly at the state level. Their dumbest moment that I remember was the Terry Shivo mess. Bill Frist, who actually comes over as normal now, made a complete fool of himself.

What has been happening at GSA is trivial when we consider what is happening with the entire federal government. Without conditions, the President promised that American people that the 2012 federal budget would not exceed 229.27 billion dollars. The President's own White House is projecting that the President is going to miss that promise by more than a factor of 5. So the federal government is spending more than 1 trillion dollars more of our money than the President promised. But it is worse than that. The federal government spent the money that they have taken from us through taxes and they are having to borrow that extra 1 trillion dollars but it will be us tax payers that will eventually have to pay the money back. Because the government is already more than 15 trillion dollars in debt with huge deficits projected for more than a decade to come it will be a long time before we can even start paying the 1 trillion dollars back. We have to pay back the old debt before we start paying back the new debt but during all this time we will have to pay interest on the new debt. This new debt is like a 160 year interest only loan. What a night night mare but it is our night mare. I do not think that interest rates can stay at rock bottom for too much longer. I estimate that the 1 trillion dollars beyond what the President promised is going to end up costing us taxpayers more than 9 trillion dollars to pay back in 170 years. That is 9 trillion dollars the tax payers are going to have to pay out to cover this administration's over spending for just 1 year. I think that this is a case of the White House gone wild.

I think that it is the President that is in charge so he is the one who ultimately bears the responsibility for all of this.

The President needs to be reminded of some words of wisdom that were spoken back in March of 2006. The words were as true then as they are today.

"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies. Increasing America 's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that, "the buck stops here.' Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better."
~ Senator Barack H. Obama, March 2006

@StillSeekingSanity #1.180 and #1.81,

You're quite the flamethrower aren't you genius ? You call people dolts, mental midgets, liars ..... basically whatever soothes your arrogant ego whenever it suits you. Then, you cower a little at the thought you might actually be reprimanded ...... naaahhh, ain't 'gonna happen, this is a libbie website.

Your concept that I cannot comment on women's issues carries about as much weight as a bag of popcorn ..... which, by the way, you can feed to Fiesty. One does not have to "be something" to have an opinion on that matter. If I followed your weak logic, then I could personally castigate any and all who make comments about tax laws ....... unless, of course, they are taxation attorneys or a CPA like myself.

Hey, but there is help ..... they do have ANGER MANAGEMENT classes for people like you and you might need to check that out. Either that, or leave your arrogance and your venom at home.

I comment on political matters mostly from a financial standpoint. Everything our government wants to do, thinks it should do or might do ..... HAS A COST ! The U.S. is around $16 trillion in debt with no budget passed in recent years and yet you believe our government still needs to pay for everyone's PERSONAL ISSUES.

The only "war" out there exists between people of extreme liberal ideology and the conservatives who realize we are headed towards financial insanity trying to PAY for that ideology. Cuts must be made.

Feisty:

"Myspace? Seriously? lmao

Get back to us when you realize the year is 2012.

You're sooo yesterday!!! *said in my best Valley Girl voice* little buddy!"

Interesting; I actually meant to reference/illustrate my point using the childishness of the old Myspace website, but I'll dumb it down for you next time, ok kiddo.

"Lmao"; seriously? Not sure what more you could you possibly have done to make my point. Funny stuff!

Interesting; I actually meant to reference/illustrate my point using the childishness of the old Myspace website

Sure you did junior... sure you did! *winky winky*

Go stalk someone else rookie, you're not ready for the major league!

The problem with government officials' lavish spending is that it is endemic. It is not necessarily Republican or Democratic, except that the General Scale Civil Service ranks within our government have been stuffed with religious conservative, Republican leaning, employees since the Reagan Administration. Obama inherited the bunch and can only replace the very top couple of officers in the agencies. And remember that the Republicans blocked several of his appointments delaying any actions like an Inspector General investigation. Republicans may try to blame Obama for everything that goes wrong. But the truth is, that just isn't realistically possible. Corruption runs deep on both sides of the fence! Just take a close and honest look at your local city and state wastes (i.e. Like the Republican CFO in the news today for embezzling $30 million from Regan's small IL hometown, Dixon).

Seeking Sanity--your right I am just so wrong because I love making up stuff on an anonymous blog just to see you get all red in the face. Wow, must be tough married to someone with such a closed mind thinking they have all the answers with their hands over their ears.

David--yes probably better for you to stay out of the match as you never have anything useful to add to the debate. I have said the same thing as Yellowdog to you several times and you just dont understand how your credibility is worthless as long as you campaign in such an arrogant bigoted manner. Thanks for pointing out spelling errors for me as I get so worried about spell check.

At one point this was actually a fairly civil debate until the campaigning flame throwers showed up. Its too bad.

Sue & Sarah

Auto insurance varies from state to state. There are No-Fault states and Strict Liability states. No-Fault states have much higher insurance premiums, and you only get so much car from the insurer and you are done. Strict Liability states the guilty party can be sued if there is no insurance or the injuries/loss is greater than the insurance covers.

No-Fault states have a tendency to be higher because the "no-fault" status makes people think an accident is no big deal, so they are not as cautious resulting in more accidents.

I had a brother rear-ended in NY a number of years ago. They guy was a lawyer and tried to get out of paying anything. Bad news for the lawyer, my brother was a resident in Vermont and his insurance had to pay. Fortuneately, my brother heard the skid from behind (the days of no antilock brakes) and got his foot off the brake saving him and his family injuries and not so severe damage to his car. (one of those principles of physics)

Jim and Kirk - my anger only comes out when idiots like Kirk go from post to post writing the same nonsense. He doesn't know what he is talking about but continues to put someone down who actually knows the industry and deals with it daily. His condescending comments and arrogance are only matched by you Jim. And, I see the conversations from men about women's issues as insulting - just like when the GOP had a panel discussing our health issues but only had men on it. You guys seem to think you need to tell women what to do; how to think; and what is right and wrong even when - like Kirk - you don't have a clue.

Actually I don't need anger management but you Kirk apparently need courses in reading comprehension.

MGates73 - any questions about mortgages, I'm more than happy to answer. The landscape is continually changing and we are having new guidelines sent to us monthly. It's going to stay that way until the housing situation settles down. Hopefully it will keep the people who didn't know what they were doing or were just out to make a quick buck out of the industry in the future. Our licensing requirements are now really stiff and it is easy to lose your license if you don't do your job well.

Feisty:

"Sure you did junior... sure you did! *winky winky*"

Interesting; I would venture that most of us who post on these articles are who we say we are, and mean what we say when we post. But I imagine someone (like you) whose entire life is wrapped up theirpretend on-line character would suspect the rest of us to be as perjurious as you.

"Go stalk someone else rookie, you're not ready for the major league!"

And there it is!! The self absorbed, self appointed queen of the absurdly inconsequential has given us a first-hand glimpse into what she sees when she looks in her on-line mirror. Pathetic, but still funny enough for me to check in on you and your lemmings for a good laugh once in a while.

Hint Hint, "*winky winky*" (another Myspace reference I suppose) Your mirror is broken!

Another information article, IR. That last line of yours sums up Mitt's plan for the country!

So true. Anyone who fall for this so called Willard Flip Romney plan is a FOOL.

Agreed, it isn't adding up and the lack of details about how to pay for lower rates, just smacks of lowering rates and revenues maintaining bigger deficits.

The GSA was setup by "W" in 2003, lets not make another mistake like that again !!!!!!!!!

What was "W" thinking of ??????????

Unfortunately, the Obama plan doesn't add up either.

The real problem I see is, every time someone is honest with the voters, they lose an election. We all want to be told we can have everything we want - and it's FREE!! As we're seeing in Europe now, the reality is different.

Great post, IR. I can't get on the thread up above but wanted to add that the whole cookie thing took place in a suburb here in Pittsburgh--the one where my office is located. The bakery which donated the cookies in question is a local icon. They are having fun with it----they are running a special they call "Cookiegate"---buy a dozen cookies, get half a dozen free. But if you think about it---Mitt sits down in someone's back yard and the first thing he does is insult the cookies they put out? The best it is is crass and to me it speaks more of his entitlement mentality. He expects that these people hosting him should have dropped everything to bake cookies. I wouldn't think one had to be an experienced politician to say--wow, those cookies look great; let's pass them around. And that's before we get to the substance of the discussions, where the people were willing to have their taxes raised so that children could be educated. And I know in that community they are not paying a 14% effective rate like Mitt is.

I wouldn't think one had to be an experienced politician to say--wow, those cookies look great; let's pass them around.

That is simply basic politics 101...

*shakes head*

Yeah, Steeler. He should just eat whatever is in front of him.

Kind of like Obama.

If you're humor impaired, don't open the link

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/files/2012/04/Doggieburger.jpg

The headline, by the way, was something like If You Lay Down With Dogs, You Get Photoshopped Eating Them.

Patriotic -- A little Bush Derangement Syndrome remaining after he has been gone for more than 3 years??

GSA was established by President Harry Truman on July 1, 1949, to streamline the administrative work of the federal government.

Clearly, No Joe-, you are one of the people JoAnne was referring to in her eloquent post above. Go ahead with your hatred of the President; it seems to be all you have.

Your deflection from my point won't work---Romney can't even sit down with people who are from his own party and have a discussion of issues of importance to them without insulting his hosts. His campaign team can't put together a small group who agree with their candidate. Their efforts at damage control generally make matters worse. And we're supposed to vote for this man because of his managerial skills? As my grandfather the undertaker used to say, he could screw up a one car funeral.

NJNB -- If it wasn't for the garbage you pick through, you'd have nothing to say. Pitiful.

You know, if we put all the unemployed back to work, the government would be taking in a great deal more tax revenue....Part of the problem is that not working means not paying income taxes, and we have way too many people in that category...You cannot keep squeezing those who are still working for more and more. I have already met people who feel that being employed is a waste, because when all is said and done, they don't earn any more for their effort and time than they would accepting the government dole, food stamps, unemployment benefits. And it is ironic that most people don't recognize that even the unemployment benefits are taxed....Most folks don't find that out until they go to pay their taxes....We have to get away from the notion that somebody without any work is better off not working. Even the part time jobs held by teens and students-they pay income tax on what they earn-The more people earn, the more tax money the government gets, it is that simple. So that brings us back to getting Americans back to work and able to pay into the system that they are not taking benefit from.

Funny picNJ. What's funnier is how the libbies lose their sense of humor so fast when the shoe is on the other foot. They really hate it when their false god is made the fool.

As they say what comes around goes around.

Seems like a pattern with the moonbats though. Why do they fall all over themselves when it come to their political leaders?

Hell, I think Romney is a terrific guy. I think he's honest and brilliant. He's going to make a great president. But holy smokes I'm not going to kiss his feet and pretend he's infallible.

What's up with you moonbats, anyway?

Well my left wing friends it's up to us to see to it that the message is carried.

What you see now is the posturing of the Republicans to find out how they can turn the tide.

I heard this morning that the time has come to forget about the Republican era under KARL ROVE and concentrate on the new KARL ROVE era should the Republicans be given the country to run or ruin.

I think the pundits are correct it is time to change the focus, it is time to look at what the Republican Congress has done to this country. It is time to send the Republican Congress packing.

Mitt Romney is a vagina dressed in men's clothing.If we win the House we will in effect run the government as Mitt Romney will be unable to handle the pressure of failure in his position as President should he get the nod.This is a man who has always seen success at any cost he will not be able to withstand not succeeding as President he will change his positions to reflect America.If we get the congress back we win

So Romney strapped a pet carrier to the top of his car for vacation.

So Obama had to resort to eating dog when he was a kid in Indonesia.

So WTF does this have to do with creating jobs, ending partisan gridlock, cutting red tape, streamlining gov't and about 10 million other things that are, I'd say, more pressing issues.

Silly season indeed.

How about this, I am in a good mood today, yes a surprise to all.

Think about this post and what it means.

Unfortunately, the Obama plan doesn't add up either.

No plans add up.

The real problem I see is, every time someone is honest with the voters, they lose an election. We all want to be told we can have everything we want - and it's FREE!! As we're seeing in Europe now, the reality is different.

I do not personally think Mitt Romney is the answer, or I should say he is an answer waiting for the right question.

Eric

sent me to a website that listed all of President Obama's promises and how he is doing in keeping them. I did not get a real chance to reply yesterday, so I am posting it today.

These are the important promises that he made, that I have questions about.

Change, actually it was hope and change.

So far it seems to me to be the policy of catering to some stupid group. I do not care if it is a left wing group or a right wing group. We need to do what is best for the country. We all can have different ideas of what that is, but we will stick to the basics.

Hope,

I have little hope or faith that my kids will have a better life than I did. Even being divorced paying child support, I managed with a lot of help from family to get back into a house. My oldest son is 22, just finishing up college, he probably has the best chance of improving on what I managed to do.

A chance a decent job. I will define that as one that pays you enough to raise kids, possibly have a home, not worry about food everyday, purchase needed clothing and have some fun. The ability to do these things without using a credit card. The actual income of this dream job would depend on what part of the country you actually live in. Something that seems to be missed by a lot of people.

Education, Free education is not the answer. I know when I went to basically a trade school right out of high school, well honestly I was not ready to buckle down and study. I finally managed to go back to school when I was 33. That was a life changing experience for me. I went to school full time, it was a tech school, and worked 5-7 days a week, while helping to raise 2 children. It sucked financially, but we made it. Our marriage didn't but at least I finished school.

If you wonder why I think that people should work for their money that is why. I am still paying my student loan off. 4 more years. been out of school for 13 years now.

So I know if someone really wants to, they can work to improve themselves. I have more than doubled my income from what I was paid before I went to school.

Free education is not an education. going to school is only part of learning about life. The other part, the hard lesson is making the trade offs on what to pay, what to buy, so you can feed and house your children. That is a real life experience.

So once again I ask, what is the real value of something that is given to you, at no personal cost to you. I know what it is worth to me. Nothing, absolutely nothing.

That is not a lesson I want to teach my kids. I want them to value their education, value their hard ships and grow as a person due to them. I am not saying that I would not lend a helping hand, but that is a far cry from paying for the whole thing.

subnormal

...

So once again I ask, what is the real value of something that is given to you, at no personal cost to you. I know what it is worth to me. Nothing, absolutely nothing.

I think it's oftentimes a negative value because it creates a feeling of entitlement.

Unfortunately when yo have a government run by a two party system if one party isn't ready to work for the common good of all citizens you can be the best President in the world and you will go no where.It is my belief that the entire problem is the Republican Party to do the right thing for the people of this country.They seem to have a my way or the highway approach and that their way is the only way.That is why it is important to give the responsiblity of government to a one party rule.

uaw,

Wow, I couldn't disagree more. There is no way I want to see one party rule. Sure, it's great when "my party" has control, but what about when another party takes over? Would you have wanted 1 party rule with Cheney at the helm?

I also do not think the Republicans are trying to hurt the country or it's people. I think mainly what you are seeing is a group that has different views than you on how to solve our current problems. The problems this country faces are very complex, and despite what pundits on the right and left will tell you, there are not clear cut solutions - it's all a bunch of guess work. Yes, at times they are just playing politics - but I think both parties are equally guilty on that front.

UAW,

We have two parties to slow down change. Look what happened to Greece. They did everything that the people wanted. Look where they are now. As I posted, we need both sides to start telling us the truth, not what we want to hear. President Obama could learn to work better. Actually he is very good at giving speaches. I would vote for him if he stood up and laid it on the line. Told us flat out this is what we need to do. Both parties are like horse traders, in that if you do this for me, I will support you on this. We have to stop them from doing that.

When you are elected to government it is the people's business not the Party's business. It's that simple and if you cannot play by those rules or you wont play by those rule's you must go. In the past election cycle the Republican Congress has refused to do the work of the people. They have chosen to do the work of the party they have failed America.This President has continually reached out only to find himself standing alone .

The Republican Congress must go. And if the people stand together and tell the Politicians you will do as we say they will soon get the message.

I am not nor have i ever been in favor of one party rule iam in favor of telling the obstructionist's if you cant do it we will find someone who can reguarless of Party. It is esential to the health of our country that these people work for us

uaw,

Some of us think the Republican ideas, for the most part, are better for the country than Obama's ideas. It's not because we want the country fail - quite the opposite. I also think Obama wants the country to succeed - but I think his economic policies, although well intended, are very detrimental to the country as a whole.

So, I support attempts to block many of Obama's economic initiatives BECAUSE I care about the country and it's citizens - especially the poor, since they always take the brunt of economic downturns.

Note: I'm not saying my ideas are definitely right. As I said earlier, with something as large and complex as the US economy, nobody can truthfully say they know the ramifications of a particular course of action. However, I do have my beliefs and I will support politicians that support those beliefs (be they Republican, Democrat, or another party).

uaw puhhllleeeeaaaaasssssseeeeeee !

The Republican congress you moan about was elected as a DIRECT RESULT of Obama's arrogance, an attitude that "we can do ANYTHING we want to, because we won", we can do it by ourselves, we can lock Republicans out of health care discussions and we can ram this thing through by ourselves .......... and there's nothing in the world the Republicans can do to stop us" !

Oh, it made queen Nancy so proud she wet herself when saying "you'll have to read the bill to see what's in it".

That why the Democratic Party got "shellacked" in November, 2010. Has it sunk in yet uaw ??????

hmm, tax cuts...

millionaires...

up to 1500 Millionaires Pay no Federal Income Taxes:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/money_co/2011/08/nearly-1500-millionaires-paid-no-taxes-in-2009-says-irs.html

as in 0, or nothing, in Federal Income Taxes.

nice to be a millionaires and pay zippo Federal Income taxes...

I am talking about both sides and the middle of the Isle. Getting the economy going is a bipartisan endeavor we don't have Republican jobs and Democrat job we have jobs for our citizens and if you are elected to government to do a Job it doesn't make two flying shi,ts what side of the Isle your on.

When Mcconnel came out and said his only job was to get rid of Obama he should have been censored and shown the door. These clowns come in there and act as though it's their government not ours. Don't you think if these morons would have worked to pass legislation to help the people they wouldn't even have to campaign to keep the government.There is somthing fundementally wrong with the way they acted and what they did to our country and our people. we constantly here the Republican Party bitching and complain forget about Bush well forget about the Democrats that did nothing

Jim I understand the rock your under is getting to heavy

Hey, Republicans, do me a favor and Google the album cover to Nuge's album Love Grenade.

Still want his endorsement?

wow!! that cover kinda sums up Ted's view of womens rights!

Noid

I think this is a good place to put this particular piece about Old Nuge.

Like all the Chicken Hawks old Nuge is real brave and talks a bunch of trash that he can’t back up.

What old Nuge don’t want you to know is that when he had a chance to put his rhetoric into actions he literally sh!t his pants.

Check it out

http://www.rutlandherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060528/NEWS/605280335/1017/FEATURES08

And this Yahoo is the New Hero of the Far Right.

Looks like a plile of sh!t to me

wow!! that cover kinda sums up Ted's view of womens rights!

Any woman that would vote for a Republican, Well you know.

Don't forget about him becoming legal guardian to a 16 year old girl! Well hell, she was too young to marry!!

freakin PEDOPHILE!!

Mitt doesn't have a problem with that. Morman girls used to get married off at age 12

I'm fairly certain that if I had "implied" that I was going to kill George Bush or chop off his head, I'd still be in jail.

I'm fairly certain that if I had "implied" that I was going to kill George Bush or chop off his head, I'd still be in jail.

You'd just be on a 'hunting' trip with Dick Cheney.

There are a lot of middle class mom's that raise their children and go to work. Romney's problem is that he said that it's "work" for wealthy women to stay home and raise their kids, but poor women with children older than 2 need to "work" for their dignity.

Sounds like a double standard to me.

Cultures all over the world, including some Native American tribes have and still do eat dog. Some day if you're starving, and you look over at ol' Fido, You'll understand.

...like the flesh and sinew of a Cocker Spaniel sticking to Barack Obama's ribs.

You must find it comforting to know that the Romney's don't hang with people like that, right?

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/10/AR2006031001843.html

Mr. Malek hosted a birthday party/fund-raiser for Ann Romney on Monday.

Romney's problem is that he said that it's "work" for wealthy women to stay home and raise their kids

I bet Willard and Ann never ever changed any of their kids diapers.

I bet they've never eaten a friggin' DOG either. WTF is your point? Is that a new requirement for prez? "Must have changed diapers before.".......

I wonder if Ms Obama, as an accomplished career woman, ever had to do most of the menial child care chores either. I understand that her mother was literally hired as nanny for the girls, so that she could come to Washington with them and watch over her granddaughters.....That speaks to me of a long term type of arrangement, where perhaps Michelle benefitted from her mother being available to fulfill alot of those less than attractive parent duties...I don't see anyone lobbing boulders at the First Lady for her child care arrangements, which are certainly different than the average American. The average American will not be able to take their children all over the world and have them meeting world leaders either.

And for women who have chosen to be single mothers, and who do not have a support network of family to share responsibilities....well, once again, when do we take some personal responsibility for our choices? Helping somebody is one thing, but we have women in our country who firmly believe that once they have given birth, they have no other responsibility to do anything to enhance their lives or the lives of their children (Here is where the guilt to the rest of us comes in....Should we make the children suffer? Should we make the children live in poverty?) The bottom line is alot of adult people get to live without exerting any efforts because of children-perhaps they should be called the "anchor babies" of welfare.

IR Va-#3.3 hope more people link to the article, it's quite a picture of a chickenhawk, thanks.

Damage, can you lay off the dog thing? Sometimes you make good points (well for a right-winger anyway) but this is not one of those times.

Barack Obama lived in Indonesia as a child, after being adopted by his mother's new husband (which is why you guys always call him Barry Soetero). He was SIX YEARS OLD. He lived there from 6 to 10, during which time yes he ate dog, and many other exotic animals. It wasn't like he was in a cult or anything, that's what they do there! And again, this was when he was a kid, not yesterday. It's not like he's fattening up Bo to eat him or anything.

Different cultures, different values. Why is it OK to eat a Cow, but not a Dog anyway? Oh I see, to quote Dennis Leary, "We only want to save the CUTE animals." I don't eat dog, but I do eat meat. And yes it is murder. It's just arbitrary that we decide eating one animal is OK and want to judge people for other choices.

And before you say I'm being hypocritical since the left has judged Romney for the Dog carrier thing, I never jumped on that bandwagon. Was it stupid and cruel? Maybe, but I think we have more important issues to focus on than how Mitt Romney treated his dog in the early 80s!

Hindus don't eat cows because they are sacred animals. They don't disturb them very much either, even when they're right in the middle of the road blocking traffic (as I learned during my stay in India).

Why is it that people still think Republicans are better for the economy? They initiated the 10 years of Bush tax cuts, like that really prevented the economic crisis that has been ruining us since 2007. The Republicans are all over this GSA and $825,000 vacations(which should have hearings and some kind of verdict) but we never sent to jail the 3 individuals largely responsible for the invasion of Iraq at a measly 1 trillion dollars, let's see $825,000 divided by 1 trillion equals .00000825 % of the Iraqy debacle, no one went to prison over that. 10 years of Bush tax cuts =4 trillions that is missing from the debt. No one screams about that.

Uh.......NO........

Watching Mittens is like watching the movie "Groundhog Day". However, for Mitt, there is never a final outcome no matter how many times he has a chance for a"do over"!

When will Romney appear on an MSNBC interview??

Watching Mittens is like watching the movie "Groundhog Day"

Please don't tarnish the reputation of such a great movie by relating it to Romney :(

While everyone assumes that Romney will be the nominee, it isn't fact yet. The convention process has not been completed, and as such, he doesn't really have the right to make specific policy statements....the platform as well as the candidate is supposed to be a product of the convention process....To make specific statements now, might well be required to retract or change them after the convention has decided what the party platform includes, and then you would all be screaming that he lied, or flip flopped or whatever else.

.To make specific statements now, might well be required to retract or change them after the convention has decided what the party platform includes, and then you would all be screaming that he lied, or flip flopped or whatever else.

A general idea would be nice. I have yet to hear even that. All I hear is "Obama is bad" with no other alternative solutions presented.

Well said, Grimey! Since I'm older, I remember hurrying home from school, sometimes going to a friends house or friends to my house, to watch American Bandstand from the time it first it TV. It was great fun.

Rest in peace, Dick Clark; you gave us much to enjoy and did it with grace and a love of music which was the heart of Bandstand.

Grimey,

(Blushing here) I can remember watching Bandstand (and Soul Train) and trying to "shake my booty" like the kids on tv. I also can remember my folks laughing their heads off at my attempts. RIP Dick Clark!

dropped the aarp membership when they abandoned the best interest of their constituency in favor of a kickback, also known as a waiver, from President Obama's HHS.

james, till beating that dead horse, eh ? You must be just thrilled with the unfunded Medicare part D Bush foisted on us. Please get informed, the waivers were temporary.

I've had it with the right wing lies! Here is the truth about those waivers:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/05/17/truth-about-waivers-protecting-coverage-millions-americans

"I offer my opponents a bargain: if they will stop telling lies about us, I will stop telling the truth about them. " ~Adlai Stevenson

I've had it with the right wing lies! Here is the truth about those waivers:

I agree with you Cynthia. I just get tired of reading the right wing lies, and I have placed over 50% of them on ignore, and the list grows daily.

Somehow james, I doubt your comment for the simple reason, it's such a lie as Cynthia's Point proved. A mind is a terrible thing to waste, james, but you seem to do a great job of it by believing the lies, repeating the lies, and never looking for the truth.

Jody,

You refer to other people posting different opinions and statements as lies, basically calling them liars in a rather consistent fashion. It appears you regularly violate the supposed "ethics" for this site. How do you get by with that ? And when did you appoint yourself to a position of judgment over them ?? Are you God, or do you suffer from some kind of complex thinking you are ??

I see NOTHING WRONG or lying in his statement at #6.1 so you appear way out of line.

I have not joined AARP, although they sure as hell solicit a lot, for much the same reason as james. Are you now going to call me names also ?? Can you handle the truth when you hear it ?????

to my compassionate left leaning folks who drop the L word at the drop of the hat. I am wrong. HHS did not grant a waiver to AARP. The Obama Administration gave them a huge gift instead:

While the Obama Administration claims the health care law will protect individuals with pre-existing conditions from insurance company abuses, seniors were left out of the law’s supposed protections. In fact, the law exempts Medigap supplemental insurance policies from the prohibitions on pre-existing condition exclusions, so that AARP can continue to impose waiting periods on seniors, as it does currently.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, AARP -- which spent millions promoting a health care law notoriously unpopular among seniors -- generates a substantial portion of its revenues from the sale of these lucrative Medigap policies exempt from the law’s consumer protections.

So you are correct, no waiver.

One other point, AARP supported Obamacare because AARP was being "cut into the deal" so that they could sell medicines ..... and, gasp ! (don't tell the lefties) make profits doing so !!

In other words, AARP was bribed and SOLD OUT !

You can have him. He's a loser.

Careful Jody! The old fella might try to chop off your head!! LMAO

Hopefully, that old red neck Ted will go to jail.

UDunnoBro, that's why it's called "First Thoughts". Try not to limit yourself to just one, you might learn something along the way.;-)

Obama/Biden 2012

So true Cindy !!

Obama/Biden 2012

LOL! Welcome to First Read. You're obviously new.

President himself demonstrates disdain for all American values

What values are you talking about?

but he the the most visible symptom of the moral decay

Now you completely lost me. You're going to need to elaborate on this.

Once again I ask...

Aren't the Republicans supposed to be the party of PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY???

@Noid In light of the GSA and Secret Service scandals shouldn't we all be in favor for personal responsibility?

motoricker

More right wing lies, and I have placed over 50% of you folks on ignore, and the list grows daily.

That only shows your need to be right. Why could anyone else have any rational thoughts or idea's?

For example, President Obama's success in a free trade deal with Colombia was completely overshadowed by the scandals that occurred over the weekend. It should be pretty exciting economic news, but I doubt most people have read about it. Prostitution scandals sell more papers than free trade agreements.

("Paper" is a thing that news used to be written on.)

The GSA thing has nothing to do with President Obama, as much as I notice Fox News tries to connect it to him somehow.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/15/obama-us-colombia-free-trade-agreement_n_1427144.html

Sure it does. Obama believes growing government is the solution to everything. But government is corrupt at times and inefficient all the time. You have GSA officials blowing taxpayer dollars out their a$$, laughing about it, and pleading the fifth when questioned by Congress.

What will happen when all the new agencies and bureaus created under Obamacare are in place ? Who will be watching the money ? Where will the real accountability come into play ??

More government means more tax dollars to fund it and therefore government is parasitic in its financial nature, feeding off private businesses and individuals. The real waste shown by our government does not inspire confidence in raising taxes .... just to further feed that waste !

Clotho, Obama's success with the Colombian Free Trade Agreement? it has been sitting on his desk since day one. What is successful about sitting on it for 3 1/2 years.?

Her posting #1 or #2 is an ego thing. Something the dems have plenty of these days. She loves to be noticed.

Or, She could just be faster and more passionate about the issues

Unconcerned citizen, You mean you have an Akita and you don't even know how to spell the breed's name??

If you still haven't figured out how to post first on an article, well, too bad!

Unconcerned citizen, You mean you have an Akita and you don't even know how to spell the breed's name??

If you still haven't figured out how to post first on an article, well, too bad!

They are the low information folks that don’t have the brains that God gave a peanut butter sandwich.

[You mean you have an Akita and you don't even know how to spell the breed's name??]

Well, it DOES go right along with the signs seen at Tea Party rallies like:

"Govermen, Keep u r hands off of my Medcare!" and

"Get a Brain! Morans"

Lmao, Mickey You should see some of the resumes I get from people graduating from "elite" universities. Hell I just read a SOW from a director in France (a grad of Cambridge, yes that Cambridge). It was 6 pages long and had 13 spelling or grammar errors. Some of the smartest people I know from New England sound like idiots when they "tawlk"!

You moronic Republicans need to really get on your high horse and rail against the dropping cost of gas. That must be President Obama's fault too, right?

Oh, and Obama never ever has his question and answer time setup? Perception is always in the eyes of the beholder........In my view, the dems and Obama are the Party of No Clue.

And why not Tom.....your side has been doing it to Bush long before Obama took office. You know, for example, Katrina and Fema, etc, etc, etc, etc.

Tom

I'm feeling kinda paranoid. You replied to my comment and talked about moronic Republicans. PLEASE say you weren't referring to me!!!!! Proud to be a Dem!!!!!!!

GC - get yur head out of the sand and go towards the light.

I am sure he just screwed up, Dee......something the dems never do, huh?

Definitely not you Dee. It's those Republican rats that wake up each day and make crap up like trying to equate the Democrats response to Bush's Katrina disaster as petty. They can say high gas prices are Obama's fault but when they start to come down, what do you hear? Silence.

GC- yeah, we screw up. But we admit it, unlike the party you seem to support. You ever get dizzy from all the spinning?

Tom

Whew! Thanks. I know what you mean about the silence. Kinda like GC right now.

Tom, Gas here was up to $4.19 today outside of Detroit.

Wow. Down in the southwest corner of the state is $3.79. Few days ago it was $3.99 though.

STEVE: Yes, total waste. And you want to see waste on a grand scale??? I suggest you check out the Pentagon. They wrote the book on waste, fraud and abuse. Funny thing though, the Right always complains about waste as regards social programs but never a word about that sacred cow, the military.

Waste in any large organization is inevitable. It's like the weather, everyone bitches about it but no one can do anything. Followed to it's logical conclusion, using the mindset of the GOP, we should disband out entire military because there is waste within it's ranks. Yes, disband it and then privatize it like Bush and Cheney nearly did in Iraq.

No one likes it, we should do everything humanly possible to minimize it, knowing you will never be able clean it up completely. And BTW, I've seen corporate waste on a grand scale, that in some instances can put "Big Government" to shame.

Always worrying about someone else's money.

Sure thing, just keep stroking it.

The list of failures of this administration is enough to give any challenger an orgasm.

I think road warrior is thinking back four years to a completely different administration. You know, the one that caused this whole stinking mess of a economy or Is President Obama finishing up his second term and he really is responsible. I guess I missed something or he's losing his grip on reality.

We didn't hire a new coach just to keep losing.

We didn't hire a new coach just to keep losing.

Maybe we should recruit new players.

Tom ,Yreka

I think road warrior is thinking back four years to a completely different administration. You know, the one that caused this whole stinking mess of a economy or Is President Obama finishing up his second term and he really is responsible. I guess I missed something or he's losing his grip on reality.

But it's politically incorrect to blame Bush for the current mess, even though it's his fault. The Republican logic is that if someone runs you over with their car and breaks your legs, you blame the doctor for not being able to get you back to walking without a crutch fast enough.

Ruken,

I'm not a Cowboys fan, but I liked it when they fired the old coach and Jimmy Johnson immediately traded all the big-name, selfish players and won the Super Bowl with new players one year later. Coach Obama kept all the old players and blames the old coach for his dismal record.

I'm not a Cowboys fan, but I liked it when they fired the old coach and Jimmy Johnson immediately traded all the big-name, selfish players and won the Super Bowl with new players one year later. Coach Obama kept all the old players and blames the old coach for his dismal record.

So you're agreeing with the 'new players' comment?

Houston,

Obama IS the doctor. He badly misdiagnosed the injury and made it worse. Now we have to amputate.

No Houston, but you do blame him for giving you a staff infection, requiring 16 IV antibiotic treatments.

Yes Ruken, we need new players, and it's the head coach's job to do so. I'm afraid it's too late. The fans have lost patience.

Yes Ruken, we need new players, and it's the head coach's job to do so. I'm afraid it's too late. The fans have lost patience.

Of course they have.

My only problem is that I'm looking around for head coach candidates, and I can't find anyone that would get me more wins than the person I currently have, the pool of candidates leaves much to be desired.

Therefore with no other choice, I have to stick with my current head coach for another season (hopefully with new players we can at least have a slightly better record) and then hope that next off-season the pool of candidates for head coach is better.

Ruken,

No college or pro team I know keeps a losing coach because there isn't any better. They fire the loser first and look for a new coach afterwards.

No college or pro team I know keeps a losing coach because there isn't any better. They fire the loser first and look for a new coach afterwards.

Not always a smart decision.

Just look at the Vikings.

jollyoldsoul1

No Houston, but you do blame him for giving you a staff infection, requiring 16 IV antibiotic treatments.

You must be talking about Doctor G. W. Bush, who inherited a budget surplus from his predecessor and left the next guy in line a Great Recession, a huge deficit, and two miserable wars. You dimwits all voted for Bush and you don't have the courage to take responsibility for the horrendous results of your bad decisions.

Road Warrior-252445

Obama IS the doctor. He badly misdiagnosed the injury and made it worse. Now we have to amputate.

Not too good at analogies, are you? If you were, you'd have noticed that by comparing Obama to the doctor, you've accidentally admitted that Bush was the guy who ran over you with his car according to the analogy I made.