agree.

Well put, Feisty!

Good Morning Feisty!

There should be no doubt in any-ones mind that President Obama is the obvious choice to continue to lead us to a more prosperous point than we have seen under the previous administration.

The GOP continues to falter with any feasible plan to help the average American.

The democrats continue to fight to resolve the problems that Wall Street help create

The President and the democratic party have sent numerous bills to Congress to help the elderly, poor, middle class, women and they have been met with opposition at every turn by the GOP.

We don't need opposition. We need a platform that the President continues to build.

The coming election is not just about re-electing president Obama. It is also about ridding Congress of the current crop of obstructionists that occupy it. We need more democrats in Congress w/President Obama to bring us into the prosperity that this country used to enjoy.

Thanks Chris & Amy!

Sometimes, less is best! ☺

Top of the morning to you Brian!

Feisty,

You are 100% correct!

Well what a silly question! President Obama has for the past three and half years worked tirelessly to make life in so many ways better for all citizens. His calm patient manner in dealing with the horrendous problems left to us by an arrogant yet, incompetent administration is nothing short of admirable. Couple that with an virulent, opposition who plotted from day one to do everything they could, and they have, to thwart his efforts to help the country it is remarkable how much he has accomplished.

None of his critics have any solutions, no plans to help speed things along, nothing, nada to improve the country. The republicans do not deserve even to have a majority in Congress, much less than the Presidency.

Phew....you said it friends!

The GOP Bully Party speaks only for the very affluent.

Totally agree with both Feisty and GBM. I don't agree with President Obama all the time, but as between him and Mitt Romney, it's simply not a contest.

Mitt's 15 minutes of fame are just about up. When the debates finally begin, the choice will become crystal clear.

All the money in the world couldn't turn Sarah Palin into a silk purse, and it won't do it for Mitt Romney, either.

Yeah, Obama is super awesome.

But I wonder, my fine libbie friends, of the two most recent scandals to hit Obama, which do you find more troubling?

1. His outing of the British Al Qaida spy for cheap political gain; or

2. His use of power to ensure that his favorite golf buddy became a 'six million dollar man?'

And to your point AM - If Mitt's 15 minutes are in fact just about up, how do you 'splain the poll trends? And how about the most recent CBS poll [which of course used nearly identical samples as the month before] and what it showed about Obama's pull with women? Just Juila fail, or run of the mill blue hackery?

Oh and AM, what are we to make of the surging of Mr. Walker?

enjoy your bankrupt country

GermamGem,

One state at a time, and California as always, will lead the way.

Yo GingerBread - better off now, or 4 years ago?

And how is that Right track/wrong track poll looking these days?

Why hell GM - the fine regulators can't even control JP Morgan. In fact since Obama and crew foisted Dodd-Frank upon us we have gotten John Corzine and MF Global and now JP Morgan.

Yep, bang up job that 'tireless' worker has done.

How many rounds of golf during this period?

The california crisis should be enough to wake people up, but as you can see on these posts, it didn't.

None of his critics have any solutions, no plans to help speed things along, nothing, nada to improve the country

As they demonstrate here daily!

The Obama bashing is only going to get them so far - sooner or later they will have to enlighten America on why the bully & bigot Willard would be better...

Contrary to popular belief - character does count!

I wonder - does Feisty think that Obama's 'solution' was his last [and wholly rejected] budget?

If not that, then what.

And that for anyone, as I am well aware the old gal cannot answer that.

Just no there, there.

lmao, now all of sudden character counts

The california crisis should be enough to wake people up, but as you can see on these posts, it didn't.

California's problems began when their manufacturing base moved to China. Romney knows quite a bit about outsourcing - he's sent more than one American company's jobs overseas. If you want to see a manufacturing revival in the U.S. stick with President Obama. He's been working his tail off, promoting American companies since he was elected: witness the fact GM is now the second largest automobile company in the world.

As California goes, so goes the nation.

Amy,

California problems go way beyond the outsourcing of jobs to China.

For the eighth consecutive year, Chief Executive, an on-line publication that surveys business leaders across the country has once again named California as the worst place in the nation to do business.

Amy - California's problems began when their manufacturing base moved to China

Do tell Amy.

Care to elaborate on that?

The US decline began when we outsourced jobs elseware. Not just California.

Bush and Clinton's 'Service-Oriented Economy' is malarky.

Re-install Glass-Steagal, invoke Protectionism and re-invoke New Deal policies such as large public works.

But I'm not the president, nor senator, nor congressman. I don't get to make those calls. Only kibbitz.

so amy, the liberal tax and spend has nothing to do with that? okaaaaaaaay.

go ahead and 'stick with obama', you'll be sticking it to the taxpayers who are about tapped out. do you have any idea the amount of 1%er leaving the U.S.? its at an alarming rate. and they take their money with them amy dear. it is and will continue to leave a big hole in the tax base. do the math.

Well imagine that...Spankster with his brand new computer and solutions to America's economic problems brought to you by the GermanGem..Who believes the US is on the path to ruin via the Cali experience. And of of course let's not forget Arizona's resident junior senator John Kyle who said this morning. "No one would be complaining if Chase had won their massive hedge fund bet and made 3 billion." This is like saying Spanky's wife wouldn't be pissed if had had gone to Las Vegas, played the blackjack tables and won $1000.00 instead of losing the mortgage money.

Mind numbing....

I understand completely now:

Gut education..

Let Wall Street do what it wants.

Let "traders" run the economy..

AND..Let's export more American manufacturing Jobs to our biggest creditor China!

I get it now.

the liberal tax and spend has nothing to do with that?

As opposed to the neocon borrow & spend policies?

President Obama was not the one who opened up the Chinese VISA card...

WCA: Do tell Amy.

Care to elaborate on that?

She heard it on "Rachel", so it must be true.

Ah Torpedo - it's so early to be that grumpy.

And funny thing is - once back in the early '90s, when money was tight I did have a Vegas bender, during which I lost a butt load of cash.

Thing is - it was my money. Not like when Obama chucks our money to his pal Whitaker, or the investors in Solyndra and 4 squared.

But seriously - are you saying Cali is not doomed?

And just how, in a post Dodd-Frank world did JP Morgan lose $2 billion? We know that COrzine got the regulators to look away, but Morgan?

Why it's almost like the regulators are monkeys.

And Tek - why not just have the gov. hire all the unemployed?

Easy right? Not so much.

Amy - think regulation and taxation.

Wait, forgot who I was talking to. nevermind.

Sorry Spank...Chase was betting with "investors" money and to a lessor extent the gubments money which means that it was "my" money since I own stock in Chase and pay Federal taxes. I am "shocked'' at your feeble analogy. Oliver Wendall Holmes would be proud or should I say William Jennings Bryan if you get my drift.

The issue is Spank we live in a Gramm Leach Biley World which Dodd Frank did nothing to resolve.

I'm all with "throwing the money changers out of the temple" and returning to a Glass Steagle world.

But then again I doubt that either you or most of the conservative posters have the slightest understanding as to why the economy tanked in 2008. Why hell you probably don't even know what a "Credit default Swap" is now do you? Can I buy an insurance policy on your mortgage Spanky? What say?

Amy - California's problems began when their manufacturing base moved to China

I heard it on the news last night, and googling the topic today, I found that California lost a third of its manufacturing industries from 2001 to 2008. That's a loss of $5 billion in tax revenues a year and 600,000 jobs.

I say you are one super smart, although always grumpy dude Torpedo.

Come on now, be happy - you get the privilege of only paying $3.80 per gallon for gas. All I know is I can't put credit default swaps in my tank, and that Havasu was a ghost town in summer '08, as were the real estate offices everywhere.

But sure, you keep blaming BUUUSHHHH.

Oh and say, didn't Obama say he'd fix it all by now? THat'd he'd cut the deficit in half by now?

Oh well, now that we got a actual socialist in office in France maybe we are all good. Although we got one in charge here in Cali, yet things 'unexpectedly' continue to get worse.

huh.

Oh Amy you are so very precious.

Now google the number of businesses Cali loses each week. The look into the regulation and tax schemes we have, as compared to say Idaho and Texas.

And really $5 billion is a drop in the bucket. In fact and for fun google the amount we pay in Welfare benefits each year.

Astounding, right?

Spanky: But seriously - are you saying Cali is not doomed?

California is in a death spiral. The roadways exiting the state are getting worn out while the roadways entering the state are in pristine shape. You wonder how many billions it will take to bailout California. Think Obama and his good friend and Wall Street genius Timmy Geithner have come up with a number?

A contrast between two bankrupt states:

New Jersey governor Chris Christie had a $10.7 billion dollar deficit. Christie closed the deficit without raising taxes and now is getting ready for a 10% across the board tax cut. California governor Jerry Brown faces a $16 billion dollar deficit, and paid billions for a high-speed train to nowhere (anyone know what name Pietro is posting under these days?). Christie canceled a proposed commuter rail tunnel between NY and NJ saying it was too expensive.

On the "millionaires " tax, governor Brown says all "millionaires" making more than $250,000 (???) will need to pay more in taxes by moving the top rate from 10.3% to 13.3%. A similar bill sent to Christie's desk by the NJ legislator was vetoed.

Governor Brown has given state union workers more collective bargaining rights which result in higher costs to the taxpayers. Governor Christie has made government workers pay more for their health care and pensions.

NJ has a ways to go, but is on the path to fiscal recovery. California looks to be heading for a fiscal meltdown.

Source: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304371504577404503988018824.html

Well, I guess if you heard it on the news and googled it on the internet, then it's settled.

Perhaps you can get a job teaching Macro-Economics now at UCLA.

Look at the electoral college polling, President Obama-253, Willard "Sweeny Mitt" Rombot-170. No contradictions there.

As to suitability, remember what Grover Norquist said at the last C.P.A.C. convention; "Pick a Republican with enough working digits to handle a pen to become President of the United States. We don't need a President to tell us what direction to go. We know what direction to go. We want the Ryan budget. We just need a President to sign this stuff. The leadership...will be coming out of the House and the Senate."

The summer doldrums are just beginning. Labor Day will concentrate the mind wonderfully, count on it.

Rombot.Has.Nothing.

Obama/Biden 2012

JoAnnaSmith1 and WCA

Did you guys know that if California were a nation unto itself, it would have the eighth largest economy in the world?

Did you know that California accounts for 13% of the national GDP? And in contrast, New Jersey accounts for 3.42% of the national GDP. So, I know comparing California and New Jersey fits into your rightwing partisanship, but it really is a pretty meaningless exercise.

California has huge budget problems, due to losing a third of its manufacturing base before the recession even began in 2008. New Jersey has it's own problems.

And where would you rather live? Me, I'd rather live anywhere but New Jersey. (Sorry, No Jo!)

JoAnnaSmith1

She heard it on "Rachel", so it must be true

As opposed to FOX NOISE; what else could it be but real?

8 Reasons Fox Is Not a News Organization

http://www.alternet.org/media/143456/8_reasons_fox_is_not_a_news_organization

PR for the GOP? Yes. Platform for right-wing hatemongers? Definitely. Freak show? Absoutely! But a news organization? Definitely not.

Even before Barack Obama was elected to the presidency, Rupert Murdoch had declared war on him via the personalities of Fox News Channel, a subsidiary of Murdoch's media conglomerate, News Corp.

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

You do know Rupert Murdoch is in a world of trouble? Does phone hacking ring a bell to you; Sniff1?

As a Massachusetts resident I will tell you that I would not trust Romney as far as I can throw him.

If anyone has a corner on lies...it's Barak Hussein Obama.

Amen Red!!

:o)

MRWSR: if you don't believe anything you read here or anything ever put out by MSNBC may I suggest that you just leave. And guess what? We don't believe you either.

I believe the eletion will produce a winner and we are bond to the process and its outcome

WOW! Were you able to come to that monumental conclusion all by yourself MRWSR?

Your post indicates that you have nothing to say that would benefit the GOP or Romney. That coupled with your apparent dislike for someone who posts intelligent and passionate support for the president (Feisty) and the entire MSNBC site only proves that you have nothing intelligent to offer here.

Maybe this would be a good time to take your leave. Perhaps you could find a site that advocates obstructionism for progress where you would have a better fit. May I suggest FOX? They are much the same as you.

Why post Fiesty,

Because I have the same right to make my voice heard as you.

it seems it is for nothing other than your ego and attempt at making yourself above others

PUHLEEZE!!!

Enough with the envy already in post after post of yours!

Don't you have anything else to bitch about?

Will not call it enny. Fiesty just still a bit taken back by the fact that you think you crap don't stink.

Y'all prove over and over that this a biased. But cry foul over any other bias that is out there.

Nomoresameo,

What would you like to see posted?

That is my point here, it does not matter what is posted. I the real world, it should be a debate of ideas, facts and beliefs. Not opinion and emotion.

To: Feisty, you are right girlfriend, you have the same rights that we all have and that includes Independents and Republicans and Conservatives also. So why don't you walk the talk. .

I have seem some facts on the left and some on the right, Just remember that it is us the middle that will decide this race one way or another. As the time has Evolved so have I and at this moment just because of the weight of facts against President Obama. Old Mitt has my vote since he is more to the middle than our President has displayed.

That coupled with your apparent dislike for someone who posts intelligent and passionate support for the president (Feisty)

HAHAHAAAAAAHAAAAHAAAAA!!! Wow! What a belly laugh! intelligent? HAAAHAAAHAHAHAAAHAHAHAAAHAHAAAAA!

I guess in your book it is so intelligent to have her call anyone she disagrees with any name under the sun! Most insulting poster I've EVER come across but you consider that intelligent... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAHAHAAAAA!

Thank you for that laugh! It actually felt good!

Here's an idea for you nomoresameo - next time bend over to kiss her a$$.... she'd like that!

Yeah - that is a good one: using intelligent to describe Feisty.

Why it's almost like he unfamiliar with the body of Feisty's work.

Poor guy - it seems he got here too late for the 'Lib R Us' round table.

What are you guys? The mean girls club? Usually when people speak with such disdain, it's because they really don't know what they're talking about. It's a defense mechanism. It's okay, we understand. I can see having a godlike figure ripped from the cluches of his believers as somewhat frightening, but you'll get over it. Obama has to go! He needs to start paying for his own $10,000,000.000 vacations.

Smalltownintheusa

I remember when President Obama was elected, just as the economy was tanking, the housing bubble bursting, and two wars were in full swing, comedian Wanda Sykes joked "sure, give the worst job in America to the Black guy."

Who would have thought we'd be out of Iraq by now, Osama would be dead, our reputation world-wide revived, regime change in Libya and Eygpt, with us on the right side for a change, and all three American auto companies profitable again for the first time since 2006?

The question in my mind is not, should we replace Obama, but, how much of a raise can we give him to get him to stay?

Bush took 77 flights to his crawford ranch.

If Obama ever gets even close to that, i'll call for his ouster as well.

In the meantime, better pass the hat for the latest Republican President's vacation expenses. Those have yet to be re-imbursed.

He needs to start paying for his own $10,000,000.000 vacations

One more time for the tin foil hat crowd:

Those who criticize the cost of Obama’s Christmas vacation don’t want you to
know that George W. Bush spent at least $20 million taxpayer dollars just on
flights to his ranch in Crawford.

The right wing has been outraged at the four million dollar plus price tag
for Obama’s family Christmas vacation, and they constantly hold George W. Bush
up as an example of how thrifty a president should be when going on vacation.

The problem is that W. wasn’t thrifty. He was the most expensive vacation
president in US history. Not only did Bush spend more days
on vacation than any other president, but he used Air Force One more often
while on vacation than any other president.

During Bush’s two terms, the cost of operating Air Force One ranged from
$56,800 to $68,000
an hour. Bush used Air Force One 77 times to go to his ranch in Crawford, TX.
Using the low end cost of $56,800, Media Matters calculated
that each trip to Crawford cost taxpayers $259,687 each time, and $20 million
total for Bush’s ranch flights.

If cost of the flight was the only expense involved to taxpayers Bush’s
vacations would still seem rather economical, but there is more, much more.
Unlike the Obama’s $4
million Christmas vacation price tag, which includes the cost of everything
from transportation to accommodations for the First Family, the White House
staff, and the White House press corps, Bush’s numbers only include the cost of
flying the president to Crawford. The cost of transporting and accommodating
staff, media, friends and family is not included in Bush’s vacation numbers.

In response to growing criticism that the president was on vacation too much,
the Bush administration adopted the Rovian tactic of scheduling, “work events,”
while the president was in Crawford so that they could claim that President
Bush’s vacations were working vacations. During his
infamous pre-9/11 August vacation, the AP reported that, “Using the ranch as
a base, he will promote White House initiatives in Rocky Mountain National Park,
Denver, Albuquerque, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh and San Antonio.”

Bush’s
“working vacations” cost taxpayers a small fortune in travel costs because
President Bush and his staff would make day trips on Air Force One all across
the country in order to counter the criticism that he was on vacation too often.
For eight years, Bush essentially used Air Force One as his personal vacation
taxi service.

Read the entire story here; http://www.politicususa.com/

Amy - we know you live in dreamland, but wow! In retrospect, tell me how much all this cost the American public? Does something near $6 TRILLION come to mind?

Iraq was planned by Bush... all Obama had to do was keep to the plan (some accomplishment for a president). Osama was a 50 cent bullet. The regime change in Libya and Egypt - let's ponder that for a moment... You actually support the Muslim Brotherhood? You think they are a benevolent organization? You actually believe we should be supporting them? How much do YOU hate Israel?

Let's not include Ford in your assessment of all three auto companies being profitable... they led by example without government intervention. GM still owes it's former stockholders a couple of billion dollars in lost value.. but that doesn't count for anything, does it Amy?

You can give Obama your entire paycheck... I want to see him unemployed.

So you really don't have a real argument for Obama, you just think he's better than the other guy that used to be there. Bush isn't running for election, so let's move on.

You know Spanky you and the others talk a good game but do you read what you write, I don't see the difference you spew crap just like everyone else and then try to stand on your pedestal and pretend to be better than anyone else. You need a come to earth moment, your just like the rest of us. No better no worse, you have an opinion which you voice with the same tone as everyone else here so what. You feel better about yourself when you insult someone, prove how big a man you are when no one can see you or reach out and touch you. Ya so brave.

tis the season,

I agree with you and I have several times taken myself down that road. But have to bite my tongue when y'all hail Fiesty and those that are liker her. Never tell them to lower the crap or be civil. But do understand you post and wish the conservatives on here show some restraint. Including myself.

Wow Tis - go after posters that criticize the liberals, but never say anything about the hateful speech of the liberals you are trying to defend. Remove the blinders. It just happens that those on the right can see through the hypocracy of the left. Liberals speak love over anything they deem to be important but show hatred towards those on the right. In other words they speak out of both sides of their mouth. Just because those on the right point that out, you decide that we are not playing fair. Too damn bad.

Tis - not better, but very different than most here.

Unlike you I run a business, I employ people, I understand the law and the tax code.

Frankly many here tend to insult themselves, and thankfully in a very amusing way.

So Tis - you ever had to make a payroll? Ever had to deal with government over ridiculous regulation?

Like I have said to Amy - imagine what life would be like if we were all like you. If the tax base all made less than $75k per year.

Tis, what would our country look like if we were all like you? If the total fed tax revenue was under $1 trillion? If there were not the 1% to pay in 50%?

And hey reach out and touch all you want. I love it.

You feel better about yourself when you insult someone, prove how big a man you are when no one can see you or reach out and touch you

I don't know if you noticed but, SpankME has a tendency to ONLY bully liberal women...

Wonder why that is?

Speaks volumes about his character.

Gentlemen I see your reading comprehension is down today, "you spew crap just like everyone else" missed were I separated anyone from that. The point is both sides can make it personal but to me there seems to be more vitriol comments as you demonstrated above from the right. Not exclusively but over 50% of it. MRWSR you have stated on several occasions you want a civil discourse of opinions, but how is that going to happen if even you travel the dark road. Brianb you very seldom have anything constructive to add to this site beyond insults oh and I have done my share but I have also tried to voice a civil opinion only to be met with your crap. Spanky, you keep trying to put yourself above everyone else simply because you are an attorney and employer, problem with that is it can make you part of the problem not solution. Are you always right in court or do you lose sometimes, does that make you always right here. Any chance you have some of the same problems Mitt has and not being able to understand the common person, and do not try to tell me you are the common person, your profession stops that dead in your tracks. You have issues related to your position and profession and it shows when you start assuming no one does or can do what you do. Sorry your not that special, this country has more attorneys than it needs. So to the three amegos try sitting in a lower chair and if you want real conversation show us how big you are and try having a true debate.

Tis,

I admitted to letting emotion get the better of me. At least I admit that. But to claim y'all arethe civil ones is bit of an exaggeration.

If we were to have a debate on issues, y'all claim bad source. If I show facts that go against anything you believe, its labeled a lie.

There is a huge divide and see no future compromise. But in the world we live in now, I will do all I can to reach as many as I can to help stop, what I feels is the wrong path for this country. I expect you will do the same.

Tis - You may never see value in my comments because your ideology is dynamically opposed to mine. I really don't care. You become offended when I point out deficiencies in yours or others statements believed to be true but I can see the ideology divide.

As far as your ideology being civil... that is laughable. You laugh at the slams, I laugh at the attempts. Liberals are anything but civil. They are angry because we don't support your president. Liberals can't see beyond their noses when it comes to Obama. Let me point out to you... if Obama is re-elected and does his dirty agenda as most of us on the right predict, what he enacts will effect you just as harshly. He will not care what your ideology is... he will spread equally among us that what pleases him. I can't help it you don't see it, nor care to. Liberals in general refuse to take notice. All they care about is that they have supported him... and he doesn't care a wit about it.

MRWSR, I stated that both sides make it personal so I am not claiming the left is civil all the time by any stroke of the pen. I try to stay civil but like you do not always succeed. Its basic instinct to strike back when attacked. I try to always respond to your post in kind when I feel I have something to say. Yes I will and am trying to stop what I see as the wrong path as you will and we most likely will not agree on all things but maybe we can agree on some and suggest a way to correct those things.

You're trying to create an illusion, Spanky.

It's never been about regulation. Always demand.

Regulations affect my operating costs.

Demands affects my revenues.

Revenues > Operating Costs is a profitable business model.

The entrepeneur community will always find a way to create that simple equation.

The government made it a lot easier by allowing us to choose under which regulations we'd operate (China vs. USA).

But even if they quit outsourcing, the entrepeneurs would find a way to make it work.

Brianb, you will never get anywhere when you simply attack the other side "Liberals can't see beyond their noses when it comes to Obama. Let me point out to you... if Obama is re-elected and does his dirty agenda as most of us on the right predict," what makes you right and the left wrong, you do not have any middle ground nor will you see any middle ground. If you want a good debate then you as well as the other side have to stop attacking as you just did. Its really that simple, but you are one of the worst offenders on the right for this. MRWSR does try and does succeed at getting a clean debate were I do not think you can let go of the hate long enough to accomplish that.

Who is "O-Bumbles"?

Who is Da Noid?

Maybe they realized this is an election year and absolutely everything the President does or says is interpreted through how it affeects the super duper, ungodly expensive, ratings-garnering, all-engaging, theatrical media show we in the U.S. like to call the Race for the Presidency!

Who is Da Noid?

I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together.

Goo-goo-g'joob!!!

You have finally answered that age old question Da Noid!!! YOU are the Walrus! HA!

Amen Ramboet!! President Obama 2012

Good Ol Dog, Please tell me how many jobs has Romney created? I need a real number!!

Great points Raboet.

I think that person should rename from Good Ol' Dog to Stray Rabid Dog.

In either case the entire canine community would be taking offense to him using reference to them.

Pray tell me how you think coming out in support of gay marriage is going to help the president politically?

1. Energize his base

2. Increase and help fundraising

3. Create social wedge issue

Right out of the GWB campaign playbook of 2004.

And the poll was published by CBS/NY Times, not Morning Joe

Good points Alan. However, don't you think it also hurts him politically. if you look at the polls, a vast majority of people over the age of 50 do not support gay marriage and its a proven fact that more of the older generation vote than the younger.

The republicans seem to think its solving the problem that Romney is having with the evangelicals.

Hey Tommy - tell me how many jobs Obama has created... and while you are at it, tell me how he did it...

Good points Alan. However, don't you think it also hurts him politically. if you look at the polls, a vast majority of people over the age of 50 do not support gay marriage and its a proven fact that more of the older generation vote than the younger.

I think he saw the poll numbers from NC and decided he couldn't win the state. I also think as they mentioned on MJ this morning that his numbers are cratering in red states, where the gay marriage issue would not help anyway. I think it will help in Colorado and Virginia. The interesting state as they mentioned this morning is Iowa, which is a strange mix of evangelical and progressive.

Either way its an issue to excite the base. He is using the same tactics as Bush in 2004 and that requires firing up the base for volunteers and turnout.

Either way its an issue to excite the base.

Tell me Alan, what are Willard's plans to fire up his base when the majority can't stand him?

Hey Brian-999431: When someone asks a question people usually try to answer. However, when they don't have a decent response they tend to answer with another question, which is exactly what you did.

When the president took office we were losing approx. 800,000 jobs a month thanks to the policies of GWB. We have now seen 26 months straight of private job growth thanks to some of the policies that the president has managed to get past the obstructionists in congress. The stimulus did in fact work although it would have worked much better if the republicans allowed it to have been bigger. Although you may not like it, there have been over 4 million new private sector jobs created since the president took office. Unfortunately, we have also lost over 600,000 public sector jobs thanks to the ruthlessness of the republicans

When the president took office, things were bad but the #1 priority for the republicans was to make sure the president was a failure. They want him to be a one-term president and they will even bring the country down to achieve it. That my friends, is anything but patriotism.

Tell me Alan, what are Willard's plans to fire up his base when the majority can't stand him?

For the Republican base

"I'm not Obama"

For the rest of the country

"You've had 4 years of this guy and he can barely work with a Democratic congress. Elect me and I will get things done regardless of who is running congress".

I'm no supporter of the fiscally irresponsible GWB but exactly what policies do you associate with this statement?

When the president took office we were losing approx. 800,000 jobs a month thanks to the policies of GWB.

Almost everything GWB did from a fiscal sense was Keynesian. Tax cuts with no spending cuts, two wars on borrowed money, unpaid entitlement. Clinton was in charge when Glass-Steagall was repealed, Clinton signed NAFTA and both parties pushed Fannie and Freddie to underwrite sub-prime mortgages (on encouragement from Fanny and Freddie lobbyists). So again what Bush policies led to 800K+ job losses?

Alan: The president definitely needs to get boots on the ground this election for sure. I will be doing my part and all the presidents supporters MUST do the same.

For the Republican base

"I'm not Obama"

Good luck with that! lmao

"You've had 4 years of this guy and he can barely work with a Democratic congress. Elect me and I will get things done regardless of who is running congress".

In other words you believe bull@!$%# is going to get bodies into the voting booths! Double LMAO!

Not in the year 2012 buddy, not in your wildest dreams...

And that Alan is the unfortunate reality for Obama.

You nailed it.

Bad year to be an incumbent.

Spanky the only thing nailed is your devine ignorance and you are welcome to it.

Not in the year 2012 buddy, not in your wildest dreams...

Nothing to do with my dreams. 67% of the country thought his gay marriage stance was political. He is no longer the big "hope", but just another politician. As Mike Barnacle said this morning, trying to portray Romney as scary just won't work. He looks and acts the part and he's not scary. The question is will people give him the chance. The more Obama panders to his base the more likely the people outside of Obama's base will look to give Romney a chance.

It will all come down to turnout, and if the voter ID laws are as effective as the left seems to think then they could be the deciding factor.

and if the voter ID laws are as effective as the left seems to think then they could be the deciding factor

You mean the voter supression laws?

Sweet dreams Alan... lol

Ramboet comments with my responses in bold:

Hey Brian-999431: When someone asks a question people usually try to answer. However, when they don't have a decent response they tend to answer with another question, which is exactly what you did. I did, but the question asked was loaded. When a question is asked to answer a question, it is a response mechanism to say that the original question did not contain enough supporting information to garner an answer. Romney is not the president, Obama is... therefore the only appropriate response was to ask the same question of the person in charge.

When the president took office we were losing approx. 800,000 jobs a month thanks to the policies of GWB. I disagree. We were losing that many jobs due to the failure in the housing and banking sectors. Those two sectors were controlled by congressional committees controlled by democrats. 15 months after the democrats took control of congress in 07, those sectors failed. To blame it on Bush is completely partisan.

We have now seen 26 months straight of private job growth thanks to some of the policies that the president has managed to get past the obstructionists in congress. You have to be more specific Ramboet. What specific policies were enacted by Obama that got the ball rolling? Remember, republicans took control of the house in January of 11.

The stimulus did in fact work That's funny... even Obama admitted that shovel jobs were not there and that was the main reason he requested the money. I think you might want to do some more research on how much the stimulus will cost us in interest payments over the time it will take to pay it back... tell me then how successful the stimulus was dollar wise. although it would have worked much better if the republicans allowed it to have been bigger. So your recommendation is to have borrowed even more money for non-existent shovel ready jobs. Although you may not like it, there have been over 4 million new private sector jobs created since the president took office. It is not a matter if I would like it or not... it just isn't true. While the job losses have stopped and some jobs have rebounded, the number is no where near 4 million. You have to stop reading ThinkProgress for your information. I found several links that contradict their claims.

Unfortunately, we have also lost over 600,000 public sector jobs thanks to the ruthlessness of the republicans Here you have to be more specific... how have the republicans caused these jobs to be lost? I need to see the facts behind your statement. I will not accept reporting by ThinkProgress as you won't accept reporting by NewsMax. They are both way to partisan.

When the president took office, things were bad but the #1 priority for the republicans was to make sure the president was a failure. They want him to be a one-term president and they will even bring the country down to achieve it. That my friends, is anything but patriotism. Obama was known before he took office. His history and his agenda was not a secret. He forced through Obamacare and the majority of this country is opposed to it. It took a congress that was totally democrat to achieve this. Another thing - How about Obama's statement that the republicans can sit in the back of the bus... and they'd better step aside... I guess you forgot about those slams against the republicans... the only thing you remember is them saying they were going to do everything they can to make him a one term president. What else would their response be? He didn't offer any compromise... he was against the republicans from day one.

I do have a question for the devoted liberals??? It is an honest question. While we cannot agree on unemployment numbers, with liberal claims that it is getting better, and conservative claims that it is merely being hidden and masked by manipulating who is counted and who is not, I think it is safe to say that we all can agree that there are way to many Americans who want to work and cannot find work. That being said.....and with the liberal attitude about cutting the military, removing our involvement and military personnel from around the globe.....well, exactly what will be the result when all these folks hit the job market? How will that impact unemployment figures???? Or do ex-military not count because they weren't really in the work force to begin with????

So, one of the solutions is to employ a large military force to give them jobs? Your solutions aren't so hot.

Sue, so how about all the public jobs lost how do they effect the numbers. I though the idea was to cut spending to start balancing the budget even social programs so when did the military become hands off. Also I believe that was a suggestion put forward by that blue ribbon panel last year. How do you cut spending if you do not cut jobs. Who said this would be painless, and this is only the start if we go the way of an austerity program like Europe, Greece for example. We will have millions more unemployeed if we cut to deep to fast plain simple fact. Get use to it its what you want.

Is that bywood in Upper Darby Pa?

The only reason I would look up to Romney is because he is taller than I am.

The president has never cheapened the position of the President. It's the republicans that are determined to do that.

UAW, it does not matter what the President does you and your ilk say it is wrong, if he is in his office he is doing nothing, if he is on the road why is he not in his office, if he is on TV he is not doing his job. How many days did Bush spend at his ranch in Texas, was he not doing his job either. Everyone on the right has made it very clear they do not like Obama for what ever reason you want to label it. Even before he took office it was made clear. So since we all know were you and the rest of the right stands, why not just move on, you not going to change any minds or opinions here, the only thing you accomplish is beating your chest how great and smart you are in your own minds. Big Deal NOT.

Smalltown, small mind we only feel sorry for those on the right, mindless sheep with your theocratic ideas of life, such a short sighted view as it is. Yours is the only way the right way, everyone else is wrong what a waste of a life you all live. You keep telling yourself what ever makes you happy but don't tell us we have to believe as you do.

Tis you are one angry person. Seems you should take your own advice you gave to Spanky and keep it civil. Learn to smile a little.

Tis - Why would you feel sorry for those of us on the right? That is an elitist attitude if I ever heard it. What circuit in your brain is unplugged? You make this statement as if those of us on the right need your sympathy. You have the shallow thought that our opinions don't matter, that we aren't thoughtful about the way we speak and our thoughts don't matter at all.

Just because you disagree with the way we approach politics, rules, morality, and life in general doesn't make your way better. Or.... is this just bravado to elicit a response?

Liberals are always doing what they can to seek out equality... how does your statement speak on this issue? How does this equality equate with your feelings that we are neandrathols, a name I've heard liberals call conservatives many times.

Brianb now turn everything you just said around and it can be applied to yourself and many others on this site. You on the right do exactly the same thing. That was the point. Look in a mirror and who do we see, ourselves.

Smalltown and what was your point in " You feel bad because you see him as an underdog" to belittle him or his supporters right. You will get no respect from anyone unless you respect them. Your opinion is yours, you are not the only one with that right.

No, I don't feel bad for him at all. I'm angry at him for lying to me.

MRWSR, you are trying to make the point that out of 8 years of republican control the democrates in two years created the entire debt Obama inherited is that right. Do you really believe that or is it that it took both parties working together to get us here. As for Obama supporting the bailouts what or were would we be today. From what I hear our economy would have been destroyed if the banks had failed agree or not tell me. Argue all you want but Obama has been trying to correct the problems even using republican ideas which you can not argue, they are there to read, but since Obama suggested it they don't like it now. Push all you want it still takes two sides to govern and when one side stops we have what we have now. It has been the party of no that stopped governing just to get one man out of office regardless of the cost to the country.

See and here lies the problem. Just a minute ago I was a small minded, small towner in all of your superiority and now you say it takes two sides to make decisions. Seems like we have a theme here.

Nope.

But to give all credit to Bush is a lie. It would have not been 1.3 trillion. No doubt there would have been debt passed on. That is no secret and was no secret. But the amount and the congress from 2007 to 2010 shows why I believe what I believe. Argue what you want but check for your self. Can't blame all the 1.3 on Bush. Just as I don't blame all the current on obama. I blame him for not doing anything. That you have proof of and can read on.

Smalltown go back and read your comment and then tell me again about a superiority attitude. You got what you gave nothing more.

MRWSR what you have him to that he has not tried to do. Questions Who's budget is this country running since 2008 who's budget was passed by the house and senate. All I hear from the right is Obama has not put forth a budget and we all know that is untrue. None have been voted on or passed so how is this country operating right now.

Good question.

Stop gap measures mostly, but all proposed budgets have not passed. Even obama's. The senate uses parliamentary procedure to place spending and line items. But there is no budget. Have not seen one in a thousand plus day's.

Not an economist, but this is what I have come to understand. Have a lot more on this, but don't like those mile long post.

MRWSR, me either on long post but none needed here. From what I understand we are working off the last passed budget unless as you say the house and senate make changes. I also understand that Obama has put forth budgets that contain spending, spending cuts, and tax increases, and it seems that anything that contains a tax increase or anything perceived as a tax increase brings an immediate no from the republican party. Question do you think it is possible to balance the budget with sending cuts only. Or will it take both cuts and increased revenue or taxes.

Tis,

I will pay more if they cut more. I will not pay more to spend more. I think that is a universal understanding. Among Conservatives, we will not be taxed anymore to pay for Government spending. Cuts will have to be there, even social programs as well a defense. But I don't hold out for a balanced tax and spending cuts. Obama's was one sided in my opinion.

MRWSR, So if cuts equal more than spending then you will pay more, correct? What kind of cuts do you feel are needed in social programs. How was Obama one sided on this in your view.

From what I was able to find in Obama's budgets, cuts and tax increases exceeded spending so overall the budget was reduced. Is this not what we all want. Granted the amount may be not what everyone wants but the direction is right is it not.

MRWSR, have you looked at the republican budget put forth by Ryan, it seems to have more spending than cuts and adds to the debt so my question is, what are your thoughts on that budget.

Tis,

You have caught me at the busy part of my day.

I am very much a fiscal conservative. Do not mind paying taxes. But as I read and saw, obama's had me filing twice on dividends and money market interests. Plus, it stalled, what i would consider consumer confidence. To slim down on the wealthy to grow the middle class is not going to work. A fair tax will do the job, again just my opinion.

The Ryan Budget. Want to see it come out of committee before I can make a solid comment on it.

MRWSR, fair enough but one last thing on your statement. When did Obama change the Tax code and again I thought that was Congress not the president, honest I had not heard he changed the tax code.

Tis,

He proposed what he called tax initiatives. Don't think I said change of the tax code. But it was based to increase taxable income that would double dip some who invest in money markets and collect interest on dividends.

Smalltown, what about all the people that are tired of the republican parties answer to everything "NO". Oh and I am tired of hearing the republicans deny their war on womens rights. How many laws have been passed in republican states that take away their rights, unless of course you don't feel they have those rights to begin with.

Since you are being very nebulous here, I guess there really is not other response than to say I as a person, respond yes or no according to the situation after thought has gone in as to whether it is wise to do so or not.

Are you not aware of the laws being passed that restrict womens right? Do you make your discission based on a individuals rights or on religious rights, not a trick question just trying to gain an understanding.

What I am hearing is the rights of the individual supercede all other concerns. What I am hearing is that the individuals whether they be women or gay or minority or workers may do whatever they please, and anything that interferes with their intention or thwarts their desire requires government intervention to assure that they are all fairly treated and not subject to ever hearing the word "no" Laws being passed do not seem intended to restrict women's rights, but rather to insure that the women are fully cognizant of the choices that they are making. The law does not presume that everyone thinks the same, has the same experiences, nor the same education, but rather tries to create a situation where things are truly equal for each and every woman before she makes those decisions. Religion completely aside, not every person thinks that an embryo is not human. Some people see the potential of life, but not life. Some see it as life from the first moment on. What is any person's understanding of this concept without offering evidence for them to base a decision on. Why is it considered fair to preserve the right to choose abortion, but not fair to suggest that educating people as to what all their varying choices might be is the truly fair approach to women. We require a waiting period for ownership of a gun, and many places require that a safety course be taken before a gun permit can be issued. The idea of a cooling off period to prevent somebody from purchasing a weapon in anger and using it in a crime of passion....Most of the laws that you are referring to, do not seem altogether that different in wanting the women to have complete information, perhaps a waiting period to insure that a decision isn't being made at the height of emotion and regretted later, or a decision made by pressure from outside parties. Freedom to obtain an abortion is also a wedge by which many women find themselves co-erced into terminating a pregnancy by family, friends, lovers, when that isn't their true feelings either. Why is it that we don't get aggravated with the notion that we have to have a learning permit to obtain a driving license and you cannot, in most states, get the permit and the license on the same day? Why is it that most states require a waiting period for a marriage license to be issued? The answer is pretty clear in that people tend t react impulsively in the face of great emotional stress and it doesn't necessarily reflect the choice that they might make if a calmer state of mind was in control. In our society, learning about the reality of being pregnant is possible very early on, so we don't necessarily get into an issue of crossing a line whereby the fetus who may be aborted suddenly and magically becomes a person. Most people can know for certain within a week or two, which still gives time for careful consideration of a serious decision.

Sue, explain how a state demand that a doctor present a statement to a patient explaining a medical condition that does not exist make sense. As to some of your other points, how does an abortion affect you if you are not the one having it. Drivers permit can affect you with an accident. So when does a private decission that does not effect society in any manner become the choice of government, I thought the right was for less government not more invasive government, what happen to government getting out of peoples lives not into them, how does contraceptives taken by one person effect another person. How do you justify this invasion by government into private lives. What is the purpose in state required exams that doctors do not see as needed, who is in charge of the patient, government or the doctor, who has the training. Do not try and tell anyone this is not about religion as that is all it is about.

Obama apologizes for just being an American.

You got a source for that... right?

Smalltown give us an example of what you see as his apologizing for being American, and what anti american actions has he shown you. Then let us respond to those. For one I will do it without calling names

"We need to internalize this idea of excellence. Not many folks spend a lot of time trying to be excellent." Barack Obama

"The point I was making was not that my grandmother harbors any racial animosity. She doesn't. But she is a typical white person...." Barack Obama

"...I've got two daughters. 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby." Barack Obama

"In America, there's a failure to appreciate Europe's leading role in the world. Instead of celebrating your dynamic union and seeking to partner with you to meet common challenges, there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive."

"You know, the truth is that right after 9/11, I had a pin," Obama said. "Shortly after 9/11, particularly because as we're talking about the Iraq War, that became a substitute for I think true patriotism, which is speaking out on issues that are of importance to our national security, I decided I won't wear that pin on my chest.

MRWSR, I assume these are from his book. Context is difficult with a couple of the items you show. First one might need more context but as it stands I don't disagree with that statement and yet we need to know his context for excellence. Second one needs more context than this simple statement. I think though that everyone makes judgements based on their own life experiences and the same statement could be applied to a blind person and a sighted one. Three again missing context. Four I agree with that statement as it stands. America has become arrogant "leader of the free world" what does that mean, is europe not free. Europe was established before America. Five not familiar with a pin but what I read, a pin can not be a substitute for patriotism actions do that not pins. Again we all judge from our own frame of reference and see what we want to see.

Understan.

I will put them into context. I agree with you it is one's views of the quotes and and based on one's view of what may or may not be anti-american.