E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Mary Altaffer / AP
Mitt Romney's new sidekick is a giant electronic board that counts the national debt. On Thursday, Romney speaks to reporters after a campaign stop at the River City Brewing Company.
JACKSONVILLE, Fla. — It has appeared behind Romney on stage more often than several of his sons, standing stiff and silent, but saying volumes about the candidate's stark vision of an economy led for another four years by President Barack Obama.
It is Romney's enormous electronic debt clock, now concluding its first trip here to Florida.
"We try to make the venue and the backdrop underline the message the governor is talking about on the stump," explained Romney's advance director Will Ritter, who came up with the idea.
Depicting the national debt is tricky. With education, a blackboard would convey the message. For the military, American flags. But with the debt – a complicated, 16-digit figure that changes every fraction of a second – the point is tougher to convey visually.
So in August, Ritter and the Romney advance staff set to work designing the clock, which is modeled after a baseball scoreboard and employs a complicated algorithm written by a young advance staffer, Harvard grad John Palmer.
The algorithm, which keeps the clock synched to the official U.S. national debt projections online, is fed by unseen laptops, which in turn display the nation's debt in real-time, as well as the amount owed by each U.S. taxpayer: $139,014 at the start of Thursday's event.
Romney first rolled out the finished product – a foam-core frame over two 56-inch laptops – at a town hall in Dover, New Hampshire on August 25th, and referenced it repeatedly.
“It’s a frightening thing here as we watch these tens of thousands of dollars going by, second by second, hundreds of thousands of dollars going by the minute,” Romney said, pointing to the clock.
"The first time we tried it we just used Duct tape and just kind of stuck it up there and we noticed in the gym that it was slipping ever so slightly and I was just praying he wouldn't touch it," Ritter said of the clock's debut.
The audience loved the visual aid.
Per the Washington Post's Phil Rucker: "When a Dover man rose to ask a question, he prefaced it with a comment. ‘Thanks for bringing the clock,’ he said. ‘I’m impressed.’”
Romney's Boston staff noticed that the clock, which costs about $1,000 per event to transport, set up and run, seems to have an effect on the audience when it’s on stage: it keeps them focused on the economy, which Romney calls his "wheelhouse."
"I've noticed that when we take questions it’s such kind of a cool prop, that people like to reference it, and we tend to get more economic-based questions," Ritter said.
The candidate, too, seems more focused with the presence of his silent partner.
“I'm going to cut programs out of the federal government," Romney declared at an event in Kalamazoo, Michigan in February, clock in tow.
In Jacksonville, Fla. on Thursday, rain forced members of Romney's audience up on the stage, blocking the sign for most of the event, but some folks still noticed.
"It's huge, and it’s sad. I have children and I'm going to have grandchildren," Phyllis Shackleford of Atlanta said of the number displayed on the clock, whose debt-per-taxpayer ticked up $3.00 during the event. "And I don't want them to be saddled with that debt."
Leave a Comment:
Let me guess... he's waving around his Etch-A-Sketch...
Powerful? WTF is the author smoking?
Here's a hint - even MORE powerful is the man who wants to be the leader of the FREE world cannot even hold a press conference!
As for the rest, I've said for years... YOU cannot fix stupid & pandering props!
Thanks to the information highway...
Oh...Run....... it's the Debt CLOCK!
Please keep putting the National Debt clock in the background so we can keep asking how high it will get under the Romney/Ryan proposed budget that is not balanced until 2040.
Another 27 years of borrowed money.
Hey guys, Not to change the subject, but FUX-NEWS has Obama leading Mitten's in their new poll by 7 points.
I'd love to see "Spanky the Monkey" and "Vag-Bob's" faces when they see that.
The purpose of the Debt Clock is to make it clear to all but the most fanatic left-wing morons that the current rate of spending is unsustainable.
There are approximately 116,011,000 households in the United States It's simple math therefore that each household will have to pony up an average of $135,471 to pay the current $15.716 trillion debt. And if we can't do it, our children will have to.
And Obama just wants to make it worse.
Feisty - Do you even have any idea where the "Etch-a-Sketch" insult originated or are you just vomiting back left-wing slogans that some other idiot fed you? Here are the facts for those who actually care about the truth:
Romney's communications director Eric Fehrnstromon referred to the shift from a primary campaign to a presidential campaign by saying "I think you hit a reset button for the fall campaign. Everything changes. It's almost like an Etch-A-Sketch" Of course, Romney's opponents immediately pretended the remark had some significance.
Contrast this with Jeremiah Wright, Obama's pastor and mentor for 20 years saying, “The government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color.”
Intelligent people will recognize that the "etch-sketch" comment is a cute analogy by one of Romney's campaign workers; while saying that AIDS is a means of genocide against Blacks. represents a core belief that Obama has absorbed.
yeah we better ask wright huh kannin???
did you watch the psycho ..hannity tonight with his new evidence on Obama?
*yawn*
Go play with yourself, I have no time or desire to kick your ass!
Maybe someday, but, unfortunately for YOU it's NOT today! ;o)
hahahaha
Don't have to Elvis. All their opinions are recorded. Just listen to Obama's speeches to find out what he wants you to think; listen to Jeremiah Wright's speeches to find out what Obama thinks.
what his black side or his white side?..what do yall have please tell me..what fox has on Obama?
Great reply Feisty!
I appreciate it when you attack me, rather than my arguments. It is your clear admission that my post is entirely accurate, and that you have no valid counter to any part of it.
Intelligent people will recognize that the "etch-sketch" comment is a cute analogy by one of Romney's campaign workers; while saying that AIDS is a means of genocide against Blacks. represents a core belief that Obama has
Kannin -
You're on drugs, Dude. What's next? Obama's birth certificate is a forgery? You are an absolute "RWNJ"!!!
yep that's his next plan
Go play with yourself, I have no time or desire to kick your ass!
Feisty - LMFAO at that one!
Any time junior - I am always happy to bring some much needed pleasure to those who haven't had any in quite a while...
Ummm... junior - you want to swerve into MY lane? - You better be prepared to wipe MY tire marks off your ass! ;o)
I have ZERO tolerance for rookies like yourself!
did you watch the psycho ..hannity tonight with his new evidence on Obama?
Hey Elvis, I didn't see it. What did the idiot have to say?
"Go play with yourself, I have no time or desire to kick your ass!
Feisty - LMFAO at that one!"
Feisty Trollhead and GT....obviously never grew up.
Another personal attack Feisty; another admission that you are firing blanks.
they are trying to say that they paid off wright to keep his mouth shut
Rob - "Eat @!$%# and Die" you little twerp!
You know the dems are getting desperate when Fiesty posts after 2:00 in the afternoon.Cuts into the "embibement" time.
How about that publicist flyer describing Obama as a "Kenyan born, raised in Indonesia and Hawaii" to promote him on the "board of writers"? That is some funny karma there.
GT-2021701
And today Rasmussen had a poll out that stated that Obama and Paul were tied, even after Paul announced that he was not going to actively campaign in the next primaries.
What does that say? Hardly a vote of confidence.
Romney tries to remind Americans of debt, but it's the Republicans who created the debt. Democrats want to raise taxes to pay for entitlements and discretionary spending, but Republicans have tried to cut taxes, and then borrow to pay for services, thus debt.
Reagan, Bush, Sr, and Son of Bush Sr. (SOB?) cut taxes, and launch expensive foreign wars. These 3 Republican presidents controlled the White House for the 20 of last 30 years. And Clinton balanced the budget.
Feisty, I am just curious, does your red hair color come out of a box? Because most redheads I know would never be Democrats. They are much too Independent.
Kannin
The purpose of the Debt Clock is to make it clear to all but the most fanatic left-wing morons that the current rate of spending is unsustainable.
There are approximately 116,011,000 households in the United States It's simple math therefore that each household will have to pony up an average of $135,471 to pay the current $15.716 trillion debt. And if we can't do it, our children will have to.
And Obama just wants to make it worse.
-----
And this is unlike the proposed Ryan plan Romney supports that keeps adding to that very same clock until 2040? What happened to all of the, "Deficits don't matter" mantra from conservatives from the 80's and 2001 - 2008 eras? Oh, that is only true if they're in power, right?
---
“I'm going to cut programs out of the federal government," Romney declared at an event in Kalamazoo, Michigan in February, clock in tow.
---
Cutting programs is not the answer, reworking programs and eliminating corruption would go much farther. However, there is no way to close the deficit gap without increasing revenues. There are only two tools for a government to increase revenues in our system: Taxes and Tariffs. Tariffs when you import more than you export are a death sentence, so that only leaves one avenue (unless they actually moved towards socialism and annexed businesses into the government, but that won't happen), moving tax rates back to 39% like they were in the boom 90s, and moving the other rates up accordingly as well. We'll all have to suck it up to get out of this, not just the bottom 97% of wage earners. moving capital gains tax from 15% to 18% would do more than any other increase, but i doubt that would ever happen.
Check out Venture Capitalist Nick Hanauer's speeches about how the economy is an ecosystem, and the only way to increase jobs is to increase the ability of the majority of the country to purchase things. tax cuts at the top will not create one job, as they will not allow for the engine of the economic ecosystem to increase demand, only increasing the amount of discretionary spending of the majority of the country has can do that. The economic model Romney is promoting is patently false, and we only have to look at recent history to see this.
Kannin - being so stupid, it's surprising you get your shoes tied each day. People picked up on the etch-a-sketch for the same reason his campaign manager used it:- Romney's positions change every other day - in other words, he is a compulsive liar, saying whatever he thinks will bring him momentary advantage.
His only consistent position is that he and people in his economic class should pay less taxes and get more, while others should pay more and get less.
Repeat: Mittsy is a chronic, compulsive, pathological liar. If he's your guy, the suggestion is that you are the same.
john-737278 -- You seem a reasonable guy. But around here Foxmussen isn't used.
Tzalaran -- The Debt Clock merely reminds the left-wing of Dubya's unpaid wars and tax cuts during the unpaid wars.
The problem is Romney and people like Romney. Enough!
Dear Mr. Romney,
You should never have something in the background that's more exciting to watch than you are... in your case... a debt clock.
Sincerely,
American Voter
LOL
All it does for me is strike up images of Bush and his $500 Billion a year "debt train" that he started. Had he even PRETENDED to fund 2 wars, Homeland Security, the new Medicaid benefits, and his tax cuts, we would be in a very different position today. Thanks for the reminder Romney. Makes me want to run out and vote for the good ole days of trickle-me-down economic policies of self-fulfillment.
I judge how Romney is doing by the anger level on MSNBC's message board. Apparently, he is doing just fine.
John: Good point-to find out how well Romney is doing simply see how defensive the liberals are and how tightly wound Chris "I have a thrill up my leg" Matthews is.
You would think after being in office for over three years all Obama would have to do is simply list all the accomplishments he had done and how well the economy is and .......... oh sorry, wait a minute-what was that? What accomplishments? Well there was the uh ...... sorry, got distracted, I mean when Obama ......... well but you can't deny that ...... uh ............ well ............ but ............ I guess you are right. Attack Romney is their ONLY chance!!
Pretty sad day when all the president can say is "but it would have been worse if I wasn't president". Wouldn't be worse?!?! THAT is supposed to give me confidence that we are moving in the right direction when you can't LIST anything you have done and your ONLY defense is it "would have been worse"?!?!? Attack attack attack. That's all the Democrats have............
The Republicans are worried about the deficit that they told us for years didn't matter. It matters now that they want to dupe the American people into putting them back into power. Where are the Jobs Republicans? You guys ran on that platform in 2010.
So Kannin, do you agree with everything your white Mormon Bishop tells you? And I'll bet you think Andrew Breitbart was a genius?
If it isn't Rev. Wright its Bill Ayres or sombody else influencing Obama because apparantly he's a "boy" and can't make decisions or think for himself. If this is all you 'baggers have against Obama you're going to be pretty dissapointed come november.
Is Mittens going to remind everyone that about 2/3 of it is attributable to Reagan and Bush Sr/Jr?
That number behind Mittsy is not the current debt. That number actually reflects how many times Mittsy says something and then says the exact opposite the next day.
...or maybe it is the number of hairs cut from the heads of "pretty" young men during Mittsy's gay-bashing days.
And the coservaterds want to lower taxes for corporate America and the one percent. They are brilliant I tell you.
This KILLER debt Rommel is parading was originally put there by Rommel and his ButtLovin' Pals, the republicanCrimeCartel via KingGeorge The VacuumBrained during his Shamefully Notorious Shrubber Reign 2001 - 2008. Now, Here’s the rundown on Mitt Romney’s devastating record as CEO of Bain Capital, a tenure marked by bankruptcies, bailouts, and mass layoffs — all while Romney and his partners raked in billions of dollars in profits for the firm and Romney himself amassed a quarter-billion dollar fortune.
Romney’s Bain Capital Caused Mass Layoffs, Sent Jobs Overseas
Thousands of Americans were laid off by Bain Capital at companies it purchased, managed, and, at least a quarter of the time, drove into bankruptcy.
The last president to come close to no deficit? Democrat
The last president to run the debt up beyond the imagination? Republican
And while none of the free market countries have been able to pull out of the debt, the ones that have gone with austerity have gotten worse. So lets combine austerity with tax breaks for the rich and see what happens.
Here's the truth: Romney and the GOP have pandered to the rich enough that the rich AND the business community in general are waiting for the election outcome before investing big money. Think about it. Romney may or may not win. But if he does, you'll get "stupid" wealthy. I would wait.
The economy will come busting out after November no matter what. Who reaps the benefits is the only question.
Romney is using his prop for deception. Here is the REAL question - who is going to pay that debt?
The money to pay that debt MUST come from our economy. There is no other magic source of money. We either grow and expand our economy to generate the money to pay the debt - or - we pay the debt from our savings.
Romney's plan is to rely on the magic Republican economic policies that got us into this mess.
Does any of this sound familiar?
- lower taxes for the wealthy to free up capital for investment
- reduce regulations to spur investment of capital
- end unions - lower business costs - lower wages and increase productivity
- deregulate banking to encourage private sector borrowing to create artificial demand.
Does this look familiar?
more capital (money) = speculation = inflation = debt = more money (capital)
Rinse, spin, repeat.
That is how our public and private debt has increased dramatically over the last 30 years. That is how our wages have stagnated. That is why we live paycheck to paycheck and rely on credit cards.
Romney only wants to use his glitzy prop to identify scapegoats - to deceive us into blaming someone else for what WE have created. Be honest Mitt Romney - explain how you intend to pay that debt. Explain how you intend to use more debt to pay what is on that clock.
President Harry Truman in 1948: "The Republicans … will try
to make people believe that everything the Government has done for the country
is socialism. They will go to the people and say: "Did you see that social
security check you received the other day—you thought that was good for you,
didn't you? That's just too bad! That's nothing in the world but socialism. Did
you see that new flood control dam the Government is building over there for the
protection of your property? Sorry—that's awful socialism! That new hospital
that they are building is socialism. Price supports, more socialism for the
farmers! Minimum wage laws? Socialism for labor! Socialism is bad for you, my
friend. Everybody knows that. And here you are, with your new car, and your
home, and better opportunities for the kids, and a television set—you are just
surrounded by socialism! Now the Republicans say, 'That's a terrible thing, my
friend, and the only way out of this sinkhole of socialism is to
vote for the
Republican ticket.'" And that was 64 Years Ago!!!, the republicanCrimeCartel is still doing the same exploitation of people THEY ARE NOTORIUS FOR. Now, according to KingGeorgeTheVacuumBrained, it is called "free market" capitalism; with families in the streets and 21% Unemployment.......
Remember Fellow and Sister Americans: A vote for ANY republicanCrimeCartelSoldier, Rommel, is a vote Against Yours and Your Family's WellBeing
Lol at Rommel. Good one. Someone said the Romm-ster plans to propose a trillion-dollar venture with NASA to go to the planet, Kolob. I am sure it was in jest, though.
Kannin, the debt clock was created in the 80s, when regan was touting debt doesn't matter. The democrats created a clock which you now jump to defend. Back in them days I don't recall repubs defending the clock, rather they followed regans words of debt doesn't matter.
So excuse me if you are a yungun that did not live through the 70's and 80's, because if you did live during those times you know your posts are contradictory to fact.
Gosh, I didn't realize Truman was so good at building strawmen!
We simply need to subtract the tax and subsidies money that Romney took from the government from that clock!
Shades of Michelle Bachman and her penchent for props. I'd love to see Republicans take responsibility for taking the Clinton surplus and turning it into a deficit JUST ONCE. Even General Washington raised taxes to pay for the American Revolution. Bush waged two wars while cutting them.
Gt,
Those poll dancers will not talk about this poll for sure.
Amy B. Portland, ME
To be clear, there was no surplus during Clinton, there was a balanced budget. The debt was still there. And secondly, Congress is in charge of the pursestrings for the nation. And during Clinton Republicans controlled both houses.
And raising taxes is fine to pay for times of necessity, but prudence would dictate that a policy would be in place to pay down the debt when times are good, preparing for when times are not.
john,
If the Republicans in Congress controlled the pursestrings under Clinton in the 90's, why is today's spending on Obama? Do they not still hold the pursestrings? Are they not responsible for 2/3 of that debt? If we go by what you are saying, they most certainly are. Republicans controlled congress for 8 of the last 12 years, and in that time, they've not passed a single balanced budget. They created the vast majority of the debt that exists today. Americans are quite aware of this, and that's part of why Romney is so far behind (latest Fox News poll shows Obama ahead by 7 points, and on the electoral map, Obama holds a commanding lead.)
VirginiaDemocrat78
Actually, the house under Republican control has passed budgets, the senate won't and the President wouldn't sign it anyway. I have never stated that the spending is on Obama, but leadership might actually produce a budget. And my comment was about clarity of who did balance the budget during Clinton. Funny thing it was Gingrich.
Oh and by the way I am an Independent rooting for Paul, at least he can't be bought. And coming out of Rasmussen today, Paul and Obama were tied.
john,
Incorrect. Well, partially. I never said they didn't pass budgets, I said they have passed a single balanced budget. Perhaps you need to work on your reading comprehension skills.
As for your assertion that Gingrich actually balanced the budgets in the 90's, you are once again, incorrect. The house passed the budgets that the president proposed.
As for Ron Paul, does it really matter how he polls against the president? Even if Romney is disqualified as a candidate, which is possible as he committed voter fraud in 2010, the Republican establishment would never let him walk away with the nomination. Let's pretend for a minute that in Bizzaro-America Ron Paul somehow gets the nomination; Once the American people hear Ron Paul's isolationist platform, he would become a laughing stock. This is a global economy, the world is more connected than it has ever been, and the giant corporations that own the GOP would demolish him.
As you know, national debt is a phony issue. When your family is in a million dollar debt, you can have problems. The national debt has been bought against the US government, the most powerful govt. ever in human history, it's not really an issue. The US gov is never going to collapse.
If you think it is an issue, then you should vote for Democrats who try to raise taxes to pay for entitlements and other spending such as defense.
If you really think debt is an issue, you have to blame GOP presidents - Reagan, Bush Sr. and Son of Bush Sr (SOB) who occupied the White House 20 out of last 30 years. These presidents made the irresponsible tax cuts, contributing to the balooning national debt.
I was not referring to the Bush years, I was referring to the last two, but what ever. You are correct that Gingrich did not do it alone but without him in never would have happened. I don't care for the man, but it is true. And there were compromises all along the way. They did not just simply pass the Presidents recommendations.
Paul is not an Isolationist. He wants the US to stop meddling in other countries business. He believes in trade, that is not isolationist. Corporations don't vote. Why do you think they fear him.
Pigotry
We spent a trillion dollars last year on Welfare and healthcare for welfare. We could cut that and have a balanced budget in 16 years without touching anything else. How about that?
Why should people who are willing to work for their money give more when they see how the government uses the money?
I believe to balance the budget, many will get hurt on both sides, but it is better than everyone that is not a special interest getting hurt. And I wouldn't be so sure that it can't collapse. China, already is starting to scale back its investment in the US. No other country has the wealth for us to outsource our debt to.
john,
Corporations don't vote, but they do have control over the GOP, they've paid a high price for that control. They can influence who gets nominated, as I said, delegates are a mere formality, and having the majority of them doesn't necessarily guarantee one the nomination.
Of course you weren't referring to the Bush years, why would you? The Republicans were spending and spending and spending with no regard for how much debt they were accumulating. No Republicans want to talk about the Bush era, it was the time they went wild and spent outrageous sums of money completely free of opposition.
Also, you should look more closely into what Ron Paul proposes, he does indeed believe that we should be economic isolationists as well as in foreign affairs. I actually agree with him to a degree on this, if I were in charge, I'd demand that any corporation that wishes to conduct business from the US (headquartered in the US) must have a workforce that is at least 51% American. I'd also demand that all US corporations pay a 20% tax on their profits (too many pay none today or are given credits, which means they pay negative taxes.) Furthermore, I'd make sure that any foreign corporation that wishes to sell good in the US also pay 20% of their profits earned from US consumers.
john-737278:
Did you forget 'corporate welfare' - the huge bailout that contributed to debt - why Bailout? because the SOBs caused the great recession - Note: SOBs is short for 'Son of Bush Sr.'
Why there are welfare payment, part of the reason is people lost jobs due to recession caused by the SOBs (short for 'Son Of Bush Sr.')
Are we forgetting the "so-called" Tax Reform, "Norquist Pledge" signers, who have ground our Country's lawmaking to a hostage, Gridlock, halt. For TRUE Tax Reform, just "AX THE TAX CODE";with its $1.1TRILLION in "breaks", Plus allowing 45% to pay NOTHING?? Instead of being focused on making Obama a one term President, "Tea Party" people follow your "namesakes"; grab your "axes" and "AX THE TAX CODE" then "Bye, Bye Deficit"?? There has to be enough "Revenue" coming in first. Get rid of "Cuts" & "Caps"??
National "debts," are not the same as government "deficits."
...Just saying.
A nation's growing population carries with it greater overall debts; such is the nature of the beast.
Maybe Romney should carry with him not a Debt clock, but a Deficit clock that accompanies a big graph of deficits that shows its rise and fall over the years. Then that will bring up questions as to what Administration had generated more deficits, and why.
(...In that case, the right-wing will historically look pretty bad, with their tax cuts combined with their spending on wars).
Pigotry
Well, let's go after corporate welfare as well. It will pay off the debt even quicker. I have no problem with that.
But. financially speaking, the country did pretty well while Bush was President, other than the debt. It was lax fiscal control over the banks that caused the crash, not Bush. The banks caused this mess, and we should have let them fail. Imagine no one to pay your mortgage to or your credit cards, and all the money we had in the banks is FDIC insured. It would have been over two years ago, nobody would have lost their houses, and it would have been over, and recovered. And, it probably would have cost less. You really need to understand that he is no longer the President, and most in this country are no better off that 3.5 years ago and get over Bush.
john-737278 -- While there is some agreement with your posts, and in follow-up to other replies to your posts, it is safe to say we would gladly take that balanced budget now that we had at the end of the Clinton administration. And I think you'd agree that a time of war is not a time to cut taxes. Certainly wars should be paid for, and tax cuts both.
To this very day the GOP/TP is arguing for more tax cuts for the rich, which would add to our deficit, and keeping defense spending that would add to our deficit, because they don't want to pay for it. Yet if Congress is to raise the debt ceiling (debt created by Republicans due to above mentioned unpaid wars and tax cuts), Boehner and Teapublicans are demanding spending cuts in equal amount or more. And they want those cuts to come from things like Medicaid, food stamps, etc. that are needed to assist folks struggling thanks to the depression -- The depression Teapublicans and deregulation has brought upon us.
Do people not see the
disconnectdishonesty here? The hypocrisy, and really hate toward fellow Americans by the rightwing is so disgusting.VirginiaDemocrat78
Just to be fair, corporations have just as much control over the Democratic Party. They give money to both sides to guarantee a bought President and Congress.
And I will discuss the Bush years if you like. His tax cuts should have never happened. It set a precedence of entitlement to all sectors of our society. Some deficit spending was necessary to finance the wars, but they were fought wrong. If we go to war, go to win, not play political games with the enemy. Beat them into submission, force them to surrender and leave. His dad had that one right. That could have been accomplished in a very short period of time with proper motivation. The Patriot Act was originally necessary, but not a forever loss of rights. The TSA was a waste of money, especially when nothing was done about the borders. I will have to think of more.
TruePatriot-445959
I agree, but to be fair, the tax cuts went to all Americans, not just the rich. And it made some of them pay no taxes at all. In fact, through some of the things, some get more money back than they pay in.
The problem you point out is true, that the GOP wants tax cuts for the rich, but it is also true the Democrats want increased spending to Welfare. There is no compromise from either side. The reality is that the rich need to pay more, and the welfare state needs to get paid less. Americans have become lazy and believe that they are above taking menial jobs to survive, at the cost of others. Crops were rotting in the fields last year because people were too good to take those jobs.
john-737278 -- I take issue on a few of your points.
First, it depends where the money comes from, how much, and which Party remains less influenced. Hollywood for example expects nothing in return, and unions only want labor rights and good paying jobs protected. President Obama is the least beholding to Wall Street, Big Oil, etc. unlike Republicans who are completely bought and paid for and you can bet Big Business expects a return on their money.
Second, the Iraq invasion was completely unnecessary, not just mismanaged. And it should have been paid for -- remember War Bonds? I'm sure Ron Paul does.
Third, rights taken away via the Patriot Act or what have you are never temporary as once lost you can never get these back. We should never give up liberties for security. And most of all the cost to our nation was exactly bin Laden's plan.
john-737278 I just saw your reply and will revert in the time allotted... It is always the "strategery" or the rightwing oligarchy to cut taxes for the rich with such guises as tax cuts for all. However, that only pertained to the 2001 cuts. The 2003 cuts only applied to the rich (in regard to capital gains, dividends, etc.). The capital gains breaks that only apply to investment bankers is the most egregious as this is a specific group within the 1% (like Romney), and gees I wonder how that got passed.
But I think we're in agreement that we need to end tax credits for all.
Well, the last time I looked the big banks gave money to both parties. And if you don't believe that, check out the campaign contributions to Obama in 2008. Health care and drug companies were among the list. Who profited most from the Health care bill? Definitely not the citizens.
I still believe we went into Iraq because it was a better killing field. Radicals came from all over the region so we could kill them. I think it was planned. But, if we are to talk about mismanagement, how about guaranteeing that we will be in Afghanistan for another decade and giving them financial support. At the same time China is building mines in the country to profit from our pain.
Bills can be repealed, and should be. Or else the SCOTUS should be more proactive in telling Congress and the President they are out of line, it is in their mandate.
The tax cuts that passed under Obama extending the Bush tax cuts were for all with earned income.
john-737278 -- Odd that though the stock market has done extremely well, and also corporate profits during President Obama, Wall Street contributions to the president compared to Republicans are now 5 to 1 -- you can Google that. I'm disgusted in particular by Scott Brown of Massachusetts who traded his vote for 19 million in breaks for banks -- With the costs passed to the tax payers, as if the bail-out and decimation caused weren't bad enough.
As for Iraq, the radicals did not flood into Iraq until after we invaded, and the war actually caused an increase in terrorist recruitment. It was based on lies, and the cost will likely never be recouped--certainly not the loss in life. Like Ron Paul, I'm more of a "clear and present danger" person and believe we are far more effective with good intelligence, the Navy Seals, drones, etc. and definitely should require other countries to contribute as was done with Libya.
But once again, we're in agreement on insurance companies benefiting from ACA -- that was a deal with the devil to get things passed? After all, the mandate was based on Republican positions in hopes of getting Republican votes (IMO that was just a GOP ploy -- they're never to be trusted). Also Afghanistan, and my hope is after the 2014 withdrawal, we will disengage from obligations earlier without alerting the Taliban.
You have far more faith in the SCOTUS. After the 2000 election, Citizen's United, and a couple of other rulings, I have lost my faith for now.
Even at 5;1, they are still hedging bets on both sides.
I think there were cost analysis of lives to be lost invading Iraq compared with only fighting in Afghanistan. Around 4500 Americans were killed and 30,000 wounded and some estimates are over a million dead on the other side. I think it could have been much worse if we only stayed in Afghanistan. I don't necessarily agree with either point of view, it is just an assessment of motivation.
With some of the things that have come out of Congress, I wonder if the SCOTUS should not be taking original jurisdiction before laws can be enforced. And as far as the SCOTUS violating their oath, the Congress could always impeach them. And your right, citizens united was an ignorant ruling. The funny thing about the 2000 election is rules about the electoral college. They could have simply said nobody won and let Congress vote for the President and the Senate vote for the vice. That is what would happen if a third party ever split the vote.
Gotta get up in the morning, nice chattin.
Where's the prop that shows the tax breaks the corporations and super-rich get every day of this year and the previous years. Cut those benefits instead of SS, Medicare and jobs if you want a balanced budget..
Re-posted due to collapse:
Dear Mr. Romney,
You should never have something in the background that's more exciting to watch than you are... in your case... a debt clock.
Sincerely,
American Voter
LOL
All it does for me is strike up images of Bush and his $500 Billion a year "debt train" that he started. Had he even PRETENDED to fund 2 wars, Homeland Security, the new Medicaid benefits, and his tax cuts, we would be in a very different position today. Thanks for the reminder Romney. Makes me want to run out and vote for the good ole days of trickle-me-down economic policies of self-fulfillment.
Pigotry- please go to the streets of Athens and say debt isn't an issue.
"To be clear, there was no surplus during Clinton, there was a balanced budget. "
On -- so when Bush said "We have a surplus for as far as the eye can see" as a justification for his tax cuts he was lying???
Hey, stop Maden:
Context...anyone?
US is not Greece - US the most powerful nation with vibrant economy, Greece is a smallEuropean nation with a not-so-good economy
Pigotry,
Yes we are not Greece, we have more ways of growing our economy out of any recession than most other countries. The question is how are we going to do it?
If you think giving money to the states to hire state workers and then having the states fund their salaries after the first year will work? Just to be clear that is what we did and no it did not work.
The question with the debt now is who is going to loan us the money? We are the largest economy in the world. GDP of 15 plus trillion dollars. The world GDP is 65-70 trillion dollars. Answer me this why would any one loan us more money when they would be better served putting it in their own economy?
I agree we should have had a tighter budget during the President Bush years. Do you remember 9/11? Do you remember the tech bubble? The real truth is our debt does matter, not only for our economy, but for the worlds economy. How does it serve us to corner the worlds available credit? How arrogant are we to have debt equal to 20-23% of the worlds GDP? And want to borrow more?
JP Morgan has been in the news for losing 2 billion dollars, how many billions of dollars has our government lost? How many trillions of dollars have we spent on programs for the poor with little to show for it? I am all for helping people work for a better life, but we have to stop just giving it to them.
We need programs that pay off now. Programs that do not rely on tax money to continue.
Charlie,
There was a couple of things that happened during President Bush's presidency that changed things.
I would agree that it probably was a stretch of the truth even at the time it was stated.
Blaming just the tax cuts is not accurate either. We spent more money than we had coming in.
The actual tax revenue exceeded projections after the tax cuts. Capital gains tax revenue actually doubled.
We need to cut spending.
Too funny. The clock represents the failure of Congress. Keep showing how inept the teabaggers are!!
John - thanks for the polite, thoughtful comments!
Jimsepa - the debt clock represents the decades of failure by politicians in both parties. This includes presidents and members of Congress. Until people get out of the "my party" syndrome, things will never change for the better. We need to focus on the merits of individual ideas, and not who proposed the ideas.
Ron, there was a time when I would agree that we need to focus on the merits of individual ideas. Unfortunately, the time has passed when moderate voices on both sides were "allowed" to voice ideas meant to help America over political ideology. Instead of striving for that moderate voice, some groups are actively trying to remove the moderates from office, only to be replaced with extremists.
BTW, my criticism was directed at the "Tea Party". Unfortunately, I don't recognize the Republican Party as the Party that I was a member of 20 years ago. Tea Partiers are not out for the best of America. Ideology first. Country last.
One day we'll get back to consensus, moderation, compromise and a joint purpose.
jimsepa,
Different perspectives. For me, my top concerns by far are the yearly federal deficits and the debt. The only political group I think truly cares about these issues is the Tea Party. There are a few exceptions, but I think 95% of the politicians in both parties could care less about deficit and debt levels. I may be wrong, but that's just my opinion, and why I voted for my local TP candidate.
However, unfortunately there are some TP politicians that I strongly disagree with on my next highest priority - minimizing government interference in my personal life. Still, given the choice between Candidate A that will help get the deficits under control but try and outlaw gay marriage, and Candidate B that supports gay marriage but won't address the deficit - it's a tough choice, but I'll probably go with the politician that will help get the deficit under control.
Also, since it often gets mixed in with fiscal conservatism on these boards...although I consider myself a fiscal conservative, I would like to see a 50% reduction in military spending over the next 10 years. I also don't want large immediate cuts or tax increases - but I do want these items triggered based on certain economic thresholds (ex: when GDP growth is over 3 for at least 2 straight quarters, revoke ALL of the Bush tax cuts and do not increase the federal budget until spending is less than 18% of GDP - like it was under Clinton).
I have a question. There have been polls that have stated that many Americans believe that we would do better picking our representatives off the street.
I would make that one better. Even though we don't necessarily agree on every topic, I do find it amazing that even on this vine, we are finding solutions to problems we all know exist through logical conversation. I say, pick the reps off the vines. At least we are willing to communicate and try to understand opposing arguments. It is better than what we have. Why not?
Ron, I will only concede that the Tea Party has brought the ISSUE of deficits/debt into political discourse: great idea; horrible execution. IF they were serious about deficits/debt, they should have worked within rather than hijacked the system. There was a fundamental misunderstanding of how our government has worked for the last 250 years (give or take).
I would also argue (agree) that our government should be able to deal with financial issues while staying out of our private lives. I find it hard that we have to have one at the expense of the other.
jimsepa
As I see it, the problem with the Tea Party is not about the original people that founded it on principles of fiscal restraint. The problem is with the religious right who saw an opening to do social engineering and hi-jacked the movement. Take Michelle Bachman for instance. A loud mouth religious extremist that pushes her dogma in the face of the nation. I have no problem with religion, it should define your values, but not give you a mandate to tell others how to live.
The principles of the Tea Party are sound, the problem is differentiating.
Carrying around a debt clock? Who the hell does he think he is, "Father-Time"!
Obama/Biden - 2012
ROTFLMAO!
Debt clock sure, but he wouldn't dare put up a deficit chart as a prop. The deficit is going down under the Obama administration.
If any government spending needs to be axed asap it's the pentagon budget first and foremost.
His debt clock (a shout-out to Flavor Flav) and his "Kiss the Cook" apron should be a one-two knockout punch.
I think this is a brilliant move by the Romney campaign! After all, what better sidekick for a robot than a digital clock?
That would also explain their new campaign slogan: "All your base are belong to-- 15,689,687,351,291.79!"
Get used to it. Andrew Jackson was the only president who didn't spend more than the government recieved.
The only way this will reverse itself is if congress waits untill they see what they have earned after they have paid back the taxes that they have borrowed from our income and use what they have left... Kind of like our pay checks, cant spend what you don't have.
But who does the government owe money to? Is there a country out there that isn't in debt?
nate,
Yes, there are countries that have surpluses...here is a wikipedia link with some info by country (I'm not sure how recently this was updated, but it gives you a starting point):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_budget_by_country
Yes, and I've noticed that the first one with a surplus on the list is *GASP* a SOCIALIST country - Norway! How 'bout that?
GT,
LOL
I think Romney stole it from Spanky.
Spanky has one sitting on his desk and would post about it daily for months on end.
Yeh, but I think Spanky adjusts it to fit his needs, or those of his "610" Congressmen.......
But once again, mr grover, the gop, & the rusbhbo can point to problems they caused but cannot tell you what they will do to correct the problems. Raise taxes to the clinton tax levels. Are you kidding. Cut defense spending. They have already said no they would not do it.
Then what's left. Social security & medicare & medicaid spending will get their largest cut. 70% across the board. They have already spent all the cash in the social security & medicare lock boxes to fight the war in iraq at a billion each day. Now they want to cut the programs.
And i tell you they will go after all the other safety net programs like the food stamp and unemployment insurance programs. They have already made significant cuts to those programs. I tell you obama will be forced to bring back the 1929 potato soup lines soon. You cannot let too many starve w/o food stamps.
Indeed. And notice too that the Muttster also has nothing very definite to offer solution-wise, except -- wait for it! -- more tax cuts for the wealthy! Of course! What's really pathetic is the losers who are buying into it.
Every spending cut kills jobs. The more unemployment, the less revenue coming in to the government. Reducing revenue will never reduce the debt.
increasing the size of government is going to increase jobs?
who are we going to tax to support these new government workers?
How about we regulate how food stamps and safety net programs work? We seem to be giving out quite a bit of money to people that either do not need it or do not even live in the united states.
you mean he has his bank account numbers of how much money he has behind him when he talks?
Obama a two termer sorry fellas yall have ran out of doo doo
it is so funny to see a man run when ask a simple question..he better read Palins books if he wants to get ahead
So if your GOP it was ok for President Bush to borrow and borrow but now that President Obama is doing the borrow and borrow routine it is wrong.
If your a Democrat it was wrong for President Bush to borrow and borrow but now that President Obama is doing the same thing it is ok.
Most people know that we can't sustain our current rate of borrowing money. Most people knew that we couldn't do it when President Bush was in office.
We are in a sorry state and unless some serious cuts are made along with increasing revenue we are in deep deep trouble and probably before the decade is over. Polotics. Amazing.
yes as soon as the tax breaks go by by ..our house will be back in order
It wasn't okay when, under President Bush, spending got out of control and our debt began to skyrocket. It was because of the spending and debt that the Republicans lost the House in 2006.
It's not okay that under President Obama, spending is spiraling out of control and our debt has increased to an unfathomable $16 trillion. The beginning of the taxpayer revolt occurred in the 2010 midterms, and the Republicans took back the House.
Reasonable people realize we can't keep going at our current rate of borrowing money. As long as one side or the other or both hide their heads in the sand and put politics over hard decisions, it will get worse. Everyone - left, right and middle - will suffer for those mistakes.
The people voted the irresponsible parties out before and hopefully will do so again in November.
The out of control spending started in 2002 and 2003 when
we went to war, not one but 2 wars while cutting taxes at the same time.
The people voted the irresponsible parties out before and hopefully will do so again in November.
Candice - And then in November, what? Vote in Mitt, who is preaching the same old policy's that got us here in the first place? Sounds like a giant circle jerk to me...
Obama/Biden 2012
Spending got out of control and the Republicans (who were doing the spending) lost their jobs for it in 2006. Dennis - we agree.
The tax cuts (EGTRRA) lifted the economy from the 2001 recession. After the tax cuts in 2003, tax revenues increased.
The more money the government has, the more they squander. They have to cut taxes, cut spending and be more responsible with other people's money.
Hey, GT.
Personally, I don't care who wins the Presidency. I'm actually more concerned about the House and Senate. If the Republicans keep the House and also take the Senate, I'd be okay with President Obama keeping his job. As long as Congress can keep his policies in check, or if he moves to the center (like Clinton did), I'd be okay with that.
Of course, he'd have to stop demeaning people like me (conservative, wall street, woman). Getting yelled at all the time has gotten very old.
As long as Congress can keep his policies in check, or if he moves to the center (like Clinton did), I'd be okay with that.
Candice - How much closer to the center can Obama get than he is now? For Christ sake, he's practically a Reagan Democrat. I'm generally considered a centrist Dem. But in this political climate, the right wing see's me as an extreme left-winging commie.....
GT. It's so interesting to me that Democrats think President Obama is center, and the right perceives him as far left. In reality, he's has been all over the right-left line. On national security, Gitmo, tax policy (the tax policy passed - not the policies he proposes), some military issues, he's been more on the right - which makes the left crazy.
On Social issues, healthcare and energy, and in rhetoric he is decidedly on the left - which makes the right nervous.
I think the real division is on fiscal policy and spending. President Clinton was far more fiscally responsible. That may have been due to the Republican Congress he had to deal with. That was before the Republicans lost their way. After his healthcare reform efforts failed, he didn't try to address too much of a divisive social agenda. And Clinton's booming economy helped. Everybody was happy back then.
An extreme left-winging commie? It does seem this political climate tends to push us all to the edges...even if in our rational moments we know we don't really belong that far one way or the other.
using a clock? just gimmicks,
or maybe Romney's time is running out.
"The out of control spending started in 2002 and 2003 when
we went to war, not one but 2 wars while cutting taxes at the same time."
You got it Dennis. Remember people --- it was George W. Bush and his Republican Congress who brought us two unfunded wars, two unfunded tax cuts, a massive, unfunded, new entitlement, the largest expansion of government since LBJ, the largest increase in energy prices in any 8 year period in our history, along with a net loss of jobs over 8 years all while turning the largest surplus of all times into the largest deficit of all times and leaving office with the worst economy since the depressions.
Charlie,
Your really make me laugh. Well ok in a sad way. So here we are 3-1/2 years later. Energy prices are just about at the level when President Bush left office. We are still losing jobs and our deficit is still rising our states are broke (there are a few exceptions more by what they did than any federal policy). We spent 5 trillion unfunded dollars for what exactly? Yes I will agree that President Bush did some stupid things, but why are we doubling down on his policies then?
They are talking about another quantive easing. How is that going to make anything better?
Who are we going to borrow the money from? Let me ask that again, who are we going to borrow the money from?
There was once a good America until the tea party corporations came along and devoured our government ..with tax breaks
True lack of intelligence expressed
what you want me to tell a lie..to fill better?
I guess I should not expect any less because that is all your leader does.................LIE to suit the political winds.
LIE to suit the political winds.
GC - Sounds to me like you're talking about Mitten's, the master flip-flopper.......
Hey GT.....read my post 15.5. Factual proven by snopes.com. So yes he is President Flipper. Does Romney flip....of course he does....all politicians do to suit the political winds. Does not make one worse or better than the other.
. Does not make one worse or better than the other.
I don't know GC, you brought up the original subject, not me..
There are just two ways that the approximately $140k debt per taxpayer can be paid: Take more of the taxpayer's hard-earned money away; or print more money, which causes massive inflation, which in turn causes the taxpayers assets to be worth less.
Either way, the taxpayer gets screwed.
good you rich bastard..about time no more tax breaks for you sorry azzezz of corporations you call yourselves
I'm not rich elvis. But I want to be rich someday! You see, it's not just the rich that vote conservative, its the people that want the chance to better themselves that vote Republican.
The poor who are content to remain just where they are for the rest of their lives, vote liberal; and the liberals, of course, want them to stay poor, so they will keep voting for Democrats.
no sorry a lot of people are catholic and are poor and working class..they vote on one issue only abortion the Church has brain washed them on this one issue and we get screwed with the other millions laws the republicans put on the ones who vote for them
Kannen - You are gullable with a capital "G". You've been listening to too much Glen Beck......
As Harry Truman once said: If you want to live like a Republican, you better start voting like a Democrat..
Obama/Biden 2012
Nope - this is where we have to disagree - when it comes to poor Kannin - the "G" stands for GULP as in BIG - as he wipes off his double chin! ;o)
hahahaha
the "G" stands for GULP as in BIG - as he wipes off his double chin! ;o)
Yeh, but there's still room for gullability behind those folds.....
Awww Feisty – I apologize for making you feel bad. I do feel sorry for you: a shut-in who lives off a meager government stipend (and thinks Obama will make it larger); no friends or family who will still speak with you; whose only real job is feeding your cats. Newsvine is your whole life ….
I agree completely with the logic that the larger one's income is, the larger their share of the debt should be. Why should my share be the same as a person making $5 million a year? If they have 100 times the income I do, they should pay 100 times the taxes I do. Even Republican Hero, Ronald Reagan, made that same argument. In fact, he even stood behind a podium, and told the story of a wealthy man he knew that told him about how his secretary paid more in taxes than he did, and Ronald Reagan spoke about how unfair that was. Sound familiar? It's amazing how Republicans praise RR, but denounce President Obama when he says the exact same thing.
this is so true... I concur 100%
Shosyn
Oh boy Shosyn agrees with Kannin the barbarian. Like anyone cares what a drone follower thinks.
pot meet kettle! Sorry to interupt your little obasm
Apparently you did, so you commented.. what a fool you are in your comments.
It doesn't matter who our next president is, that number is going up and up and up. No one has a plan on how to stop it. It has passed the tipping point.
Eventually, someone will have to pay. Actually, everyone will have to pay. Rich, poor, black, white, white hispanics even. No one is going to fix it for us.
The politicians, all of them, and most of America, are all living in denial. If you raise taxes, the economy suffers, thus fewer taxes overall. If you lower taxes, that's also less revenue. If you keep them the same, the debt still keeps going up and up.
If you raise taxes to 100%, no one will work, so no taxes. Do you think you know the magic number? 90%, 70%, 50%, 20%? No, you don't know the magic number, because there isn't one.
Just as long as it isn't you paying taxes, right? Take the money from someone else, right?
Close the loopholes, tax the rich. That'll fix it, right? Sorry, the math has been done, won't fix it.
Make everyone pay some taxes, right? Make those 50% who pay no taxes pay some too, right?
Sorry, the damage is done. Years and years and years of mismanagement, from both Democratic and Republican leaders got us here.
So, you ask, what's going to happen?
Inflation. It's inevitable. Massive cuts to everything. Pain. Suffering. Hunger.
We all have to pay, and it's going to get ugly.
Absolutely correct...................
Finally! - Someone who does understand. Thank you Memphian.
its funny to see Murdock's empire of news networks destroy union workers around the world..and he help with this despair with the world economy .of helping tea nuts around the world get in office
You have no idea what "tea nuts' stand for except the crap spewed by your favorite talking heads.
funny we all know now? you are no joe the plumber
Are you ever coherent?
come on give me some intelligent points you have?
How is this:
"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 HUSSEIN OBAMA, MARCH 2006
The above quote consists of two excerpts from a long speech delivered by Barack Obama during a Senate debate over raising the national debt limit on March 16, 2006. Along with his entire party, Senator Obama voted against the increase, which passed nonetheless with overwhelming Republican support.
President Obama says he regrets having taken that stand. "He realizes now," explained White House spokesman Jay Carney in a statement to the press on April 11, 2011, "that raising the debt ceiling is so important to the health of this economy and the global economy that it is not a vote that, even when you are protesting an administration's policies, you can play around with."
Your right about one thing, Mr. President.....the country deserves better but we certainly did not get it with you, President Flip-Flopper
Now you might notice that the Republicans back in 2006 supported increasing the debt limit whereas they oppose it now. So what is going on.........? The answer is that both parties work exactly the same----oppose anything the other party wants. So dems get off your high horse and look at your own droppings as well.
Notice that the White House said:
"...that raising the debt ceiling is so important to the health of this economy and the global economy that it is not a vote that, even when you are protesting an administration's policies, you can play around with."
WHAT......are they saying that by not voting for the debt increase in 2006 that they did not care a damn about the US and World economy. Of course they are which means they are not any damn better than the republicans by a long shot.
Now let see....he was against raising the debt limit before he was for it and he was against gay marriage before he was for it. The guy is a born liar.....only saying what needs to be said for political gain.
let me help you to tackle the problem 10 years of tax breaks is over do
WTF has that to do with my post......
I guess it is time to stop debating an idiot because you will beat me everytime with your vast experience.
Bye.
obots don't even realize you could take all the millionaire's money and not even make a dent in the debt. Only a moron would believe robbin the hood is the answer. Just keep licking those oboots while he walks over your face. And if you ever had a job, you'de understand how corrupt the unions have become.
Leaving GCC? Thank God!
GCCal,
This maybe out of topic,but the way you manipulates lie about President Obama stand on Gay Marriage,I NEED to rebutt what you said.On other subjects,its' just rubbish,I dont have to waste my time to bulge your lie.
On the Stand Between Private family and between " A President Of United States" Stands
Mr Barack Obama capacity as American private citizen,a family man and as devoted christian he against it as he voice out,But As President of United States he support it.
What does that have to do with the price of tea in China personally i don't give a rats ass about gay marriage the difference here is using political manipulation against 2 pawns- the church and the LGBT community-the left and the right to create a wedge partisan issue to garner votes.
They don't care what the church thinks the only thing they want is recognition from the Goverment to give them money via taxes, and divorce and parental rights.
Now considering from the mouth of the great big O he said it was a state right then why is the Government chiming in now of all times?
I thought you guys were freedom loving Constitution lovers...shouldn't you be happy that your Presdient (yes...YOUR President) is coming out for EQUALITY and defending peoples freedom to love and marry who they want.
Or do you have stiulations on Freedom and Equality?
The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, drafted by James Madison, declares that Congress "shall pass no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Madison's friend and mentor Thomas Jefferson was proud of his role in drafting and winning assent to Virginia's religious liberty law (1786). In a letter of 1802, he referred to the need for a "high wall of separation" between church and state. Both men considered religious liberty not just a convenient political response to the actual diversity of denominations in the new Republic but as a natural right.
I'm not saying gay marriage is right. In fact, for all I know, it could be a moral abomination. We're not talking about a math equation or the rotational orbit of Jupiter here. We're talking about what people's consciences are telling them, and my thoughts on the decency or indecency of gay marriage are no more inherently right than anyone else's.
As a result, I'm not going to tell you what the hell to think. Truth be told, I don't really give a @!$%#. If you believe homosexual sex acts will land people in Hell, warn your friends. If you believe homosexuals have nothing to be ashamed of, go hug some gay dudes. Your thoughts don't affect anyone else's lives, except, of course, when they're written into a state's constitution.
The battle for the soul of America and the battle for the moral path this country will follow into the future shouldn't be fought in a courtroom or a voting booth. It should be fought every single morning by hard-working people trying to do the right thing.
If you think your neighbor isn't living correctly, use him as motivation to achieve your own goals. If you think the girl down the street is a slut, make wise decisions so you don't end up like her. If you think gay marriage is wrong, share those feelings with your loved ones, but always remember, those are your opinions, not excuses to force people into behaving how you would.
I'm not saying gay marriage is right, but banning it is definitely wrong.
Brilliant President of United States of America decision.
Obama/Biden 2012
Did they give Dennis Miller credit for the idea?, Miller was on O'Reilly the other night boasting about how he has a great idea for Romney's campaign which just happened to be the debt clock. wonder if miller will be upset he got no props for the idea?
I think Miller is probably not really worried about if Romney used his idea or not.
no he thinks he is funny and laughs at his own jokes..but we are laughing at him not with him .but he thinks we are laughing at his barn yard jokes
Wow, I bet he is really worried what you think, payne.
no fox pays him good can you imaging going the bill and miller concert.you better bring a six pack of 5 hour
Please restate so we can understand what you are trying to say. Geez.....no wonder Obama won last time.
GCC
Mr. Perfect I thought you were leaving. Oh I forgot this IS your life. Calling others names and trying to pretend you're an intellectual. You were right the first time get the H*** out of here.
That's a great way to play up to most people's ignorance. That debt clock has been running for decades now, but the previous Repugnican administration really put some stank on it. Mutt must think that voters are fools to forget this. In a sane world, it's Obummer who would be using this against Mutt.
All the experts posting BS Just don't pay attention to the BS the canidates put out< Use your comman sense if you have any to make your vote... The polticans lie any way just to get your vote... So Vote for a person you can respect not because of what comes out of his mouth!!!!
The debt is not a problem… we print our own money. Order another printing press – we’ll be fine.
The new republican tea party cant win on truth..need some truth Walker of Wisconsin
He is going to win elvis.
Romney did you remind the people it was your party that has put how many war bills on that tab ?
Bush's Iraq war was under 1 trillion- obie has spent 5 times that on NOTHING- epic fail
Crystal
Duh.... it must be crystal meth you're on. That was two wars you moron. Typical brainwashed Repube. Try to remember that Georgie Jr. pulled out half our troops when we were closing in on Osama Bin Ladin in Afghanistan and started his own war in Iraq. There seems to be no end to your ignorance.
Is that the deficit or the number of fillibusters?
Maybe the number of Obama lies...........
Name me some lies and I bet you are lying.
Read my post 15.5....still don't believe me...google it....even snopes says it is true. The guy will say anything depending on the political winds.
GCCal- you ever notice how when you stop them dead in their tracks they quit responding? I do, and it is happening a lot lately. Love it.
So true, talk...
“I will close Gitmo within one year!” He lied! .... and you lose.
"My adminstration will be completely transparent"
"Every bill will be posted online for 5 days"
I will go through the budget line by line and do away with lobbyists..... epic fail
Kannin--So a promise unkept is a LIE? Seriously? I remember that Obama tried quite diligently to encourage Congress to close Gitmo, and they (especially Republicans) threw a hissy fit.
During the debate over raising the debt ceiling, President Obama said that 80% of Americans support including higher taxes as part of the deal. But a Rasmussen poll taken the same week showed that only 34% supported a tax hike. Is that lie enough for you Bethie?
When Obama was selling his $787 billion stimulus package, he consistently bragged about how shovel-ready construction jobs would be funded across the nation. He later admitted that was a lie, when he told the New York Times: “There’s no such thing as shovel-ready projects.” How about that one?
Name one.
I'll do my own research into the shovel-ready story; I wouldn't be surprised if you haven't taken words out of context. I noticed you didn't address my point about Gitmo. So it's OK to just throw it out that that Obama intentionally lied about that? I'm sorry, but unkept promises do not equal lies, especially with the obstructionists he's had to deal with since Day 1.
Bethie- In 09 and 10 the Republicans didn't have the votes in either the house or the senate to stop anything the president wanted. So if the president did Lie. The reason is because the Democrats knew if they passed the closing of Getmo they would have probably be thrown out of both houses be even larger numbers. As for his other lies, I would have given him credit if he at least tryed to make them law. But he would have to submit it to congress at least, something he never did. So he didn't even try to keep his word. Telling people you will do something and make no effort toward doing it is a lie.
He passed is Government Heathcare with no problem despite that every Republican voted against it. He seems to have to trouble appointed Czar's.
At least Fox is not in the presidents pockt like the others, and they are the only ones that will put both sides on at the same time to discuss the issues.
Is that the deficit or the unwanted baptisms from the Mormon Church?
Give it a rest.....doesn't mean much.
GCC
You're the liar you said you were leaving an hour ago.
In the summer of 2011 a university Econ Dept. started tallying up the cost of our two unfunded wars as a project. Cost of the two wars a little over $4 Trillion dollars and climbing. Iraq and Afghanistan are the first two wars outside of the revolutionary war that had not been funded by rationing, taxes, war bonds, etc.
Typically, it's during a war that this country's manufacturing goes into gear creating armaments and employing a lot of people. However since the beginning of this century none of that has taken place and now the American people are faced with paying for it along with interest. During the majority of these wars it's been the GOP in control.
Think about it...
When obie took over, the Iraq war was 880 billion, Afghan war is his.
Crystal, Obama absolutely did not start the Afghan war. It was started BEFORE Iraq, and then Bush took his eye off the ball (gettng bin Ladin) and decided to start another war in Iraq. The war in Afghanistan has been going on for almost a decade. Yes, Obama has added troops--in an effort to succeed there and bring the war to a successful end. I personally am not sure that we should stay there any more because it doesn't seem like a winnable situation and we're spending billions and losing lives. Get your facts straight!
dubya started 2 wars at a cost of $10 billion/month with no exit plan. He had no goal!
To be fair, raising the debt limit may have a (very, very small) positive side: The massive inflation caused by increased national debt reduces the value of everyone's dollar by exactly the same amount - rich/poor, industrious/lazy - it doesn't matter. We are led to the conclusion, therefore, that funding the Government on an UNbalanced budget is equivalent to a flat tax.
At least all citizens will be giving up the same proportion of their wealth to fund our runaway Government. That's fair.
Kannin--That's an interesting theory. Too bad it is not supported by logic or evidence. We've been increasing the debt limit for a very long time and have yet to see your so-called "massive" inflation. In fact, since 2000 the annual inflation rate has ranged from minus .4 to plus 3.8 (in 2008). See http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/historical-inflation-rates/.
I see you didn't want to talk about Carter's 13.5% rate.
There's actually some irony in the Obama apologists still claiming it is all Bush's fault. In three years, Dems will be blaming Romney for the high inflation, and Republicans will be blaming Obama. The irony is that in this case it actually will be Obama's fault. The damage was already done with Obama's unfunded trillion-dollar "stimulus" and "Quantitative Easement" (printing money) to cover it. Because of those, inflation became inevitable. You can hold it down in the short term, but it will eventually manifest.
George W. Bush inherited a strong economy, a budget surplus, and a nation at peace.
Eight years later, he left Obama with a shattered economy, a trillion dollar deficit, and two useless wars.
Obama saved the country from another Great Depression, rebuilt GM, reformed healthcare, reformed Wall Street, doubled the stock market, created 8 straight quarters of GDP growth, created 22 straight months of private sector job growth, and got Bin Laden. The expiration of the Bush tax cuts should help the economy and force people making > $250k/year to pay their fair share of taxes.
sam, really? Clinton left office with $5 trillion in debt an in a recession. I know you really would like to change the facts, but I guess being that they are facts, you cannot.
In 2001, debt was $5 trillion, in 2007, when Pelosi and Reid took control of the house and Senate, the debt was $8.5 trillion. Now it has about doubled. Sorry, but you may want to actually do some research before you make yourself look like a fool.
Drew, you seem to imply that Pelosi and Reed are responsible for personally adding billions to our debt. If you want Obama to take responsibility for raising if after taking office, you have to acknowledge the damage Bush did while in office. His unfunded wars (which were not put "on the books") combined with lowered taxes didnn't help the debt situation. Those wars ontinue today and keep piling up our expenses. Romney wants to start a third war (Iran) and add to the defense budget, while cutting programs for the needy. You might not agree with the stimulus, but it's hard to know where we'd be without it. I also wonder how much better our country would be doing if we had actually given the amount of stimulus that economists suggested (higher).
And Bush left $10 trillion in debt, two wars, a trashed economy, $4.00 / gal gasoline, the reputation of the US among the world community in shambles and the sore memories of 9/11 for which he ignored the warnings while he was "relaxing" in Crawford!
Steve - When Bush left office in January 2009, gas was $1.86/ gallon. (http://gasbuddy.com/gb_retail_price_chart.aspx)
The repuliecon party is all lies. Almost everything they say . They cater to the misinformed ,brainwashed and just plain stupid.
They have taken the same path as your candidate. "Fight fire with fire". Stinks for you doesn't it? That is how he got elected the first time. Cater to the misinformed and "oppressed". What goes around comes around and Obama is facing his Waterloo. The same BS isn't going to work this time.
Talk--While anything could happen between now and November, I wouldn't be too confident of a Romney victory. Look at the Electoral College map: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html. Note that not only does Obama have a commanding lead, but he also leads in seven of ten "toss up" states while Romney leads in two (only Florida is a real toss up).
Lot of "likely's" in there. Trust me, when the vote comes, it won't be "likely's" that decide. 46 to 43 in the last poll I saw. And the women are swinging Romney's way by a larger margin (albeit a couple of points) and the mythical "war on women" isn't working anymore with those who think.
Talk--Good luck with your theories. What poll is 46 to 43 (not that it makes any difference inasmuch, as GW Bush showed, it's the Electoral College that counts)? Do you have a link to evidence showing that women are swinging Romney's way? Until I see such evidence, I'll stick with the facts as presented by political professionals.