Further evidence Willard isn’t half the man his father was!

He’s willing to sell his soul to the devil for the birther vote;

Mitt Romney will not 'repudiate' Donald Trump, even as the billionaire has resumed his public flirtations with "birtherism," according to the AP.

Romney told reporters Monday:

You know, I don't agree with all the people who support me and my guess is they don't all agree with everything I believe in. But I need to get 50.1 percent or more and I'm appreciative to have the help of a lot of good people.

Does America deserve to have a birther occupying in the Oval Office?

It was good to see George Will call it like it is…

PS: The funniest thing about this is, liberals have George Clooney as a surrogate, who does the right wing nuts have to counter?

Donald Trump & the squirral who lives on his head... lol

Under the Radar:

Last Friday on "Inside the Boiler Room" the question was asked about Ron Paul's role in the Republican Party. So I decided to add my .02.

About two weeks, MSNBC's own Chuck Todd talked about the undecided voter in the general election. Pollsters were interested in the characteristics of these people and found out they had a lot in common. His first observation was that they did not like President Obama and they really did not like Willard Romney, they demonstrated many of the characteristics of the folks who supported Ross Perot. In short, they are avid Ron Paul supporters.

That got me to thinking that ever since Willard became the presumed nominee for the GOPTP, the media began talking about Romney and President Obama. Ron Paul totally fell off the radar screen. There was a footnote that Ron Paul was not going one-on-one against Romney, but was focusing his attention on gathering delegates at state GOP conventions. In fact, he acquired 12 of 13 delegates in the gopher state (MN) and has picked-up some delegates in a number of other states.

So what is Ron Paul up to? He cannot get enough delegates to overturn Romney. Perhaps he is seeking leverage to gain a prominent speaking role in the convention? Maybe he wants his name put in nomination so he can tell his grandkids that he ran for POTUS? Maybe he wants some of his beliefs included as planks to the GOP platform? Maybe Ron Paul is simply looking for some respect? I really don't know.

But what I do believe is that Willard Romney will not give Ron Paul the time of day and will discard him the same way Romney treated the employees at AMPAD. If that happens, then I wouldn't be surprised to see Ron Paul and his followers walk out of the convention and stay home in November. That's something Romney can ill afford.

Backhouse

VOTER PURGING.

That is so riviting Backhouse

The truth is the only way that clown show called the GOP can win is by cheating and stealing.

GOP TACTICS

In just this past year's legislative session, the GOP has led efforts to:Target Voter Registration Drives Cut Early Voting Repeal Election Day Registration Create Citizenship Challenges Change the Electoral College Pass Photo ID LawsElection Day or Same Day Registration (EDR or SDR) allows eligible citizens to register to vote immediately before casting a ballot on Election Day or during early voting.
To all the sheet loving righties you need to read this:

FACT CHECK: ‘Non-Citizen’ Voter In James O’Keefe’s Voter Fraud Video Is Actually A Citizen

Thank you for informing everyone bachhouse

Good Morning Feisty:

If Willard can't stand up to Trump, there is no way on earth that he would stand up to world leaders like Putin. He is a very weak man with no spine whatsoever. Anything for a vote.

The notion of a straight-party ticket has always been inconceivable to me. My maternal Grandfather was a Roosevelt Democrat and there was no way he would ever vote Republican. On the other side of the family, voting Democratic was nearly treasonous. It always seemed to me there wasn't a single candidate who went right down the line with my views. That meant choosing the guy who was more closely aligned with me. Party affiliation wasn't that important.

In my earlier years, it seemed Republicans tended to tout fiscal responsibility, but they had this unfortunate inclination to regulate private behavior. A "We spend responsibly, but we want to look in your bedroom." Democrats, on the other hand, didn't seem to be aware of the consequences of expanding just about everything, from broadening rights to creating very expensive programs, without much concern about paying for them.

Over time however, it became clear that neither party was acted responsibly when it came to spending, not just tax revenues, but any money they could beg, borrow, or steal. It was the question of rights that now divided the parties.

Today, it's a pretty simple choice. Republicans want a fetus to become a human being at the moment of conception. They want a government that approximates Taliban rule. (That is not hyperbole. Taliban law is virtually identical to that of the Old Testament.) They abhor the thought of someone touching their guns. They restrict voting rights. They hate unions. In short, the idea of having rights just pisses them off, and to crush those rights, no tactic is off the table. The ends justify the means.

For Democrats, broadening rights is an article of faith. A woman is not the property of her womb's occupant, nor is she the mere chattel of her male partner. The freedom to assemble and associate peaceably as protected by the First Amendment is a fundamental right. It doesn't matter whether the assembly is in a church or a union hall. Voting is most certainly a right and it shouldn't be denied to any citizen who is at least 18 years of age.

Today's Republican party is replete with voters who vote against their own best interests. Oh, we hear their cries of anguish, "Don't tell me I don't know what my best interests are." We will ignore their pathetic rants if we take a moment to remember that as children we said the same thing to our parents. "You're not the boss of me. I know what's good for me." We were wrong, of course, but we grew up. The screaming element of the Republican Party still hasn't grown up. Think tantrums! They're breaking everything in the house.

I desperately want true Republicans to take back their party. It is patently absurd to insist that Democrats have moved so far to the left that compromise is impossible. ALL evidence says the crazies in the G.O.P. have moved so far to the right that they are the ones who take compromise off the table. Until genuine Republicans take back their party, they will NEVER have my vote.

i would like to thank our

Amazon.com is the 18th corporation to drop ALEC. ALEC models just-add-water legislation to suppress voting rights and get rid collective bargaining. Bills include anti-immigrant legislation, eradicating public education and tax breaks for corporations.

In particular, A.L.E.C.'s Voter ID laws, and Stand Your Ground (Shoot First) laws in 26 states: have caused big corporations like Pepsico, Coca-Cola, Wendy's, Mars, Kraft, Proctor &Gamble, , Kaplan, Yum! and Blue Cross/Blue Shield -- to drop their support of A.L.E.C.

Another right wing organization (cannot recall name at this moment!) immediately took up the baton to curtail voting rights in America, and make them available only to a favored group of voters.

CNN (5/28/12) - Asked on his charter plane whether Trump's questioning of President Barack Obama's birthplace gave him pause, Romney simply said he was grateful for all his supporters.
"You know, I don't agree with all the people who support me and my guess is they don't all agree with everything I believe in," Romney said. "But I need to get 50.1% or more and I'm appreciative to have the help of a lot of good people."
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/05/28/romney-doesnt-back-away-from-birther-trump/

Mitt doesn't even understand the Presidential chess board. He could get over70% of the popular vote and still fail to win the 270 delegates needed to be President.
He should be smart enough to understand that if he repudiates the far left they will not change their vote and cause them to vote for President Obama but he could pick-up or hold onto some of those in the middle.
Mitt (the cowardly lion) needs to ask the Grand Wizard of Oz for courage as he follows the yellow brick road where he only needs 50.1% of the vote to win.

And this doesn't even begin to address the state's biggest financial headache: the Illinois state pension fund has a shortfall between assets and liabilities of $83 billion. The Dem governor has proposed increasing the retirement age and increasing the workers share of retirement contributions.

I wonder how the shortfall is calculated, because here is the news from the NY City pension fund.

In New York, the city's chief actuary, Robert North, has proposed lowering the assumed rate of return for the city's five pension funds to 7 percent from 8 percent, which would be one of the sharpest reductions by a public pension fund in the United States. But that change would mean finding an additional $1.9 billion for the pension system every year, a huge amount for a city already depositing more than a tenth of its budget — $7.3 billion a year — into the funds.

But to many observers, even 7 percent is too high in today's market conditions.

"The actuary is supposedly going to lower the assumed reinvestment rate from an absolutely hysterical, laughable 8 percent to a totally indefensible 7 or 7.5 percent," Mr. Bloomberg said during a trip to Albany in late February. "If I can give you one piece of financial advice: If somebody offers you a guaranteed 7 percent on your money for the rest of your life, you take it and just make sure the guy's name is not Madoff."

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/28/nyregion/fragile-calculus-in-plans-to-fix-pension-systems.html

So who's going to pay the difference? The tax payer is already set to be slammed by the Federal liabilities, SS now requiring taxes from general revenues, Medicaid expansion due to Obamacare, and Medicare which will increase by 100B a year for 10 years.

Another interesting point this morning was the charts produced by Steve Ratner on MJ. Apparently the CBO is predicting an 8% hit to the economy if Washington does nothing regarding the tax rates and sequestration. What I was wondering if tax cuts don't add to economic growth, and therefore increase revenues, why is it the CBO predicts that tax hikes will dampen economic activity? This is what the UK government found out when they implemented their so-called austerity budget, which was tax increases now and spending cuts later. Well they increased taxes, economic activity went down and so did the expected revenues. They haven't even tried to implement the draconian cuts yet.

Morning Bev, hope you had a good weekend,

WISCONSIN: A recent report shows ALEC's "extraordinary influence" in the Wisconsin legislature for the past16 months, ever since Gov. Scott Walker (R-WI) began his term.

The executive director of the Center for Media and Democracy (CMD), released a report. In a nutshell, it says:

That A.L.E.C. forwards the agenda of huge corporations and special interest groups, while undermining the interests of WI families.

Purging voters is one more GOP/Koch scam strategy to gain the voting edge.
"Cleansing" votes is an egregious blow to our democracy and our voice, and cannot go unchecked.
We must NEVER forget that voting is a basic constitutional right.

Realize the scope of the Nix the Fix Party's sense of ENTITLEMENT -- on all voting and tax matters.

So true Backhouse,

W Bush was an illegitimate President and due to this illegitimate take over of government approved by the Supreme Court, we the citizens and the world have been forced to pay a heavy price.

Well Romney may be pushing back on Bain, but the people are not going to let go of what this "heartless" man did to the Companies and employees lives he destroyed. They are pushing back, we are pushing back and you can be assured the Democratic Party is pushing back. Romney just wants it to go away, guess what? IT WON'T.

By the way Willard, WHERE ARE YOUR TAX RETURNS ?

Obama in 2012.

As of today there were 36 names in Tampa that were wrongfully purged yet they have proved their citizenship. That leaves the rest...aprox 2664, just in Tampa alone that have not answered the letters. This 36 have sent in a copy of their birth certificates.

If anyone has tried to get a copy of their birth certificate from out of state, they know it's not a simple process nor is it quick. And then of course, there is the cost associated with it. Rick Scott is employing the same tactics used in 2000. It's illegal and improper.

By the way, msnbc.com’s Mike O’Brien today will have a more in-depth piece looking at Romney and Trump.

Yea, god forbid any of you hacks write anything about Obama ever during this election. Maybe no one has endorsed Obama so there is no one to write about?

Alan, NJ: So who's going to pay the difference?

The usual suspects, the "rich"! There's just an endless supply of them.

LR: Maybe no one has endorsed Obama so there is no one to write about?

Super Joe Biden seems rather fond of Barry, and he's an absolute riot to listen to.

We must NEVER forget that voting is a basic constitutional right.

___________________________________________

Things That Are Not In the U.S. Constitution

Have you ever heard someone say, "That's unconstitutional!" or "That's my constitutional right!" and wondered if they were right? You might be surprised how often people get it wrong. You might also be surprised how often people get it right. Your best defense against misconception is reading and knowing your Constitution.

A lot of people presume a lot of things about the Constitution. Some are true, some are not. This page will detail some of the things that people think are in the Constitution, but are not.

The Right To Vote

The Constitution contains many phrases, clauses, and amendments detailing ways people cannot be denied the right to vote. You cannot deny the right to vote because of race or gender. Citizens of Washington DC can vote for President; 18-year-olds can vote; you can vote even if you fail to pay a poll tax. The Constitution also requires that anyone who can vote for the "most numerous branch" of their state legislature can vote for House members and Senate members.

Note that in all of this, though, the Constitution never explicitly ensures the right to vote, as it does the right to speech, for example. It does require that Representatives be chosen and Senators be elected by "the People," and who comprises "the People" has been expanded by the aforementioned amendments several times. Aside from these requirements, though, the qualifications for voters are left to the states. And as long as the qualifications do not conflict with anything in the Constitution, that right can be withheld. For example, in Texas, persons declared mentally incompetent and felons currently in prison or on probation are denied the right to vote. It is interesting to note that though the 26th Amendment requires that 18-year-olds must be able to vote, states can allow persons younger than 18 to vote, if they chose to.

http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html#vote

Feisty, .....the birther mentality?

Does the Trumpery Brigade think our National and Home security might possibly have sussed out anyone who does not meet citizenship requirements?

-After 3.5 years in the office of United States President?

Under President Obama, didn't the United States just stop Al Qaeda's second in command, as well as Bin Laden, and dozens more AQ-ers, for starters?

Dumb Fux talks about Romney selling his soul for the birther vote. remember when Bill Clinton excused Robert Byrd's association with the KKK? (emphasis is mine)

“He once had a fleeting association with the Ku Klux Klan, what does that mean? I’ll tell you what it means. He was a country boy from the hills and hollows from West Virginia. He was trying to get elected,” former President Bill Clinton said of Sen. Robert Byrd.

“And maybe he did something he shouldn’t have done and he spent the rest of his life making it up. And that’s what a good person does. There are no perfect people. There are certainly no perfect politicians,” he added.

Maybe he did something he shouldn't have?? Are you kidding??

Except that Byrd didn't -- He was the leader of the Democrat-led filibuster trying to stop the passage of the Civil Rights Act.

So bash Romney all you want to but remember there are an equal number of democrats that would and have done anything to get elected.

Another laugh I had over the weekend was the repeated claim that Obama had barley increased government spending. The rational for this argument is that Bush should be responsible for the 2009 spending, because the Federal Fiscal year begins in October 2008, and Obama wasn't elected then.

Well how exactly is Bush responsible for the Stimulus of 800B? You know the one-off spending in 2009 passed in February 2009 by a Democratic congress and signed in law by the new Administration. This 800B has now been baked into the figures as a baseline against which Obama's spending is measured.

Nice trick.

BTW One of the recurrent gripes on this board is that Bush didn't pay for two wars and Medicare D. I agree. He was fiscally reckless. On the other side, however, Obama didn't pay for his stimulus and and spent the same amount for three years now. Also, fiscally reckless, and the 2 wars and Medicare D are actually less than the stimulus time four.

Thank HEAVEN for the Trump card.

Without Rudy Slippers Giuliani in the race, I was beginning to worry that we would have to endure an entire Presidential campaign without any bad hair jokes.

Donald Trump personifies the bad hair joke.

Smart move, Mitt.

If that alone doesn't make people sit up and question Romney's judgment, then we're doomed.

james --

Dumb Fux talks about Romney selling his soul for the birther vote. remember when Bill Clinton excused Robert Byrd's association with the KKK?

I don't think you can quite compare those two things. Byrd's KKK association was well in the past, like Romney's homophobic attack on a classmate. If you want me to forget that, then forget Robert Byrd, too.

By contrast, Donald Trump has recently doubled down on his own crazy birtherism.

Besides, Clinton created 23 million jobs while he was President. We have yet to hear Mitt Romney make any solid claim to the number of jobs he actually created at Bain.

But he and Donald Trump do share one important thing in common.

They both like to fire people.

Embrace it, James. You own it now.

Note that in all of this, though, the Constitution never explicitly ensures the right to vote,

Which is a critical and important point to Conservatives right now...they're working hard to make sure only the "right people" are allowed to vote.

Sad, isn't it?

Is it dangerous for obama's dalliance with Rev Wright, Billy Ayers, Bernadette Dohrn to continue? Louis Farrakahn endorsed Barry in 2008, will he do it again in 2012? What about those venture capitalists working in Barry's campaign... kind of a double standard since their whole campaign thus far is an attack on Bain. As a matter of fact one of them also worked for Bain! Oh surprise, surprise!

I think it's great Trump is helping out.... everyone has the same goal, send Barry into retirement. Maybe he can find a job in the private sector, God knows he can't create jobs!

Ah,, another week and another gaggle of complaints from the usual suspects about things that out here in the real world, nobody cares about.

Let's see:

Voter purging

ALEC

Donald Trump

Ron Paul

Bush was an Illegitimate President (way to go Job1!)

Romney's Tax Returns

Guess what folks, gas is still near $4/gallon, groceries are through the roof and my energy costs are killing me.

Whine all you want about this other ridiculous junk. People will vote with their pocketbook.

The economy always wins.

Always.

Feisty,

Exactly. Can't see Romney disputin Putin.

Dennis: Almost everyone believes that Obama has presided over a massive increase in federal spending

Dennis, cut and paste all you want. Again, out here in the real world, it is being felt. You are screaming in an echo chamber.

There is a reason everyone believes it.

It's because they are living it.

Independents will be disgusted

Republicans won't see any problem with Trump

Democrats will sneer at the Trump "birther" reputation

The MONEY , the incredible, unfathomable DOLLARS that are being used to BUY VOTES has totally eroded our American ideas of freedom and democracy.

Thanks for bringing up gas prices and their impact on people's wallets, WCA...not even Fox News agrees with you, partly because gas prices are closer to $3.50/gallon than $4.00.

More Americans will hit the road this holiday weekend than a year ago. And they'll have a bit more money to spend thanks to lower gas prices.

Memorial Day kicks off the summer travel season, and since pump prices never reached $4 or $5 a gallon, as feared, economists says travelers are likely to dine out or shop more once they pull off the road.

About 30.7 million people will drive more than 50 miles for Memorial Day trips, according to auto club AAA. That's 400,000 more than last year, a jump AAA attributes to improvement in the economy and consumer attitudes. The number of holiday travelers grows to 34.8 million when you include planes, trains and other means of transportation.

A drop in gas prices encouraged Americans to spend more at restaurants and bars in April. And that trend could continue over the holiday. Pump prices are down 27 cents since their peak in early April, to $3.67 a gallon, where they're likely to stay this weekend, predicts Tom Kloza, the chief oil analyst at the Oil Price Information Service. That's 12 cents cheaper than last year. Over the weekend, U.S. drivers will burn about 1.2 billion gallons of gasoline — and spend $144 million less on gas than last year.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/05/26/cheaper-gas-spurs-more-travelers-this-memorial-day/#ixzz1wGbw7WDy

Recall Scott Walker.

Don't blame others if you don't vote.

WCA --

Guess what folks, gas is still near $4/gallon, groceries are through the roof and my energy costs are killing me.

Just turn down the hot air. ;-)

The economy always wins.

Indeed. And things finally seem to be looking up.

Backhouse

Morning Bev, hope you had a good weekend,

WISCONSIN: A recent report shows ALEC's "extraordinary influence" in the Wisconsin legislature for the past16 months, ever since Gov. Scott Walker (R-WI) began his term

Thank you,

I had a lovely holiday I had my oldest son, granddaughter, and great-grandson over. We bar-b-qued in the back. I couldn't make Fiesty's cook-out but there will be others.

LOOK at this:

WE ARE WISCONSIN ISSUES TV STATIONS CEASE AND DESIST LETTER ON RGA’S FALSE, MISLEADING ATTACK ADMay 25, 2012

RGA ad knowingly uses unverified jobs claims to falsely attack Tom Barrett

Today, We are Wisconsin sent an official cease and desist letter to TV stations around Wisconsin demanding that an ad by Right Direction Wisconsin – a PAC of the Republican Governors Association – be immediately removed from rotation because of its false and unverified claims manipulating Scott Walker’s worst-in-the-nation jobs record.

http://www.wearewisconsin.org/uncategorized/we-are-wisconsin-issues-tv-stations-cease-and-desist-letter-on-rgas-false-misleading-attack-ad/

Isn't that great? The college drop out, Gov Scott Walker, Lies are coming to light.

Hey Obama, when you meet Putin next time try not to bow.

What's the matter?

Was appeasement too big of word for you to spell? lol

Really off your game this morning...

How did they find a room large enough to accommodate Trump's ego AND Romney's ego?

Common sense will trump everything else, including Trump and his money

Almost everyone believes that Obama has presided over a massive increase in federal spending an 'inferno' of spending that threatens our jobs, our businesses and our children's future. Even Democrats seem to think it's true. But it didn't happen. Although there was a big stimulus bill under Obama, federal spending is rising at the slowest pace since Dwight Eisenhower brought the Korean War to an end in the 1950s.

Subtract 800B from the last year of Bush and add 800B to the first year of Obama and lets see the figures then.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/31/AR2010083102811.html

Federal domestic spending increased a record 16 percent to $3.2 trillion in 2009, the Census Bureau reported Tuesday, largely because of a boost in aid to the unemployed and the huge economic stimulus package enacted to rescue the sinking economy.

BTW Did Obama pay for that stimulus the way Bush paid for his wars?

In the past months Mitt Romney has shown a total lack of leadership and zero courage for many reasons. He is unwilling to stand up to those voices in his party who make the GOP a laughing stock. Whether it is Rush Limbaugh's tirade of lies, the Brian Fischer's of the evangelical extremists or Donald Trump and his birther nonsense, Mitt Romney has simply smiled and kissed their rings. Donald Trump is a carnival barker, a liar, and an opportunist whose only purpose is to make a buck by playing the fear card and blowing dog whistles at the gullible; Trump desparately wants to be relevant but he never will be. Mitt Romney is also a carnival barker, as equally opportunistic as Trump, trying to be relevant with those who at one time even the GOP would have shoved to the side. Romney might as well join Trump's birther train because as long as he stands on stage with him, he's blowing the same whistle. What a coward Romney is.

@ Beverly --

What I find so interesting is how some folks here in my own state seem to think nothing of Scott Walker's countenancing of illegal campaign activities being coordinated out of the County Executive's office, not further than 25 feet from his office, his taking of illegal campaign contributions from a railroad crony while at the same time opposing stimulus spending for high speed rail, and his having had close political associates and appointees who shamelessly embezzled money from a veteran's fund.

If they are willing to overlook all of that, then a little obvious fudging of his disastrous job numbers won't bother them, either.

It's a shame how low on the scale of integrity and honor people are willing to go to support their own ideology.

And it also says a LOT about their ideology.

Scott Walker at Marquette University, a Personal Remembrance by Dr. Glen Barry

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker Is STILL [Unfit] for Office
Personal Essay by Dr. Glen Barry

May 22, 2012

~snip~

I had the misfortune of being a college classmate of Scott Walker. Walker attended Marquette from 1986 to 1990, two years younger than I. He was a laughable dork – dumb, full of himself, and authoritarian. Being deeply imperfect myself, nonetheless, I have to speak up on how going to college with Walker showed him to be a piece of work. And that his bad conduct, which began there, and led to a harsh and unjust start to his political life, which remains ugly and dangerous to this day, do in fact indicate Walker remains [unfit ]for office.

To put it politely, Walker was not the sharpest tool in the shed, actually amongst the least sharp. With a C average (if that) and [never graduating], I am not surprised to see him making up his own math on jobs when the real numbers don't suit him. This reflects the utter disdain with which he holds truth, knowledge, education, and anything else that clashes with his absolutist worldview of religious and corporate based rule. As a classmate, he displayed a shocking lack of curiosity, original thought, or interest in topics other than his political ascendency.

I wish I could say definitely why he never graduated – it is a closely guarded secret. I believe the general line of thinking – that Scott Walker was caught cheating. Both Walker and Marquette University should end their cover-up of what occurred. Instead Marquette hails Walkers as a "Marquette alumnus" even though he only attended and did not graduate.

For the 99% of you reading this essay – who are not from Wisconsin – Scott Walker is the latest tea party, right-wing, uneducated, superstitious nut job bent upon destroying America with a virulent form of conservatism bordering upon fascism.

In early 2011, after only days in office, and without running on the issue, Walker threatened to call out the state national guard to ram through reforms to gut public unions. Over coming months, Wisconsin citizens fought back – coming out by the hundreds of thousands in a "Cheddar Rebellion" to protest and occupy the state capitol – and though ultimately unsuccessful, laying the foundation for the Occupy Movement.

Scott Walker is still [unfit ]for office. During his time as Milwaukee County executive, massive illegal fund-raising went on feet from his office door. In the past year and a half, Governor Walker preemptively threatened not only eerily to call out the National Guard, he threatened to illegally arrest political opponents. He refers to hard working nurses, fire-fighters, cops, teachers, and government workers as union thugs. For months he illegally limited access to the Capitol – the people's house. Corporate interests were given the keys to the state, and told to go forth and plunder

http://wcmcoop.com/members/scott-walker-at-marquette-university-a-personal-rememberance-by-dr-glen-barry/

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

Didn't I tell ya'll this cross eyed badger is a college drop out and Liar?

I even posted his "divide and conquer video

Bombshell Video Captures Walker Admitting 'Divide and Conquer' Strategy to Take Down Unions

here it is once more

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1S_Pxw2n-U&feature=player_embedded

If Romney's Bush advisers and the Vegas Clown Show while chumming(as in fishing) with Trump the Chump does not prove that Romney is out of touch with us ordinary Americans and that he has no sincere interest in We the People as his bottom line in governing, then we have become the dumbest country on the face of the Earth!

Alan, NJ --

Subtract 800B from the last year of Bush and add 800B to the first year of Obama and lets see the figures then.

Now you're starting to fudge numbers like Scott Walker. You know you can't reasonably do that.

Obama didn't spend money in 2009 just for the heck of it.

He spent it because of Bush's disastrous recession. And states took it, as I recall. Some of them, like Texas (under Perry) and Minnesota (under Pawlenty), used it to reduce their own deficit rather than to create jobs, and then complained about the federal deficit and whined that the stimulus hadn't created any jobs.

Well, duh.

Besides, Bush is mostly responsible for the fiscal 2009 budget, including war appropriations and TARP. Don't blame Obama for TARP.

So AM, KKK associations are OK with you, I guess he evolved (to use the current left synonym for "flip-flop"). It was after Byrd died in 2010 that Clinton made the excuse so less than two years ago it was being talked about.

Your hanging on to the firing thing is laughable.

What Romney said was taken completely out of context. According to Politifact: Romney was specifically talking about the ability to get rid of your health insurance provider when you aren’t satisfied with its services.

In that context I too get satisfaction from firing my dry cleaner after a suit is damaged or the car wash that does not perform to my standards or the restaurant that serves bad food.

I gather you have never fired anyone? How about a hairdresser or a grocery store?

For various reasons the US media avoids the topic:

Unlike President Bush - this President has been appreciated, and favored by world leaders ever since he took office.

................................

In some countries like Japan, it is customary for people who meet to BOW to each other:

As a sign of human EQUALITY.

Good post Backhouse, great topic. Here is a sample of Rick Scott's work at purging voter rolls:

Meet Maureen Russo: An Eligible Florida Voter Governor Rick Scott Just Purged From The Voting Rolls

By Judd Legum on May 25, 2012 at 1:55 pm

Maureen Russo was born in Akron, Ohio. For the last 40 years she’s operated a dog boarding and grooming business — Bobbi’s World Kennels — with her husband in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. Maureen is 60 years old and has been a registered voter in the state for the last four decades. She regularly votes at the church around the corner from her home.

Two weeks ago she received a letter from the State of Florida informing her that they had received information that she was not born in this country and, therefore, was ineligible to vote.

She was given an option to request “an administrative hearing to present evidence” disputing the determination of the State of Florida that she was ineligible to vote. Unless Maureen returned a form requesting such a hearing within 30 days, she was told, it would result in “the removal of your name from the voter registration rolls.”

She immediately sent off a registered letter to the State with a copy of her passport. She hasn’t heard anything back.

It’s unclear precisely how Maureen was identified by the state as an ineligible voter.

Maureen’s story raises serious questions about the integrity of the massive voter purge being conducted under the direction of Gov. Rick Scott. Last year, Scott instructed his former Secretary of State, Kurt Browning, to compile a list of people who were registered in Florida but ineligible to vote. Browning resigned in February after struggling to find reliable data, stating “We were not confident enough about the information for this secretary to hang his hat on it.”

Congressman Ted Deutch (D-FL), who represents Ms. Russo, has called on the Governor Scott to “immediately suspend” the voting purge because of widespread inaccuracies and a lack of transparency.

Unfortunately, Maureen’s situation is not an isolated incident. Earlier this week, ThinkProgress reported Seminole County Supervisor of Elections Mike Ertel, a Republican, posted a picture on Twitter of a voter on the list falsely identified as ineligible, with his passport. Congressman Deutch also told ThinkProgress he’s heard from several other constituents who have been removed from the rolls without justification.

It is unclear what legitimate purpose Gov. Scott has to move forward with the voting purge in the face of multiple documented errors. Florida has no history of mass voter fraud. It does have a history, however, of mass voter disenfranchisement. By one estimate, 7000 Florida voters were wrongfully removed from the voter rolls for the 2000 presidential election — 13 times George W. Bush’s margin of victory in that state after the Supreme Court halted the post-election recount.

The GOP political strategy; If you can't beat em, cheat em!

AM Indeed. And things finally seem to be looking up.

Really Anna? Without charts and graphs, can you tell me how things are looking up.

Cuz I only know of one poll that checks the pulse of the American public on how they think things are going. Right track/wrong track.

And 2/3 of Americans think we are in trouble.

So go ahead pull a Dennis, and show me all the economic indicator polls that show Unemployment is going down and gas prices are going down.

See the problem with you folks is that you have accepted this rotten economy as the new normal and if it gets even a little bit better than that is progress.

Most of us, again in the real world, don't accept Obama's new normal.

We know it can be better and it will.

Just as soon as we have a new President.

John B, Des Moines, IA

Note that in all of this, though, the Constitution never explicitly ensures the right to vote,

Which is a critical and important point to Conservatives right now...they're working hard to make sure only the "right people" are allowed to vote.

Sad, isn't it?

Especially, when you have nimcompots like the fake pimp, James O’Keefe making FAKE videos.

FACT CHECK: ‘Non-Citizen’ Voter In James O’Keefe’s Voter Fraud Video Is Actually A Citizen

In fact, if O’Keefe had done a simple Nexis search for “Zbigniew Gorzkowski”, he would have found a single article from the News & Observer in 2008 noting that Gorzkowski and his wife are naturalized citizens:

O’Keefe has a responsibility as a journalist to ensure the veracity of his facts before he makes wild charges like these.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/05/15/484462/james-o-keefe-voter-fraud-north-carolina/

He spent it because of Bush's disastrous recession. And states took it, as I recall. Some of them, like Texas (under Perry) and Minnesota (under Pawlenty), used it to reduce their own deficit rather than to create jobs, and then complained about the federal deficit and whined that the stimulus hadn't created any jobs.

OK. Now you accept that he spent that money, and it was supposed to be a one-off. If so, shouldn't spending for 2010 dropped by 800B? Or lets, take the scenario that the stimulus was a two year plan of 400B each year. This year, 2011 should have seen a noticeable drop in spending, not the 1% they're throwing around.

The fact is the stimulus inflated the baseline number and they've been using that to "fudge" the numbers. They were pretty stupid to jump on the Nutting analysis as it has brought increased scrutiny on their real spending.

Don't blame Obama for TARP.

Why not? He was responsible for half of it. Didn't he use TARP money to "save" GM? Or do only want to count the fact that it was "saved" not the cost of saving it?

http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/12/news/bush.tarp/index.htm

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- President-elect Barack Obama made his case Monday to Congress for the release of $350 billion in remaining federal bailout funds.

http://www.thepoliticalguide.com/Profiles/President/US/Barack_Obama/Views/TARP/

The legislation outlines what items can be purchased, and defines the institutions from which those items can be purchased. President Bush violated those rules prior to leaving office when he loaned money to General Motors and Chrysler. President Obama further violated those rules when he purchased stock in GM and then used the influence from those purchases to direct changes at GM.

Although the TARP expressly limits the use of the program to the purchasing of stocks and warrants from financial institutions, President Obama decided to expand the program shortly after assuming office and made it a fund through which programs to assist homeowners and create jobs could be drawn. Although this violated that text of the legislation, President Obama created numerous programs to accomplish this goal. These include programs to spur lending among small businesses, programs to assist homeowners in refinancing their homes, and programs to directly provide funds to states hardest hit by the housing crisis

Many Republican controlled states are putting up legal barriers to voting - such as stringent photo-ID requirements. In Texas, for example, a gun permit can allow you to vote, but not a student ID. Many such states try to move back to practices that remind us of the old south's poll tax and literacy test. Is this really what Republicans stand for?

AM: I don't think you can quite compare those two things. Byrd's KKK association was well in the past, like Romney's homophobic attack on a classmate. If you want me to forget that, then forget Robert Byrd, too.

This is one very odd piece of moral equivalency. So you're comparing a prank by a 15 year old to be similar to the leader of a white rope wearing organization that struck the fear of God into everyone of a certain race while calling for that races destruction?

This is way out there, even for you AM.

WCA,

[And 2/3 of Americans think we are in trouble.]

58.7% of Americans say their city or area where they live is "getting better" in April 2012 which is the highest level since Jan 2008. A 4 1/2 year high !!!

http://www.gallup.com/poll/154892/Americans-City-Optimism-Reaches-Four-Year-High.aspx

This 800B has now been baked into the figures as a baseline against which Obama's spending is measured.

Do you somehow imagine if you shout this loud enough it will become true? The financial meltdown happened in October 2008. Bush/Cheney and the Fed Chairman came up with the plan to rescue the banks after a week in free fall. Congress nixed it and the world economy began to tumble. IIRC, Cheney pulled his cronies in and said, heaven knows what, Obama addressed congress and so did McCain and they passed it.

Now, no matter how you spin it, no matter how loud you shout it, no matter how you try to tinker with the numbers, THIS HAPPENED WHILE BUSH WAS IN OFFICE. THIS WAS DESIGNED BY THE REPUBLICANS TO SAVE THEIR PRECIOUS BIG BUSINESS.

One of my favorite things about the GOPers is that they think everyone is as clueless as their constituency.

So AM, KKK associations are OK with you,

Byrd apologized publicly and spent the rest of his life trying to make up for the error of his ways...something that can't be said for, say;

Strom Thurmond

Or Trent Lott, who missed Thurmond dearly to his last days in the Senate

Or Jesse Helms

Or Haley Barbour, who credits the KKK offshoot Concerned Citizens Coucils for "keeping the peace"

Or Rand Paul, who STILL thinks we should have the right to segregate.

Beverly in Chicago, you are the easy sale in Obama's Black Americans for Obama in 2012 (i.e. Vote by Color) campaign. You say that the Viet-cong used racial propaganda during the war? Oh shame on them! What group of people in the US would believe that and make it effective ... oh, I know! You bring shame on all us Vietnam vets when you use our sacrifice for racist politics ... just like Obama does to us! How would you like to come back and get spit on by a bunch of Young Dems with their Jane Fonda rhetoric like we did! Instead you pick out the racist bits for your hackneyed agenda. Have some respect for those who sacrificed it all answering their call to duty!

james --

It was after Byrd died in 2010 that Clinton made the excuse so less than two years ago it was being talked about.

Yes, but Byrd's behavior took place many years ago. Trump continues to behave like a crazy birther even now.

Your hanging on to the firing thing is laughable.

I know. I laughed, too.

But you're saying that we should drop that, and hang on to Robert Byrd's repudiated KKK associations from so many years ago.

Sorry, no go.

WCA --

Really Anna? Without charts and graphs, can you tell me how things are looking up.

Sure. As John B. explained it, gas prices are pretty far down from where they were -- if it was Obama's fault when the went up, it must be his fault when they go down -- and jobs are being created, slowly but surely.

Any other questions?

See the problem with you folks is that you have accepted this rotten economy as the new normal and if it gets even a little bit better than that is progress.

Most of us, again in the real world, don't accept Obama's new normal.

I'll take it any six days of the week over Bush's "normal," especially the "normal" of Bush's economy in 2008, as it all collapsed.

It collapsed because it was all built on the ever-shifting sand of Wall Street, and that's exactly where YOU and Mitt Romney want to take us back.

No thanks.

Because I don't think there's any money left to bail the idiots out a second time.

AM: Obama didn't spend money in 2009 just for the heck of it.

So which is it? Obama spent the money, or he didn't spend the money. And why has he kept spending the money? Maybe next we can lie, ehh, talk about the results of all that spending?

He spent it because of Bush's disastrous recession

Yes, now we're back to Bush. It seems that is the catch-all excuse of the Left.

I guess if the Obama klan makes up enough things, certain people may actually start to believe them. AM is one of those people.

Florida, in an attempt to ensure that all registered voters in the state were entitled to vote, requested data from the US State Department who denied the request. That caused Florida to question the status of certain registered voters who had out of date identification on file. Unlike Democrats who allow votes from people who have been dead for decades, Republicans respect and enforce the law.

I personally cannot believe MSNBC placed this story above the massacre in Syria.

Anna Molly

@ Beverly --

What I find so interesting is how some folks here in my own state seem to think nothing of Scott Walker's countenancing of illegal campaign activities being coordinated out of the County Executive's office, not further than 25 feet from his office, his taking of illegal campaign contributions from a railroad crony while at the same time opposing stimulus spending for high speed rail, and his having had close political associates and appointees who shamelessly embezzled money from a veteran's fund.

If they are willing to overlook all of that, then a little obvious fudging of his disastrous job numbers won't bother them, either.

It's a shame how low on the scale of integrity and honor people are willing to go to support their own ideology.

Anna Molly,

I find it just as astonishing. My only conclusion is they are brainwashed.

Gingerbread Momma,

The stories are emerging. I have one about a top election official receiving a letter that she is being cut off the rolls. Also, the letter falsely claims she is a felon, when she is not.

Even so, Florida laws allow felons to vote once more, if they have served their time, and followed the bureaucracy needed. (That is another voter purge issue.)

What can/will Florida citizens do to stop Scott Walker? It must be terrible to be living in a state with his radical anti-democratic policies.

Like Walker (R-WI), and Snyder (R-MI), Rick Scott did not run on slashing Education, shifting budget monies to the wealthy on the backs of seniors, Headstart and the non-affluent -- or breaking unions.

But that continues to be the focus OF Republican governors, even when the polls are telling them NO, STOP, WE DON'T WANT YOUR POLICIES.

So what you're telling us, Bill, is that Florida is using data which they knew to be unavailable as an excuse to disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of people with "funny-sounding" names.

And you find that defensible?

Romney/Trump - what a ticket! Two crooks on a mission to benefit the 1% at the expense of the rest of us. You have to be a real dufus to vote for them!

Recall Scott Walker

Fat chance. Latest poll 50-42 Walker.

President Romney should appoint Walker as Union Busting Czar, Christie as Communications Director and Trump as Ambassador to China.

It is pretty hard to beleive that the money will be worth fundrasing with an idiot like Trump.

Backhouse, is it surprising the voter purging is being done most openly in Florida? This state has been so corrupt since the Bush family ran it. Nothing has changed much.

For Romney to grasp onto Trump shows his utter panic in the race. Let's get real. No one of any intelligence is going to put any belief in Trump. He is there to appeal to the least intelligent - the ones the GOP can get through their fear tactics - Obama the boogeyman! The GOP is no longer a party anyone can proudly say they belong to or believe in. The party has become nothing but a very bad joke.

Our President made me very proud yesterday - not only laying the wreath in Arlington but then making his way to the Viet Nam wall. His support of and belief in all the veterans is something we should all embrace. For too long we have not given the support we need to, to our veterans from all wars.

WCA - consumer confidence is the highest it has been since 2007. Are things where we want them - of course not. This was a serious recession and it won't be fixed in a short time. But we are digging out, thanks to this President.

I like Donald, his views on Chinese imports is dead on. However he losses me when he gets on this Birth Certificate kick. Put it rest Donald, the guy is President.

Romney is just what he says, A Business Man. Most of the Financial Sector CEO's are just like Politicians and they will chop off your head to make a buck.

Not saying it's wrong, its capitalism of today, No Morality at all. Oh except when it comes to God.

It is pretty hard to beleive that the money will be worth fundrasing with an idiot like Trump.

Probably just deferred money from education.

Not saying it's wrong, its capitalism of today, No Morality at all. Oh except when it comes to God.

Funny how they ignore the parts of the Bible that don't fit their needs. Something about the eye of a needle and a camel comes to mind.

People that put their money where their mouths are (professional odds makers) are (decidedly) betting on Obama/Biden 2012.

http://www.oddschecker.com/specials/politics-and-election/us-presidential-election

How can this be? The honking gaggle of Newsvine regressives assures us the opposite is true.

Please regressives.....honk us an "explanation".

Do you somehow imagine if you shout this loud enough it will become true? The financial meltdown happened in October 2008. Bush/Cheney and the Fed Chairman came up with the plan to rescue the banks after a week in free fall. Congress nixed it and the world economy began to tumble. IIRC, Cheney pulled his cronies in and said, heaven knows what, Obama addressed congress and so did McCain and they passed it.

You are referring to TARP, a 700B bail out of the financial sector, which Obama diverted 350B into other programs (see above). Obama also enacted a so-called one off 800B stimulus program that was passed in February 2009 after Bush was out of office. It is this 800B I am referring to, not the additional 350b of TARP money that he spent. So i don't have to shout, its simply the facts.

@david walker, if the Republican Party could get back it's former glory, life wouldn't be so bad. Not great but not all bad. But back than the party didn't do all that right by the country. The problem now a days is the greed that is associated with the Republicans. How much money do you want to steal before you have enough. I think you have enough. Donald Trump STOP giving my country away!!!

Let me make this very clear, to all you Republicans! If I were President If you own a manufacturing and do not produce 50% of the products that you sell in this country you will not be importing the difference. We have companies here, that with some backing can step up do all that we need. Right here on good ol' US soil. Sure these companies would be on the slow growth track for a while, but they would rise. I would call this the Pheonix Plan. It would get more people and this country moving faster.

Jesus Dennis, you are so predictable.

You go find a different poll to try to square your opinion.

So tell me, have you ever quoted the "Congress Approval is 10%" line here? Cuz if you ask people about their local representatives they all think they are doing great. That's why they all get elected.

That is why I almost never quote polls. See what happens? I use one poll and the Spin masters come out of the woodwork.

BTW RCP has RT/WT as:

RCP Average Right Track/Wrong Track
5/3 - 5/20 Date

33.8 Right Track

58.5 Wrong Track

-24.7 Spread

you righties crack me up with your crap on Obamas spending in 09 MORONS WAKE UP he came into a disaster on steroids caused by bush and his policies hate to break the news to you but thats a FACT and he had to spend to help lift the economy out of its spiriling fall off the cliff its what all Presidents and congress has done in the past in times of recession Reagan twice,bush 1,bush jr twice but this was the deepest hole in our nations history and what was really needed was a larger stimulus as he oringinally proposed economist agree but had to scale it down to get congress to agree so shove your Obama spending garbage where it belongs on the repub party ,Obama would'nt have spent that money if it was'nt needed and yet he's still the lowest spending President in the last 60 yrs by increased % per yr, the gop always likes to brain wash their voter base their the party of controlled spending and lower taxes but history proves this to not be true their the highest spenders the last 60 yrs thats FACT...OBAMA 2012..

Corrrrection at #1.62.

What can/will Florida citizens do to stop Governor Rick Scott (R-WI)?

............................................................

Since 2010, Republican governors have knowingly enacted (in Walker's case in the wee hours of the morning, as well as against the orders of the state Judge) serial damage to our democracy and to the recovery of the U.S. economy.

AND without regard for the needs of non-affluent Americans. Indeed, these GOP elected officials targeted seniors, children, the jobless and the poor -- following a great recession that caused the loss of 8 million jobs.

President Romney should appoint Walker as Union Busting Czar, Christie as Communications Director and Trump as Ambassador to China.

Wow, this would be the repeat of the The Third Reich.

Yea Alan the same TARP fund that Bush and Hank refused to make banks account for. They spent the money how they pleased..

Picking sides when it comes to the BailOut ERA is like handing out speeding tickets at the Indy 500 to only some of the Drivers.

I suggest to anyone accusing a single party of TARP should read Paulson's book. Both Parties wanted Bank bailouts, their Vote Speaks louder then does their flip flop rhetoric.

AM - if it was Obama's fault when the went up, it must be his fault when they go down

Sure AM, they went up $2.00/gallon on his watch and now have fallen back about $0.20/Gallon here in Detroit.

So a 10% reduction is OK in your new Normal?

Blaming Bush is so 2008 AM. Can't you come up with something new? Ask Feisty, you seem to be getting your talking points from her lately.

I give him all the credit in the world for this POS economy and the gas prices, just like you do.

News Flash: Rob-ney's dogwhistle is to go after the same kooky people that didn’t vote for our Presdient the first time thinking he has expanded his base.

What does Willard gain? Simply put...NOTHING

And gas prices were still higher during the GW Bush Administration...way to cherry pick the data, WCA.

Then again that gets pointed out to you every day...so far it hasn't stopped you from retelling the same lies.

WCA,

6 months before our President took office gas prices were at an all-time high that still stands.

So what happened to drive them down so low by year end 2008 – how about an economic collapse that affected the entire world and the bottom fell out of oil prices?

It"s obvious someone has convinced Romney that a tryst with "Trump" will gain Him some votes. Course "Sneezy" and "Doc" are behind the whole production. Mittens will end up with nothing but a sore ass and a couple of millions lighter.

Republicans Want a rump hump? See Trump.

Alan NJ,

The 2 things that were the major contributing factor to Obama's deficit increasing are 1) the 800B dollar stimulus spending and 2) the extension of the Bush tax cuts.

If he had not extended the Bush tax cuts you would be in here pizzing your pants about Obama raising taxes.

Rod_Father - Its always the same rhetoric when it comes to deficits, "Welfare State" Repubs "Low Taxes for the Rich" Libs..

The reality is probably something in the middle. Our Government is to big and complicated and Tax Loopholes make it basically impossible for everyone to pay a set rate, so the Government can have a more accurate accounting of Actual Tax dollars to be paid.

The current system is constructed to give Law Makers all the power. Create a simple tax plan and you would eliminate a lot of garbage in politics..

Yea Alan the same TARP fund that Bush and Hank refused to make banks account for. They spent the money how they pleased..

Picking sides when it comes to the BailOut ERA is like handing out speeding tickets at the Indy 500 to only some of the Drivers.

I suggest to anyone accusing a single party of TARP should read Paulson's book. Both Parties wanted Bank bailouts, their Vote Speaks louder then does their flip flop rhetoric.

But I didn't pick sides. it was AM who said I couldn't blame Obama for TARP. I didn't. I merely pointed out that he spent 350B of it as did Bush. As to the benefits of TARP, I personally did not like it but I do think it was effective and did more to save the economy than the stimulus. On the other side the morality of it was despicable as those responsible for creating the crisis were the ones who were saved by TARP.

Posters above are now trying to defend Obama's spending as necessary when he came into office. That is not the argument regarding spending. The Administration is using the Nutting analysis to claim that they have barely increased spending. This is patently false as they spent 800B in their first year and used that figure as a baseline for the next three years.

I am not arguing here as to the merits of that spending, just the fact that it is an unprecedented increase in Federal Spending, 40% of which is borrowed.

Ultimateride .....what specific Bush policies caused the real estate melt down and credit freeze that caused the fall '08 melt down?

His spending increases have been so low the last couple of years because he put it a a very high rate to start with. Our economy averages since 1950 around 18% revenue/GDP. Obama is spending at 24% of revenue/GDP that is why we have massive deficits.

If you want to look at actual dollars Bush spent around $6.8 Billion a day and Obama is spending an average of about $9.5 Billion per day.

Hey Bev this is off topic but I just read the article about there being 40 shooting and 10 murders in Chicago this weekend, what the heck is happening over there?

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/05/29/11935475-violent-holiday-weekend-claims-at-least-10-lives-in-chicago?lite

And gas prices were still higher during the GW Bush Administration...way to cherry pick the data, WCA.

It's really quite amazing that the Libs continue to make comparisons between Obama and the "worst president ever (according to the Libs)", Bush. And more times than not, Bush comes out ahead. They had tried to tie Obama to Reagan for a time there, but that lie fizzled out quickly.

They had tried to tie Obama to Reagan for a time there, but that lie fizzled out quickly.

Or they finally realized Reagan was trash.

The last great President to fly the "Republican" name was Teddy.

My brother has no reason to lie about history he expeiercend.

Neither did his friends many of whom who still wear black braided wristband to force their loyalty to fight for their survival. A girl friend of mine , a Viet nam vet also confirmed it to me yesterday.

Just because you listen to white noise, from bloviating ignoramuses, appealing to the lowest common denominator doesn't mean everyone is a moron like you. Neither do they try to rewrite history or ignore it.

Here is the poster for you to gloss your doubtful igonorant azz eyes upon:

http://www.psywar.org/psywar/images/race_vietnam_shouldnotfight.jpg

AFRO-AMERICANS!

The Vietnamese are not exploiting you nor discriminating against you. No Vietnamese shoots and kills Black freedom-fighters in the streets of America. The Vietnamese are fighting for their own independence and freedom.

Your true enemy is not the Vietnamese people. Your true enemies are those who are calling you @!$%#s.

Unite with your Vietnamese brothers to fight our common enemy: the ruling clique in the United States who are carrying out an extremely cruel war of aggression in Vietnam and an extremely barbarous policy of exploitation and racial discrimination in the United States!

http://www.psywar.org/psywar/images/race_vietnam_shouldnotfight.jpg

Saigon associates the African American struggle for independence from racial oppression with the experience of Black soldiers who fought in the Vietnam War, particularly their stories not told in the grand tale of History – such as the Viet Cong pamphlets which fluttered down during battle: ‘This ain’t your war. Go home"

http://tuanandrewnguyen.com/letters-from-saigon-to-saigon

You are a moron

President Romney should appoint Walker as Union Busting Czar, Christie as Communications Director and Trump as Ambassador to China.

Wow, this would be the repeat of the The Third Reich.

Wow, your understanding of the Third Reich must be zero judging by your post. But hey, why let facts and history get in your way of being a name calling idiot!

John B: Byrd apologized publicly and spent the rest of his life trying to make up for the error of his ways...

Sure, Byrd was a regular speaker at NAACP meetings,

Here's a quote from the Senator:

"I shall never fight in the armed forces with a Negro by my side ..... Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds" - Robert Byrd in a letter to Senator Bilbo (D-MS)

Source: http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/2012/05/leftist-race-baiting/591011

Quotes like that kind of stick with you, no matter how many "apologies" you make.

Associating a political party with a celebrity is something only the mouth foaming, red faced radicals do to the party they hate.

Donald Trump no more represents Republicans than Sean Penn represents Democrats.

And if you think either one SHOULD represent the political party they like to identify with, you are all ready beyond saving.

The 2 things that were the major contributing factor to Obama's deficit increasing are 1) the 800B dollar stimulus spending and 2) the extension of the Bush tax cuts.

If he had not extended the Bush tax cuts you would be in here pizzing your pants about Obama raising taxes.

First, the stimulus was supposed to be a one off so it would not be a long term driver of deficits. However, the administration has maintained this level of spend for three years now so a trillion a year begins to add up.

I would have knocked Obama for raising taxes when he said he wouldn't. I felt that he would say anything to get elected, "not force you to buy health insurance", "not raise taxes on those earning more than 250K'. But from my own personal opinion the best thing for the country would have been for the tax cuts to expire, some spending cuts, and for Medicare to be reformed.

Quotes like that kind of stick with you, no matter how many "apologies" you make.

What about quotes like: "I don't care about the very poor"?

Who said that one again?

LOL Dennis of ohio...

Nice play on the rate of spending growth. Two things come to mind...

First is that obama declared he was going to reduce our deficit by half by the time he leaves office in 2013. Yet you have confirmed that it is still rising but now you want to deflect by saying the rate of increase is low.

Second is that it is the bottom line that tells the real story. It is the bottom line that this (OR ANY) administration reports annually if not indeed monthly and is called the public debt. You know, that amount determined by when government outlays exceed revenue.

Deflect all you want by quoting growth rates but most with a modicum of math experience will tell you that 1% of a trillion dollar expenditure is still greater than 8% of a 100 billion dollar expenditure. Hence the importance of the bottom line.

The spending increase is low the last 3 years because spending was increased 40% in his first year.

Equate that to a personal family expenditures of a family spending 30k a year with that much income. Then you increase your spending that same 40% as Obama did and you are now spending 42K a year. Then the next three years you spend 41.5K while still having that same 30k income. Try looking your spouse in the eye and say "but honey, i have decreased spending the last 3 years". See how well that would play at home as you have added almost 45k to your credit card debt with 30k spendable income.

That's what we as a country are doing just with more zeros.

How come this car is not for sale in the United States?

http://www.volkswagen.co.uk/#/new/golf-vi/which-model/engines/fuel-consumption/

Adjusting for Imperial to US Gallons this diesel car gets 66.7 miles per gallon on the highway. In the city it gets 48.

Why is it banned from the United States but for sale in the United Kingdom?

Environmentalists have crippled the diesel here after vilifying the "sooty" nature of the power plant for the last several decades. But the pollution per mile is far less than the most efficient gasoline engines.

The same VW sells in the US with a diesel that meets the US standard and it gets 42 highway and 30 in the city.

Does this make sense, President Obama? I mean, you keep saying you are for the environment but then you instruct your EPA Department to act this way?

Pollution per mile driven should be the new standard.

Now back to your political bickering.

David,

Excellent post. I completely agree... Republicans are no more the party of fiscally conservative spending, as they have proven to spend just as much as Democrats. The only difference is that Republicans are now trying to change America into a Christian-Sharia Law governed theocracy. Republicans hate terrorists and their extremist views, yet they are blind to the fact that they are becoming what they hate.

This is not an election about spending or the economy, as both parties will continue to spend. This is an election about rights... a decision between supporting equal rights, versus limiting rights using religion as justification.

ruken 1.95 -- You said:

What about quotes like: "I don't care about the very poor"?

Who said that one again?

Romney said that as part of a response to a question. I realize you want to demonize Romney but not providing a complete quote is tantamount to a lie.

Here is the complete answer that was provided and from which you cherry-picked a portion to achieve your desired point.

“I’m in this race because I care about Americans. I’m not concerned about the very poor — we have a safety net there,” he said. “If it needs repair, I’ll fix it. I’m not concerned about the very rich — they’re doing just fine. I’m concerned about the very heart of America, the 90-95 percent of Americans who right now are struggling.”

Here is the complete answer that was provided and from which you cherry-picked a portion to achieve your desired point.

Newsflash: Even in full context it still sounds utterly terrible.

James .... just as some like to pick the "i like to fire people", but fail to mention that Romney was talking about Health care providers. And as above that mention we have had spending decreases the last three years, but fail to mention that the baseline for that was a 40% increase his first year.

ruken -- may sound terrible to you but to many of us it is a thoughtful and good response.

The spending increase is low the last 3 years because spending was increased 40% in his first year.

Ooh, it's quiz time!!

Q: Who set the budget for the first year Barack Obama was in office?

A: His predecessor, George W Bush.

Rats!!!!!! I lost the pool!!!! I thought sure the media would use "the war on Women" again this week to divert attention from Obama's record, and instead they go with some trumped,(excuse the pun),up, make believe birther issue! You see, You guys have become so pathetically predictable and such a clownish laughing stock, that people are forming, pools and taking bets on what silly , "issue",You will come up with the next week to try to divert attention and keep people from talking about the 25 million jobless, the 8 trillion dollars of wasted spending in three and one half years, or the collapsed housing market, (the real issues), Hmmmmm? Now I Wonder, What will it be next week?

Environmentalists have crippled the diesel here after vilifying the "sooty" nature of the power plant for the last several decades

Then how does VW manage to sell their OTHER diesel models here in the US?

http://www.vw.com/en/tdi.html

Are you wrong or lying? Enquiring minds want to know.

UAW,

Gallup (05/29/12) - Americans' Economic Confidence Stable at Four-Year High.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/154913/Americans-Economic-Confidence-Stable-Four-Year-High.aspx

Alan, NJ --

Posters above are now trying to defend Obama's spending as necessary when he came into office. That is not the argument regarding spending. The Administration is using the Nutting analysis to claim that they have barely increased spending. This is patently false as they spent 800B in their first year and used that figure as a baseline for the next three years.

I am not arguing here as to the merits of that spending, just the fact that it is an unprecedented increase in Federal Spending, 40% of which is borrowed.

I take your point, and it's a good one. But I also know, as should you, that not all the stimulus money was spent the first year. Some of it was deferred to 2010 and some of it, I believe, has never been spent. So that skews your numbers by some unknown -- at least to me -- amount.

Whether those apparent increases in spending relate to defense spending or entitlements or whatever, I just don't know the answer. Do you?

james --

ruken -- may sound terrible to you but to many of us it is a thoughtful and good response.

Which goes more to the level of your thoughtfulness than it does to the substance of Romney's response.

The guy is ruthless, as his experience at Bain clearly demonstrates, irrespective of that very candid moment.

Ruthless may make a great equity manager, but it doesn't make a great president, whose job is to serve ALL the people.

JoAnna --

Yes, now we're back to Bush. It seems that is the catch-all excuse of the Left.

Really, JoAnna? Are you saying that President Obama caused the collapse of the housing bubble and the meltdown on Wall Street, both of which occurred well BEFORE he ever took office?

Lordy, JoAnna, don't we love such a powerful man.

Road Warrior --

Latest Poll. 50 - 42 Walker.

Not the latest poll.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/wisconsin-recall-scott-walker-enters-final-week-with-edge/2012/05/28/gJQAtv3oxU_blog.html

This one is roughly 49-45. Sorry to burst your little bubble.

@ John B, Des Moines,

Are you wrong or lying? Enquiring minds want to know.

There is certainly a difference between 42 MPG and 67 MPG wouldn't you agree? Or are you a complete dum bass.

That wasn't your point. Your point was that environmentalists have made it impossible to sell diesels in America. I proved you wrong. So, did you have no idea what you were talking about, or were you lying?

Anything to win and gain money for the Presidency--Romney.

Both crooks, Romney and Trump---a bad pair up.

Neither one could negotiate like our present President Barack Obama.

Losers.

John - I don't believe a lot of the folks here actually research their comments, they just pontificate what they hear on Radio and News channels.

Environmental Groups are peons compared to the Energy Lobbyist in our Country.

Energy Company's have Paid 150 times more in Lobbying Fee's than the next nearest Industry, The Financial Sector.

JoannaSmith1:

Super Joe Biden seems rather fond of Barry, and he's an absolute riot to listen to.

Gee Joanna - did you mean that heartfelt speech he gave this weekend to the veterans? Where he told them he knew how they felt when they received news of the death of a loved one in the war. He told about when his first wife and his daughter were killed in an automobile accident. Yeah he is an absolute riot.

You are a typical right wing pig - GOP should not have the elephant but a pig instead.

Keep in mind that Romney has picked Robert Bork to be his advisor on selections for the Supreme Court.

Think about that. Robert Bork making selections on who should be appointed to the Supreme Court.

Q: Who set the budget for the first year Barack Obama was in office?

A: His predecessor, George W Bush.

That would be the 2008 Congress, he just signed it. Nice try Preacher man

BackhouseRestoredm"VOTER PURGING. Following the 2000 critical post-election recount halted by the Supreme Court, we now know President Bush didn't win the election in Florida."

Still fixated on the past, Al? It's time to move on - It's been 12 years.

By the way, the media completed the recount requested by Gore, and guess what - Bush still won. Now you're 'inventing' a new angle? Give it a rest.

Paul,

Please help me understand what the congressional budget and the nominations for the Supreme Court have in common.

dennis 1.107 -- Not everyone agrees. Different study different results.

NEW YORK (AP) — Americans' confidence in the economy in May had its biggest drop in eight months as consumers fretted about slow hiring, a big stock market drop and the global economy, says a private research group.

The Conference Board says its Consumer Confidence Index now stands at 64.9, down from a revised 68.7 in April. It was the biggest drop since October 2011.

Economists were expecting a reading of 70, according to a FactSet poll of analysts. The current level is below February's 71.6, which is the highest level it's been in a year.

Consumer confidence is widely watched because consumer spending accounts for 70 percent of economic activity. The measure is significantly below the 90 reading that indicates a healthy economy. But the current level is well above the 40 it hit last October.

But the latest reading is expected to be well above the 40 figure reached last October and the all-time low of 25.3 in February 2009.

I see that reading comprehension in Iowa continues to suffer.

John in Des Moines wrote:

That wasn't your point. Your point was that environmentalists have made it impossible to sell diesels in America

I had written:

Environmentalists have crippled the diesel here after vilifying the "sooty" nature of the power plant for the last several decades. But the pollution per mile is far less than the most efficient gasoline engines.

Show me where I said it was impossible to sell a diesel here?

Clearly I know what my point was. Environmentalists have made it so difficult to make a diesel by requiring the particulate be below a certain level at any instant in time that they have lost the real point which is particulate per mile driven. A 67 MPG diesel vehicle produces less pollution per mile driven than a vehicle that gets 40 MPG and burns gasoline. But in the US we require diesels run in such a way that they only get 42 MPG and produce more particulate pollution than the European diesel.

I would rather drive a eurodiesel that produces 10% more pollution and gets 67 MPG over a US diesel that only gets 42 MPG which uses 37.3% more fuel. This is a big duh moment for every one not just the boys from Iowa.

You probably thought your response was snarky and cool but it really showed your limited knowledge of the English language (enquiring should have been inquiring by the way) and your willing belligerence in all discussions that we should agree on. Instead as is typical with all Libs you'd rather pick apart your own failed grasp of the post and argue a tangent. To that I'd say, you should be embarrassed.

Rational AmeriCAN " Instead as is typical with all Libs you'd rather pick apart your own failed grasp of the post and argue a tangent. To that I'd say, you should be embarrassed."

My experience with Libs is that they adhere to a very strict motto;

"Don't confuse me with facts - my mind's already made up"

Dennis, Columbus, Ohio "6 months before our President took office gas prices were at an all-time high that still stands."

And 4 months before he took office, the price had dropped to $1.60 per gallon under Bush. So what did Bush do that Obama can't seem to do?

ROY,

Bush killed the world economy !!!!

White Collar Auto "Dennis: Almost everyone believes that Obama has presided over a massive increase in federal spending"


Perhaps because it's true.


In Bush's last fiscal year in office (2008), they spent $2.983 Trillion, and in Obama's first fiscal year in office (including stimulus spending), it was $3.518 Trillion, for an increase of $535 Billion (18%).


The average increase under Bush was $149 Billion per year.


PS - Some will inaccurately claim that 2009 was Bush's last Budget, but the Democratic Congress never gave Bush a 2009 Budget to sign, so it was all Obama. Bush only authorized spending for fiscal 2009 at the same level as in 2008 with a 'Continuing Resolution, since the Democrats refused to give him a Budget to sign.

"In Bush's last fiscal year in office (2008), they spent $2.983 Trillion, and in Obama's first fiscal year in office (including stimulus spending), it was $3.518 Trillion, for an increase of $535 Billion (18%)."

That huge increase in spending under Obama has continued. The average federal spending for Obama's first 4 years is $3.593 Trillion, a 49.9% increase over Bush's 8 years average level of federal spending.

Dennis, Columbus, Ohio "ROY, Bush killed the world economy !!!!"


Of course the Democratic Congress that refused to implement Bush's attempts to control sub-prime lending, and the lack of oversight of Wall Street by the Democratic Oversight Committees had nothing to do with it, RIGHT?


Give me a break.

ROY,

“Give me a break”

OK

Paul-Florida "Q: Who set the budget for the first year Barack Obama was in office? A: His predecessor, George W Bush. That would be the 2008 Congress, he just signed it."

Absolutely false. The Democratic Congress (Reid & Pelosi) refused to pass a 2009 fiscal Budget, so Bush only signed a 'Continuing Resolution' on September 30, 2008 to only authorize spending for fiscal 2009 at the same level as for 2008. All of the spending increase for 2009 was from the big spending programs by Obama and his Democratic Congress after Obama took office. Here's a link to prove what I say is true;

https://www.aamc.org/advocacy/washhigh/highlights2008/159056/president_signs_spending_bill.html

Good Ole Roy, Cherry picking with the best of em..

kevinoffsite "Good Ole Roy, Cherry picking with the best of em.."

I guess those facts get in the way of a perfectly good 'spin', don't they?

Which facts are 'Cherry picked'?

Roy you do this same old tired crap every time. Anyone with a pulse can google and find facts to suit their opinion.

Kind of like you blaming the Democrats for two unfunded wars, remember that conversation? Probably not because you're not a single poster.

No rational person would debate a spending increase under Obama but that doesn't excuse the last Administration from setting record deficits to cut Taxes for their cronies. Both Parties and their politics are responsible for this mess, not just Democrats.

BTW I don't spin, I speak from the opinion of one man and I back up my post with facts!

kevinoffsite "Roy you do this same old tired crap every time. Anyone with a pulse can google and find facts to suit their opinion. Kind of like you blaming the Democrats for two unfunded wars, remember that conversation?"

No, I don't because I never 'blamed the Democrats for the wars', but they did authorize them, along with a long list of prominent politicians on both sides of the aisle.

As for the Bush tax cuts, about 82% of them went to the Middle & Poor classes, but I'm perfectly fine with letting them expire for everyone. I'm even OK with extending them for the Middle/Poor classes but not the 'Rich', since they can afford it, but even that is a small portion of the huge deficits under Obama.

BTW I don't spin either, I speak from the opinion of one man and I back up my post with facts - almost always from official government sources, not the biased 'spin' you find on most of the Internet.

What is someone that is 'not a single poster'?

I'll check back later - I need to go bicycle riding with my 6 years old daughter - it's beautiful here in Costa Rica.

The Romney camp tells First Read that its message this week is that Obama “is hostile to job creators.”

Yeah, if Obama was hostile to job creators, why did he pledge to keep their Bush tax cuts??? He's only raising taxes on the wealthy, who by the way only create jobs for high-end industries (minority of economy).

Says a Romney official: “Take a look at Solyndra -- that is a perfect example of how President Obama is hostile to job creation.

Not really. It is simply an example of an investment gone wrong.

President Obama believes we would be better off if political appointees were making decisions on where taxpayer money is spent. President Obama’s economic leadership has failed and at times has shown the worst of cronyism, like in the case of Solyndra.”

You do realize that Obama's economic leadership has fostered over 4.2 million jobs created, resurgent manufacturing growth, and economic expansion??? I'll admit that this recovery is slow, but bear in mind that this was a downturn that trumped every recession except the Great Depression???

Romney can accuse Obama of failed economic leadership all he wants. He can do it regardless of the facts that unemployment has steadily gone down, housing is up, and the economy (and job creation) is slowly but steadily churning forward. Romney himself advocating for the very stimulus that he now denounces.

And by the way, while we are arguing about economic experience, I find no trouble in declaring that Romney knows absolutely nothing about the economy. He may understand basic principles of supply and demand (except when it comes to gas prices), yet he has no understand of key economic facts like the Laffer curve and the influence of tax policy on the economy. Essentially, Romney thinks that we can easily cut taxes to record lows once again and still find enough money to pay for a massive spending binge on defense. He doesn't realize that we are currently at the right side of the Laffer curve, somewhat below the optimal tax rate. He also doesn't realize (or remember) that we tried the same damn policies to recharge the economy from a recession (in Bush's case the dot-com crash), and it didn't work. How the hell will this get things going??? If the Bush tax cuts, $3.8 trillion over ten years, couldn't recharge a small recession, how could a smaller $3.4 trillion tax cut boost an anemic recovery from the 21st century Great Depression?? Basic proportional comparisons alone show that it won't work, never mind the complex nuts and bolts deeper within the economy.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

Until genuine Republicans take back their party, they will NEVER have my vote.

David ... that was a great post. You certainly summarized my feelings. My family's Republican roots stretch back to the 19th century. In my eyes, the Republicans were the party of reason, trying to restrain the "loony left." But, over the past decade, it is the Republicans who have gone loony and Democrats like Bill Clinton are looking like statesmen. I don't know if it is too late to save the GOP. I hope not. This country needs a bi-partisan system. But, until then, I'm voting only for the Republicans who are educated and rational. In other words, I'm basically voting for the Democrats.

Q: Who set the budget for the first year Barack Obama was in office?

A: His predecessor, George W Bush.

That would be the 2008 Congress, he just signed it. Nice try Preacher man

In which case President Obama isn't responsible for the deficit...the Republican House of Representatives is.

Thanks for playing.

As for the Bush tax cuts, about 82% of them went to the Middle & Poor classes

It isn't that Roy is wrong, it's that he knows so much that isn't true.

And where would this $680 billion go? Nearly all of it would go to the richest 1 percent of Americans, people with incomes of more than $500,000 a year. But that’s the least of it: the policy center’s estimates say that the majority of the tax cuts would go to the richest one-tenth of 1 percent. Take a group of 1,000 randomly selected Americans, and pick the one with the highest income; he’s going to get the majority of that group’s tax break. And the average tax break for those lucky few — the poorest members of the group have annual incomes of more than $2 million, and the average member makes more than $7 million a year — would be $3 million over the course of the next decade.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/23/opinion/23krugman.html

But, over the past decade, it is the Republicans who have gone loony and Democrats like Bill Clinton are looking like statesmen. I don't know if it is too late to save the GOP.

No offense Barry, but the GOP have devolved ever since they elected Reagan. The change became apparent after Bush got "elected," but the change has been happening. What with the deregulation and anti-tax movement that created bastards like Grover Norquist.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

John B, Des Moines, IA "As for the Bush tax cuts, about 82% of them went to the Middle & Poor classes............It isn't that Roy is wrong, it's that he knows so much that isn't true."

I based my comment on a CBO estimate that letting the Bush tax cuts expire would raise taxes on the 'rich' by $700 Billion over 10 years, but it would result in raising taxes on the Middle and Poor classes by $3.2 Trillion over 10 years. That's an 82% cost to the Middle/Poor class, and an 18% cost to the 'rich'. Most people would realize that this means that 82% of the tax cuts go to the Middle/Poor classes.

PS - You don't REALLY expect me to believe a biased source like Krugman, do you? He wanted Obama to spend $Trillions more in his first few years, and is a well known apologist for liberal causes.

John B, Des Moines, IA "Q: Who set the budget for the first year Barack Obama was in office? A: His predecessor, George W Bush. That would be the 2008 Congress, he just signed it...In which case President Obama isn't responsible for the deficit...the Republican House of Representatives is."

Still repeating that nonsense? Absolutely false. The Democratic Congress (Reid & Pelosi) refused to pass a 2009 fiscal Budget, so Bush only signed a 'Continuing Resolution' on September 30, 2008 to only authorize spending for fiscal 2009 at the same level as for 2008. Virtually all of the spending increase for 2009 was from the big spending programs by Obama and his Democratic Congress after Obama took office. Here's a link to prove what I say is true;

https://www.aamc.org/advocacy/washhigh/highlights2008/159056/president_signs_spending_bill.html

PS - Your history is inaccurate. The Democrats controlled the House of Representatives (and the Senate) in 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010, so how could the Republicans be at fault for the Deficit - they had no say whatsoever in 2008?

Another interesting point this morning was the charts produced by Steve Ratner on MJ. Apparently the CBO is predicting an 8% hit to the economy if Washington does nothing regarding the tax rates and sequestration. What I was wondering if tax cuts don't add to economic growth, and therefore increase revenues, why is it the CBO predicts that tax hikes will dampen economic activity?

Well, actually the CBO expects a hit of roughly 1.3% in negative GDP growth in the first half of 2013, yet projects a recovery of 2.3% for the next half. Technically, the Bush tax cuts didn't work to fix the economy during 2001, ask the Tax Policy Center. During a good economy, tax cuts are mainly used for savings or investments, or for one-time purchases like televisions. During a bad economy, tax cuts that are already in place are used to supplement spending levels or help pay off debt or stave off pay cuts. Raising taxes during an anemic recovery will drain money out of the economy via spending cuts, layoffs, and reduced consumer purchasing power. Had the Bush tax cuts never been in place, revenues would be much higher (not because of the economy, but because of the revenues that the Bush tax cuts originally wiped out). Personally, I think this is a rehash of the 1937 recession, which was caused by premature fiscal austerity. But, in my opinion, the temporary crash is all for the best. It will cut deficits to $500 billion in 2013, and provide low deficits for the rest of the decade, buying us time to get our entitlements and tax code reformed. It will also shut up those deficit hawks and give the president (hopefully Obama) some room to start spending again to get the economy going again.

“I don't agree with all the people who support me and my guess is they don't all agree with everything I believe in. But I need to get 50.1% or more, and I'm appreciative to have the help of a lot of good people,” he said

Bull@!$%#. Obama said the same thing about his relationship with Rev. Wright, but Romney himself denounced him nonetheless. Romney is obviously showing his weak backbone and hypocrisy. If he can't stand up to Donald Trump and extremists in his own party, how the hell is he gonna stand up to China, who by the way has roughly 200 nuclear warheads, a growing military and economic structure, AND roughly 8% of our national debt??? And to those who say that comparing Obama's 20 year relationship to Wright to a political association between Trump and Romney, I don't believe that Obama is fundraising and throwing rallies with the reverend while commending his personality, is he???

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

Trump thinks Mitt Romney's Elevator is going to take him to the Top !

White Collar, I truly have enjoyed reading your posts. I am a law abiding citizen of this once great country, and probably make a little more money, than most of the liberals posting here. And I for one am tired of being taxed up to my eyeballs to pay for all of Obama's useless government controlled programs. The government is regulating to death the small buisness owner. Most likely to appease his constituency of corporate unions campaign funding backers.

He campaigned in 2008, with slogan of you tired of high gas prices, are you ready for change?!! Yet now he has long broken his promise, or promises. And tells us now to live with this current economic crisis we are in, and that these higher prices have FORCED us to be more ergonomic. But yet with the higher price on gas, it also hiked up the price of everything else that is required for self preservation. I am in the frame of mind that his socialist government hasn't gained the control he has desired. Never thought he would have so much resistance.

Amusing, that the liberals are still crying over spilt milk. Referring to the Florida fiasco of its polling places antiquated methods being used in that time period. They have since corrected the problem, and there is a more up to date method being used, to vote and check viable voter registrations.

I am pleased to see thye liberla socialist nervous in the up coming election. That right away the resort to tetchy tactics of past elections, and who is supportive of the GOP candidatecy. Seems to be paltry and biased to keep an exorbitant amount of this country unemployed and reliant on government subsistencee(ssocialism).

TAWDRY and TACKY = the Team of Romney and Trump......Romney who was a Draft Evader during VietNam and who counseled his 5 sons that they should "Never consider the military as a career option, thats for WorkingClass kids, with your educations you have a greater value for your country"

Romneys Father was a MEXICAN....born there, lived there in a Polygamous Mormon Cult-compound until he was 6 years old...despite that Romney-Senior rand for President, and the Dems didn't make a Birther stink...neither did they when Sen. John McCain ran for President 4 years ago, even though McCain was born in Panama.....a Panamanian citizen !

TRUMP, the guy with Woody-Woodpecker bad hair....HE INHERITED his WEALTH from his father who left him 4000 apartment units....Trump pushed for casinos in Atlantic City...the Casinos torpedoed that city, sand it into a morass of prostitution and drug abuse, littered with closed,failed casinos.....

TRUMP is immoral, a philanderer, and he is a grumpy, gripe filled old man.......

John B, Des Moines, IA "Q: Who set the budget for the first year Barack Obama was in office? A: His predecessor, George W Bush. That would be the 2008 Congress, he just signed it...In which case President Obama isn't responsible for the deficit...the Republican House of Representatives is."

Still repeating that nonsense? Absolutely false. The Democratic Congress (Reid & Pelosi) refused to pass a 2009 fiscal Budget, so Bush only signed a 'Continuing Resolution' on September 30, 2008 to only authorize spending for fiscal 2009 at the same level as for 2008. Virtually all of the spending increase for 2009 was from the big spending programs by Obama and his Democratic Congress after Obama took office. Here's a link to prove what I say is true;

https://www.aamc.org/advocacy/washhigh/highlights2008/159056/president_signs_spending_bill.html

PS - Your history is inaccurate. The Democrats controlled the House of Representatives (and the Senate) in 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010, so how could the Republicans be at fault for the Deficit - they had no say whatsoever in 2008?

Reading comprehension isn't your thing, is it Roy? If President Bush isn't responsible for the deficit on his watch because Democrats controlled the House (where ALL budgets originate) then President Obama isn't responsible for the deficit NOW...you don't get to have it both ways.

you don't get to have it both ways.

Exactly John. So Obama is lying when he blames Bush for the budget, right?

Or...

The Democrat Congresses of 2007-2010 were to blame for the budget.

And since our Constitution makes it very clear who is responsible for the finances of our country and that is CONGRESS, then clearly

The Democrat Congress led by Nancy and Harry are to blame for the ridiculous spending in 2007-2010

AND

Obama is lying when he blames Bush.

Thanks for helping us all understand that!

See, that's the problem with that entire scenario. Deficits exploded from the very first budget that President GW Bush and his 6 year Republican majority put in place. We now have a serious structural deficit in place because Republicans insisted that tax cuts would pay for themselves. They didn't. Now we have a serious, permanent revenue shortfall that Republicans won't allow anyone to correct.

It's become both a test of faith and a litmus test among Conservatives that the economy would benefit from...no, DEMANDS an immediate, severe dose of fiscal austerity to shock the American economy out of its doldrums and return us to strong growth and full employment. Nothing else will work, nothing else is acceptable, ANYTHING else is socialism of the most Bolshevik sort.

Others have pointed out with consistency that such policies run contrary to any responsible and credible advice from Economists, that such beliefs run contrary to what history has demonstrated to be the behavior of actual economies in the real world, and that their religous devotion to Ayn Rand leads to actions currently responsible for a deepening recession in Europe...and the possible failure of their common currency.

These are two positions that are deeply, deeply at odds with one another. I suppose it isn't entirely unreasonable to think that there must be a "truth" that exists somewhere between the two, but it doesn't seem likely. Perhaps there's another possibility...that Conservative leaders don't actually believe what they tell us. If only there were some way to prove it -- like for example the words of Conservative leaders;

During Mark Halperin's extended Tiger Beat session with Willard Romney, the following exchange took place:

Halperin: Why not in the first year, if you're elected — why not in 2013, go all the way and propose the kind of budget with spending restraints, that you'd like to see after four years in office? Why not do it more quickly?

Romney: Well because, if you take a trillion dollars for instance, out of the first year of the federal budget, that would shrink GDP over 5%. That is by definition throwing us into recession or depression. So I'm not going to do that, of course.

didn't Romney, in saying that, pretty much blow up the entire rationale for over 30 years of Republican economics right there? Cutting government spending will throw us into a recession or depression? No Christmas cards from the Ryan household this year, Willard.
Read more: http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/mitt-romney-government-spending-9146518#ixzz1w7b0VIyS

Then again, Romney "isn't really a Conservative" anyway...just like George W Bush. It proves nothing until REAL Conservatives start to say the same thing. If solid Republicans with true Conservative bona fides were spreading such ideas there'd be reason to doubt.

A giant austerity bomb is timed to go off at the beginning of next year, and the threat of significantly higher taxes and lower spending has Republicans running around the Capitol sounding more like John Maynard Keynes than John Boehner.

Automatic, across-the-board reductions to domestic and defense spending, combined with the looming expiration of the Bush tax cuts, will dramatically consolidate the budget in the next calendar year, if Congress does nothing. And despite bemoaning deficits throughout the Obama years, the GOP’s suddenly come around to the view that cutting government spending is a job killer.

Just listen to Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX).

“Just when you thought the economic news could not get much worse with slow economic growth, with reduced wages because of higher costs, and with many people simply giving up looking for work with the lowest labor participation rate we’ve had in some time,” Cornyn warned reporters in the Capitol Tuesday, “we have an entirely predictable and preventable jobs crisis approaching in January, where because of the sequestration [automatic spending cuts], my state alone will lose 91,000 private sector jobs — and there are about a million private sector jobs at risk if the sequestration goes into effect on January 2.

This marks the return of the Defense Keynesians — Republicans who admit that government spending supports job growth in a weak economy, if and only if that spending is directed toward the military.

As luck would have it, a new Congressional Budget Office concludes Republicans are right about the economic consequences of defense cuts — but that their other fiscal priorities are just as perilous for economic growth.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/05/defense-spending-budget-deficit-austerity-congressional-budget-office.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

Count rabid Conservative John Kyl among the Defense Keynesians;

“The whole point here is to try to get some economic growth, job creation, to get out of this recession,” Kyl told POLITICO. “Why would we risk going backward with policy that even CBO says would be the wrong prescription right now?”
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76749.html#ixzz1w7kHEkew

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76749.html

Tie that in with the GOP history of increasing spending even as they cry about deficits, comments by prominent Republicans like Dick Cheney that "deficits don't matter", and it's clear that there's simply no reason to believe Conservatives on this issue. They're lying. The Emperor has no clothes.

That's reality. Now, let's do the things that are necessary to actually fix the economy.

It's their attempt to muddy up all the Bain enterprises that went belly up with the stimulus-assisted firms

Of course!

It is obvious that mittens will not run upon his record, nor admit his past actions and positions....

The President, on the other hand, can put forth HIS record over the past 3 yrs and tout all the numerous successes and advancements he has accomplished even in the face of obstinate obstruction from the tea/gop.

President Obama has actually been pretty successful in spite of all the untrue, negative spin the TEA/RNC barrages the voting public with in their effort to "brain wash" the citizens into believing white is black and that things weren't really so bad under Dubya.....

...muddy the water indeed, because teapublicans can not get elected on truth!

They must distance themselves from their past and their records

John B: Very well said and right on target!

The President, on the other hand, can put forth HIS record over the past 3 yrs and tout all the numerous successes and advancements he has accomplished even in the face of obstinate obstruction from the tea/gop

Looks like they're upping the levels of hallucinogenics in the Obama kook-aid.

Obama/Biden 2012 - "We raised the deficit by $6 trillion and that's all we got was this lousy 8% unemployment rate"

.

Over the weekend:

Former Wyoming Senator Alan Simpson came out swinging against the Republican Party today in an interview with CNN’s Fareed Zakaria. Simpson took his own party to task for its unwillingness to compromise at all on tax increases.

Simpson said that Republican rigidity on the subject has hampered the country as now a deal with Democrats on debt reduction is even further away.

Simpson said,

“You can’t cut spending your way out of this hole. You can’t grow your way out of this hole, and you can’t tax your way out of this hole. So put that in your pipe and smoke it, we tell these people. This is madness. If you want to be a purist, go somewhere on a mountaintop and praise the east or something. But if you want to be in politics, you learn to compromise. And you learn to compromise on the issue without compromising yourself. Show me a guy who won’t compromise and I’ll show you a guy with rock for brains.”

The former senator, along with debt commission co-chair Erskine Bowles, developed a plan after being appointed to a bipartisan debt reduction committee by President Obama. Their plan which became known as Simpson-Bowles, was almost completely ignored on Capitol Hill.

During the interview with CNN he lamented the Republicans focus on social issues and on the way Americans for Tax Reform head Grover Norquist has been able to control the party.

Simpson said,

“I guess I’m known as a RINO now, which means a Republican in name only, because, I guess, of social views, perhaps, or common sense would be another one, which seems to escape members of our party. For heaven’s sake, you have Grover Norquist wandering the earth in his white robes saying that if you raise taxes one penny, he’ll defeat you. He can’t murder you. He can’t burn your house. The only thing he can do to you, as an elected official, is defeat you for reelection. And if that means more to you than your country when we need patriots to come out in a situation when we’re in extremity, you shouldn’t even be in Congress.”

Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/244137/alan-simpson-slams-fellow-republicans-for-lack-of-compromise/#bRSYy60GtogQlMlm.99

And now we have Donald Trump, the king of conspiracy theorists, as a sidekick of the presumptive Republican nominee, one has to wonder what its worth to Romney and what price he's willing to pay for future favors. There is no way that the present day GOP is looking to compromise on anything for the foreseeable future, they are only interested in the power and using that power to line their own pockets and those of their friends. Anyone, regardless of party, who is a centrist, a moderate, a progressive will not be welcome.

The GOP War Machine. Listening to Morning Joe today added to Romney and all the GOP presidential candidates and lawmakers war-drum beating at Iran, North Korea and anywhere else they can contemplateand it makes one wonder how many more wars the GOP is willing to fight, willing to send our stretched-too thin for too long troops they claim to honor when it should not be just our fight. How much more blood and treasure should Americans sacrifice to put boots on the ground somewhere in the name of something or other. Thankfully there were some saner voices on Morning Joe today pointing out that Syria is not Libya, that the rebels in Syria are fractured without real leadership and they are not in a concentrated area, pointing out that an invasion of Syria would be starting an indirect war with Russia and China. It seems republicans never bother to look at the entire picture, they just think war. That's all they do, THINK WAR should be one of their bumper stickers.

Romney appeared with McCain at a Memorial Day event. That's fine but to turn Memorial Day from a day to honor those who died and who have served into a political campaign rally with a negative attack on President Obama by warning about the danger of shrinking our military budget was off-putting at best.

It is time to change the mindset from thinking that a powerful military is all that is needed to make this country strong. It is time to rebuild this country rather than continue spending billions and billions more every year, doubling and tripling our military coffers since Reagan. Reagan began this nightmare of military spending and for 30 years we have neglected investing in this country; neglected investing in education, roads, bridges, etc. in the name of an ever increasing, powerful and expensive military and that lack of investing in America shows.

The GOP and Romney speak about the deficit and debt yet according to republicans only domestic spending should be cut while we increase spending on the military to fight some unknown enemy lurking somewhere over there. They are willing to take bread from the poor and disabled to build a bigger, better airplane just in case. Of course, we need to keep our military current but we certainly can easily cut military spending without harming us. The greatest harm to our economy is not the deficit or the debt, it is the unwillingness of conservatives to spend money on Americans and America for something besides a powerful military.

What good is a powerful military if there is nothing left for anything else?

Great post, Jody. I too had noticed that Mittens had no problem using the lives given freely by our brave soldiers and sailors as political props.

You can list just about every poster on this site.The truth on this site is hard to find all these libs just refuse to believe anything that does not come from their liberal media.

SRAGAN is just another one of the 35% of republicansthat doesn't know anything. Gosh, they are the ones that need their votes suppressed.

Good Morning to you all.

Say what you may. Things are looking pretty tight for November, for a President that is so likable (personally he is). I believe that he was born here in the US but I also believe that allot of his believes are rooted from his early years and high-school years. After all that is the normal process for all that is human.

There is a saying in Spanish, "Dime con quien handas y te dire quien eres" the translation is " tell me who you hang around with and I will tell you who you are".

It looks like the masters of the universe are out in force this week. They got their marching orders and their Marketing points out already.

Pretty funny stuff from Mark above, the Big Lie is in full force today;

Bonus) Conservatives believe that judges should act like umpires
instead of legislating from the bench. That means that judges should determine
whether laws are permissible under the Constitution and settle debates about
the meaning of laws, not impose their will based on their ideological leanings.

Two words and two words only needed to debunk this one...Citizens United...although there are plenty of other examples.

10) Conservatives believe that individual Americans have a right to defend themselves and their families with guns and that right cannot be taken away by any method short of a Constitutional Amendment, which conservatives would oppose.

Who's trying to take away your guns, Cowboy? NOBODY, that's who.

9) Conservatives believe that we should live in a color blind society where every
individual is judged on the content of his character and the merits of his
actions.

Funny, Rand Paul believes you should still be able to run a segregated establishment if that's what you choose. They wail endlessly about how afraid they are of the Black Panthers...it's a funny way to demonstrate their "color blindness."

8) Liberals are socialists

We hold the idiocy of that remark to be self-evident.

7) Conservatives believe that abortion ends the life of an innocent child and
since we believe that infanticide is wrong, we oppose abortion. Most liberals,
despite what they'll tell you, believe that abortion ends the life of an
innocent child, but they prefer killing the baby to inconveniencing the mother.

Actually, what we believe is that the 1st Amendment doesn't allow you to impose your religious beliefs on the rest of us. Sell that snake oil someplace else.

6) Conservatives believe in confronting and defeating enemies of the United States before they can harm American citizens. Liberals believe in using law
enforcement measures to deal with terrorism, which means that they feel we
should allow terrorists to train, plan, and actually attempt to kill Americans
before we try to arrest them -- as if you can just send the police around to
pick up a terrorist mastermind hiding in Iran or the wilds of Pakistan.

Name a terrorist plot that was foiled by war...there are dozens that have been foiled by police work. It's called a pragmatic approach...Conservatives should try it some time.

5) Conservatives, but not necessarily Republicans (which is unfortunate), believe it's vitally important to the future of the country to reduce the size of
government, keep taxes low, balance the budget, and get this country out of
debt. Liberals, and Democrats for that matter, believe in big government, high
taxes, and they have never met a new spending program they didn't like, whether we will have to go into debt to pay for it or not.

Which side of the aisle is pulling for a balanced approach the federal debt, consisting of both revenue increases and spending reductions...that would NOT be the GOP...or any Conservatives, for that matter.

4) Conservatives believe that government, by its very nature, tends to be
inefficient, incompetent, wasteful, and power hungry. That's why we believe
that the government that governs least, governs best.

Unless, of course, we're talking about regulating morality, or corporate welfare, or...

3) Conservatives are patriotic,

So are Liberals...that's why we're always working to make the best nation on Earth better.

2) Conservatives, most of them anyway, believe in God a

So do a lot of Liberals. You don't get to claim my God, nor do you get to tell me I'm not worshipping him right. It's offensive that you try.

1) Conservatives believe in pursuing policies because they're pragmatic and because they work. Liberals believe in pursuing policies because they're
"nice" and make them feel good. Whether the policies they're advocating actually work or not is of secondary importance to them.

And yet what Liberals propose and do works so much better than what Conservatives propose and do. "Pragmatic" doesn't mean "what Conservatives do" and your attempts to distort language are simply Orwellian.

Democrats need to grow a spine and stop being afraid of attacking Republicans. The President is a nice guy, and he learned to use the bat, after having sand repeatedly kicked in his face. Now, is the time to hit these Republicans like Romney hard and heavy.

Romney,

I've warned you once already, stay away from Trump. It makes me want to vote for you less and you are what is left if I dont want Obama.

Well -known celeb do not get you kudos from most Americans. Trump is especially bad since eveything about him reeks of excessive narcissism and greed.

To who wrote:

What good is a powerful military if there is nothing left for anything else?

Why do liberals believe that the Defense budget is the vast majority of the Federal Budget? The truth is that is only accounts for less than 20%. We spend as much Social Security and Income Security. If President Obama and Democrat controlled Congress (first two years of the Obama Presidency) passed a stimulus that worked, both of these numbers, and the deficit, would be significantly lower.

Defense is over half the discretionary budget...but keep trying to twist words to minimize what we spend on our military, to make it sound as if it's insufficient.

Is there a reason we need to spend as much on defense as the rest of the world combined?

We spend as much Social Security and Income Security.

SS was paid for in full, however. Therefore using SS as an example is somewhat flawed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:U.S._Federal_Spending_-_FY_2011.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:U.S._Federal_Receipts_-_FY_2007.png

Bill 2910238 - still the lies about the congress being controlled by Democrats for two years. President Obama had a filibuster proof congress for 7 months - during which time Ted Kennedy was ill and there were recesses. Try again!

Obama killed Osama Bin Laden.

Bush43 "I'm not concerned about him."

Nuff said.

Quiz for regressives:

1. What was the unemployment rate in 1936? A: 18%

2. What was the unemployment rate in 2012? A: 8.1%

3. What was the Federal budget deficit as percent of GDP in 1936? A: -5.5%

4. What is the Federal budget deficit as percent of GDP (estimated) in 2013? A: -5.5%

5. What presidential election had the biggest electoral college landslide? A: 1936 (Roosevelt v. Landon)

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/unemployment-rate

http://federal-budget.findthedata.org/

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/year_spending_1936USbn_13bs1n#usgs302

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_election_of_1936

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Quote....."The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism - ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. " .....EndQuote

Buy American ! Buy Local ! Support America’s middle class ! Support Women’s rights ! Support Civil Rights ! Protect God’s Green Earth ! Defeat Fascism! Vote Democrat ! Obama/Biden 2012 !

John B, thanks, and ditto your post.

Mark from Lake Tahoe, there's no way to put this nicely except to call your post bull pucky. I am sick of reading conservatives claiming some moral superiority on patriotism, exceptionalism, judges, etc. Conservatives do NOT love their country any more than liberals. Love of country goes beyond flag pins, and support our troops bumper stickers. Love of country means being willing to pay taxes to make this country strong; a willingness to invest in those things which make society civilized. You claim judges should be umpires, well, activist right-wing justices determined corporations are the equal of people in Citizens United which went far beyond the ruling needed in the case and overturned two centuries worth of thinking that people are what makes this a great country. As for American Exceptionalism, how exceptional is the USA in education, infrastructure, providing health care to all not just those who can afford it? Liberals believe in American Exceptionalism as much as conservatives except we believe in it being something real not just words touted in a speech or written in a post and we believe that it it entails something more than a powerful military, waving a flag and saying the words. American Exceptionalism is more than a patriotic coupling of words, it should represent the finest in education for all children both rich and poor, top notch infrastrucure, caring for the least among us because we can and we should. American Exceptionalism and America First are more than catch phrases. We can only be those things if we continually strive to achieve them and are willing to contribute to the cost of being "exceptional".

Mark, great post (2.10), it pretty much sums up politics in American today. The liberals are living in a vacuum and they just don't know it....!

Romney 2012, let's end the mistake!

Defense is over half the discretionary budget

"Discretionary" being the magic word. It is the entitlement programs that make the majority of the complete budget.

Mark from Lake Tahoe,

Conservatives, most of them anyway, believe in God and think that the
Constitution has been twisted by liberal judges to illegitimately try to purge Christianity from the public square.

nope, Liberals feel that all religions, and non-believers should be treated equally.

We also believe, most of us anyway, that this country has been successful in large part because it is a good, Christian
nation and if our country ever turns away from the Lord, it will cease to prosper. Liberals, most of them anyway, are hostile to Christianity.

How do you feel about the lying suck of $hit Romney then? Isn't lying a sin?

BTW, I'm a born, and raised Catholic. As an adult, I decided that going to Church every Sunday does not make me a good Christian. Treating people the way I want to be treated - regardless of their skin color, national origin or sexual preference - is what makes me a good Christian.

That's why, whether you're talking about a school play at Christmas time, a judge putting the Ten Commandments on the wall of his court, or a store employee saying "Merry Christmas" instead of "Happy Holidays," liberals are dedicated to driving reminders of Christianity from polite society.

send your kids to a Christian school and you can have as many Xmas plays as your little heart desires. Public buildings, including schools and courts, are supposed to represent ALL citizens, not just the Christian ones.

LOL JohnB...

Isn't obama a fervent embracer of cheneys "deficits don't matter" comment?

I don't recall that the republican agenda includes massive spending cuts in order to effect austerity. Even ryans budget plan doesn't support it except in what the liberal mind wants to spin it to be. Nice try though. I wonder what senate leader rieds alternate plan is for a budget, more CR's?

Whatever happened to smart spending? Oh, that's right, politicians wouldn't get the votes.

Mark, how you and John Hawkins can rationalize your bonus point with your point number 2 is beyond me.

How typically conservative of you.

John B, Jody, GBM -- Excellent posts.

The headlines of a successful President!

Homes Prices Drop 2% to Post-Crisis Lows: Case-Shiller

Consumer confidence plunges in May

Dow Pacing Losing Streak That Dates Back to 1903

Faber: ‘Massive Wealth Destruction’ Coming, Well-to-Do ‘May Lose 50%’

I don't recall that the republican agenda includes massive spending cuts in order to effect austerity. Even ryans budget plan doesn't support it except in what the liberal mind wants to spin it to be.

Thanks for backing up my point, american. Republicans claim they can balance the budget exclusively by reducing revenue. How does that work, exactly? Anyone with a 3rd grade education realizes that once you subtract a number you end up with LESS.

Here we go again...Obama will not use his record...only the character assassination of his opponent...but he has never been one to talk about his accomplishments...I wonder why that is?

John B, Des Moines, IA and bayllie

Your responds to Mark from Lake Tahoe were very, very revealing about his blindsightness from a whacked out right wing website.

Might I add, their color blindness is apparent. They only see old, pale, male, white men's arcane stances who would love to take America back to the Guilded and pre Civil War days.

Mark, did you miss the entire primary campaign, in which Romney buried all his adversaries under mountains of negative ads?

Nice use of Rovian projection, however...too bad we've all educated ourselves on how that works.

Thanks for backing up my point, american. Republicans claim they can balance the budget exclusively by reducing revenue. How does that work, exactly? Anyone with a 3rd grade education realizes that once you subtract a number you end up with LESS.

It has to do with the L curve. If you tax to high you will see a decrease in revenue, but if you cut taxes it will spur more activity, in turn spurring activity that generates more revenue. At the same time you cut the already bloated government that we have now.

seeking 2.21 -- Are you suggesting that without a super majority in the Senate and a majority in the House that President Obama is incapable of leading our country and getting anything done?

Why not just go for a veto-proof majority to seal the deal?

Better yet, let's outlaw all parties except the Democrat party then you can do whatever you want. Maybe that is the flexibility that Obama will discuss with Putin if he wins a second term.

Of course one day sanity will return to most Americans and the Republicans will enjoy the same benefits in the majorities that Democrats desire.

I am always amused to see that liberal attack posts that are 'collapsed by community' are always miraculously restored, while conservative posts that are 'collapsed by community' are rarely if ever restored. Double Standard time.

I know this is an extreme liberal blog, but I thought even those guys respected freedom of speech. And I guess Newsvine's COH ONLY applies to comments seemingly negative of the liberal agenda! While the name calling and abuse of some of the liberal posters are largely ignored. The COH should be applied equally to all, at least that's my opinion.

This post will be collapsed shortly.

George,

All you need to do is request that the collapsed comment be reviewed and restored using the “Report Bug” in the upper RH corner of your home page.

All you need to do is request that the collapsed comment be reviewed and restored using the “Report Bug” in the upper RH corner of your home page.

Except it's much easier for the George's of FR to piss & moan while playing the martyr!

It's all a vast left wing conspiracy with these clowns...

Dumb FUX -- Good job. Just as expected by George the name calling and insults have arrived.

George has officially been schooled.

I feel a collapse coming on.

and restored using the “Report Bug” in the upper RH corner of your home page.

Thanks Dennis, but I'd still like an explanation of the seemingly selective enforcement of Newsvine's COH. Obviously a little one sided (or 'left' sided) in which offenders get penalized.

George,

Newsvine primarily only uses their computer moderation on First Read articles – no Moderator intervention (Tyler/Sally). If you notice neither moderator leaves comments on these articles – they only deal with them on an exception basis.

This was an agreement/arrangement reached when Newsvine entered in a contract with First Read when they (NV) took over moderation a couple years ago.

It has to do with the L curve. If you tax to high you will see a decrease in revenue, but if you cut taxes it will spur more activity, in turn spurring activity that generates more revenue. At the same time you cut the already bloated government that we have now.

That would be 'L' as in 'Laffer'. The Laffer curve was long ago discredited and even Bush Administration officials are on record as agreeing that tax cuts don't pay for themselves.

Welcome to Conservativeland, where up is down, day is night, and less is more.

"Liberals believe in American Exceptionalism as much as conservatives except we believe in it being something real not just words touted in a speech or written in a post and we believe that it it entails something more than a powerful military, waving a flag and saying the words."

You got that right!! Chris Hayes proved that over the weekend!!! Be proud Jody, be proud of your Liberal ways of our Heros!!! Can I say Heros on this blog? Will I be banned? Sorry POS!!!! Hey Red, you got any SKIN in the game??? A line form Torpedo, you idiots don't have a clue what happens in your "Game"!! Sorry a@@'s!!

Obama/Biden 2012 - "We raised the deficit by $6 trillion and that's all we got was this lousy 8% unemployment rate"

Oh Joanna, you crack me up!!! But seriously, you need to look at the facts. You may have gotten that number from the Romney website, and I'm here to tell you that it is false. I know, I went there and checked it out. Romney said that Obama has spent more than the 43 preceding presidents combined, which is false. The preceding presidents accumulated a debt of roughly $11.9 trillion. Obama raised it by roughly $4.7 trillion, and by $1.5 trillion if you include his spending policies, which was the stimulus, the surge in Afghanistan, and the rest of TARP.

Mark L-464288

Thanks for backing up my point, american. Republicans claim they can balance the budget exclusively by reducing revenue. How does that work, exactly? Anyone with a 3rd grade education realizes that once you subtract a number you end up with LESS.

It has to do with the L curve. If you tax to high you will see a decrease in revenue, but if you cut taxes it will spur more activity, in turn spurring activity that generates more revenue. At the same time you cut the already bloated government that we have now.

Mark, I notice a few problems in your message. For one thing, you fail to mention that if taxes are too low revenues will be too low. For another thing, you use a blanket statement on saying that cutting taxes will automatically spur more activity and create revenues. That is true, but only in certain cases. I believe that President Bush tried to do the same thing, with economic advisers using the Laffer curve to justify the Bush tax cuts. I believe in the Laffer curve myself, but I am an ardent Keynesian and anti-supply-sider. Part of the justification for the Bush tax cuts was that it would spur economy growth during the 2001 recession. Unfortunately, the Bush tax cuts did not help the recession, and they mainly served as a drag on the economy due to high deficits, and thus higher interest rates. Revenues did not necessarily rise because of those tax cuts; it may just be a coincidence. And I do not believe that the Laffer curve is shaped in the perfect semi-elliptical shape that is commonly displayed. I believe it is leaning more to the right side with a steep and short drop to the right end. And I believe that we are stuck somewhere on the left of the curve, thanks in part to the Bush tax cuts and the tax cuts forced by the GOP Congress in the late 90s. Tax cuts during good economic times only reduce revenues, and the Bush tax cuts reduced potential revenues during the acceptable years between the dot-com crash and the Great Recession. The GOP is proposing to cut government spending, I'll give you that, but it is seemingly going to use all of the savings from cutting spending to pass massive tax cuts, sending us right back to square one. Every rational person knows that you cannot cut shortfalls and keep the recovery stable without revenue increases, and by that I mean tax hikes. It is a fact. You cannot cut taxes in a fiscal crisis. It is as simple as that.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

Romney is Americas toilet paper king !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Just what in the hell are we supposed to talk about?

*raises hand*

I know... I know...

The evil Kenyan-born, socialist, Marxist, teleprompter reading, dog eating, 57 state, black man occupying THEIR White House!

Am I right?

Well IR, I ain't talkin' about it. I ain't votin' for it neither.

The wit and wisdom of FR's very own Will Rogers...nicely said, IR.

Good point IR. I think Willard would be worst than W was.

IR - We ain't supposed to talk 'bout notin' regarding Romney....after all - isn't it their turn?

And also - "Obama bad...no good...etc etc.." so all the bad things that have happend are the Presidents fault....and all the good things that have happened are any one but Obama's fault.....This is the word according to Mitt with the yellow streak down his back...

I love the talking lying point the Republicans use when the topic of the Presidents race comes up and allegations of racism comes up.

There number one response is that the President is not black. The hidden message by this stupid statement on their part is “see we aren't racist because the President is not black."

Obama IS worse then Carter.

Obama Biden 2012 “Gosh, so many right wing trolls like greg berry that don’t know anything. and these fools actually vote.”

Just what in the hell are we supposed to talk about?

Keep talking about Bain capital.

Keep talking about a company that has an 80% success rate in saving trouble companies.

Keep talking about the jobs "created and saved" but for the fact that Bain saved them.

Keep talking about how this was achieved without a dime of taxpayers money.

Keep talking about how Bain generated the returns needed by Public Pension funds to meet their future liabilities. (see post above about NY City Pension Fund)

Keep talking about one of the most successful companies in America and how it was led by Romney.

I love this conversation about American Capitalism .

IR--I think we're supposed to talk about how Mitt saved the Olympics---you know, how he got all that government assistance through earmarks? The same assistance that was too much for even John McCain. Oh wait---we aren't supposed to talk about that either.

Speaking of voting job 1.. Firts off... Your the fool...this shoulb be the way we hold our elections in the United States, #1 if you do not pay income taxes to the government, you should not be allowed to vote...... Then the worst President in US history would not have a chance at re-election.... No money contributed to this great nation... And you only "TAKE" you should not be given the right to vote... Sorry.. Get a job.. # 2 Illegals.... No papers... no voting... Tuff @!$%#...

You see that dumb a$$es like SRAGAN don't know anything because they still live in their parents basement, and they are jealous of people like me that own a home and have a good paying job.

Actually, the worst two Presidents in history were Herbert Hoover and W. Bush.

Perhaps someday you can take some classes.

SRAGAN: Your point is lost in a jumble of nonsensical meandering thoughts that don't seem to lead anywhere. But whatever it was, I don't think we're supposed to talk about it anyway. Let's just keep the focus on Obama and hope nobody actually expects policies to be specified by our rich guy with all the experience, OK?

Great post, IR. If we are not supposed to talk about Romney's background, how can we determine if he meets our expectations of a president? Do we believe that it is "his turn"? I'm still waiting to hear the details of his plans.

Then by all means Alan then let us talk about All the Lives he had to destroy to achieve it. In the words of David Allan Coe "sometimes it ain't worth all you had to kill to get here". Just a thought there Sport.

Whose Willard?

SRAGAN: "Firts off"? "Your the fool"? "shoulb"? Perhaps a literacy test should be included. So you would have armed services members and college students who pay no income tax not be allowed to vote?

Keep talking about Bain capital.

Keep talking about a company that has an 80% success rate in saving trouble companies.

Keep talking about the jobs "created and saved" but for the fact that Bain saved them.

Keep talking about how this was achieved without a dime of taxpayers money.

Keep talking about how Bain generated the returns needed by Public Pension funds to meet their future liabilities. (see post above about NY City Pension Fund)

Keep talking about one of the most successful companies in America and how it was led by Romney.

I love this conversation about American Capitalism .

Stop Alan, NJ you're killin' me! I just spit iced tea all over my monitor.

...er, um, you mean it wasn't a joke?

No, like most Libertarians and Ayn-Rand addled Conservatives he believes that the accumulation of all wealth in the hands of a few is the genius of the American system.

It takes a Liberal to realize that the genius of America is to pair the creative force of Capitalism with a reasonable dose of regulation to let the little guy have a fighting chance.

Independent Redneck Va.

In the words of David Allan Coe "sometimes it ain't worth all you had to kill to get here".

DAC!!! High five IR! He used to come into my shop once a week, nicest guy ever. He just got married a couple years ago, his wife Kim is amazing.

SRAGAN,

Are you even in the work force? Your rants sound like those of an 11 year old. Too young to be a legal worker in the USA so you must be an illegal.

The evil Kenyan-born, socialist, Marxist, teleprompter reading, dog eating, 57 state, black man occupying THEIR White House!

Am I right?

err... wrong carrot top, you continue to use the race card when it's not about race, it's about truth! All we want to do is end the error! He promised hope and change and failed. At the end of the day obama is just smoke and mirrors, a nice guy that is in way over his head. He is just another inept politician who can't defend his record so uses dirty politics and attack ads in a desperate attempt to save his job.

He will not win this election because of race, but because of policy. And his policy stinks! And we quite simply can't afford 4 more years of it!

Say Hey for me First Sgt. Wife. Been listening to David Allen for years. Glad to hear he's married and settled down some not totally I'm sure Just Some.

Then by all means Alan then let us talk about All the Lives he had to destroy to achieve it. In the words of David Allan Coe "sometimes it ain't worth all you had to kill to get here". Just a thought there Sport.

I'm confused. Are you arguing it would have been better to "destroy" the lives of everybody rather than save parts of the companies? Are you arguing that saving jobs should have been the focus rather than building a profitable company?

I'm curious but can you give me an example of a company that doesn't make a profit that employs workers? If this situation continues will those jobs still be there? If Bain took less profit to save more jobs that would mean they had less money to invest in the future, so logically they would be saving some jobs at the expense of others because the investment capital would not have been available. Further, I posted above that NY City pension fund is downgrading it's forecast for investment from 8% to 7%, a figure that is still unrealistic. But how much more will they have to downgrade if PE is to focus on job "creation and savings"?

Please enlighten me with your economic model that will save all the jobs at a troubled company. Put your model up against the record of Bain at 80% and we'll see which model destroys less lives in the long run.

you continue to use the race card when it's not about race

Get back to me when you correct one of your racist buddies on this board... K?

Does "buckwheat", "Watermelon One" or the NIC = @!$%# in chief ring a bell... hypocrite?

At least they have the balls to say what the majority of YOU are thinking!

Independent Redneck Va.

Say Hey for me First Sgt. Wife. Been listening to David Allen for years. Glad to hear he's married and settled down some not totally I'm sure Just Some.

lol he's 72 now so yeah it's just some ;)

I don't live there anymore so I only see him maybe once or twice a year now.

If you yank carrot tops chain hard enough, she'll always throw the race card thing at you. Poor girl her wig may be on too tight!

I'm against Obama because in one word he is very ineffective! Clinton, despite his ruining the lives of several women, was much more successful and pragmatic! Bill worked very well with the Republicans, Barry never could... he's a thin skinned narcissist and those are two characteristics that don't mix with politics.

I would never insult Buckwheat by comparing that character to obama

Buckwheat was funny

Obama is not

IR, keep those pearls of wisdom coming! Excellent, Will Rogers is smiling.

I find it interesting that David Brooks and republicans want President Obama's campaign team to lay off Bain Capital and Mitt Romney's days there; they are busying trying to paint the Obama ads as negative attacks on Mitt Romney which makes me wonder why telling the truth about much of what Bain and Mitt were up to is now considered a negative attack. Why is it that the GOP doesn't want to talk about Bain Capital? Well, because the GOP knows the truth, Romney is as vulnerable running on his Bain Capital success today as he was in 1994 and 2008.

I'm at the point where I'm sick to death of both of them, if I wasn't such a political junkie, I'd have turn my back on the whole process by now, guess I'm just a glutton for punishment. Think there's a rehab for that? lol PA politics anonymous. I need it.

Alan, NJ

Keep talking about a company that has an 80% success rate in saving trouble companies.

What you are failing to disclose is that the 20% was not a "normal" business failure but a deliberate sucking life out of a healthy company.

It's like me taking out debt, on top of debt in someone else's name, and then leaving them with one option: bankruptcy; and all this while I'm laughing all the way to the bank.

Legal? Yes. Ethical? Apparently even Romney is ashamed of admitting to it because, otherwise, he would be wearing that label proudly.

Upset, sragan may be experiencing communication difficulties but the following ny you makes even less sense...

Let's just keep the focus on Obama and hope nobody actually expects policies to be specified by our rich guy with all the experience, OK?

Hmmmm, Obama is a 1%er. Obama campaigned only on "hope and change" in 2008. Obama ignores his own advisors and claims experience because of his "on the job training".

By all means let's keep the focus on obama and his failure to deliver on his rhetoric.

IR -- Great post. Something else we ain't suppose to talk about is how they do this with government's help.

The most obvious is the special tax treatment for "carried interest," a loophole that allows managers of private equity firms, hedge funds and certain other entities to pay an income tax rate of just 15%, while managers at other types of companies pay up to 35%.

That is an indefensibly sweet deal, one that encourages top financiers to go into private equity, and gives their firms a leg up in the business of restructuring inefficient companies.

Combine the carried-interest treatment with a forgiving corporate bankruptcy code and the deduction for interest payments on corporate debt, and it's hard to avoid the conclusion that government wants to promote highly leveraged deals such as the one that brought GST down.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/story/2012-05-28/bain-capital-political-ad/55251940/1

@Alan, NJ

Just what in the hell are we supposed to talk about?

Keep talking about Bain capital.

Keep talking about a company that has an 80% success rate in saving trouble companies.

Alan- you have repeatedly used this "80% number. I have done considerable research on Bian Capital and have found nothing remotely resembling this. What is your source for this info? If you can't back it up, I assume it is a gross exaggeration or lie. Also, they didn't usually buy troubled companies. They bought healthy companies. You can't bleed out a company that's almost dead. Their MO was to buy healthy companies, bury them under debt of bowwored money, cut maintenance almost entirely, lay off workers, outsource everything to maximize short-term profits in lieu of long-term sustainablility, pay themselves royally with this increased "profit" and borrowed money, and once the patient was sick, unload it. I can back this up and will gladly do so. If you can prove your 80% assertion, I am most eager to see it. I'm calling this as BS. The needle is off the scale on my meter. Please back this up or desist.

What you are failing to disclose is that the 20% was not a "normal" business failure but a deliberate sucking life out of a healthy company.

So you are now claiming that these companies were healthy before Big Bad Bain came along? GST was a thriving business before Bain? Seems the facts are not on your side.

When Bain bought the Kansas City mill in 1993, steel was a scene of carnage. Global players were pouring out cheap products, and America's high-cost steel plants couldn't compete. The industry had lost 200,000 jobs in preceding years. In 1992 alone, the six largest U.S. steel mills had lost a combined $3 billion. Armco, the company Bain would buy the plant from, would lose $641 million in 1993.

The Kansas City plant was itself dying. At its 1970 height it employed 4,500; by the late 1980s it was down to 1,000. A year before acquisition, Armco had laid off another 75. Its equipment was old; it faced fierce competition at home and abroad.

B.C. Huselton, a vice president of the business at the time, tells me that in 1990 the Armco CEO held a meeting. "He told us, 'Look, we either try to sell it, or we've got to shut it down.'" Armco had shut down another Kansas City facility, Union Wire Rope, only a few years before.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303360504577410573651845802.html

So lets go back to IR's post. Why were all these jobs lost before Bain? I thought this was a workers paradise where jobs are the focus and not profits?

Sad fact is in a Capitalist society, jobs are a by-product of profits. To take the sole-proprietor model, does he employ workers at the expense of profits, or does he employ workers once profits justify expanding?

BTW an 80% success rate of healthy companies is phenomenal, never mind an 80% of troubled companies.

The latest statistics from the Small Business Administration (SBA) show that "two-thirds of new employer establishments survive two years, and 44 percent survive four years."

Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_percentage_of_new_businesses_fail_in_the_first_year#ixzz1wHF1CbRQ

Nice deflection post, IR. Now if only the IRS can find any illegalities relating to romneys tax returns or the use of blind trusts.

Are we to assume also that 2nd place finishers should not get any respect when they finally achieve a first place finish? Ref. mccain getting the nod over romney for the nomination in 2008.

Really IR, romney had to destroy lives? Were these lives already destroyed by companies already in distress prior to private equity stepping in? Perhaps you can explain to us all on this aspect, care to expound on how these distressed companies couldn't get financing to survive, or whose policies were leading them into a death spiral, or even a changed market making continued existance impossible.

I realize that obama and company likes to focus on one midwest steel plant closure or the facility in florida. Wonder why he doesn't reflect on bains successes as well. Perhaps staples isn't on the governments approved vendor list.

Obama and company must really be proud of GM and chrysler. All those dealerships closed, production models gone like saturn, hummer, pontiac and others along with their workers, just gone forever. Then we have obamas pet, solyndra. 400 lives just utterly destroyed and taxpayer money just chucked down a rathole or back into obamas pocket.

Alan in NJ...

Yep US steel production was already in decline by the nineties, yet I am sure that obamas policies could have saved it.

I grew up in WNY when bethlehem and lackawanna steel were going great guns. Heck, they even built a "skyway" past the mills to keep the flow of non-steel mill traffic going. Today the "skyway" is gone and the mills vacant.

Interesting on how libs think that things shouldn't change and will stay in place forever. Not very progressive thinking really, trying to cling to the past.

Alan- you have repeatedly used this "80% number. I have done considerable research on Bian Capital and have found nothing remotely resembling this. What is your source for this info? If you can't back it up, I assume it is a gross exaggeration or lie. Also, they didn't usually buy troubled companies. They bought healthy companies.

Can you back up your statement that bought healthy companies? What do you define as a healthy company because GST certainly wasn't.

Here is the 78/22 split statistic. BTW it was first quoted here by Backhouse who that 22% failure rate was bad. He doesn't seem to know how difficult it is to have a successful business.

The Wall Street Journal, aiming for a comprehensive assessment, examined 77 businesses Bain invested in while Mr. Romney led the firm from its 1984 start until early 1999, to see how they fared during Bain's involvement and shortly afterward.

Among the findings: 22% either filed for bankruptcy reorganization or closed their doors by the end of the eighth year after Bain first invested, sometimes with substantial job losses. An additional 8% ran into so much trouble that all of the money Bain invested was lost.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204331304577140850713493694.html

Obama ran his last campaign on yes we can, and since that the Obama message has been why we couldn't. 3.5 years later Obama has done nothing but blame everyone else for his failures, and that fact combined with his already negative campaign message is going to turn off the voters.

For Obama to suggest that his community organizing, non-tenured law professor status, and less then one term as a junior senator somehow makes him more qualified to be president then someone that was governor of a major state and has more then 25 years of private sector experience is laughable. If Obama had a record to run on, he would. Obama looks to be running scared.

Bain DID cost taxpayers money. It happened when they raided the employees pension plans that the fed govt Pension Guarantee had to honor.

Bain was in the business of breaking inconvenient contracts at the expense of the workers to line the pockets of the investors. No re-negotiations. Simply rip them up as if they never existed.

Did Bain ever lose any money on any of these ventures? They always came out on top even if the taxpayer had to contribute. Romneys millions (billions??) are built on the backs of those who lost everything while Romney lost nothing.

@ Alan and Blearyeyed...

Yes, they did repeatedly dip into the govt till to make money at our expense. Perhaps clever investing but very poor business for the country as a whole.

Alan, did you read this whole article that you cited? If not, I'll assume poor preparation on your part. If you did, then it is classic cherry-picking tantamount to lying. Nowhere is the number 80% to be found. 78% is a stretch. And let's begin this critical analysis by stating that it is from the WSJ which is famously conservative, some would say GOP leaning. The article states that an ADDITIONAL 8% failed so completely that Bain lost their money as well. So now we're down to 70%. Further, this study only looks at the 8 years following Bain's takeover, a rather arbitrary distinction. What happens after 8 years? We don't know because Bain isn't talking. Did Bain relinquish control after 5 years? Sometimes, sometimes not. 7 years? 8 years? We don't know. They're not talking. So saying that 8 years is a good cutoff point is pretty arbitrary.Further, the article states, and I quote,"Amid anecdotal evidence on both sides, the full record has largely escaped a close look, because so many transactions are involved. The Wall Street Journal,
aiming for a comprehensive assessment, examined 77 businesses Bain invested in while Mr. Romney led the firm.

So this tells us that many transactions are involved and yet we only see 77. Why would we assume that this is a good cross-section? We don't really know that.

Here are a few sentences that I found telling:

"Another finding was that Bain produced stellar returns for its investors—yet the bulk of these came from just a small number of its investments. Ten deals produced more than 70% of the dollar gains.Some of those companies, too, later ran into trouble. Of the 10 businesses on which Bain investors scored their biggest gains, four later landed in bankruptcy court."

Okay. Well, this indicates that we realistically are talking about maybe only 60%, a far cry from 80. But it gets better...

" Some experts, while conceding that available studies don't provide a direct comparison, said the rate at which the firms Bain invested in ran into trouble appears to be higher than experienced by some rival buyout firms during the era."

I suspect,Alan, that you will take exception to my disagreement on this interpretation, so let's be sure to include this statement from the article that you were referencing:"Some of the companies that ran into trouble did so after Bain was no longer involved and new owners had taken charge. Bain declined to provide information on when its involvement in its investments ended."

Why would Bain refuse to provide info if they are so helpful to all. And why has no one from these companies they have saved stepped up to sing his praises? Not one?

Now let's look at one statement credited to Romney that is provably false.

"Mr. Romney has told potential voters how at Bain he helped launch or rebuild
companies such as Staples Inc., SPLS +1.42%Domino's Pizza Inc. and Sports Authority
Inc., creating more than 100,000 jobs."

With these 3 specific companies, Bain was a minority owner and had no real control over what they did. These companies did well on their own with no "help" from Bain. To suggest that they were responsible for this growth is laughable. That would be like me buying 100$ of Microsoft stock and saying I helped them succeed.

"Bain, citing privacy reasons, declined to provide a list of the companies it
invested in". That keeps popping up. Bain doesn't want to talk. Why? Romney doesn't want to talk.Why? Whose privacy are they protecting,I wonder...
This is interesting:"Academic research provides some basis to compare this performance. A study of buyouts by various firms globally found a 5% to 8% bankruptcy rate among target companies that were taken over from 1985 to 1999."

You asked for my source of info? Your own article bears this out:

"Bain, after its initial focus on small firms needing capital, later shifted
toward the potentially more lucrative business of leveraged buyouts—acquiring control of businesses by using investors' money amplified by debt.In such deals, a buyout firm tries to improve profitability by refocusing operations and cutting costs, a step that can include cutting the work force. Buyout firms seek to make money not only by eventually selling a business for more than they put into it, but also by extracting fees and sometimes dividends while they own it."

So here you see what I mentioned. But here's another article that delves into that deeper, and it's where Bain made their best money and created the biggest losers:http://www.seattleweekly.com/2012-04-18/news/mitt-romney-american-parasite/

This post is long enough already and I don't like long posts so I'll stop in a minute but not before I point out what you should already know if you read this repeort. It is extremely difficult to come up with reliable numbers for comparison in this kind of a murky business and doubly so when the party involved won't talk or give info. My question is "why won't they give info?" Saints don't generally work in the dark. Romney is no saint- not even close. The only thing that this article makes clear is that Romney and Bain were just more vulture capitalists and not especially good ones at that. Just very, very deep pockets.

So now the question is: did you not read the whole article? Did you fail to understand what you read? Or were you just cherry-picking to try and spin your POV like Bushco did?

..and now Mitt is apprenticed to Donold Trump!! May God help us all!!

Just plain hard to believe that tens of millions of Americans will line up in November and vote for Romney and many of them would vote for Trump if he were running against Obama. And not because they would like either of them as a candidate. Rather they will vote out of irrational hatred. Hatred stoked by Fox News and the likes of WND.com. Much of America has fallen off their rocker and can't get back up. Just pathetic. That is exactly what I think of many of my fellow citizens.

Mitt Romney has no problem with defending his record at Bain, as Governor of Massachusetts, Olympics, or his faith. The problem is when the Obama campaign and Super PACs try to blame him for things that he had nothing to do with. Even the liberals at the Washington Post have been giving them Three Pinocchios ratings time after time.

As far as his “weird” faith, I was under the belief that one of the founding principles of this country was freedom of religion. Is that something that you do not believe in or do you routinely denounce a faith you know nothing about?

Let us not forget that both Gingrich and Trump have bankruptcy as a tool in their capitalist tool box. Just like Romney.

the sanctity of marriage....

Isn't it amazing how Romney preaches family issues and morality while surrounding himself with examples of men who lack morality. Who cheated on their wives and in Gingrich's case left a sick woman and his child penniless while he went off with a mistress. These are really men to look up to. Gingrich uses the old prison toon "I found God" sung regularly by inmates on death row. If these are the kind of men Mitt surrounds himself with before the election what will he surround himself with should he win. I don't really like Obama but it's going to be another "lesser of the two evils" election.

Hmmmm, seem to recall that obama is a strong advocate for bankruptcy as well, right david?

All right American, I'll play:

Romney uses bankruptcy - the stats are there, and you know them - to gut a company of its assets and pick the meat from the carcass. He's called a vulture capitalist for a very good reason and you know it. I might point out for those who continue to defend the steel company pillaging, that taxpayers are picking up a portion of the gutted pension fund.

Gingrich loved to go on and on with his creds for balanced budgets. Couldn't hear enough about his being the genius behind the balanced budgets he handed over to President Bush, could we? Now, we find a guy who has a line of credit at Tiffany's isn't smart enough to keep one of his own outfits from going under. I don't speak for the President, but I'm willing to bet he didn't have bankruptcy in mind as a tool for decking out your current favorite female.

Trump? This is a guy who would have even more bankruptcies were it not for the fact that at one time, bankers were on the hook for so much money they had gambled on that twit, that they bailed him out. You might say, Trump taught the banks about the virtues of "Too big to fail".

Can you really imagine that's what the Framers had in mind when they put the bankruptcy clause in the Constitution?

Lest we forget, Newtie wanted a 3 some but his wife turned him down so he chose bird face Calista.

Hey Nash

If you seen it through you would heard all sides express sympathy for the position the President is in. Joe actually said this was a morning where being President is the job nobody wants because there are no good options.

They actually had a very reasonable discussion about American Leadership of a humanitarian crisis, where a Libyan solution is not available (no organized resistance to arm, Syrian Army more formidable, resistance spread over the country so no-fly zone possible), and the only military solution is a heavy one. This in a war-weary country, but who else will lead?

Like Iran no easy answers.

Good morning Alan . . . thanks for letting me know that . . . but I am afraid I have heard a little too much of this type of "commentary" from Morning Joe-ke and other places to wait around and see if they are having a "reasonable" day! :o)

Too much nonsense for me.

The only reason to tune into MJ is to get a laugh. Joe Scarborough is the quintessential clueless "man of the people" politico. He stomps around and struts and sputters about how he knows what the common man thinks when in reality, he sits inside the beltway and fabricates based upon what is best for him.

It's difficult for me to get my arms around which is more clueless, Mika Brzezinski or Joe. They both live in some television fantasy land that has nothing to do with the life the rest of us lead.

I tune in on the odd chance Harold Ford Jr is in attendance. I don't always agree with him but I think he has a pretty good understanding of what needs to be done balanced with what can be done.

Nashville_fan

So which is it? Intervene anywhere there is injustice in the world or whine about it when we actually do intervene?

Sadly, in today's corrupt media climate, pundits don't have to choose, they can do both simultaneously, and many folks actually agree.

How many times do I have to hear "Well, that's not the way I would have done it." after yet another country is impacted by U.S. intervention. You just can't make some folks happy.

Yet another sign of how unreasonable and ridiculous the political "conversation" has become . . . no logic required, just rhetoric.

Nash

As usual, you make good sense. It's too bad the old folk don't get it like you. The right wingers, young and old, are just plain old too whacked to make any kind of sense.

Loser!!!!!!!

Obama Biden 2012 "Gosh, so many right wing trolls like greg berry that don't know anything. and these fools actually vote."

Romney - We think Corporations are people and are entitled to corporate welfare, special tax structures, and should continue to receive a tax cut for sending American Jobs overseas..

Obama/Biden 2012.

I hate Corporations. I freely admit it. They are at the root of most of what is wrong today, not only in the US but in the world.

If you had half a brain you'd hate them too. They serve no purpose but their own aggrandizement. They take for doing nothing. They use people up then blame them for being used.

Down with Big Business. Up with MADE IN THE USA.

We hate greg berry.

Obama Biden 2012

Up with MADE IN THE USA.

Hooah

mj -- really? on whom will you depend for your automobile, your food, your furniture, your anything else you use in your daily life?

What will you do with the millions of Americans employed by corporations?

your post is senseless.

Down with Big Business. Up with MADE IN THE USA.

You do, of course, realize that those are conflicting statements, don't you? Are you for or against General Motors, Kelloggs, John Deere, Microsoft, and Hershey's? They are all big businesses that make products in the USA. So, do you want them all to close down because you are big businesses? Or, do you want them because they make products in America?

You seem awfully confused........

losing again!!!

Obama Biden 2012 "Gosh, so many right wing trolls like greg berry that don't know anything. and these fools actually vote."

Repubnuts better get their tissues ready. This nut Romney is associating himself with the dump Trump for his money. He doesn't realize hitching his wagon to dump Trump is killing his chances of being elected. What a piece of work? To think that this "man" is running for POTUS is funny.

greg berry

Obama Biden 2012 " We hate company Profits"

Romney ___— 2012 "We hate class warfare unless we do it."

Obama Biden 2012 "We hate economic inequality."

The Koch Baggers are pushing their teaReTards to back the Flip Flopping Clown ! Mitt's dirty laundry smells, it makes your skin crawl !

Still dumb!!!

Obama Biden 2012 "Gosh, so many right wing trolls like greg berry that don't know anything. and these fools actually vote."

Since both Obama's and Biden's current investments are hiddden from them by blind trusts they can't possibly 'Hate" company profits or businessmen. What an incredibly stupid comment on your part.

greg berry

Obama Biden 2012 "We hate Businessmen"

Romney ____— 2012 "We hate union workers"

Obama Biden 2012 "We hate businessmen that avoid paying their taxes"

I've got all day, greg. All day. Bring it on.

Andrew! Kind of like the republicans trollin' on the birther issue. Kind of silly huh?

So many death sentences are attributed to Mitt by the liberals, yet he is consistently in a tight race with Obama. Must be scary heh. Yeah yeah, another death sentence.

Wasn't Bain Capital supposed to be a death sentence too? But, apparently the voters are smarter than that and seem to understand that there are NO companies that are ever started for the purpose of creating jobs...... they are always started with the intention of making a profit. Jobs are created ONLY WHEN a company can make a profit by doing so.

Can someone tell me the if Romney and Trump have the same hairstylist ?

JC - jobs are create when there is a demand for them. It has nothing to do with profit. Profit is a byproduct of demand. Obviously you don't own or run a company.

Ifor1 - in fact, my wife and I do own a small manufacturing company. While I agree with your statement that jobs are created when there is demand, I was attempting to make a simplistic statement not write a treatise on the determining factors involved in the hiring process. However, if I did, I would certainly take profit potential into account because I would want to determine if it is worth hiring short-term workers that require training versus paying overtime to experienced workers, depending on the expected duration and size of the increased demand. Profit is the result of effective management and an efficient work force generating demand for their product(s)/service(s) and maximizing the result of their efforts.