Politicians and no small number of pundits love to tell their constituents and listeners that American voters are smart. They lie. Politicians are saying, "If you're voting for me, you're smart." Pundits are saying, "If you're listening to me, you're smart." That kind of smarmy BS doesn't even rise to the level of hogwash.

So it is, we watch daily the spectacle of at least two competing groups, charging into battle, armed with the knowledge that they have the right answers, because - "they are smart." It doesn't take a genius to realize that more than likely one of the parties is wrong, or the truth lies somewhere in between. Somehow though, "smart people" can't see this. So it is, we get a smart guy, who believes he is a conservative, throwing out a list of irrelevancies that in his mind demonstrate that President Obama is a failure. Post 1.1:http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/12/12183903-first-thoughts-heres-your-economic-anxiety#comments

You see, in this fellow's world, there is no change - the essence of the conservative mind. What happened yesterday, will happen again today, and will happen again tomorrow. He cannot grasp why unemployment might have climbed. Why don't all typewriter repairmen still have jobs? Why do we have unemployed carburetor rebuilders? Why are buggy whip makers out of work? Why isn't the home building industry booming? Why hasn't President Obama created jobs for these people? Can't he issue an executive order to build defective typewriters?

The American economy is NOT static. It changes and the dislocations are painful, but can also be very profitable. No one knows this better than the Republican candidate for President, Mitt Romney - the most dishonest, disingenuous, disconnected candidate of my lifetime. Romney has profited on this change, but his supporters are not bright enough to see it.

When Romney's Bain Capital bought a Missouri steel company, it was with leveraged funds. The purchase might have succeeded, it might not, but the driving force behind the purchase was not altruism, it was the profit motive. There was no gamble. The deal was structured in a fashion that if it failed, Bain made money. If it succeeded, Bain made money. In the end, when you cut through the smoke and mirrors, Bain walked off with taxpayer money, and the steel company was no more.

As far as Romney's job creation, the two great examples that are expected to drive us to our knees to worship Mr. Plastic are The Sports Authority and Staples. In the main, the jobs at these places are minimum wage. They create virtually no wealth. H-P builds a computer overseas. They ship it to Staples. An employee puts it in the storeroom. Customer walks in and buys it. Employee takes it from storeroom and puts it in customer's car. What Romney did, was add to the price of the computer so he could pay his employee, and he gave himself a little cut for being so clever in getting the customer to pay more than the computer itself was worth. Where's the wealth?

Damned right the private sector is doing just fine. They're taking in huge profits. Fact is, they can't increase their profits any further because they've cut their work forces to the bone, and they aren't smart enough to figure out how to increase profits in any other fashion beyond cutting employees, and somehow that's the President's fault.

So when President Obama says the private sector is doing fine, he's absolutely correct. That was NOT a gaffe. It's a truth "smart people" can't grasp. The private sector is sitting on piles of cash, but the "smart people" who run the private sector quite clearly aren't able to figure out how to make that money work. That just has to be the President Obama's fault. Right?

And who knows better than the President? Why Eric Cantor and Mitch McConnell, neither of whom has worked in the private sector in his life. Neither of whom has created a job in his life. You aren't smart if you believe people like that. To the contrary, you have to be an idiot. Of course, if you've read this far, and you disagree with the content, you could always collapse the post.........Because that's what "smart people" do, right?

Or consider all the interviews he does with FOX (especially its cherry-picked programs vs. its newsier anchors) compared with other news outlets.Or think about the fact that the Romney camp isn't planning (for now) on delivering any new policy speeches.

I seem to have missed the old policy speeches then, unless of course "Obama is bad" is a policy.

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL & Ron Indiana

Excellent characterizations of Mittens. He is still more clueless and more wooden than ever.

The Huffington Post has it on their front page...

CLUELESS: Mitt's Firefighter Fail

Mitt Romney's 'Absurd' Claim Misses Billions In Federal Funds For Cops, Teachers, Firefighters

From the Heartland --

This is a painful article for Wisconsin democrats to read, but I know that we will take it to heart.

http://host.madison.com/ct/news/local/govt-and-politics/capitol-report/wake-up-call-walker-s-easy-win-exposes-dems-weaknesses/article_5ca7d664-b4ce-11e1-977c-001a4bcf887a.html

"There's an old adage: If you're going to shoot the king, you sure as hell better kill him," says Mark Graul, a Republican strategist with Arena Strategy Group of Green Bay. "It was a strategic blunder. The state Democratic Party, labor groups and left-wing groups around the country underestimated Scott Walker tremendously. I think they thought if they got the signatures, it wouldn't matter who ran against him. And that was an egregious error on their part."

I find it interesting that Republicans always use metaphors about guns and shooting, but the author here does make a good point, although in an ironic way that he probably did not intend.

His point was that democrats ran the wrong candidate. But, in fact, it REALLY wouldn't have mattered who we ran against Scott Walker, with the possible exception of Russ Feingold. Wisconsin no longer has any marquee democrats of the stature necessary to overcome a spending disparity of 7 to 1.

The fact that we were able to flip the State Senate does demonstrate that, to a certain extent, politics are still local. And that's the level on which democrats will now find themselves competing as long as Citizens United remains viable, and now that the unions, along with their political funding, have effectively been destroyed.

This article, painful as it may be for us here in Wisconsin to confront, is also a wake-up call for all progressives in any state. The tsunami will not stop at Wisconsin. If we couldn't resist it here, then there are very few places left where it could be done. But Scott Walker couldn't do what he does without help from the legislature and local governments. Going down to November, we need to be mindful of all those little races that were ignored in 2010 -- elections that brought many states, like Wisconsin, and Michigan, and Florida, and to a lesser extent Ohio, into the position we are in today where democracy is in real danger of being overwhelmed by the fascist interests (yes, I'll use that word) of corporate America.

We cannot afford to lose Congress. We cannot afford to lose any more statehouses or state legislatures.

Courage, my friends. And remember.

Thanks Damage, I always wanted insight into how the kiddies who copied off me in school were doing these days.

Courage, my friends.

Nice to see you this morning Anna Molly!

You have made my day! ;o)

PS: I saw there Walker's beer & brat summit was a total bust! lol

Dumb Fux -- Yesterday, I think, you were indignant about how people refer to President Obama but you do not display a similar level of respect to Governor Romney. Why is that?

Do you find his name, Willard, to be amusing?

ROMNEY, WHAT ARE YOU HIDING IN YOUR TAX RETURNS?

Excellent question Tom!

Willard had no problem handing over multiple years worth to John McCain...

Maybe that's why the old coot chose Palin..?

Good Morning to all my Liberal friends and Congratulations to Ron Barber. This was expected.

I wonder if you would congratulate anyone when Mitt Romney wins.

First Read gets a cheer from me this morning regarding Mitt Romney's running out the clock. The only criticism I have of that portion of First Thoughts is the failure to challenge all the media to do their jobs. If Romney refuses to answer questions and give interviews beyond FOX, then why should the MSM bother to cover his campaign. Why should Romney get free press and television coverage when he refuses to cooperate with the press and MSM?

As for the democrats "pushing the panic button", I do not see this "panic" from the Obama Team. The only ones in panic are Carville and Greenberg and guess what, they're 1990's vintage and their candidate did not fare well under their direction back in 2008 now did she? In addition, as Howard Fineman put it last night, democrats are prone to lots of hand wringing right about now. One only needs to remember the hand wringing panic that the Clinton and Obama supporters would never merge and support Candidate Obama. I find it interesting that the Romney campaign is not criticized as being insulated when Mitt's staff is operating in much the same manner? Why would anyone think that because the Obama Team or Romney Camp keeps their plans close to the vest that is something unusual and worthy of criticism? Incidentally, last I checked Mark McKinnon is a republican so his opinion about what the Obama Team is doing wrong should be ignored by democrats and especially by Team Obama for the simple reason McKinnon is more likely expressing what the O Team is doing right and hoping they stop.

It is a fact that most Americans have no idea what ROI stands for, but ROI is the most important aspect of business and capitalism.

It doesn't matter if a corporation is sitting on $200 billion dollars in their accounts. If they know their ROI on an investment of $100 million is going to be near zero, they won't use that $100 million of their $200 billion. The consumer base of America doesn't have the savings, income or wealth to justify expansion of the private market.

As larger amounts of capital flow to the top, the "job creators" can't produce an ROI which creates larger returns for their accounts. They will just let that cash sit their in their accounts.

Wealth redistribution always happens in a healthy economy. Its just a matter of if the private market redistributes it as pay checks, or if the government redistributes it as public services paid for through taxes. The biggest difference is that the government doesn't keep revenue in its accounts, it sends it back out. The private market has the option to collect large amounts of capital, and just hold on to it.

Anna Molly: Good to see you this morning. Two quick questions: In Paul Ryan's district, how did the voting go between Barrett and Walker? Is Paul Ryan vulnerable in November?

David Walker --

You see, in this fellow's world, there is no change - the essence of the conservative mind. What happened yesterday, will happen again today, and will happen again tomorrow. He cannot grasp why unemployment might have climbed. Why don't all typewriter repairmen still have jobs? Why do we have unemployed carburetor rebuilders? Why are buggy whip makers out of work? Why isn't the home building industry booming? Why hasn't President Obama created jobs for these people? Can't he issue an executive order to build defective typewriters?

Indeed. And have you ever noticed that the argument is always two-sided? Or should I say two-faced?Why CAN'T President Obama just wave his magic wand and create jobs for those folks, and from the other side of Janus's mouth, the federal government does NOT create jobs.

Really.

james --

Do you find his name, Willard, to be amusing?

I can't speak for Feisty, but I do.

Tell you what, james -- when conservatives stop, we'll stop. Let's start with your friend and buddy Damage123's avatar, shall we?

I wonder why you haven't called him out.

Ron --

Anna Molly: Good to see you this morning. Two quick questions: In Paul Ryan's district, how did the voting go between Barrett and Walker? Is Paul Ryan vulnerable in November?

Good morning, Ron. Good to see you, too. 60 of 72 counties went for Walker, including several that had gone for Barrett in 2010. But a couple of other counties flipped the other way. Kenosha, which is in Ryan's district, went heavily for Walker, but Racine was the State Senate district that flipped. I believe the woman who run was inspired to run by Ryan's budget, so that's hopeful. I haven't studied the demographics yet in any detail, but if gerrymandering hasn't made it impossible, then there still may be some hope.

As I said, it is these local races that have the most hope of making a difference. I hope we all remember these lessons come November.

I'm waiting to hear something from Amy in Portland, Maine with her thoughts about the upcoming senatorial race. I'd really like to know how an independent candidate ( King ) can be the favorite there.

Not to take anything away from a candidate I know nothing about, but someone outside the structure of a political party such as the democratic or republican party being the favorite always makes me curious what their platform is and where their monetary support comes from.

The fact that our country is showing signs of economic recovery in spite of all the republican obstruction should be a signal to all voters what this country could be doing if both houses and the POTUS were democrats. When the houses and the president are able to work together to get the country moving forward, there is no stopping the prosperity we could all be enjoying. Imagine having money to make purchases again without fear. Imagine the country having the resources to build and rebuild our infrastructure. Imagine having enough firefighters to actually be able to battle a wildfire before it destroyed over 100 homes. Imagine having enough police on the streets that crime was thwarted before criminals committed a crime.

Now imagine a republican such as Mitt in office. They'd like to cut back on more teachers. They would cut more firefighters and police. They would like to cut back on government spending for infrastructure. After all, who needs bridges, roads without all those potholes and parks that are clean and staffed? Who needs more teachers so our children could actually learn? Who needs all those firefighters and police officers? The republicans would like nothing more but to eliminate unions. Now imagine what your pay, hours worked and benefits would be like if there were no alternatives to what an employer demands of you. Unions have brought laws into the workplace so that everyone can have decent wages, working conditions and retirement benefits. But republicans don't like that in any way shape or form because they are the ones that are running the companies and the last thing they want is the people working for them to have any say in the workplace.

The coming elections are once again a simple matter of the democrats supporting the average American and the republican party supporting a way of life that stifles the average Americans life.

Anna Molly

'Marquee candidates" is an interesting term. Yesterday, Maine threw a primary and nobody came. It was one of the lowest turnouts for both the Republican and Democratic Parties' primaries, they have ever had.

"Voter on the Street" interviews indicate interest in the primaries was low, because most folks expect former governor (Independent) Angus King to win the Senate seat over either the Republican or Democratic candidates. Also, both sides expect the incumbent Democratic Representatives, Michaud and Pingree, to be re-elected. I also believe, voters have tea party-burnout. The Republicans still support the governor, but most voters are pretty sick of what the right-wingers have wrought.

@ Feisty --

Good morning, my friend, and as always, thanks for your support.

Although, I don't think it's entirely fair to say that the beer and brat summit was a total disaster --

http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/brat-summit-a-good-st-step-but-more-needed-lawmakers/article_ef6e6dc4-b4f0-11e1-874b-001a4bcf887a.html

... but it did yield a couple of chuckles, including this one --

To get to the party, lawmakers walked through a small crowd of familiar protesters, many of them holding signs that read things like "End Corporate Rule" and "Healing begins with an indictment," a nod to the ongoing John Doe investigation into some of the governor's current and former staff.

Healing begins with an indictment. Let's hold that thought. ;-)

Amy --

'Marquee candidates" is an interesting term. Yesterday, Maine threw a primary and nobody came. It was one of the lowest turnouts for both the Republican and Democratic Parties' primaries, they have ever had.

Beware, my friend. That's exactly what happened to us in 2010. Complacent and disinterested voters.

oppie --

Wealth redistribution always happens in a healthy economy. Its just a matter of if the private market redistributes it as pay checks, or if the government redistributes it as public services paid for through taxes. The biggest difference is that the government doesn't keep revenue in its accounts, it sends it back out. The private market has the option to collect large amounts of capital, and just hold on to it.

Bravo.

That was perhaps THE most concise explanation of what is going on that I have ever heard. I try to characterize it as the realization by modern high finance and big business interests that money can now be made freely in the global markets without actually spending any money on jobs or infrastructure, and that while that remains true, it presents a vicious cycle -- no investment because no ROI; no ROI because no investment.

And the American worker has become whipsawed in the middle, between the proverbial rock and hard place.

"Dems press the panic button:"

No way. There is no panic concerning Democrats with Romney. Romney is just giving us the proof that he is not qualified to be President of the United States.

I love how MSDNC uses Jim Tressel as its example of how to "run out the clock" .... Tressel was forced out at Ohio State for apparently covering up NCAA violations. Besides, the whole premise of this article is bull$hit.

Obama is self-destructing lately and his only game plan is to suggest that Romney might do worse. I guess that's a new twist on "Hope" and "Change" which has now given way to the reality of "Let's HOPE we CHANGE the President of the United States."

There will be more specifics from Romney at a later time, but for now, Obama is losing the election all by himself .... except for an occasional foot-in-mouth remark from Joe Biden.

Romney won't be able to go the distance not answering the press's questions. It will turn the tide and make it look like he's afraid to answer the "tough questions".

In fact, Obama ads need to be targeting Romney's hiding from the press. Make it a point to say that he doesn't give specifics, is hiding something, and isn't ready to lead if he's afraid of the press.

First Read on the disgraceful Republican witch hunt against Holder:

It’s amazing the political heat he’s had to absorb -- and that’s he’s survived so far. Many would have cracked by now…

He not only didn't crack, but when Corny Cornpone Cornyn demanded he resign, Holder calmly pointed out that the Republicans were merely engaging in cheap political game playing of the sort that "turns people off" about Washington. Cornyn's problem is that the uppity black man he REALLY wants to humiliate is Barack Obama, but Holder will have to do since it seems unlikely he'll get his claws into the president.

ROMNEY, WHAT ARE YOU HIDING IN YOUR TAX RETURNS?

Remember that Mittens said that "corporations are people too" and therefore like a corporation, Mittens is finding all the loop holes so that he doesn't have to pay a dime in taxes. You know, like GE.

Run out the clock? Alright, I can go with that analogy. Many the times I have seen a sports team do this. They play the game not by trying to win, but by trying not to lose. Ya know what? More often than not, the team that is trying not to lose ends up losing the game.

Jody

First Read gets a cheer from me this morning regarding Mitt Romney's running out the clock.

Well, it got a thumbs-down from me. I find it revolting that journalists think it's clever for Romney to avoid answering legitimate questions. No wonder Romney gets away with his lies. Rather than angering "serious" journalists, it fills them with admiration.

AM -- The name reminds me of some successful business people. Do you hold all folks named Willard in the same way? J. Willard Marriott, as an example. Or Willard Wirtz (from DeKalb, IL, home of my alma mater) -- William Willard Wirtz was a former U.S. administrator, cabinet officer, attorney, and law professor. He served as the Secretary of Labor between 1962 and 1969 under the administrations of Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson. Or maybe Willard Ford, son of Harrison Ford. Would you also make fun of these folks?

Had to look at his avatar. A caricature of President Obama, not a problem. Many presidents are subjected to this treatment. Are you suggesting that President Obama is somehow different?

See how others have been immortalized.

(Hope the link appears, sometimes they do not. If not do a google search on presidential caricature)

Anna Molly

David Walker --

You see, in this fellow's world, there is no change - the essence of the conservative mind. What happened yesterday, will happen again today, and will happen again tomorrow.

I've got plenty of conservative friends, and that is not their mindset. I know conservatives and liberals that are good critical thinkers, and I know conservatives and liberals that are just lemmings.

Personally, I hate labels like conservative & liberal because they come with so many preconceived notions that they inhibit rational debate of the issues.

I wish people could just drop the labels and debate the merits of individual ideas...

It's close to summer time Obama's sinking fast, with all his surrogates putting a foot in his mouth, you just got to love it. Why would'nt Romney just ride the wave? Beverly In Chicago, I read today in the Chicago Tribune, Young democrats (flash mobs) attacking doctors by Northwest Memorial Hospital. You must be SO proud of what your Community Organizer accomplished while he was in Chicago. His former Chief of Staff Little Napoleon has homicides up by double. CONGRATULATIONS. What a Democrat Utopia!

Romney is simply showing Obama and his campaign management team how to ACTUALLY EXECUTE laser-like focus.

Romney is simply showing Obama and his campaign management team how to ACTUALLY EXECUTE laser-like focus.

No, Romney is showing that using blanket vague statements to manipulate the weak-minded masses actually works.

Feisty, Ron, David W, Anna M, Nomoresameo, Amy, Beverly--great way to start Wednesday!

The trouble for anyone using Politifact as a sole source regarding student loan rates doubling or ??whatever is that one must read the entire article in order to understand why they claim it false or true or somewhere in between. When I read that particular summary, Politifact assumes Mitt Romney's words that he wants to keep the rates low are "fact"; Politifact assumes the same from Congressional GOPers comments; plus Politifact ASSUMES that the GOP House and Congress will actually DO something to prevent the doubling of the student loan interest rates. Therefore, Politifact says that President Obama's and democrats comments regarding Romney and the Ryan Budget doubling the student loan rates are false or mostly false when in reality, in order for President Obama's statement to be false--the GOP House and Congress must act to prevent the doubling of the rates. Politifact states the Ryan Budget makes no mention of student loan rates; that is true, but that also means, it allows the rates to double unless Congress chooses to address it. Assuming that Mitt Romney meant his words is questionable since the man has told more lies and done more flip flops than any other candidate ever and the GOP House hasn't been exactly honest lately either. For that reason, I rate POLITIFACT as making too many assumptions to fairly judge the Obama comment as false; it can only be false WHEN Congress acts.

A vote for Mitt Romney = a vote for a third term for George W. Bush!!! If you liked the first 8 years of Bush 43, vote Mitt for another 4.

james --

AM -- The name reminds me of some successful business people. Do you hold all folks named Willard in the same way?

Of course, not. Willard Wirtz was a great Labor Secretary. But they're not all running for President this year, are they?

As Feisty pointed out, Romney doesn't use his own given name. You have to wonder why. That alone opens the door for caricature based on his name -- because, like a good political cartoon, that's all calling Romney "Willard" amounts to. It is a way of drawing a picture of a rat without having to draw it.

In other words, he's a public figure, and it's fair game.

I'm not one of those people who gets anal about calling President Obama "President." But I have taken to heart the commentary of others who point out that, like no other president in my lifetime, this president's name has been used in disrespect by the opposing party, especially to insinuate that he is a terrorist. Until that stops, then Willard has absolutely nothing to complain about. Especially since he, probably most of all, would never lift a pinky finger to stop his own supporters from being disrespectful of the President.

In that, and perhaps that alone, I give John McCain all the credit, and I give Willard none at all.

He doesn't deserve my respect until he earns it.

Ron ## --

I wish people could just drop the labels and debate the merits of individual ideas...

Wouldn't it be loverly? But it probably wouldn't be First Read.

Vague statements worked well for Obama in 2008. In fact, it's a pretty common strategy and it's very effective because although most voters say they want politicians to make "the tough decisions", the reality is, the voters don't want to be on the receiving end of those decisions. This is true for Dem and Rep voters.

Tressel, blah!!! That sweater vest wearing, douche nozzle!!! The only thing that made me happier then Rodriquez leaving U of M, was Tressel getting run out of town.

Anyway, that was off topic.

The Obama campaign is confusing me. Now, I'm no expert, but if I were running it, I'd be focused on Romney's lack of specifics and tendency to support the same old plan we've had in place for a decade, his flip flops, and base the whole campaign more on running against the GOP as a whole, then Romney specifically.

Alas, that's just me.

In 146 days, Hope and Change will be terminated. ObamaCare will be forgotten. Republicans will have reclaimed the Senate. And the dream of a liberal majority in the Supreme Court will be gone. What a difference four years make.

I love it that the pundits are telling the Obama team not to worry yet. Let's see - can't find a campaign message that resonates with the people. Democrats complaining how bad his policies are. Polls show Obama nationally with a slight advantage over Romney (46-45%), and we know the majority of the undecided (right now 9%) have historically not voted for the incumbent...

Reminds me of Kevin Bacon in Animal House when pandamonium has hit the parade. "Remain calm, ALL IS WELL!" Too funny.

Houston, you misunderstood me or I wasn't clear. I gave FR a cheer for pointing out Mitt Romney is running out the clock instead of actually trying to win (or lose) and then I criticized the press and the media for not challenging him, etc.

No, Romney is showing that using blanket vague statements to manipulate the weak-minded masses actually works.

Kind of like "Hope and Change" and "Yes We Can!"?

Man this stuff is really pushing you folks over the edge. Although, Ruken my friend, I don't think you had very far left to go.

Anna Molly

One of the people interviewed on the street in Maine said "don't ask me about politics! I'm still so upset about what happened in Wisconsin!"

I actually feel like the recall in WI was a lost battle, but not an indication of how the war will end. If anything, it sets up the issues for the presidential elections: do we support teachers, firefighters and cops, or do we kow tow to vulture capitalists? Let me tell you, with a Tea Party governor and Republican majority Maine legislature pushing the same issues WI faces, most voters in Maine are experiencing Republican-fatigue. We want moderate Democrats/Independents, NOT more extremist Republicans.

WAC,

There's a difference between a campaign slogan and vagueness in proposed policy.

Good morning to feisty and all of my liberal friends out there! It seems that the community organizer is no longer darling to the world and all of the kissing up to Goldman Sachs and the Arabic world has only damaged voter confidence to the point of no return! The truth hurts but he is one and done!

Anna Molly -- WSJ online had an interesting article on how Walker won. It seems Republicans relied heavily on the absentee vote. What's ironic is that many Republicans in other states have tried to shorten the time frame for absentee voting. My guess is those same Republicans will be reversing their stance/laws on that issue.

Absence Makes the Vote Grow Bigger for GOP

The Candidate: Scott Walker

The Play: Getting out the absentee vote

The Strategy: As Mr. Walker, Wisconsin's Republican governor, tried to fend off an effort to recall him from office over his law limiting union power, Republicans rolled out a program to encourage less-than-reliable GOP voters to cast their ballots before Election Day using the state's absentee-ballot option. The goal was to identify Wisconsin Republicans who were likely to support Mr. Walker but occasionally skipped elections. Mr. Walker prevailed, and RNC officials say they hope to use their absentee-voting efforts in Wisconsin as a model for other states in November and in the future.

It was a comprehensive effort. The Republican Party of Wisconsin teamed up with the Republican National Committee to push absentee voting. The Republican Governors Association launched its own program, and the conservative group Americans for Prosperity provided volunteers.

National-party officials said they focused on about 500,000 carefully selected voters, contacting them often to make the pitch for absentee voting, which in Wisconsin can be done by mail or in person. Mailings from the party included ballot applications already completed with voters' personal information; recipients just needed to sign their names and submit the forms. Each piece of mail was followed up with phone calls or home visits. The door-knockers came bearing more ballot applications.

The GOP governors' group sent out 1.8 million pieces of mail focused on getting out the vote, with a heavy emphasis on absentee voting. With multiple efforts running simultaneously, some voters probably were contacted more than a dozen times. "People were deluged," one Republican official said.

Early- and absentee-voting efforts haven't been a Republican strong suit. Democrats, with a big assist from labor groups, often have had a better "ground game" and generally have focused more resources on convincing their supporters to cast ballots early. In several states, GOP lawmakers in recent years have pushed for new limits on early voting, primarily by shortening the period when ballots could be cast. Florida, Georgia, Ohio, Tennessee and West Virginia have enacted legislation reducing early voting, according to the Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University School of Law. Some of the laws have been tied up in court.

Republicans who worked on the absentee-ballot program in Wisconsin acknowledge that the GOP has been slow to embrace early voting but say their success Tuesday suggests the party can match or best the opposition on the ground.

The Result: Mr. Walker became the first governor to survive a recall election, beating Democratic opponent Tom Barrett 53% to 46%. The state is still pulling together final election data, but Republican officials say their internal analysis shows that Mr. Walker won a majority of absentee ballots, giving them a jolt of confidence and a game plan for a similar effort in the presidential election. Each state has its own election rules, but Wisconsin suggests one way to make a sustained pitch for early voting.

—Colleen McCain Nelson

Man this stuff is really pushing you folks over the edge. Although, Ruken my friend, I don't think you had very far left to go.

Don't be mad my cute little Blue Collar Auto, just go back to dodging bullets in that slum you call your home.

Ironically, the very issue Romney wants to talk about -- the state of the U.S. economy -- is something that presidents have little control over, especially compared with foreign policy (which they have A LOT of control over).

So the President has more control over what the rest of the world does as compared to our own economic policies? Talk about a stretch..

Ron - lotsanumbers:

Your point is well-taken, and that was precisely what I was addressing - the utterly ridiculous labeling that goes on.

In Webster world - where I go to find definitions - a conservative tends to hold to the past. A liberal is more open to change. Not perfect definitions by any means, but they work for most purposes. Indeed, the differences between the TRUE conservative mindset and the TRUE liberal mindset is not that great. Compromise is actually possible between the groups.

What we now have dominating, not only blogs such as this, but elections as well, are caricatures of liberals and conservatives. Liberals no more like indolent clods taking government money for refusing to work than conservatives like it. Conservatives no more support unjustifiable military incursions than liberals support them. Extremism unfortunately now carries the day.

Look at the pathetically idiotic response of James - lotsanumbers. He's put out that Feisty calls Mitt Romney, Willard. But this guy's mind is so twisted he can defend the insufferable bigot, damage123's avatar, which is a disgusting alteration of President Obama's photo. He has changed this avatar on several occasions. Really? These are Republicans? These are conservatives? They seem to think so.

Not long ago, First Thoughts was dominated by a leftist point of view. In the last month or so, the right wing crazies have overwhelmed the site with their one-line witticisms. They collapse posts on a wholesale basis, and they fancy they are conservatives.

How bad has it gotten? The model of decorum, Anna Molly, was finally moved to refer to Kirk, one of the most unbelievably ignorant posters on the planet as an "ignorant tool". Her characterization is absolutely accurate, but for Anna Molly to actually come out and say this is a clear indicator that the tolerance of moderate-types is at the ragged edge.

Welcome aboard.

Cornyn (R) Texas, is an ignoramus.....especially his comment about AG Holder 'betraying the public trust'. Cornyn conveniently forgets about Rick Perry and the Bush/Cheney Administration......Classic betrayal of a magnitude not seen!....Lying liars and the lies they tell!

Are any of us surprised that Romney is avoiding talking to anyone but his handler's selected press? Anyone who has listened to him try to talk knows he can't put a coherent discussion together - even when it has been written for him.

The more he tries to avoid the press, the more he looks just like Sarah Palin - not a good thing but actually predictable.

As President Obama goes on attack people will realize where the substance lies - and it isn't with Mitt or any of his minions. He is showing how frightened he is of talking about anything of importance. It will not sit well with the voters in November.

Republicans can laugh all they want right now. Romney looks weaker and weaker day to day. He is showing he has no courage and no ideas. He is showing he has no leadership ability. It's very telling.

Obama/Biden 2012

Say what they want do as you will they still have the debates and that will be his undoing.Time for a new congress get out the word defeat the Republican obstructionist congress in2012

I'm not one of those people who gets anal about calling President Obama "President."

Me either Anna Molly!

The thing that bother me is, they do this every opportunity that presents itself while ALWAYS referring to Willard as Governor Romney!

Talk about a subliminal message to diminish the office...

Ruken - seriously?

You cast stones at a man and try to make fun of his living arrangements because he has a difference of opinion than you? My dog behaves better.

When you have nothing to say "Shut up". He will be satisfied to let the superpacs run his campaign because he only represents 1% of the sane Americans.

This policy will work untill he has to say something at the Debates. He will look like an arrogant ass when Obama finishes with him during the debates. He has no substance, he is against Women, against fair taxation, against public sector jobs, against helping the Auto Industry, against abortions and anthing that will help our nations average citizens have a better life.

He is a very poor choice for the Republican party but based upon the whole field he was the survivor.

David,

I suggest you take your issues with the civility of this board up with the #1 antagonizer.

For you to claim that only recently, this board has gotten malicious and that only left opinions are being collapsed is simply blind on your part. Stop playing the victim.

Your titular leader on this board is a foul mouthed cretin.

Her favorite motto is that Politics is a contact sport.

So if it "offends" anyone, they should leave, because Newsvine likes things the way they are out here in the Wild, Wild West.

Carl Lafoon - You said it. It is very unsettling when what once was a great party comes down to the candidates the GOP had. And, it's very telling. Clearly no one of substance wants to be tied to the party which leaves us with the dysfunctional group they had running.

To say that Mitt Romney is the best you have to lead a party is really sad. But, until the GOP stops being the backward party of hate and division, I don't think they'll produce any real leaders. No one of value wants to be associated with the group.

David Walker

Ron - lotsanumbers:

Your point is well-taken, and that was precisely what I was addressing - the utterly ridiculous labeling that goes on.

...

Indeed, the differences between the TRUE conservative mindset and the TRUE liberal mindset is not that great. Compromise is actually possible between the groups.

What's interesting to me is, when I can get my conservative and liberal friends to actually discuss issues (instead of repeating party mantras), they usually find a lot of common ground. Yes, they generally have different world views so their proposed solutions are often different - but their goals are usually very similar. People want to ensure their families are safe and provided for, and once that's done, they want the same for others. Conservatives don't want slave labor camps, and liberals don't want to make everyone dependent on the government.

The problem I see is, more and more, people seem to believe the vilification of others with different viewpoints - instead of trying to understand opposing points of view.

Opppie well said about ROI, however I would like to hear your opinion on what the government's roll should be and how active they should be in that roll. I think during a recession they should be very active. The private sector is eager to contribute during growth and will do so, most of the expenses the government exerted during a recession but I feel it is recovered through the spending that occurs during strong growth. The economy is cyclical and the government is here to ease our pain (my opinion).

David Walker, you speak well about this subject. I never understand the conservatives. They speak so badly of the liberal ideal and now progressivism will ruin the world. Though I try my hardest to stay moderate, there is one thing that appeals to me about a progressive thought. The idea does not change. "Make things better for everyone to the greatest extent ppossible". Conservatives take a survival of the fittest approach. This is a fair strategy (efficiency vs equality). What I condemn them for is how they do not let the role play out. They SELECT who wins and loses.

A conservative economist will tell you about the invisible hand, how the markets correcting themselves. Let the financial pros handle it. Return was rewarded by risk. At the same time he will tell you to ignore all of the experts setting up shop trying to nickel and dime anything they can as the money moves through the system.

The invisible hand works and in the end it prevails. Its the conservatives who build the walls against it and amass their fortunes, but I can guarantee you, as it already has, that they will come crying to us when that invisible hand knocks everything the can build down.

Define the words, conservative leans against the wind, a progressive opens it sails.

Albany Joe --

AM: Have you forgotten the looney left calling President George Bush "Shrub" and "W" and "Dubya" and "Dumbya" and calling his WH staff "Bushies" and the bitter Clinton staffers who pried the "W" key off the WH PC keyboards as they scurried out the door??

No, of course not, and neither have I forgotten those who referred to -- and still refer to -- Clinton as "Slick Willie," which had its own set of unpleasant inferences. But he had only himself to blame for that, as he made his own reputation, just as George W. Bush was to blame for his being labeled "shrub." In no way are those things the same as playing on the coincidence of a name to insinuate that the President of the United States is a terrorist, all actual evidence to the contrary.

That just about scrapes the bottom, as far as I'm concerned.

When Lefty Liberals start respecting Republican presidents, they can start asking for respect for the Messiah, Barry Hussein Obummer.

This obviously begs for the application of the "rule of holes," which counsels that when you find yourself in one, stop digging.

David Walker --

How bad has it gotten? The model of decorum, Anna Molly, was finally moved to refer to Kirk, one of the most unbelievably ignorant posters on the planet as an "ignorant tool". Her characterization is absolutely accurate, but for Anna Molly to actually come out and say this is a clear indicator that the tolerance of moderate-types is at the ragged edge.

David --

I wouldn't exactly call myself the "model of decorum" (but thank you). The rest of this is pretty much spot-on. I wonder why we can't all see this as clearly as you do.

I learned something about myself yesterday, and I apologize to all those who had to witness my learning it, or to take the brunt of it.

Anna Molly and David--take off your preconceived notion of dislike for Romney for a second and lets just talk about several examples of private equity investments or investment value and lets talk about the economic consequences to everyone. David goes after Bain capital as if its bad and lets discuss. The starting point is that Bain goes out and raises money for a fund from its investors. These investors are Union pension plans, university endownments, large charitable or tax exempt foundations and sovereign wealth funds (country assets like Brazil's surplus). So Bain creates an investment criteria for the fund such as investing in distressed businesses with high risk of failure. Bain earns a fee of 2% on the total asset value annually and a certain percentage of the business gains above a minimum return. So lets say Bain gets to keep 20% above returns above 15% to the investors. Now Bain goes out and buys a Missouri steel plant that has lost money for 8 consecutive years and is basically insolvent with the idea it wants to turn it around. David mentions leverage so it either assumed the debt it had or went to a bank and if the purchase price was $100 dollars, it borrowed 75 and invested 25 of union pension money and other investor money. Bain doesnt make a dime if this company goes under so David's characterization is inaccurate and no bank will continue to lend to any private equity fund that does intentionally lose money. So over time Bain continues to pay and employ the workers that would have otherwise been out of job but it doesnt work and it has to liquidate. Guess who gets those funds--the investors not Bain. Bain makes money if the union pension plans make money. So if Bain hadnt liquidated and had not retained funds within the bought company for its investors, the union pension plans would now be even more unfunded right? So its not like they are enriching Bain at the expense of Missouri workers. Its not a zero sum game. You might not agree with Romney politically but his business success in the private sector is not a great place to attack. Doesnt make him qualified to be president any more or less than the critique of Obama for being a community organizer. I think these criticisms dont advance the ball.

As for corporations sitting on money or as Anna Molly says why not take less to pay workers more. So AM, lets play that out too. By the way, the better argument is pay senior executives less and pay workers more but lets just take AM your approach to argue for less profits and more worker pay. Where do you think the corporation profit loss comes from? Do you think it comes out of the corporations coffers without a cost to anyone else? So lets say that McDonalds or Walmart paid its employees a higher wage or greater benefits lowering their profits but the costs are not passed on to the consumers. So now WalMart's stock value is reduced exactly the amount of the higher wages and benefits. Who is Walmart's stock owned by. The vast majority of McDonalds and Walmart stock is owned by institutions primarily union pension plans, endowments and 401k plans (not rich investors). So you are reducing the retirement benefits of union members, increasing the cost of college and reducing the future retirement benefits for the middle class. Is that what you are advocating? Maybe thats fine, I just want to make sure we are speaking from the same economic understanding.

David, Romney is really the worst candidate in your lifetime? Worse than Dukakis or Mondale or Nixon?

Akeem,

A few points;

I could support deficit stimulus spending if I thought the money would be spent in ways that stimulated future economic growth by private industry (i.e.; according to Keynesian theory). The problem is, I don't think the money in the last 2 stimulus bills (by GWB and Obama) was used in an effective manner. Yes, some of it did go for infrastructure projects that will promote long-term growth, but most of it was spent on other projects such as paying private and public union workers, research projects like the one on male transsexual hookers in Eastern Europe, and the multi-million dollar turtle crossing in my home town.

Also, I listened to an interview on NPR in 2009 where one of the top people in charge of distributions said they liked to give money to the NEA because they are very good at distributing money quickly, and the main goal is to spend the money as quickly as possible. In my opinion, that is a very bad way to approach stimulus spending.

As to selecting corporate winners and losers - in practice, both conservative and liberal politicians do this. As an example, Obama has tried to do it with the green energy loans.

As to conservative vs liberal views on others - while I agree the approaches are different, I think both groups are concerned about others. What you call "survival of the fittest" can also be stated as "teaching people to provide for themselves". All of my conservative friends are concerned about the poor and downtrodden - as are my liberal friends. They have significantly different views on why people are poor and downtrodden, and significantly different views on how to help them improve - but they do all care about others.

Ruken - seriously?

You cast stones at a man and try to make fun of his living arrangements because he has a difference of opinion than you? My dog behaves better.

That's right. The best part is, he cast the first one. I just picked up a bigger one and threw it back

Of course you'd overlook that part.

I still want to know if Policemen, Firemen and teachers are public employees or private employees? I mean, and if states feel they have enough of all of them. How is the federal gov going to make them hire more that they dont want. I have a feeling that any stimulus money will head to states and be used to bolster retirement funds. Here in Detroit the clock is ticking, Friday we will run out of money. Wont it be fun in downtown Detroit with out policemen and Fireman. Im sure going to be carrying a few extra clips and a backup weapon.

Sorry for my constant use of roll rather than role, I guess you can see it is nearing lunch time.

Romney is the Palin male version. Remember at the debate with Biden - she said I am not going to answer that question and then went on about something different. Romney doing the same thing. Other than his supporting the Ryan plan - what other ideas does he have??? All I ever hear from him is bashing Obama but nothing about what he would do in specific terms. I heard him say you will find out when he is President. Really anyone can support that?

I still want to know if Policemen, Firemen and teachers are public employees or private employees?

They are public.

How is the federal gov going to make them hire more that they dont want.

They aren't hired by the federal government.

Obama's latest budget projects a $1.3 trillion deficit this year declining to $901 billion in 2012, and then annual deficits in the range of $500 billion to $700 billion in the 10 years to come.

If Mr. Obama wins re-election, and his budget projections prove accurate, the National Debt will top $20 trillion in 2016, the final year of his second term. That would mean the Debt increased by 87 percent, or $9.34 trillion, during his two terms.

Obama Must Go!

Sarah

When running a political campaign you don't want to use a shotgun, you want a rifle. You don't want to pepper you opponent with bird shot, you want one shot, straight to the heart. No, I'm no suggesting that anybody commit violence against anybody else.

You want to find that one issue that joe six-pack can understand and get mad about and then HAMMER that one issue ad nauseum. It works every time.

The issue the GOP is trying to sell is, OBAMA IS A FAILURE and all their little side-trips connect to that one thing. They are good at it. They've been doing it for years with the help of FOX NEWS and Rush Limbaugh.

What the President needs to find is that one issue that everyone can identify with. I think that issue is wealth and the death of the middle class. Romney doesn't care about the poor, he told us so, and he's never been a member of the middle class. He's a little rich boy corporate raider. A job destroyer, not builder. A man who is willing to do anything or say anything to get elected so he can help his class, the upper 1%, to get richer while the poor gets poorer and the middle class become extinct.

Wealth and it's acquisition are what made America great and everyone else is expendable.

That's the silver bullet. That's the stake through the heart. Class warfare? Yeah, but who really started it? Rupert Murdoch and the Kochs, that who! The rest of us are just trying to survive.

Obama/Biden 2012

WCA --

I suggest you take your issues with the civility of this board up with the #1 antagonizer.

I don't think we exactly agree on who that is. Point of view is everything, I guess.

Politics may be a contact sport, but remember, that goes only to politicians and wannabe politicians, who are public figures to begin with. Posters on public blogs are not politicians.

David, interesting that I am one of the most ignorant posters? Why because I disagree with you and point out your inaccuracies all of the time? Why dont you stop name calling and stop taking it so personal and actually point out where I am ignorant rather than name calling? Anna Molly--you wonder how Joanna responds the way she does when you have David pulling crap like this. Just a question Anna Molly--you indicate that David is spot on--in terms of what?

Akeem--I agree with some of your characterizations of the liberal and conservative mind but you also miss one aspect of the progressive mind and that is the desire to ignore personal choice and subsequent consequences from economic policy. The best example is the characterization of income inequality. The progressive knee jerk reaction is that the 1% is or stealing from the middle class. Put aside for example appropriate tax policy but the progressive mind wants to totally ignore the education gap, the impact that talent or cognitive ability and personal choice (having a child while young and poor and single for example) have on income inequality. I understand that conservatives also tend to blame others too and I dont excuse them at all and its unfortunate that we live in a world in which these labels now tend to prevent real solutions to address the underlying problems because neither side will even admit their lack of self awareness or unwillingness to compromise. It goes both ways, conservatives wont even admit that current tax policy or increasing the taxes on the rich is something that is necessary just like progressives are unwilling to admit that unions and their democratic legislators in their pockets are unwilling to embrace education reform. So we dont get compromise to address any of these fundamental issues and we instead get labels and personal attacks and David style name calling.

Neither party listens to its actual base. I'm sorry that I don't have 35k to crap out to eat a meal with either party, but believe me I could give them both an earful before I got kicked out. Citizens United must have turned into a nightmare for the Supreme Court, now that corporations are people. Shell is now saying they can't be held liable for human rights violations because they are a Corporation? Ohh yea, you read that right.

I believe in equality for all, even Jesus freaks who don't like gays. Even black people who perpetuate violence against their own neighbors for a supposed piece of turf or right to sell drugs on this street corner. Hopefully, one day they will wake up too the fact they've been manipulated to serve someone else and realize all this time they are slaves, economically.

I don't trust Romney's economic views, as they are proven failed policies that we are still trying to dig out of. I don't trust Obama's "Transparent Government" when he is crapping all over the Constitution in the name of my security and freedom. I probably won't vote, because no one is listening to my views or hearing my suffering. Politics has turned into "Money talks Bullsh!t walks". So screw them all, I'm filing for political asylum with countries that do listen to citizens. And represent ALL the people, not just playing the "Ha, my side won, so suck on the (R's) or (D's)"

I wouldn't exactly call myself the "model of decorum"

______________________________________________________

AM: Especially not after you said yesterday that you would like to slap Barry for not putting on his "comfy" shoes and going to WI to defeat Scott Walker.

This obviously begs for the application of the "rule of holes," which counsels that when you find yourself in one, stop digging.

___________________________________________________________

Unless you are digging for oil, then it's "Drill Baby Drill".

Yet, it is YOU reporters who continue to give him a free pass!

Amazing what warm cookies will buy you these days...

What an arrogant SOB!

Wahhh! Cry me a river, Feisty. We have in the White House right now the most arrogant, narcissistic POTUS in the history of the U.S. whom was given a total free pass in 2008. Now when the shoe is on the other foot it isn't fair? I didn't hear you complaining about the press then, while they were busy crucifying Sarah. Bahwahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Do you conservatives routinely buy products without knowing what is in the box? Do you buy your oranges without smelling them? Do you buy cars without a test drive?

That's exactly what you're doing by buying Romney without knowing what he stands for. Without answering questions on the issues of the day, you don't know what you're really getting. And yet, you appear to be fine with that.

Unbelieveable!

Ron I appreciate your response. I know most people conservative or republican care about people. From what I've come across, when picking winners and losers, Democrats usually have more people who share the win column than the Republicans.

I never said "survival of the fittest" is a terrible idea. The problem is when you tell me I am engaging in class warfare or trying to "distribute wealth" from someone who didn't survive much of anything and is disproportionately benefiting from my tax dollars I find it offensive.

No, Romney is showing that using blanket vague statements to manipulate the weak-minded masses actually works.

Wasn't that BO's MO on the campaign trail in 08?

Romney doesn't have to say anything. President Obama's record on the ECONOMY speaks volumes for him.

felden

Do you liberals routinely buy products without knowing what is in the box? Do you buy your oranges without smelling them? Do you buy cars without a test drive?

That's exactly what you're doing by buying Obama without knowing what he stands for. Without answering questions on the issues of the day, you don't know what you're really getting. And yet, you appear to be fine with that.

Unbelieveable!

See how that works!

Mr.Steady, Dick Cheney was the most narcissistic and arrogant President. He just had you all fooled that he was the Vice President. I guess you've never heard of puppet regimes. Bush Sr. was the President from 84-88, because Reagan was already suffering from Alzheimer's.

Mr Steady,

This is the same press that bragged PBO would raise a billion dollars, then turns around and whines and lies that Scott Walker outspent Barrett, 7 - 1.

When in they didn't take into consideration the 20 million the unions spent just getting the recall.

They are HYPOCRITES, just like Red haired on and Bev are.

It is OK for there team to do anything darn thing they want, yet they hold the other team to some impossible standard.

Romney is ripe for busting, has been for a long time. Same for most republican Congresspeople. As "Classy Feisty" said in Her post # 1.8, the media continually gives them all a free pass. Romney calculates He is better off, and will lose less, by not releasing His past tax records than He will if He releases them. That speaks of turdy grains mixed with the beans. Does the media care? Apparently not. Media has gotten so gwaddamn lazy, or inept, It accepts all forms of crap as acceptable, traditional bullsh^t. Beat journalists don't ask probing questions anymore. They either don't give a damn, or, seemingly, do not know how. Investigative journalists will investigate generally, only when someone else notices or discovers something that is strong enough to assure them the working of the thing will likely yield them enough notice to satisfactorily profit from their efforts, otherwise, they give it little or no attention. It is not enough to report what these people in power say, or how they respond to questions asked of them, especially when they say only what they wish to say, and predetermine the questions the journalists ask. This also goes to "David Walkers" point above. The American Electorate is in fact, rather dumb and uninformed. Its imaginings aren't tempered with much discipline of reality anymore. Regards

Fielden, you could certainly say the same thing about Obama in 2008 as he was clearly the most inexperienced candidate in several generations. Now I think many people know Obama and just clearly disagree with many of his policies. For me it is his economic views and others its a different political position. Just like there is someone who is anti gun that would never vote for a GOP candidate just on that one issue alone, there are people who have fundamental differences of opinion on Obama's political positions and wont vote for him. Isnt that the democratic way and process and ultimately a very good thing? Why is it so strange to you?

All Romney has to say is, if you enjoyed Bush and PBO spending trillions of dollars more than they have every year so that some day every dollar taxed just goes to servicing the debt, please vote for PBO. If not vote for me.

Kirk --

By the way, the better argument is pay senior executives less and pay workers more but lets just take AM your approach to argue for less profits and more worker pay. Where do you think the corporation profit loss comes from? Do you think it comes out of the corporations coffers without a cost to anyone else? So lets say that McDonalds or Walmart paid its employees a higher wage or greater benefits lowering their profits but the costs are not passed on to the consumers. So now WalMart's stock value is reduced exactly the amount of the higher wages and benefits.

Sigh. I simply do not care that much whether a passive shareholder makes a profit or loss. Other than contribute money, which is fungible, they do nothing active or creative or unique to make the company better, even for themselves. And unless they are living solely off their investments, their livelihood is not at risk when their investments decline. Don't even get me started on executives.

I'm sorry, Kirk, but you are still buying too much into the theory of trickle down. If the past 10 years have taught you anything, it ought to be that trickle down doesn't. On the other hand, if you pay people decent wages and benefits, that eventually trickles back up.

If you cannot see that your fundamental economic assumptions are wrong, possibly because you have personally benefited by passive investing, then you can never see past your biases to examine other possible solutions.

The issue on the table this year, Kirk, is not languishing shareholder returns. They aren't languishing, and that's merely deflection, anyway. The issue is jobs. And the evidence is now crystal clear that trickle down doesn't provide jobs.

They have significantly different views on why people are poor and downtrodden, and significantly different views on how to help them improve - but they do all care about others.

Ah, yes. I know only too well what your views are on why people are poor and downtrodden, and that those who are poor and downtrodden should be left to the arbitrary mercy of their betters to provide for them as they see fit through tax-write-off-able charitable contributions.

But answer this, Kirk. Until the collapse of the housing bubble and the Wall Street meltdown, all those same people who are poor and downtrodden now were NOT poor and downtrodden, were they? Why is that? Why is it that when there is work available, people work, and times are good?

The answer is clear. History has shown that spreading wealth out through the economy -- by giving people the dignity of work, whether that be public or private sector -- will eventually benefit everyone. And because trickle down doesn't, giving people jobs is the only way to improve this economy for those people who do not have them. This in turn will improve it for everyone AND allow all of us collectively -- through taxes -- to take care of those who are truly in need, rather than leaving it to whim or chance, as you would do.

Ron -- Most of the stimulus went towards tax cuts, one-third to be exact.

All Romney has to say is, if you enjoyed Bush and PBO spending trillions of dollars more than they have every year so that some day every dollar taxed just goes to servicing the debt, please vote for PBO. If not vote for me.

Uh...that post is so wrong I don't even know where to start.

"The message Team Romney is essentially giving: 'We're going to talk about what we want to talk about -- and to whom we want -- and not talk about the rest.' " - First Read

Soooooo...pretty much what Obama has been doing for the past 4 years.

"A president often doesn’t get to pick and choose the issues he has to deal with." - First Read

But he does get to pick and choose what he talks about and with whom...evidence his last press conference and softball follow-up questions.

Looks like Romney is going for the Sharon Angle stratagy. Talk to no one but his own chose friendly media giving him easy, softball pitch questions. I wonder if Romney would participate in a debate with Obama? If not, that would be a big win for Obama. I think voters would see the hipocracy in Romney and the Republicans if they won't even debate or talk to any media other than Fox. Go for it, Romney!

Bob --

Kirk, Don't even try. David and Anna Molly (seriously where are your parents from - 2 first names?) are not mentally able to read and understand your explanations. It's easier for them to behave like Fisting Redhead and Sarah (can you say weight weight watchers) and spout off talking points from MNLSD. Don't try to cloud their head with logic and facts...remember they support Hussein and so logic and facts are what they are used to NOT hearing.

Too funny in situ. And while we're into Latin, res ipsa loquitur.

As usual, Feisty, you don't have a basis for your comment. Except that you want to turn every incident into a political reason to criticize non-liberals.

Greedy government is the root of all our problems. High property taxes, high sales taxes, high corporate taxes, high resale taxes, captial gains taxes, luxury taxes, gas guzzler taxes......government destroys innitiative, destroys our drive to invest. Democrats are the root of everything that is wrong with our country.

Jody

Houston, you misunderstood me or I wasn't clear. I gave FR a cheer for pointing out Mitt Romney is running out the clock instead of actually trying to win (or lose) and then I criticized the press and the media for not challenging him, etc.

I guess it's more a matter of what people react to first. It just struck me that the First Read people seemed to be praising Mitt's deft avoidance of accountability. What they SHOULD have done is to have praised their fellow journalists who have tried to hold him to account, however unsuccessfully.

David walker - How droll on your attempt to take the high road. Unfortunately you end up just painting yourself to be the same as those you try to pass judgement on.

BTW - If obama was correct in saying that the private sector was doing fine, care to expound on the number of workers who are long term unemployed/underemployed? Surely you aren't implying that these are all just public sector workers?

Perhaps the most egregious mistake obama made in his speech saying that the private sector was doing fine was that now more public workers needed to be hired. Why? To increase the private sector tax burden in support of ineffective public programs? I would be willing to bet that main street isn't buying off on the private sector being "fine".

High property taxes, high sales taxes, high corporate taxes, high resale taxes, captial gains taxes, luxury taxes, gas guzzler taxes

Should we go back to when the income tax rate for the highest bracket was over 90%? You think that discouraged people from getting rich?

Spare me.

Dont_carry_it_all

Ron -- Most of the stimulus went towards tax cuts, one-third to be exact.

I don't think 1/3 is "most", but, I'm also against tax cuts as stimulus unless they are very carefully targeted at promoting future private sector growth. So, I could be in favor of tax cuts to encourage things like R&D spending, but I'm against cuts such as reducing SS taxes on paychecks.

As one politician said when talking about the GWB stimulus and it's focus on sending people checks "let me get this straight, we are borrowing money from China to give to people in the US so they can buy goods made in China...who's economy are we stimulating?". I think they were very correct in their assessment since we don't have much low to mid-range manufacturing in the US anymore.

Also, concerning targeted tax cuts for businesses, I think the risk of politicians trying to use it for sweetheart deals in their districts usually outweighs the potential benefits. So, generally I'm against tax cuts as well as spending.

What I am for is a safety net to ensure nobody is ever hungry or homeless. Beyond that, I think people should have to work for what they want.

Or consider all the interviews he does with FOX (especially its cherry-picked programs vs. its newsier anchors) compared with other news outlets.

I had to stop reading there. Apparently this reporter thinks The View and SNL aren't cherry-picked programs vs 'newsier anchors'.

And for those complaining about Romney being the candidate, maybe you should have listened when people told you that voter ID laws would help. I found it HILARIOUS that Democrats screamed about voter fraud in the recall election after pushing against voter ID laws. Most states don't even get a choice in their candidate with our current system. All but 5 of the primary states that count lean to the left so you end up with candidates like Obama rather than Hillary Clinton, McCain, Edwards, Al Gore, etc. Most of the country just has to vote on whoever was selected for them in the general election.

Kirk just a message, you make many responses and not all of it is bad or if much at all. When we get down to the issue many times we agree more than we don't.

The issue I have a problem with is the way you prove your point to others. You scold others savagely for the ideology invested in their post (David Walker for instance), but hold no accountability for your own. There is usually some fact that is being debated, where you will put down the opposing side's opinion and superceed it with your own.

Your views of the poor are not absolute and neither are mine. Your posts often come off in a tone that says I should abandon my views and accept yours. To any body who "critcally thinks" and truly values their beliefs that is offensive and it does not promote any conversation.

As Ana Molly clearly states in her response she understands what you said but quite frankly she doesn't care and rightfully so. The lievelihood of people should be measured by the market not the other way around.

Feisty and team.......Omaba/Biden supporters, always a pleasure....May I jump in?

Repubs are left with the "pitiful last" in the line of candidates. Mittster Romney. Every republicon candidate held a lead over Romney and every one fell by the wayside because of their character flaws. Repubs knowing full well ahead of these flaws, and had no problem with Cain and Newster cheating on their wife and wives. Imagine electing a president who cheats on his wife, how well I remeber repubs said anyman who does that is not fit for office!... Bachmann lies nonstop and was caught making up medical story lie about some imaginary child getting sick from health shots. Ron Paul wasnts a pony. Pawlenty had no clue who he is because everyday as the louder christian rights spoke out, he kept going further right. Perry had 3 major flaws, 1 spaced out interviews, 2. more wacked out interviews, 3. I will remember when Perry remembers the third one. Santorum wants war on women and sex. No birth control and no sex before marriage...uh huh and anti everything that is normal everyday life. And that leaves them with the last straw...strawman... for the billionaires who own all the media and their signature man, "we just need someone to sign the documents,"(per Norquist). Down to the last straw....but holding the "Coroprations are people too" Mantra upheld by repub Un-Supreme court. With all the money available from around the world, they now can buy the president of their choice. Mittster is their last choice. The very last choice. The pitiful last.

President Obama/Biden 2012

Feisty and team.......Omaba/Biden supporters, always a pleasure....May I jump in?

Come on in... the waters fine!

Good comment! ☺

AM, by the way I replied to your post on the yesterday's postings with my own apology and respectfully asked you to remember that because context, inflection and different life experiences along with the preconceived biases towards people on this blog it is difficult to really get your point across on here. Especially when someone is not as articulate as myself. So I asked for some forgiveness and patience. In response, a couple of things. First you assume that I think trickle down always works and I dont. I think trickle down does go through periods of it working very well such as the Clinton era and during parts of the Reagan era especially when economic policy was geared towards incenting investment and research. I dont think trickle down works very well when the various economic bubbles get burst because greed takes over and thats where you and I agree that government economic policy needs to shift. Just like trickle down worked during the Clinton administration creating the right incentives for investment and job growth and after the internet bust, we needed something different than what Bush brought us. Remember I think he was a horrible president and still do. As for shareholder returns, I understand your point but that doesnt mean ignoring those passive investors doesnt have real economic consequences. I am not against paying people decent wages and benefits and never have. However, I am not sure the causes of lower wages and benefits is corporate greed or the 1% as many on here think. Certainly there are instances of this and plenty of blame to go around but there are plenty of other factors too and my guess is that we are not as far apart on many of these things but differ on what we focus on in print.

I have not benefited more or less from passive investing any different than anyone my age who has built up savings and retirement benefits so that doesnt apply to me. But why are my fundamental economic assumptions wrong? I can see why you dont care about passive shareholders and if a union pension plan is less funded or a middle class 401k account owner has less for retirement you just dont care and feel that wealth transfer is for the overall good, but where are any of my fundamental economic assumptions just plain wrong? Seriously, not playing games, can you explain to me what fundamental economic assumptions are wrong versus your opinion that the policy related thereto is just different from yours?

As for poor and downtrodden--this is the part that actually gets me stirred up. You are making the constant assumption that because of a different economic policy view, that a fiscal conservative is not compassionate or wants to stick it to the poor. I have never advocated tax policy that doesnt provide a very progressive tax rates for income. I have never advocated any dismantling of social services and government assistance programs and I personally behave in my life accordingly. That said, I do believe that these issues are not black and white and I dont believe that personal responsibility or choice doesnt have consequences that is the governments job to fix in all situations. Do I believe its the government's job to create equality of outcomes--no way but that doesnt mean I disagree with the concept of making sure wealth is shared in a fair manner. I also think that talent, investment etc should be rewarded and that meritocracy is better than a more socialistic system. Because you feel that the wealthy are disproportionately taking a bigger share of the pie, you want to ignore all of the other issues that are inherent in the inequality equation. I share your view for example that senior executives (and we can debate the reasons how it came about) make too much money but I also know that the education gap, especially cognitive ability and talent are far bigger drivers of this inquality than just being born into various social economic circumstances. AM, there is room for both arguments and both of us still being right dont you think?

How pathetic. Old Rainman Romney thinks he can avoid talking about the important issues for how long?

If he was intelligent, he would be able to discuss just about anything if he thinks he can be president of this country. He would have the most secretive administration in history if he was elected.

'sup peeps?!

hey police and fire are hired by local government not the feds............with a few exceptions obviously.....obama is done....one and done....everyday something new comes out that shows the clown obama is not anywhere near a good president......america has wasted the past three and half years slogging through the muck made by obama and his gang of petty tyrants.........all this chatter about birth control, the "war on women", taxation, gay marriage, is nothing more than an attempt at a smokescreen by obama to hide the miserable failure he has been...a lame attempt at dividing and conquering....obama is a liar, a distorter, and a divider.......ROMNEY IN NOVEMBER!

MSNBC is nothing but a propaganda machine for obama this article is doing nothing but making excuses now that the election is not fair for poor obama because presidents have to answer questions about currents affairs ratrher than whatever they choose. LOL

The funniest thing about this entire election is MSNBC CBS NBC CNN ABC are ALL in obamas corner as left wing liberals and he is such a bad president he is still going to loose because he has destoryed this nation and its even funnier to read this attack comments by all the libs that are throwing tantrums (LOL) as they watch his own actions destroy himself. He is just an idiot and way above his head in a position he should never have been in and now the entire country sees it and he WILL lose without any doubt and even all this biased propaganda is NOt going to change it... Because he is horrible as a leader and as president.

Why was Bush attacked and still attacked over the economy but yet now all the articles say the president cant cotrol the econmoy? You can't have it both ways, you cant blame Bush foor teh economy and yet say obama has no control over the economy lol you lib losers crack me up. Enjoy this year after that your socialist marxist pres will be only rememebered in history as tlhe worst president n the history of the US...Hows that hope and change working out for ya? LOL (HISTORY = obama)

Ron -- Just 6% of the stimulus went toward infrastructure compared to the 33% that was used for tax cuts. The tax cuts comprised the single largest expenditure from the stimulus funds. I will agree that Congress wastes money on pet projects, Bush's "stimulus" was wrong and that a safety net is essential in a civilized compassionate society.

Akeem, that is a fair point and I apologize and my guess is you are correct in terms of my posts. Maybe whats happened is that overtime I have become like the people I was originally pointing out as why do you post in that style. I feel that when I first came on this site, I attempted to have reasonable debate with people like David John B and others. Coming from a more fiscal conservative viewpoint, I was called every name in the book and my credentials/intelligence and sexuality was challenged. I am sure my tone has gotten more rude in the meantime in reply. David has been the biggest protaganist for some reason. I have had very nice and good discussions with a variety of people in whom I have come to respect regardless of whether we agree. Others have picked up the slack like Seeking Sanity and would follow me around calling me an idiot or stupid regardless of any intention on their part of substantively discuss or debate. My guess is that the core group of Fiesty followers including David dont care what the debate or the substantive aspect of a policy position and their goal or job is to discredit anyone who criticizes Obama because they are in essence campaigning on his behalf. Its not about policy discussion but pandering for votes otherwise much of what they post makes no sense. Thus, you are correct, I apologize and promise to watch my tone and not be rude. I hopefully have never been rude to you and dont intend to do so thus slap me if I am.

As you said in your last statement--how does someone's livelihood get set by the market under the progressive philopsophy. I thought that is what I am advocating and that many factors including education, talent, ambition, cognitive ability factor into that not just compassion lets pay them more. It doesnt sound like you do agree with AM.

if obama is reelected you know how my life will change....it wont.if romney is elected you know how my life will change,same thing it wont.ill still be working paying more in taxes then i get to keep.not have a car while my neighbors will continue going to college and get my money in grants[theyve been in college for 20 years].nothing will change.i still wont have a congressman that knows im alive or cares.our country will still allow big money to rule it while the peoples lot diminishes.no...romney....obama....who cares our system is broken

For the moderator.

The following are suggested NEW RULES for posting on Newsvine.

Do not post:

• Potentially libelous statements or damaging innuendo.
• Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
• Copyrighted materials of any sort without the express permission of the copyright holder.
• Personal attacks, insults or threats.
• The use of another person's real name to disguise your identity.
• Comments unrelated to the story.

Sure would eliminate most of the Liberal comments since they go off topic continuously, throw out racial slurs, always attacking anyone with a different opinion, and some who use multiple handles.

Time for "Change" on Newsvine. Let's move "Forward" with these rules.

obviously ido youre a conservative.trying to tell others how to live is a life style with you guys

Elisa, SF

Romney is the Palin male version

That is the knee slapper of the day! Do you not realize that Romney is both a JD and MBA from Harvard & a BA from Brigham Young? Obama only has a JD from Harvard and a BA from Columbia and nothing from Occidental.

What are you saying then, that who you are counts more than where you went to school and what sheeps skin you brought back?

the financial channel say just 16 percent of college graduates from 2009-10 and 11 have found full time work.it doesnt matter what your education is.going to college to try to land a job thats been outsourced is stupid

Anna Molly - as usual, you post very intelligent and significant arguments to support your point of view. You always post well- thought out cases for your beliefs. As we all know, trickle down economics has failed this country and, adopting that approach again, would pitch the country into a depression. The point has been made over and over again but, as usual, the GOP has nothing else to advocate.

We need to move forward by putting a Congress together that will work with President Obama instead of against him. We'll see the country move forward faster when we begin to pull as one, together, instead of against each other.

Obama/Biden 2012

I am not bothered by it. I was just trying to make it apparent to you why you face so much backlash for your posts,

What I meant with the livelihood comment is AM approach deals with the livelihood of these individuals directly. You counter with the idea that the reduction in stock from the corporation effect people equally via pension and other investments. I say that livelihood dictates markets and not the other way around.

Like Anna Molly says, giving these people jobs can create an optimistic view of the economy which alone could make up that swing. Many other factors such as the possibility we are not in a recession in the future also change the concept.

You are almost using the market as if it was always absolutely correct. It is simply a measure, and within that measure lies hope and pessimism. Eliminating pessimism has a positive effect on the market. It may be correct that the company taking money from profits and giving them to workers immediate effect may be a drop in stock price,. I think your argument about the pensions is flawed because that money does more for the economy when brought back in to the economy in comparison to sitting in an account of a company. Because a pension is diversified they are more concerned about the overall economy than a company by company view. To imply that a worker and the economy loses as much as they gain from a wage increase does not work as the markets, though taught to be, are not completely financially measured.

Simply speaking, the dollar spent making people feel good does not cost a dollar to the economy. (opinion of course).

California TomAnd Gabby, thank you for helping Mr.Barber hold your seat until your comfortable enough to retake your seat in Congress. We miss you, please hurry back.

Mr. Barber has to run again for the November 2012 Elections. Barber represents Congressional District 8 for 6 months and then in Nov has to run for a full term in the newly drawn District 2. Unfortunately I doubt that Gabby will ever be in office again and that is sad. She's one of the few good Democrats that are left from the old Democrat Party. Liberals have completely destroyed the party. More than likely Barber will win again in Nov because District 2 has more Democrat constituents. I just hope since he was hand picked by Gabby, he has similar values and respect for both sides of the isle. I imagine he is since he actively distanced himself from President Obama and Nancy Pelosi.

Akeem - well put!

SeekingSanity We need to move forward by putting a Congress together that will work with President Obama instead of against him.

President Obama had a Democrat Congress for his first two years yet nothing was accomplished. And still controls the Senate of which still hasn't passed a budget for 3 years. So what do you propose? Maybe all the Democrats are the ones that need to go.

tick, tick, tock,

Mitt runs up the clock,

the clock strikes November,

Mitt the rat run out of luck?

Fiesty, Please jump off a bridge when Obama loses.

joe -

what bridge? Republicans have burnt all bridges ... to a bright future.

Only one bridge left, that's GOP Gov. Palin's 'Bridge to Nowhere' - which is reserved for Mitt the MisFitt after the November Election.

Anna, I would respectfully disagree that Walker won the recall based on superior funding. From the time of the protests, the state was pretty clearly divided between Walker and the not-him vote. I don't really think in this specific case it made much of a difference. Unusual, but it was a very polarizing event as well. The error of the Democratic party was not that they didn't use their funds wisely, but as you pointed out, they did not present a good candidate. In this instance it was vote for someone paid for by big business or vote for someone paid for by the unions - at least that was the majority perception. Had ANY candidate been presented that seemed more concerned with the "whole" of the state rather than one group, they would have been easily voted in.

Romney is a joke and a nightmare. Obama has a terrible track record and has several documented lies to boot. Predominantly from what I can see, only the most die-hard party line members are sold on either of the two. Several Democrats will no longer support Obama, and many Republicans are highly dissatisfied with the Romney option. All that's left after that is Ron Paul. And these 3 are our choices. The single best thing the Democrats could have done to guarantee the next election would be to thank Obama sincerely for his service and find someone that the country as a whole can support for the 2012 election. Instead, because of the promises and deals behind the scenes and because of the overwhelming arrogance of each party we are left to choose between an out of touch crook, a bumbling liar and a radical old guy. Not our finest moment.

Akeem:

It's worth a minute or two to make this point. You wrote:

"The issue I have a problem with is the way you prove your point to others. You scold others savagely for the ideology invested in their post (David Walker for instance), but hold no accountability for your own. There is usually some fact that is being debated, where you will put down the opposing side's opinion and superceed it with your own."

This is the reason it is utterly foolish to engage Kirk, as many posters learned long ago. He wrote:

"David goes after Bain capital as if its bad and lets discuss. The starting point is that Bain goes out and raises money for a fund from its investors. These investors are Union pension plans, university endownments, large charitable or tax exempt foundations and sovereign wealth funds (country assets like Brazil's surplus). So Bain creates an investment criteria for the fund such as investing in distressed businesses with high risk of failure. Bain earns a fee of 2% on the total asset value annually and a certain percentage of the business gains above a minimum return. So lets say Bain gets to keep 20% above returns above 15% to the investors. Now Bain goes out and buys a Missouri steel plant that has lost money for 8 consecutive years and is basically insolvent with the idea it wants to turn it around. David mentions leverage so it either assumed the debt it had or went to a bank and if the purchase price was $100 dollars, it borrowed 75 and invested 25 of union pension money and other investor money. Bain doesnt make a dime if this company goes under so David's characterization is inaccurate and no bank will continue to lend to any private equity fund that does intentionally lose money."

The bolding is mine.

No where did I say that Bain Capital was bad. What I pointed out was the irony that Bain has found a way to make money on a losing proposition. While this was profitable, in no way could Bain be properly labeled a "job creator".

As far as the leveraged buyout, I made no such characterization. This entire scenario springs from Kirk's very disordered mind.

You don't argue with people like that.

BTW - If obama was correct in saying that the private sector was doing fine, care to expound on the number of workers who are long term unemployed/underemployed? Surely you aren't implying that these are all just public sector workers?

Ah, but Conservatives and in particular the Libertarians so in vogue recently have made very clear that it isn't the PURPOSE of companies to provide jobs...it's their purpose to maximize profits. They've done masterfully at that prime directive.

The problem, then, is that private companies can make more money by sitting on their money than they can by spending it. The reason for that is that THERE STILL ISN'T ANY DEMAND. The gradual erosion of middle class buying power through 30+ years of Republican Trickle Down has destroyed the ability of the middle class to bring that demand.

The solution is simple, really. In the short run the government should be taking advantage of a buyers market. There are roads to build, airports to improve, roads to repave...all manner of things that can be had at a bargain rate in a slow economy. Even unemployment benefits are cheap compared to payroll, and it's money that IMMEDIATELY goes into the economy.

At the very least we should stop the layoffs of public workers that are currently putting a drag on the economy. The private sector can only do so much to expand the economy when Conservatives are at work actively CONTRACTING it. It's the same effect at work in Europe where the austerity plans Conservatives were pointing out with smug pride a few months have dropped the continent into recesson.

Once the economy is moving at a good clip again and people are back at work the President has stated repeatedly he'd like to pay down the debt. That's actually the opposite of what President GW Bush did in the last decade, when they put large amounts of economic stimulus into the economy by cutting taxes while increasing the amount of spending rapidly...much more rapidly than has President Obama.

For people who pretend not to believe in stimulus Republicans do it pretty consistently. Too bad they aren't honest enough to admit what they're doing.

I guess that's reason enough for Romney to want to fly under the radar and avoid answering questions...most of them are going to be pretty uncomfortable for him.

Akeem, I agree with your views in concept or theory but applying it to practice is so much stickier and thats why good healthy discussion and debate is good. Seeking Sanity, Akeem doesnt need a cheerleader, so it would be better if you actually added to the discussion rather than subtracting from it. But Akeem here is where your concept or AM's create economic problems and the math isnt so simple. There is no doubt that reasonable people can debate the impact on shareholders and the market but the impact on global or US competition isnt so simple. There is a reason US shoppers go to Walmart versus the local store--because they get products cheaper. If you create artificial and not market based compensation and benefits, a competitor will come in and try to steal market share. Global competition makes it that much harder because various foreign competitors with lower wages can steal US business. Moreover, it really impacts small business, if you create artificial wages and benefits, you definitely reduce the ability to expand and employ more people. You think the dry cleaners that employs all family members doesnt have a huge cost advantage over someone who must pay wages and benefits greater than what the market will dictate?

Finally, all of us are unfortunately not born equal, I cant jump as high as Michael Jordan, hit a ball like Pujols, sing like Bono, dance like anyone that makes money or have the leadership ability as Obama or a Fortune 500 CEO. They command greater salaries and the market determines that Ophra Winfrey can be a billionaire right? So how is her economic status worse or better than a hedge fund owner at Blackstone or KKR? On the other side, although politically incorrect the vast majority of those under the poverty level have less talent or cognitive ability and in many cases made bad choices. We as a society have a duty to create a safety net because clearly the children of these people havent made those same choices and we have been very successful in creating that safety net. Its how we address beyond the safety net that everyone argues over--how to address the education gap, how to address gender and racial inequality as if it all caused by pure discrimination, how do we address tax policy or entitlement policy.

IT ALL BOILS DOWN TO ONE THING....

Willard believes that MAGIC PANTIES will get him into heaven.

If you think America needs a man in the WH who believes that MAGIC PANTIES will get him into heaven

then by all means vote for WILLARD .

If on the other hand, you have more than 2 Neurons able to fire a spark you already know what not to do .

Ron 1861

Post 1.69

Stimulus, doesn't work. What it does is reward people to buy early, i.e. those already intending to spend. It gets almost no activity that was not going to happen.

Consider that the Fed Declared the recession over in June 2009 - a Full month before even one nickel of stimulus was spent.

Consider that the CBO followup on the stimulus showed no net gain in jobs.

Consider that watchdogs followed the stimulus money. 2/3's went to localities that supported Obama and Democrats in general. Yup, the politicians are the ones who got stimulated!

Consider that a large chunk of the money went to Fire Fighters, Police, and Teacher union pensions and wages. Yup! Trouble is that the public sector spending doesn't really stimulate growth, because these are really services.

David, I am not sure why I bother engaging with you since you clearly dont read my posts with anything other than an antagonistic preconceived unwilling to understand bias. First, lets go back to your original post, you say it "was purchased with leveraged funds". That means one of two things, one you believe that Bain borrowed the investment money (which isnt true) or borrowed against the invested funds. I assume that you meant that the Missouri steal company was purchased via a combination of equity from Bain capital and debt from a bank (which I assume thats what they did but havent confirmed). If you meant something else let me know and I will take back my assumption in my example. Second, what does any of your reply have to do with any substance in my post. You have spent many posts trying to put Bain in a negative light or pointing out examples of bad investments or job losses. Lets face it you are trying to paint Romney's Bain success in a negative light for campaign purposes. Explain to me how Bain made money on a losing proposition versus their investors made money on a losing proposition. The fact that Bain made fees isnt making money as I guarantee fees dont come close to covering their legal and accounting bills on these acquisitions. For the life of me I dont understand why you feel the need to personally attack rather than discuss these issues fairly. Its clear to me that you really dont understand how private equity works and its interesting because I agree with Anna Molly in that having success at Bain doesnt necessarily translate to being a successful President. If you had instead put forth a post that said that private equity success doesnt translate to being a able to create successful government fiscal policy and then stated your reasons, that would be far more credible than just using campaign talking points. If you had said that Romney's experience as a private equity businessman creates jobs in the wrong method or his creates different management and leadership skills than what makes a successful president. Even if you just disagree with his policies in general that would be better than just making stuff up or feeling the need to attack me for no reason. David, as Akeem put it so well, maybe my tone needs to be softer, but explain to me where any of my economic fundamentals are flawed? So far everytime I reply to you, you havent ever been able to point any out. Instead, its personal attacks. Maybe try a new approach and show me the error of my ways and I will come to your side. Just dont campaign.

David Walker...so based on your last post, you are admitting that Kirk owns you when it comes to intellectual analysis? On that basis, I agree with you!

DB, Akron --

Consider that a large chunk of the money went to Fire Fighters, Police, and Teacher union pensions and wages. Yup! Trouble is that the public sector spending doesn't really stimulate growth, because these are really services.

That's just plain short-sighted, DB, and frankly sounds like Rush Limbaugh logic.

Don't people who provide "services" also purchase homes, cars, refrigerators, DVD players, dinner out, and a whole host of other things that private sector businesses need to sell to survive and thrive?

You cut off your nose to spite your face when you hack that many consumers out of the private economy, not to mention the public sector "services" that you lose.

And when you talk about 2/3 of the stimulus money going to localities that supported President Obama, you are actually talking about 2/3 of the 1/3 that actually went to "stimulus," rather than to tax breaks or to stopping disasters by propping up unemployment insurance and COBRA benefits for all those workers laid off after December 2007. So it wasn't really that much money to begin with.

And then consider that a big chunk of THAT money went to places like Texas, where aspiring Presidential candidate Rick Perry spent it to buy down his own deficit, rather than creating any jobs, so he could say he fixed the deficit. But what he really did was essentially pass Texas's credit card debt off to the rest of us, and then blame President Obama for the federal deficit and complain that the stimulus didn't create any jobs.

Well, duh, DB. Well, duh.

John B, or any of the progressives who are advocating the stopping of the government sector layoffs. I dont know the specifics of each layoff and personal story or each local municipality, state or federal burueacracy that is making the tough decisions. But lets use the post office as an example, are you guys saying that if a government service including education where enrollment and administration needs change all the time, should employ or not layoff anyone while they are getting paid with taxpayer funds--Just Because? So in the post office's case, if the mail delivery as been reduced by 30% because of technological advances or competition, we should not lay anyone off even if it means sitting and doing nothing? Since virtually all of these layoffs are at state and local levels, how do you know these services are even required and who is going to pay the bills? Even with a reduction of 1% nationally in the state and local government workforce, it is still substantially higher than in 2008 so I am not sure what the austerity point progressives are making? Not trying to be difficult but could someone provide me with the economic policy that says this is good for our country?

John B --

The problem, then, is that private companies can make more money by sitting on their money than they can by spending it. The reason for that is that THERE STILL ISN'T ANY DEMAND. The gradual erosion of middle class buying power through 30+ years of Republican Trickle Down has destroyed the ability of the middle class to bring that demand.

Tell that to DB, who also seems to believe that hacking 700,000 jobs out of the public sector doesn't mean anything because those people only provide "services."

Excellent post, John.

@ Kirk -- What John is saying and I am saying is that you can hack all the public sector jobs you want, and you will kill the private sector economy in equal measure.

Like any other jobs, if you're going to reduce public sector jobs, then you need a good reason, rather than just wanting to save money on your taxes. Because it is certain that doing that will have side effects.

As I said to DB from Akron, you had better be prepared for the hole left in your face to bleed after you cut off your nose.

"He’s (Romney) provided no clues and his campaign appears to be making sure there’s little opportunity (for now) to find out."

Sort of like Obama's vague 'Hope and Change' rhetoric in 2008. It seemed to work for him back then, but now he has a record - dismal as it is, and he can't run away from it.

David Walker --

No where did I say that Bain Capital was bad. What I pointed out was the irony that Bain has found a way to make money on a losing proposition. While this was profitable, in no way could Bain be properly labeled a "job creator".'

The problem is that conservatives have tricked a certain segment of its base into believing that making money -- even on a losing proposition, and no matter how many jobs are lost -- is the only thing that matters, and that somehow, if they just sit up and beg long enough, some of those ill-gotten gains will trickle down to them.

Sure, it will. Maybe in the form of tips.

@ Bill, Fairfax VA

Where would we be if we hadn't put Obama in the White House? Are you ready for the next war? Romney has a better chance of making that happen than President Obama. Romney will see it as making billions for his 1% while reducing the population of the 99%. He doesn't have a clue how to be diplomatic. It's always been my way or the highway for Romney and he's not ashamed to tell you to hit the road no matter what it does to your family and with out any reason other than to make more money.

Obama's latest budget projects a $1.3 trillion deficit this year declining to $901 billion in 2012, and then annual deficits in the range of $500 billion to $700 billion in the 10 years to come.

harley girl, what will Romney's deficits be?

DB Akron "Stimulus, doesn't work...Consider that the Fed Declared the recession over in June 2009 - a Full month before even one nickel of stimulus was spent...Consider that the CBO followup on the stimulus showed no net gain in jobs."

Excellent points. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported that the total number of people working when the recession ended (June 2009) was 130,503,000, and after spending virtually all of that $800 Billion on the 'stimulus', the total number of people working 18 months later was only 129,856,000, for a loss of 647,000 jobs.

Unfortunately, much of the money was used to prop up public union jobs, when what we really needed was private sector jobs to grow the economy. Now, Obama is complaining that public union employees are being laid off - because they are loyal Democratic voters.

His anti-business policies of more burdensome regulations (a record 81,000 pages of new regulation in Obama's first year) and moratoriums on energy production are coming back to haunt him.

We need a fresh start with someone that understands how to actually create private sector jobs.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported that the total number of people working when the recession ended (June 2009) was 130,503,000, and after spending virtually all of that $800 Billion on the 'stimulus', the total number of people working 18 months later was only 129,856,000, for a loss of 647,000 jobs.

Roy, 10,000 people a DAY are reaching 65 and retiring. Your statistic is meaningless.

Harley girl won't respond to that or any other Question. I think she's married to one of those Republican Congressmen. I see Romney is going into CEO mode, only going to answer questions that he knows the answers to and doesn't have to think about. So I guess he is not going to show me his DD-214 either.

I really want him to answer the tuff questions because the Presidents position is really going to have some serious decissions in the near future. If he can't react under pressure of just questions at this time. How is he going to work in real situations that come at you out of nowhere.

So I'll say my point of view right now. Romney you have 5 months to proove to me you can do the job. Saying you won't answer real life questions is showing me you are weak and have no confidense in youself. You were only a 1 term governer of Mass. and you screwed that up so bad they didn't want you for a second term. If you can't manage a simple little state, what makes you think you can run The United States Government?

StoptheCannibals-2908428 "Roy, 10,000 people a DAY are reaching 65 and retiring. Your statistic is meaningless."

I guess those 15,000 people a day that are just entering the workforce don't matter to you.

The total NET INCREASE in the working age workforce is about 5,000 people a day, so not only do we have 1.32 million fewer people working (thru May 2012) than when Obama took office, but we have an additional 6 million people looking for work that have very poor job prospects - thanks to Obama's anti-business/growth policies.

No matter how you try to 'spin' the record, Obama has been a huge FAILURE.

Anna Molly--ha now you are doing to me what I do to you--which is try to point out the potential other costs intended or unintended of various government policies. I couldnt agree with you more that just eliminating cost from a government budget isnt a complete analysis and that the costs to the city due to unemployment and lost economic activity should be factored in and most state and local governments dont do it. It also has horrible consequences on lower social economic areas because of the education gap. In higher income areas the loss of jobs isnt as impactful as they are able to find replacement jobs quicker including public sector employees which isnt the case in lower social economic areas. Not sure what the economic policy fix for that is. But thanks for doing to me what I try to do with you and thats point out the impact of your advocated policies in other areas.

As for trickle down--lets stop calling it that because it has a bad connotation but you dont disagree with the concept that greater consumption and employment in the private sector leads to more do you? If the wealthy working person has more disposable income regardless of tax policy or greater earnings, I know you agree that they hire more landscapers, maids, nannys, go on fancier vacations etc so there is clearly a "trickle down" impact. But as you point out its certainly not good permanent policy because it doesnt work in times of economic distress or economic bubbles bursting as we saw with the internet crisis and housing bubble. But all presidents use it to some extent even Obama with his payroll tax holiday so lets have a discussion on more substantive policy issues as trickle down as you call has always worked to some degree and at some times in the various economic cycles very well.

DB, Akron --

That is the knee slapper of the day! Do you not realize that Romney is both a JD and MBA from Harvard & a BA from Brigham Young?

Why, yes. I've heard that. I wonder why conservatives haven't been clamoring to see HIS transcripts.

Oh, I know.

He wasn't president of the Harvard Law Review, was he?

That much is pretty obvious.

Anna Molly - that is interesting isn't it? They clamor for the president of Harvard Law Review's transcripts but not the guy who didn't measure up?

The lack of transparency (and honesty, being trustworthy, etc.) is a BIG problem with Romney. Whether taking the hard drives from computers, ignoring questions from the press, or his famous "I'll get back with you on that" and never getting back on that, Romney is NOT presidential material if only for this reason alone.

According to David Cay Johnston, Romney's refusal to release his tax returns indicates that Romney has "been thinking about this since before Bain" but the American people deserve to learn:

Did Romney buy illegal, gray-market tax shelters?

Was Romney audited in a way that the government found serious problems?

Did Romney make use of offshore vehicles in order to defer or not pay taxes?

Did Romney take advantage of things that were not caught in audits by the IRS?

If Romney's returns are clean, if there's nothing to worry about, then why not just provide them?

How can anyone support a candidate who is NOT being transparent? No, Mr. Entitled 1%, no you cannot run out the clock -- You've got some "splainin' to do!

Romney -- He's not in it for you.

Proud NV writes........"Why was Bush attacked and still attacked over the economy but yet now all the articles say the president cant cotrol the econmoy?"

Let's try this once more.......Bush started with Gigantic surplus, created two unfunded wars(one with lies to give war profiteer friend of Cheney Billions) did not fund "No Child Left behind" or Medicare part D, or any of the incredible tax breaks for anyone. Then big crash of economy putting millions out of work and losing every thing they owned. Then the next day after President Obama had his inaugeration, 14 repubs met and pledged to destroy the economy to prevent President Obama from serving a second term....Just like Bin Laden, they want to take the economy down. For GREEDY 1% rich. Record obstruction of every bill including health care for the first responders of 911.........Now write that down and put it someplace.

Anna Molly--I am not one of those who give a crap about the Obama birther issue nor do I feel that he is somehow not intelligent enough to be in the white house regardless of his grades. I find it odd that he wont release his transcripts as most presidents have including Bush, Gore, Clinton etc. However, I would be surpised to find anything thats going to be earth shattering no different than people like True Patriot worrying about Romney's tax return. If you are predisposed to want to find something you likely will be doubtful you will find anything that will change votes.

As for Harvard Law Review, you do know how the law review is selected at Harvard right? At my law school it was top percentage of first year grades and a writing competition and a few professior selections intended to ensure a certain amount of diversity. At Havard, its only the top 6 in grades, a writing competition and virtually all of the selections are professor selections. Editor positions are voted in. This means that Obama was more than likely selected not earned. But again, that in of itself is just a mechanism for anti Obama campaigners to say he wasnt smart enough or he is an affirmative action pick so not qualified. I am against those tactics no different than being against the tactics used on here and elsewhere to attack Romney based on his tax return or Bain success as being not qualified to be President. Neither are relevant to the discussion.

I'll freely admit I'm not as politically savvy as many of you are. Nor can I post as eloquently. I guess that makes me the "blue collar" political follower. I've seen many of the ads by both POTUS hopefuls. I've also watched some of the interviews, news conferences and what not. To be honest, Mitt/Willard scares me. He's destroyed how many lives with his hostile takeovers and selling the company's assets off piecemeal and giving the workers a little severance package and a boot in their rear on the way out. My father was a fortunate recipient of one of those deals, not sure if Mitt was involved. My father was a steel worker for 30 years in NW PA. The company was bought out and my father was given a little package and an early "retirement". Well, within a year, the company filed for bankruptcy and all of those who retired from that mill EVER lost their retirement. My father can't go out and get another job. He's dependent on Social Security (which isn't much). I unfortunately am also dependent on that monthly check due to an accident and a stroke. What I'm seeing is that Mitt got rich off of other peoples misery and misfortune, and there are people who will vote for that in November. Is President Obama perfect? No. I don't think we'll have a President that is "perfect" The closest we've ever come was JFK. Is the economy recovering? Yes. Just not as fast as everyone wants. President Obama was left with a dumpster of crap left on the White House steps while Bush was laughing all the way back to his ranch. Were the American people gullible enough to think that after an 8 year unfunded war things would be hunky-dory? I was hoping not but apparently some were. The economists saw this coming down the pipeline long before Obama took office and were throwing up all kinds of red flags but they couldn't do anything else. I really feel for all of those steel workers from PA to TX who were railroaded out of their jobs and had no recourse. I am also glad I got out of "the Commonwealth" of PA. I went back to visit in October and was really saddened seeing so many closed doors. There were signs of hope though, thing are coming back on a small scale. The little guy was opening shops. The big companies were gone but Mom and Pop joints were springing up. Which was one thing President Obama said was one of his goals. Then seeing the state parks being sold off for parking structures and private resorts. The sad part is the new GOP is almost worse than the old guard. They want to revert to a Patriarchal sociaty and take away women's rights. What next? Loving Day was yesterday (I believe). I'm not sure how many here know what that is. I'm a Caucasian male and knew about it. If you're not sure go look it up It was Loving vs VA, I think you can look it up either that way or just Google Loving Day. I'm scared that that may go by the wayside as well. I can't grasp the fact that people actually want things to go back to the days of The Salem Witch Trials. I thought this great nation had evolved beyond that. Just like the Republicans are so hell bent on this "one term President" thing that even if a bill come across their desks that would help the nation they'll veto it, then blame Obama for not doing anything. I'm willing to listen to sound arguments but one thing I have noticed on many of these political boards is the conservative side are the first ones to start name calling. Not just candidates but others on these boards. It's as though they can't come up with a sound argument so they revert to being 12 year olds. The republicans want to make the pill illegal, they want to over turn Roevs Wade, what other things do they want to take away from people. We already know their stance on equal rights for gays and lesbians. They say civil unions are enough, that if they are allowed to marry it will "destroy the sanctity of marriage". Well marriage is a contract not a religious union. The only thing the church has a say over is holy matrimony. Hence the separation of church and state. If anyone wants to live in a country that is ruled by religion head over to the middle east. Just don't get caught doing ANYTHING wrong, you may lose a body part, or your life. The Republicans are wanting to cut social Security and get rid of medicare. That's a great idea, if you want to see an entire field collapse let's do that. If you think medical care is expensive now? Cutting medicare won't make those people who use it healthy. they'll still need care. It's just the doctor won't get paid at all. but if they cut medicare those same people won't be able get the medications they need and will die off. Maybe that's the agenda? Survival of the fittest? Master race? Wait wasn't that tried back in the 40s? How well did that work out?

I apologize for the book and that I wasn't as eloquent as the rest. It's just the view of an average guy.

I apologize for the book and that I wasn't as eloquent as the rest. It's just the view of an average guy.

I for one, very much appreciate hearing the thoughts of an average guy!

Hope to see you expressing your thoughts around here again...

You got my vote!

TC......nice post and no apologies necessary you did just fine. Your voice is very welcome here anytime. Peace.

TCLucas--I also appreciate your thoughts and would always love the chance to debate or discuss various conclusions you make but I appreciate you sharing your experiences and views. The only part I would ask you to revisit is the name calling. Always go to the first post everyday and see where the name calling and the personal attacks start and then see how it evolves from there. The unfortunate truth is that both sides are guilty including me and we should debate and discuss in a more civil manner if we want to achieve any political success going forward for any economic policy initiatives.

Kirk, I'll give you that. I do think it's a pretty fair split between the extreme ends of both sides and I apologize for that. I've seen them all from Socialists, Lefist Liberals to The Reich Wing. I just wish more people would talk about the issues than trying to come up with some quip to describe their disdain for the other side. it's quite possible, if they put as much thought into talking about the issues as they do for name calling we might just have a good discussion

TexasT-2966501,

The only thing Romney has going for him is that he can still suck air. Aside from that, he's a sociopath. He has not a care in the world about anything or anybody but what's best for him. He has never run a real business (vulture capitalism doesn't count). He has fired more people than he ever employed. His jobs record is a big fat ZERO.

The real trouble is that you will vote for anybody that isn't Obama. So here is a reminder for you TexAssT, you have been invited to take your state and leave if you don't like the way things are going. Obama is going to secure the election and all the yammering you do isn't going to matter.

He is going to win for several reasons. First, he goes to the center, not the extreme that Mint Raw Money is currently doing. Second, Mint Raw Money only speaks to the people that pay for his campaign. A working man voting for him is like a chicken assisting Colonel Sanders. Third, he has done a good job with the economy and getting us out of these wars. Forth, the incumbent has a 70% statistical margin of success (Walker is a case in point).

Simply put, Mint Raw Money is not going to overcome that 70% statistical advantage. He is no Reagan and he is no Clinton.

Blue collar Republican voters: I can't emphasize this enough:

A) The Republican front runner follows a religion started by a polygamist (having multiple wives for anyone not aware of this antiquated term) who was lynched by an Illinois mob ( Joseph Smith, look it up !!).

B) He is building a "car-elevator" in his new California mansion, after he tore down a previous mansion

C) He has $ 1,000,000.00 in a Swiss bank account

D) He says "The trees are the right height in Michigan" and wears denim to look like a regular guy

E) Did you guess who yet ? (answer: Good ole Mitt)

Right On Schedule: The republicanCrimeCartel Created this disaster back in Reagan's time and Perfected it with the Bushies, especially With KingGeorge the VaccumBrained during his NOTORIOUSLY SHAMEFUL Shrubber Reign 2001 - 2008. FACE IT Fellow and Sister Americans, The republicanCrimeCartel IS Causing this Depression we are back into to get people mad at Prez O and vote for Rommel and Whomever his love mate is. You KNOW what Rommel's got in mind: HUGE American military, OTHER PEOPLE's Sons fighting Newly thought up And VERY PROFITABLE WARS And NO American Universal National healthCare System. Even Prez O was "forced" to cut a deal with the powerful health insurance industry. Does ANYONE KNOW what the ceo of United HealthCare took Home for 2008 Salary? Hold onto your hats: $128,000,000 *C A S H* WHILE, Mind You, their paid policyHolders were denied and DIED. The fact that America HAS NO Universal HealthCare System like the other countries, which take care of their citizens, instead of fattening the wallets of the EVIL Rich and paying for Unending Wars, IS A NATIONAL DISGRACE... YEAH, A lot of US are mad at Prez O; He let the $4.00+Gas and oil go by without a protest OR Complaint to the Justice Dept Going after the oil companies for price fixing And price GOUGING. AND that shaking hands with karzai of afghan
after what he said????? "thanks sucker taxpayers..." NONEtheless has anybody got an idea what republicanCrimeCartelSoldierRommel will do to US and ANY economic progress made?? He will GUT US LIKE A FLAPPIN' FISH ON THE DOCK.....You're gonna' see Unemployment up to 38% and NO Social Security..Gotta Pay for New Wars And NO MEDICAL CARE
AS "healthcare" policies cost SKYROCKET out of control. Don't fall for the republicanCrimeCartelPropaganda and just say NO!!! to MittTaxPittanceRommel.

Here's the rundown on Mitt Romney's devastating record as CEO of Bain Capital, a tenure marked by bankruptcies, bailouts, and mass layoffs — all while Romney and his partners raked in Billions of Dollars in profits for the firm and Romney himself amassed a Quarter-Billion Dollar Fortune.
Romney's Bain Capital Caused Mass Layoffs, Sent Jobs Overseas
Thousands of Americans were laid off by Bain Capital at companies it purchased, managed, and, at least a quarter of the time, drove into bankruptcy, ruining Lives, Destroying Careers and Families including Many Many Suicides While stuffing his pockets, Keeping his Darling son OUT of service to his country with the line "My son is Fulfilling his Patriotic Duty by helping me get elected"...Got that one?? and, Of Course, installing the InHouse car elevator for his "darling little boy's $180,000Ferrari....Listen Up People...This guy IS Count Dracula In carnate. A vote for ANY Republican politico is a vote against Yours and YOUR FAMILY'S Well Being. You can take that to the bank.

when one has no chance of winning, running out the clock is called "playing out the string". Nothing is going down until the conventions, and Mitt will be ashamed to look into the TV cameras after the clown show the GOP will have. It'll be a bit like some of the matches in Euro 2012, without the soccer--right wing chanting, racial abuse, women flashing their b00bs, drunks vomiting on themselves after drinking for 14 hours straight--interesting to watch, but scary to people who don't understand. I actually thought this column was written as a joke, then I realized these knuckleheads might actually believe this BS. Romney's not going to answer any questions mainly because he doesn't have any answers. He's Robo-Dork, and he's comin to your town!!

I remember when Romney ran against Ted Kennedy. Republicans were all excited because early on in the race it appeared that Romney might actually win. Then Ted Kennedy began to challenge Romney's miserable record as governor and ended up winning by a substantial margin. President Obama hasn't even begun to go after this clown yet. He can start by simply replaying what Republicans said about him then bring out the big guns. Romney is giving us the same old, same old Republican answers -- tax cuts and deregulation -- the same policies that caused this depression in the first place. Voting for Romney to improve this economy makes as much sense as smoking to cure lung cancer. It won't take long for the American voters to see what a fraud flip-flop Mitt actually is.

Where I think Romney is making the mistake is by not giving any info on what his policies will do. Sure, he doesnt have to do or say anything to get the right to vote for him, they would vote for Hitler if it meant Obama wouldnt be president anymore. But independents want information, they look at the whole picture before deciding and if he thinks he can sit back and just say he is better than Obama without giving details then he best plan on losing in November because the only ones that will vote for him are those that hate Obama.

When will Romney release this great plan on how to recover our economy...... We're still waiting....

The debates couldn't come sooner.

Romney 2012/ Cupon health care and more tax breaks for the rich because we "misunderestimated" how well they worked the first time.

joe-2849984

Fiesty, Please jump off a bridge when Obama loses.

Why have her wait?

IDEO- The only meaningful part of your post was where you said "if you win in November." That's pretty good that you dimwits now realize that is a real possibility. Just a couple years you people were still spouting your "Republicans are almost extinct" BS. Funny how things change after the novelty of the first White-African-American President wears off and the nation starts to realize he's just some socialist community organizer.

Once again, another reminder courtesy of the Damaged One that today's GOP wouldn't know a real Socialist if he walked up and stuck a sickle and hammer up their arses!

Damage123

IDEO- The only meaningful part of your post was where you said "if you win in November." That's pretty good that you dimwits now realize that is a real possibility.

Damage I am from Canada and Canadians watch our cousin to the south quite carefully. We use dimwit to define the vast majority of Republican voters ... you know, racists and women haters. So, the "possibility" is that your side will rile up enough of them to get out and vote.

Canada? Cool. Say "hi" to Bob and Doug for me.

ideologyspoilstheview:

If President Obama loses the election in November, it will not be because Republicans won. It will be the jackals, the religio-nuts, and the low-intellect mouth-breathers who have stolen the name of the once-great G.O.P. who win. The irony is that the "victory", such as it is, will make it abundantly clear in a few short years, that the "victors" are pure cannon fodder for their very evil, and very greedy masters.

To David Walker who writes.

If President Obama loses the election in November, it will not be because Republicans won. It will be the jackals, the religio-nuts, and the low-intellect mouth-breathers

The usual rant frm the left, We are the Masters and they are dumb. Let them eat cake!

Damage123

Canada? Cool. Say "hi" to Bob and Doug for me.

Don't think so Damage ... they would probably fling a case of empty beer bottles at me and my reflexes are not what they used to be.

WTF? The word 'leaders' in my post has been tagged with an ad from intel ... intel, get your crap out of my crap!

Good Morning Lefties

"If President Obama loses the election in November, it will not be because Republicans won"?

As long as I can say is the good guys won.

HI Damage123, Mike in Delray, Crystal....and how many others?

I hope you are staying busy keeping your vote counts up.

Romney can't go the distance not answering tough questions. The press needs to press him, and so do the Democrats.

Is it possible there is a chink in the armor of the No Tax Pledge? Earlier in the week, Jeb Bush had the temerity to suggest that the Republicans of today would not welcome his father GHW Bush or Ronald Reagan and in addition suggested the party take a look at their present course of action. Lots of right wing bloggers took umbrage at that and called him a RINO that being the more polite criticism he received. Yesterday, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham let it be known that he was no longer in favor of the Norquist NO TAX Pledge.

Hmmm, Grover's not pleased about that. This unelected pompous individual, who has extracted a pledge for no new taxes from over a 1,000 elected officials by threatening them with challenges in their races, may have finally met the wall of resistance by those in his party who realize they are losing much support.

A recent study by the Center for Public Policy shows that 49% of those polled believe that the GOP's actions or lack thereof are to sabotage the economy 44% disagree and of Independents 50% think so. That's a terrible indictment, yet it has been clear to those of us who pay attention, that has been a goal of the GOP since President Obama was elected, just so he would not succeed, and fulfill their agenda to make him a one term President. ....and they call themselves patriotic Americans.

Gingerbread Mamma

Is it possible there is a chink in the armor of the No Tax Pledge?

I hope so...but I wouldn't raise any taxes until there are also commitments to real spending cuts. The bottom line is, we are going to need real tax cuts AND real spending cuts to get out of the hole we are in. We don't want to be another Japan where 40% of tax revenue is needed just to pay the interest on the debt.

Also, to make a difference, the tax increases are going to have to hit the middle class. I'm fine with the upper 1% taking a larger hit, but the reality is there are not enough 1% people to get the revenue increases we'll likely need to get our deficits under control (unless we go with very, very large spending cuts in both defense and entitlement spending - which I don't see happening)

Ron, in order for us to make a success of pulling ourselves out of this self inflicted

malaise of our financial health, everyone has to give something. It has to be that there is a sincere effort from both sides and that I don't see from the conservatives. Extremes on either side never works and until those issues are resolved or at least tempered by electing officials who are willing to comprise, it will not work.

I read the Democracy Corps story on several different sites- their conclusion, that Obama's economic ads were not only not helping, but actually hurting, was based on the reactions of focus groups.

Funny thing- the "I saved the auto Industry" bit actually made Obama voters angry. Go figure.

One of the articles, (I don't recall which one), had response from the Obama campaign. The message was that, yes, they heard the story, and, yes they were taking it seriously. In fact, Pbama's speech yesterday would reflect the lessons learned from Democracy Corps' work.

Whereupon, Obama gave exactly the same speech he's been giving all along. My father always said the one person you cannot teach is the person who believes he or she knows everything.

In terms of the election, this news could not get any better- for Romney. Even the Obama slanted polling firms can't help him out of his self inflicted morasse.

Reuters/ipsos is a good case in point. Over a year ago, they ditched any shred of credibility, and began to load their pool with Democrats and democratic leaning independents. As you might expect, Obama's job approval numbers recovered nicely from the trough they had been in. Well, it looks like that strategy is not working either.

Today, the R/I poll showed Obama's job approval three points under water- down seven points since last month. It also sowed the race tied- Obama 45, Romney 44. So, you say, not too bad- after all, other polling shows the race tied, too.

Well, might seem so, until you look at the demographics. In this case, the pool was 47% democrats and democratic leaning I dependents, with only 38% republicans and republican leaning independents. There were exactly 15% pure independents- those who do not lean one way or the other.

If you think Obama can win with numbers like that, I have a bridge to sell you, cheap.

Gingerbread,

I don't see a sincere effort from either side. I do give credit to Paul Ryan and the presidents deficit committee for at least trying to start the debate with some reasonably detailed plans, but unfortunately - the leadership in both parties refuses to have serious public debate about the merits of any real proposed solutions.

Ultimately, I blame the voters since we say we want solutions - but when anyone talks to us about real consequences for any approach (either cuts in programs "I use", or increased taxes), we throw them out of office. This is true for both parties.

This is a smart strategy for the Romney camp. Let the super PACs do all the heavy lifting and keep Romney in friendly territory with vetted supportive crowds and planned photo-ops. When Romney goes off script, he's likely to make more of those awkward comments that show him as out of touch with people outside of his income bracket and social circles, so keep him in a bubble and let the campaign handlers do their handling.

As the active president, they know Obama can't stay totally out of the public and will make occasional statements that his opponents will spin and take out of context.

Romney's biggest weakness, however, is not what he's currently saying, but what he's been on the record for saying and reversing himself on so many times. The super PACs will surely be spending a lot of money and ads to whitewash his past and convince voters that the current version they're selling is the real one.

What a great american Barry is. He won a Nobel Peace Prize and then proceeded to escalate (unsuccessfully) the war in Afghanistan (more American's were killed under his watch in his first few years as president than during Bush's entire two terms). And let's not forget the ultra-judicial killing of American citizens. What happened to "change we can believe in"?

NO American should ever support this man!

Oh my, just listen to the sobbing. Leave Obama alone. Unfair for Romney to not stick his foot in his mouth like Obama does, he is just running out the clock. HA! Maybe he has more sense than Obama, of course most people who support our Consitution and individual freedoms do anyway.

Too bad NBC politics, Obama is going to lose, deal with it.

Harley Chic

And Obama has rid us more characters responsible for 9-11 in 3 years that George did in 8 years. Oh, my bad, I forgot that George set it all up by the ruse of saying he had no idea where Bin Landen was and frankly didn't give a damn.

George is retired now, it seems you have "forgot" that too :-)

No need for Mr. Romney to say anything....

Mr. Obama and his ObamaWagon "masters of the Universe" are self-imploding....just look at the posts from the Left.....still referring to previous administrations for Mr. Obama's failures.

A new day is dawning and the Liberals will be sent into obscurity for another 100 years....what did Mr. Obama say again ? Oh yeah..."We WON so go sit in the back of the bus".

Shaking - in your dreams. Obama will be re-elected in November because Mitt has nothing to offer the US -nothing!

Obama/Biden 2012

Concern Citizen-856329

If President Obama loses the election in November, it will not be because Republicans won. It will be the jackals, the religio-nuts, and the low-intellect mouth-breathers

The usual rant frm the left, We are the Masters and they are dumb. Let them eat cake!

If you believe the mathematical impossibility that Romney is peddling about how he can create jobs by firing government workers, you are pretty dumb.

George is retired now, it seems you have "forgot" that too :-)

To be retired, that implies you actually had to be working at one point.

And working to dodge the draft doesn't qualify, fyi.

ldo ... the past has weird way mapping out the future whether you choose to forget it or not.

I guess you can't use Obama's accomplishments to make a point, so just start acing like a racist or sexist and start making derogatory generalized stereotypes against everyone who doesn't vote like you. There are sexists and racists in this country, unfortunately, it's the ones screaming about it that are guilty of it.

Keep calling all of those religious good folks in black churches names, making derogatory comments about Cain, Powell, and Rice, calling non Democrat voting females "stupid" or the "C" word if it makes you feel better I guess. Nobody is being fooled by diverting attention away from yourself by making stereotypical accusations though.

Willard Romney is using the Seinfeld method of electioneering; he's running a campaign about nothing. He (and the rest of the Greedy Old Pie Eaters) are also using the George Costanza Imperative in their messages, "It's Not a Lie If You Believe It."

Bet he does not have one, being a foreign student and all.

Ah, here we go again...

Allen-968499

So some on the blue side say @!$%# and some on the red side say slut ... your point is what? Oh, by the way, Dems like Powell, Repubs do not.

Wow, just wow! We have a new comedy team on FR in the likes of the canadian ideology and david walker. They must have missed the FR editors spin on what a POTUS controls...

...so much of the job is reacting to unplanned events. Ironically, the very issue Romney wants to talk about -- the state of the U.S. economy -- is something that presidents have little control over, especially compared with foreign policy (which they have A LOT of control over).

At least with their foolish and humorous generalizations they do point out that a POTUS's control is far more than what the FR editors suggest and minimize it to be. On this I can agree, and is why obama needs to go.

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

BTW ideology, since you imply that as our northern cousin, you watch us so astutely could you share with us outliers just where this came from...

We use dimwit to define the vast majority of Republican voters ... you know, racists and women haters

Perhaps your own ideology has spoiled YOUR view.

WRT to romney being elected, economics isn't like a light switch, if romney can get us going down a path of unity his 1st year he will have accomplished more for America than obama has in 4 years.

Seeking sanity - If obama could get elected on the phrase "hope and change" alone, why shouldn't it work for romney as well?

Gingerbread Mamma:

A recent study by the Center for Public Policy shows that 49% of those polled believe that the GOP's actions or lack thereof are to sabotage the economy 44% disagree and of Independents 50% think so.

Shhh!!! We're not supposed to talk about that. It's one of those facts that has too much of a liberal bias to be discussed by the "serious" media. It's been exiled to the MSNBC evening show along with the authors of that book that discuss the obvious fact that the current political dysfunction is due almost completely to the growing and historically unprecedented extremism of the modern Republican Party. Some things are just too shocking to be mentioned in polite society because political pundits will get the vapors and need to be revived with smelling salts.

american-2051576

Seeking sanity - If obama could get elected on the phrase "hope and change" alone, why shouldn't it work for romney as well?

Obama ran on policies that he promised to pursue, like health care reform, taking out Bin Laden even if he had to go into Pakistan to do it, etc. Romney has policies too: the same ones that G. W. Bush had, except on steroids.

There was an interesting article in today's paper (L.A. Times) about how Romney heavily supported environmental issues and global warming while Governor in Massachusetts; however, he's now COMPLETELY flip-flopped against these issues now that he's running for president. It's amazing how he keeps spouting words that he THINKS his GOP base want him to say....makes you wonder how much he'll flip-flop if he, unfortunately, gets elected. I don't think he actually KNOWS what he believes in any more!! It depends on the time or day and where he's at!

Houston, somehow I find this statement to be off base...

If you believe the mathematical impossibility that Romney is peddling about how he can create jobs by firing government workers, you are pretty dumb.

Other than your mind controlled keyboard got the mainstream news source that says this?

american-2051576

Come on up sometime and discuss why you are number 1 in the whole dang world ... your vaunted healthcare system or your education system or that your jails are full of minor offenders who got nabbed with a joint. If that is not enough you could try the efficacy of vaginal probing ... maybe deregulation of the banking industry ... the wealthy need more tax breaks. That should clue you in.

ideologyspoilstheview,

Since you are Canadian what gives you a voice in United States politics? Unless you are part of the Chicago practice of counting illegal and dead voters your view is moot. Take care of your own country and its problems and stay out of ours. Unless you are part of the solution you are the problem.

Dismissed.

I will NEVER vote republican in any election.

The Tea Baggers and their Republican allies are society's rats. They offer nothing of value to anyone, hide behind the rhetoric of growth while pursuing economic suicide, claim to be holier than thou while harboring more hatred than any one person can carry without imploding, claim to be more productive while they hoard their wealth, and more greedy as they avoid taxes and social supports.

Lose your freedom, cast your vote for Romney.

Houston, wrt to my question to seeking sanity...I also remember obama saying something about Guantanamo, debt ceilings, etc. Didn't really come about did they? Even his healthcare reform is being subjected to judicial review. You really think that every thing romney wants, will come to pass?

Perhaps you can enlighten us all on all of the past POTUS's who have been able to follow the policies of their once removed predecessor's? I know of one, but international events has made it moot over 50 years ago.

Notsosure10

ideologyspoilstheview,

Since you are Canadian what gives you a voice in United States politics?

Because you drop bombs everywhere? Because your fiscal shenanigans affect the entire world? Because you have a history of meddling in the affairs of other countries? Shucks pal, I really don't know.

And Shekel,

What great economic improvement do you offer?

More of the same asphyxiation? FAIL!

Ideology, trying to change the argument?

Come on up sometime and discuss why you are number 1 in the whole dang world ... your vaunted healthcare system or your education system or that your jails are full of minor offenders who got nabbed with a joint. If that is not enough you could try the efficacy of vaginal probing ... maybe deregulation of the banking industry ... the wealthy need more tax breaks. That should clue you in.

I see you are still on the comedy kick, what does all this have to do with what I asked? Seems that you have become somewhat delusional or at least misinformed on American politics. Then again, Canadian politics are different.

Ideology nice reply to notsosure...

Because you drop bombs everywhere? Because your fiscal shenanigans affect the entire world? Because you have a history of meddling in the affairs of other countries? Shucks pal, I really don't know.

LOL, but by your arguments only the U.S. republicans do this. Golly, ideo you must be off your meds again or you just like being stroked by the FR left posters. I almost wish I knew of the european links and asian links you post to spouting the same.

american-2051576

... merely listing why many on the right would be referred to as dimwits.

I am still waiting for Romney... or anyone for that matter why we should elect Romney? without using the word Obama...

Or any more than vague ideas on how he is going to fix this mess besides more tax cuts for the wealthy... (he pledged elimination of the capital gains tax... which would bring his last year tax rate to damn near 0%)

If tax cuts alone actually worked... the country should be sitting on a mound of gold...

american-2051576

I almost wish I knew of the european links and asian links you post to spouting the same.

You want to discuss Africa? I am willing to dump all the blame on England, France and Italy. You want to discuss the Middle East? Up to the 1950's same people get the blame ... post 1950's, now that's America's bag of responsibility. You do know why Iran dislikes you? Iraq was a Bush invention that was passed on.

Because you drop bombs everywhere? Because your fiscal shenanigans affect the entire world? Because you have a history of meddling in the affairs of other countries? Shucks pal, I really don't know.?

Ideo...you can have an opinion, but you don't get a vote. Just be glad Canada has't pissed us off, Yet.

alwayzright ...Just be glad Canada has't pissed us off, Yet.

Oh alwayz, you just want us to come down and burn Washington again. Light it up yourself this time.

american-2051576

Houston, wrt to my question to seeking sanity...I also remember obama saying something about Guantanamo, debt ceilings, etc. Didn't really come about did they?

You're question didn't deserve an answer because it was based on the false premise that Obama was running on "hope and change" "alone." I just pointed out that he actually ran on policy positions, the most important of which became reality.

You really think that every thing romney wants, will come to pass?

No, but if a teabag Congress and Senate are elected, the worst of Mitt's promises WILL come to pass. Maybe you'd be gleeful as Romney cut back on "useless" government jobs like the inspection of food to ensure it doesn't poison you, but I would not.

@ Feisty - "If Willard was sitting in the Oval Office right now ..."

First, the country would be a lot better off.

Second, show some respect. You should refer to him as Mister Willard. After all we refer to POTUS as President Hussein.

american-2051576

Houston, somehow I find this statement to be off base... If you believe the mathematical impossibility that Romney is peddling about how he can create jobs by firing government workers, you are pretty dumb. Other than your mind controlled keyboard got the mainstream news source that says this?

Romney himself is saying it every time he vows to cut the size of government as he did when he mocked teachers, firefighters, and police. If you're too dim to understand that it's jobs that are cut when the size of government decreases, it's your problem, not mine.

Ron writes.... "I do give credit to Paul Ryan and the presidents deficit committee for at least trying to start the debate with some reasonably detailed plans"

Pure HORSE HOCKEY! Ryan was one of the 14 repub politicians who met secretly and pledged to vote against any bill that would help President Obama. They told each other at the meeting they had to act like Taliban, to use Taliban/insurgency tactics to keep Obama from serving a second term.

Reasonable debate? HORSE HOCKEY and BALDERDASH! Haruuummmmpppphhh!

President Obama/Biden 2012

By looking at this group of highly intelligent people, I have come to the conclusion that you all act like small children. Name calling and getting highly irate over nothing but words being tossed back and forth. I would like to see some of you people face to face and either beat the hell out of one another or crawl back into your holes cause you can't say it face to face. Dems or Repubs,who cares cause we are all gonna lose. Obama sucks and Mitt blows. Pick the lesser of two evils. Not the best man wins anymore!

My opinion is Mitt is waiting for the Dems to shoot themselve in the foot and I think they are missing two toes already. JMO

Good morning IR:

This morning on Morning Joe, the table of deep thinkers was pontificating that President Obama was pretty clearly upset about wealthy people.....wealthy people being defined as those who made more money than President Obama.

Maybe it's an age thing, but it seems to me President Obama has made it very clear that he includes himself in that group of people who can pay more taxes. On the other hand, maybe Morning Joe is having memory issues.

That said, if a candidate is too afraid to say that there really is a point at which wealth becomes not only obscene, but outright dangerous, I'd say say your little post here just might do that. Here you have a guy with so much money he can actually influence government policy.

There seems a lot more to say, but I just can't get past the one man, one vote thing on this subject. Yeah, you can have too much money when you can completely subvert entire nations.

Independent Redneck Va.

Right-Wing Billionaires Behind Mitt Romney

They're trying to buy a presidency - and they expect a big payoff on their investment

Great exposure Independent Redneck Va.

Keep it up. the more we expose these sugar Daddies, the more other will wake up. Not only that that, those are have been awaken for along time will now believe as evidenced by the poll yesterday revealing how much the Middle class lost and Ceo gained/s.

The Fed’s survey of consumer finances between 2007 and 2010, which is adjusted for inflation, showed median income fell 7.7% from $49,600 in 2007 to $45,800 in 2010 and that median net worth fell 38.8% from $126,400 in 2007 to $77,300 in 2010, approximately the level recorded in 1992.

The drop was concentrated in middle-class families. Noitice that was from last year

http://www.topix.com/forum/personal-finance/TS2R22D151SQKUDKB

That is what Cluess, Wooden, Mitt has in store for America. People need to be aware although the economy is still fragile President Obama has turned some of it around.

Obama/Biden 2012

Bev, Do you really think that posting every word of yours in CAPS adds any credibility ?

Be honest, those with any savings and net worth are seeing what Obama has done to diminish it. That is why the money that went to Obama in 2008 is now going to Romney in 2012.

David Walker ... if you use the words 'Wealthy People' you will confuse the Repubs. You must learn to use 'Job Creators' to define the Fat Cats instead.

I love how Bev states all the terrible accomplishments of Obama and then states . . .

"That is what Cluess, Wooden, Mitt has in store for America"

Romney is not trying to continue the failure - he, like most of america, are trying to get rid of the failure. aka Obama

jim-1455434 - just a clue because clearly you don't have one. Beverly is not posting in Caps -she is posting bold. Totally different. Most of us learned that in elementary school. You DID complete elementary school, right?

Bev - good post.

Obama/Biden 2012

jim-1455434

Bev, Do you really think that posting every word of yours in CAPS adds any credibility ?

she doesn't write in CAPS; she writes in bold but it's not the font style that matters; it's the message that does. It appears that jimmy is one of those who gets distracted by shiny objects but does not know what the object is - just that it's shiny.

Again, a quick check of numbers at the White House’s own website gives the lie to Obama claims of cutting deficits and bringing the budget under control: the last budget signed by George W. Bush and passed by the Democratic Congress (for fiscal year 2008) amounted to $2.77 trillion with a deficit of $459 billion. The next year’s budget (signed by Obama and again authorized by the Pelosi-Reid Congress) included a great deal of “emergency spending” for the Obama Stimulus Package and reached $3.52 trillion with a deficit of 1.4 trillion.

In other words, deficit spending more than tripled in Obama’s first year as president, and it’s remained at comparably crippling levels ever since.

Aaahhh, but making an error brings out the trolls to quickly defend her "shouting". Still, it is amazing that you libtards still seem to get the message.

Oh, and SeekingSanity, with two college diplomas and a CPA certificate under my belt, I have forgotten far more than you will ever know. Your weak attempt at arrogance is only exceeded by your history of name-calling and personal attacks.

Yes, because Obama doesn't get donations from billionaires or Wall Street AT ALL, right?

Feisty and team.......Omaba/Biden supporters, always a pleasure....May I jump in?

Repubs are left with the "pitiful last" in the line of candidates. Mittster Romney. Every republicon candidate held a lead over Romney and every one fell by the wayside because of their character flaws. Repubs knowing full well ahead of these flaws, and had no problem with Cain and Newster cheating on their wife and wives. Imagine electing a president who cheats on his wife, how well I remeber repubs said anyman who does that is not fit for office!... Bachmann lies nonstop and was caught making up medical story lie about some imaginary child getting sick from health shots. Ron Paul wasnts a pony. Pawlenty had no clue who he is because everyday as the louder christian rights spoke out, he kept going further right. Perry had 3 major flaws, 1 spaced out interviews, 2. more wacked out interviews, 3. I will remember when Perry remembers the third one. Santorum wants war on women and sex. No birth control and no sex before marriage...uh huh and anti everything that is normal everyday life. And that leaves them with the last straw...strawman... for the billionaires who own all the media and their signature man, "we just need someone to sign the documents,"(per Norquist). Down to the last straw....but holding the "Coroprations are people too" Mantra upheld by repub Un-Supreme court. With all the money available from around the world, they now can buy the president of their choice. Mittster is their last choice. The very last choice. The pitiful last.

Yes Mittster you can run and hide...but you can't drive with your dog on the roof of your car!

President Obama/Biden 2012

@ starsailing: I have similar but different view. It did take forever, but Mr. Romeny finally did secure enough votes for his primary. You say it was due to quite a few good reasons....I think it was one reason. He had the most money, to last the longest.

It's not as though the repub's liked Mitt. He just spent the most on his campaign. And we heard all the supportive endorsements, after the others dumped out: "Well, Mitt's the last man standing, so yea (big sigh) I'll endorse him, cause there's no one else left".

Harley Chic

Liberals conveniently don't count 2009 as Obama's first year. They say it is "unfair" to count it against Obama's record because it was governed by a budget passed during the Bush administration and that the stimulus bill and TARP II were one- time deals because of the recession. Never mind that Obama's administration spent all of the money in the budget as well as allocating all of the stimulus and TARP II funds or that a different administration might have done things differently (probably with better results). Because ignoring 2009 generates more favorable statistics for them, they simply do not use it.

You'll notice when Obama (or any Democrat for that matter) talks about job creation, they only go back for 27 months claiming that 4.3 million jobs were created. This is because if they count 2009, this number would drop to a mere 55,000. Which sounds better to you?

Rebel, dems did not put up any candidate after they found out he cheated on wife, You on the other hand...put forth Newtster who openly did it several times giving him the top choice for repub while saying it is wrong for everyone else...Hypocrite much!

Hey..its meeee.......I do feel sorry for repubs...I was not much of a fan of Reagan and his voodo economics, however, realizing his folly, he raised taxes 11 times to try and undo..the did! He also stated that unions have the right to use collective bargaining. He was appalled that his rich friends told him that they could use numerous tax loopholes and end up paying no taxes. So today's repubs will spout off Reagan's name gloriously and salute him while at the same time, anyone who agrees with his policies would not be let in the republican party. Colin Powell too....a man without a party because he was a regular republican. Repubs are now extreme rts due to the rich and their fear mongering ads. Studies show that conservatives when exposed to certain stimuli, use the part of the brain that makes them react to fear the situation. While dems when exposed to the same stimuli react with the part of the brain that reacts using logic and reasoning. Ergo........repub political ads use the heavy handed sounds and music to create stimuli of fear, cayouse, to round up people like sheep with their fear instincts kicking in. All kinds of studies on repub/dems brains online. Repubs need an Eisenhower again who warned the nation about people like tody's 1% taking over the country.....He was right...er...middle...but correct on his prediction of beware of the person who wraps himself in the flag carrying a bible......today the republican party.

Ronnie Reagan: increased the national debt by 189%, interest rate was 18% in during his presidency, unemployment 10.8% (higher than Obama), increased debt ceiling 19 times. Wanna be Reagan's and Tea Bangers are the LAST thing we need!!!

BTW:

GW Bush's vice president famously stated, "Deficits Don't Matter". Now, all of a sudden, every Republican has woken from their slumber to scream, "Deficits DO MATTER!!",

Bev: "Right-Wing Billionaires Behind Mitt RomneyThey're trying to buy a presidency - and they expect a big payoff on their investment".

Is this any different than the billions that left leaning unions steal from their members to support Democrats all the time? Are they trying to buy a presidency too? It always amazes me how those on the left never seem to be able to look at both sides and see that both of them are doing the same thing: yet its ok for lefties to do this but not ok for those on the right. What difference does it make where the money is coming from.....unions or rich corporations.....they both have lots of money.

jim - that's all you've got? I still outdo you and will continue to. Don't worry, maybe you'll catch up someday - but I doubt it!

Shekal... and reagan won a second term because the unemployment rate was at less than 8% and consistantly dropping. The interest rates were high to kill inflation and stagflation. He conned the soviets into bankruptcy. The best thing reagan did was to turn Americas attitude malaise of the 70's to one of unity and of being "can do".

To bad all obama wanted to do since the 2010 midterms was to campaign, blame, divide and promote his own brand of trickle down economics.

I would gladly take another reagan type, be they democrat, republican or independent over obama. BTW - Romney is not a "reagan"

Yep, shekel, when a dificit is a small fraction of GDP they don't matter, but do when they are a high fraction of GDP. Of course obama and company can't see this. To them, why worry!

Shekal, almost forgot to say that a lot of our current decline in unemployment is due more to people falling off the unemployment rolls because they fell off of extended unemployment or just stopped looking. Why not tell us what these numbers were with reagan and I am sure you would cite the BoL statistics to support them. If I recall correctly these numbers are called the U-6 unemployment numbers.

jim-1455434

Bev, Do you really think that posting every word of yours in CAPS adds any credibility ?

Be honest, those with any savings and net worth are seeing what Obama has done to diminish it. That is why the money that went to Obama in 2008 is now going to Romney in 2012.

Actually it's the so called J-O-B creator sitting plotting to wreck the economy in order to put their wooden puppet, Willard "the Myth" Romney in the WH to continue their sabotage off the backs of the middle and poor classes of people. You do know they pull Willard's string?

You said that you have forgotten more than Seeking Sanity with your educational accomplishments.

Tee Hee Hee Hee; obviously ☺. Apparently, you forget how to read and interpert data too. It's bolded not Capped.

No, no one is defending me. It's the truth they are defending which you certainly can't do.

Oh Bev, Glad to see you post something other than your usual racially oriented rant. But then again, I find it amusing that you libbies magically elevate your opinions to "truth".

Yes, indeed, I said "Caps" when I should have said "Bold". But of course, you actually knew what I was talking about anyway, didn't you ?

As for SeekingSanity, she appears to be a legend in her own mind. She normally runs a steady course of name-calling and hateful remarks, and she resents when I call her out for such.

You, Feasty and Sanity are all Chicagoans apparently which explains your "bow at the altar of Obama mentality". Obama, however, has failed to keep unemployment below 8% as promised, and has run up the national deficit rapidly while our country has NO BUDGET and no plan for the future under his "leadership" ... except to try the same things that did not work before. U.S. citizens are seeing their wealth slip away and Obama seems clueless about jump-starting the private sector.

At the end of the day, you are chasing a runaway train with no engineer at the wheel.

And left-wing billionaires behind Barack Obama:

George Kaiser, an Oklahoma billionaire, invested $400 million in Solyndra through an investment vehicle connected to his family foundation. Kaiser was a "bundler" for Obama's 2008 campaign, raising between $50,000 and $100,000 for the president, records show. He also made multiple visits to the White House in the months just before the company was granted a $535 million loan from the government. The company then went bankrupt, putting 1,100 employees out of work.

Corzine, MR. " I lost Billions and don't know where they went' is out bundling for Obama, again. Instead of being in jail or even under investigation, he's bundling for Obama. Isn't that sweet?

Rebel....Clinton scandals came out AFTER he started his 2nd term. You are mistaken on you hypocrisy claim. Repubs love Newt cheating on his wives and wanting open marriage more than they love Santorum, Bachmann, Perry, Paul, Paulenty, etc.

Kannin Repubs started the investing under Bush with Solyndra. See article from Was Post Sept 2011.

Does that prove the White House engaged in cronyism, shoveling cash toward a political ally? Not necessarily. Democrats have pointed out that Solyndra’s loan process was initiated by the Bush administration and that many key investors were Republicans. Still, there could have been other reasons the deal was hastened. As a former Clinton energy aide stressed to me, it was arguably a mistake to sell the loan guarantees as job-creating stimulus (the program was expanded as part of the 2009 stimulus bill). “It means you try to force huge amounts of money quickly through processes that aren’t quite ready yet,” the aide said. “It’d be better to have a calmer, steadier source of funding.”

2) Solyndra proves that energy-loan guarantees are a flop. Not exactly. The Energy Department’s loan-guarantee program, enacted in 2005 with bipartisan support, has backed nearly $38 billion in loans for 40 projects around the country. Solyndra represents just 1.3 percent of that portfolio — and, as yet, it’s the only loan that has soured. Other solar beneficiaries, such as SunPower and First Solar, are still going strong. Meanwhile, just a small fraction of loan guarantees go toward solar. The program’s biggest bet to date is an $8.33 billion loan guarantee for a nuclear plant down in Georgia. Improper political influence in the process is disturbing, but, at least so far, Solyndra appears an exception, not a rule. (That said, the GAO and others have pointed out potential pitfalls and the need for stricter oversight in the loan program.)

3) The government should leave energy R&D to the private sector. Actually, there’s reason to think the private market is drastically under-investing in new energy technology. As a new report from the American Energy Innovation Council lays out, the utility sector spends just 0.1 percent of its revenues on R&D — the average for U.S. industries is 3.5 percent. The electricity sector is heavily regulated and capital-intensive — power plants last for decades and turn over slowly — and hence tends to focus less on innovation. What’s more, many objectives that may be in the public interest, such as reducing carbon emissions, aren’t fully valued in the marketplace right now.

As such, the AEIC report concludes, “Energy innovation should be a higher national priority.” Right now, the federal government spends a middling amount on energy research (about $3 billion in 2009), compared with the sums lavished on the National Institutes of Health ($36.5 billion) or defense research ($77 billion). And the AEIC report recommends public support for all aspects of the innovation process, from basic research to pilot projects to helping companies commercialize their products. (Solyndra was in that last phase.)

4) Solar is a doomed industry. This view has been gaining popularity, but it’s not borne out by the numbers. Prices for solar photovoltaic modules continue to tumble, even as fossil-fuel prices rise. A June report by Ernst & Young suggests that large-scale solar could become cost-competitive within a decade, even without government support. Of course, grid operators still have to grapple with the fact that the sun doesn’t always shine, but storage technologies continue to improve — in July, a solar plant in Seville, Spain, achieved continuous 24-hour operation using molten salt storage. All told, some 24,000 MW worth of projects are in the pipeline in the United States, led by California. Those projects may not all get completed, but that’s a lot of growth underway.

5) It’s all China’s fault. This one is complicated. China does provide hefty subsidies to its solar industry. As Climate Progress’s Stephen Lacey details, the Chinese Development Bank offers cheap long-term loans to domestic manufacturers that dwarf anything Solyndra ever got. That allows Chinese solar companies to offer cutthroat prices and drive competitors out. And yet, as Westinghouse Solar CEO Barry Cinnamon explains, it wasn’t China that caused Solyndra to go belly-up — the company had invented a solar panel that didn’t use silicon, unlike its competitors, and foundered after silicon prices plummeted.

jim - clearly the "legend in your own mind" is you. But, whatever makes your day. I know it's all you've got!

Repubs started the investing under Bush with Solyndra. Wrong Starsailing. The Bush Administration Voted AGAINST the Solyndra loan when the Office of Management and Budget repeatedly questioned the wisdom of the loan. In one exchange, an Energy official wrote of "a major outstanding issue" -- namely, that Solyndra's numbers showed it would run out of cash in September 2011.

There was also concern about the high-risk nature of the project. Internally, the Office of Management and Budget wrote that "the risk rating for the project sponsor [Solyndra] … seems high." Outside analysts had warned for months that the company might not be a sound investment.

But the only thing that mattered to Obama was that Solyndra's chief investor, George Kaiser, was a bundler for Obama's 2008 campaign, gathering over $50000 in campaign contributions or him.

All he has to do then is stand and laugh at Odumbo. The whole country will have a good laugh with him.

Jerry40yeardemocrat - no one will be laughing at President Obama except the low information voters who think Romney is any kind of candidate. And, they'll be laughing more out of embarrassment at the really dismal candidate the GOP is fielding.

Obama/Biden 2012

SeekingSanity,

I like how Jerry40yeardemocrat tries to pass himself as a Democrat but uses words like "Odumbo."

I guess Romney is his guy: he pretends he is someone he's not.

Willard will run the clock out on himself, then he's going to have to pick a running mate (make or break moment), and meet the demands of the debate.

All that will be left will be the ads that begin with:

"For the last "x" months, Former Governor Mitt Romney and his supporters stated that "x" was the case.

It isn't, and never was." = Instant loss for Willard.

GOP = LOSER ...and beating 'em isn't required.

Obama will win because he has the votes from the Food Stampers in his hip pocket.

MR. Right...food stampers should vote for President Obama, because they remember how Bush and repubs put the need for them to be on food stamps. They know that Repubs have blocked every effort to help the economy.

Bin Ladens master plan he wrote down was to destroy the American economy. Just like Bin Laden 14 repubs met just a day after inaugeration and they pledged to vote against every bill that would help the economy just to make President Obama a one term president. Voting to kill the economy saying they had to act like the Taliban. Is that not treason? The same plan as Osama Bin Laden. ref: Richard Draper new book. Who pledged to be a economy terrorist? Ryan, Cantor, Gingrich, DeMint to name a few.

Is that post supposed to make any sort of sense?

It makes plenty of sense Ruken. Just not to liberals. But then MOST things that are common sense to normal people don't make sense to liberals.

It makes plenty of sense Ruken. Just not to liberals. But then MOST things that are common sense to normal people don't make sense to liberals.

So in other words, no.

Got it.

Damage123

WOW. I know my lefty friends here were disappointed that I was only on here briefly yesterday to leave two posts, but I DID peek in from time to time. And what a sight it was.

Brain Damage123

I was not on at all. I had a funeral to attend, my 89 year paternal old aunt died which leaves my 92 yr old dad and 83 year left out of 10 children. What was remarkable about our clan is that everyone there from young to old evoked President Obama's name. The fact that they including my deceased aunt got a chance to see the 1st Black President and how people like you are sooooo living in denial was discussed. My point is-- to paraphase President Obama-- "you cant solve the problem if you can't see it".

a) Eric Holder

b) Tryavon Martin

c) Rick Scott's FL voter purge

You, Brain Damage can't see thunder. Posting outrageous lies daily proves it. You need to stop kowtowing to the NRA, KOCHS, & ALEC!!!

Also, why bring up the same old warmed over hash daily. Shame on you!!!

Did you see where the typical democrat Joy Behar said she wanted Romney's house to burn down - Not very joyious of Joy !

Did you see where the typical democrat Joy Behar said she wanted Romney's house to burn down - Not very joyious of Joy !

Joy obviously wasn't thinking either, as Mitt has houses to spare.

Dont worry Bev - Holder is suing Florida to make sure your dead aunt can still vote for Obama -

well damage123..you have it pretty well figured out. Perfect examples of many of those on the left totally unhinged.

Oh, and beverly in chicago, try reading the COH and user agreement. Changing people's screen names can get you a suspension...not that you care....

Have a great day.

Beverly - your aunt had a good, long life. People like Damage (and I use the word people loosely when referring to him) are angry at the world. They clearly have serious problems and have to take them out on someone. He's better left ignored.

Sounds like you come from a great family. I'm sorry for your loss.

vol fan in chatt, tn - you're siding with Damage and you want to talk about unhinged! Please spare us all!

BoTheDog

Dont worry Bev - Holder is suing Florida to make sure your dead aunt can still vote for Obama -

you apparently have inside info on the voter fraud in FL. Care to share it? Your Republican friends will be happy with your proof that voter fraud exists in FL (or anywhere else in the country, for that matter) because they haven't been able to come up with any themselves.

Unemployment at start of Romney Mass Admin - - 8%

Unemployment when he left - - 4.7%

Deficit when he arrived - $3 billion

Surplus when he left -- $2 billion

Competency Matters

Romney 2012

Obama Tax Plan:

Current Income Tax Rate : 35% - Obama Plan: 39.6%

Current Income / Payroll : 37.4% - Obama Plan: 52.2%

Current Capital Gains Tax : 15% - Obama Plan: 28%

Current Dividends Tax : 15% - Obama Plan: 39.6%

Current Estate Tax Rate : 0 % - Obama Plan: 55%

All that plus no jobs is why he has already lost.

Source: Wall Street Journal

Current Income Tax Rate : 35% - Obama Plan: 39.6%

Current Income / Payroll : 37.4% - Obama Plan: 52.2%

Current Capital Gains Tax : 15% - Obama Plan: 28%

Current Dividends Tax : 15% - Obama Plan: 39.6%

Current Estate Tax Rate : 0 % - Obama Plan: 55%

All that plus no jobs is why he has already lost.

In other words, starve the beast. More failure supply-side economics.

Hows that "distribute the wealth" plan workin out for ya? :-)

You can only run to the wealth well for so long, before the well runs dry.

By continuing to use bad grammar and spelling, by continuing to attack the person rather that the message, by continuing to jeer and taunt, by continuing to slander through word, avatar, and inference,

Conservatives are only proving that what is said about them is true.

Hows that "distribute the wealth" plan workin out for ya? :-)

If you had any sort of knowledge into government whatsoever, you'd know that one of its fundamental tasks is to redistribute wealth.

So let's see you now need to research government and economics, should we find more things to add to the list?

Regan, Bush and Romney are totally into the concept of re-distributing the wealth, only problem being that their goal is to redistribute wealth out of the pockets of the 99% into the pockets of the 1%. When guys like John McCain don't know right off the top of their head how many homes they own, that pretty much tells me that the money well of the 1% is not about to go dry any time soon. It always cracks me up when conservatives make the claim that taxing the rich won't solve budget issues because the money is not there. Yeah right, how gullible do you think I am? I'm not stoopid enough to believe just anything.

Harley Chic,

The middle class is the golden goose that drives the economy. Even Henry Ford knew that he had to pay his workers well so they could afford to buy his cars and provide him with great wealth.

So once the middle class is completely crippled/destroyed who will buy the products needed to support the companies that make them?

To paraphrase someone I saw on TV; " I make 3,000 times the average salary but I have 3 cars in the family. I'm not going to buy 3000 cars."

The only thing that trickles down is crap.

@ Ruken,

In other words, starve the beast. More failure supply-side economics.

The "beast", as you call it, needs a healthy diet that's all, before it requires by-pass surgery!

If you had any sort of knowledge into government whatsoever, you'd know that one of its fundamental tasks is to redistribute wealth.

WHAT?! Easy there Ruke, that's crazy talk.

Ruken, I know that you are infinitely more intelligent than I am, and probably in the high income range due to that intelligence. But if the federal government sends money to states ear marked to hire policemen, firemen and teachers, who when the federal money runs out will be laid off.( happened here in Detroit twice already) Are those people really not working for the federal government?

Robin, if you aren't getting paid enough, is it because you are not worth it?

Why do you think the unions were shot down in Wisconsin? It's not rocket science, even a caveman liberal can figure it out.

Are those people really not working for the federal government?

There's a difference between "working for" and "where the money paying for your salary comes from".

Because if clients stop buying our products, people get laid off. Doesn't mean that they work for the clients.

Harley Chic,

Where do I say that I don't get paid enough and are you so insecure about yourself that you need to be such a rude witch?

You can clobber the middle class for just so long before that well runs dry. That's not rocket science either.

Amen, Jody---it is beyond me how the media has failed to scrutinize Romney. Where are the reports of what questions he's been asked and what answers, if any, he's given? Where are his tax returns? Where is an analysis of the job creation he did or didn't do at Bain?

Jody,

The clock is indeed running out. Only 75 days until the reunion show in Tampa.

Newt, Perry, Santorum, Bachmann, Paul even Cain will be there. Maybe Romney will have these new supporters all on the same page when they give their speeches. Or maybe not...

But according to tradition Romney will have to give his acceptance speech on his own.

Hope he is ready to tell the voters what is his PLAN for jobs, the Middle East, healthcare, immigration, education.

Gosh, Willard Romney giving an interview? Now that is funny. However, he can run but he can't hide.

Good morning Jody and friends,

Yesterday, Romney was asked a question by NBC's imbed Garrett Haake at the rope line, his response was "I don't want to talk about that now". Seems to me this would be the perfect time for NBC/MSNBC to keep asking those pesky impromptu questions. Romney does not get a pass on this, as we want to know, what he would be like if in the WH, would he hide behind a wall of officials regarding his actions a la Richard Nixon.

Steeler Fan-380417

Amen, Jody---it is beyond me how the media has failed to scrutinize Romney. Where are the reports of what questions he's been asked and what answers, if any, he's given? Where are his tax returns? Where is an analysis of the job creation he did or didn't do at Bain

Steeler Fan,

I am not astonished. As much as I love MSNBC , it may as well be MSNBainC. In the morning we have Moaning Joe and co-horts extolling the virtues of Bain Capitol and how it relates to Rob-mey's expertise. Actually, Mittens forte is corporate raiding. This exualtaion goes on until we get Martin Bashir, Chris Matthews, AL Sharpton, ED, Rachel and Lawerence O' Donell.

But, hey MSNBC can't be in conflict with what their sponsors want.

I'm so glad MSNBC is getting rid of that bloviating shrill, Dylan Ratigan. I would suggest MSNBC replace him with Dr. Michael Eric Dyson and give Martin Bashir another repeat time slot instead of giving Chris Matthews so many. In fact, my attonry girlfriend and I chuckled Chris mouth is loud enough to echo Both Martin Bashir and Dr Dyson are impressive and have a remarkable way of connecting with lot's of humouros examples to illustrate just how out-of-touch the Tea Baggers, the old, pale male, and dark skinned lawn jockey republicans are.

Job1: I disagree entirely. He can run AND he can hide. He has the press largely on his side and they'll softball him from here to November, with the occasional "real" question to show their bona fides. His strategy is smart. The Republicans completely control the debate on every issue and the Democrats have no earthly idea how to get out of the box they've allowed the Republicans to put them in. All Mitt has to do is say "Obamacare" and everyone freaks out. No matter that it's a Heritage Foundation and Republican Party creation; the idiots on Team Obama handed all that and a giant club to the Republicans and practically begged Mitch McConnell to beat them senseless with it.

Meanwhile, Team Obama remains clueless, hopeless, and adrift. I've been saying it for over a year: it never mattered who the Republicans ran against him; Obama has zero chance of re-election.

I have watched Presidential politics with great fascination since I was a (very) young boy watching Watergate unfold. In all that time, I have never seen a White House team more politically tone-deaf, more strategically incompetent, and more poorly organized than Obama's. He is definitively finished, and the Republicans are going to take the Senate and extend their lead in the House as well.

Frankly, I'll be surprised if the Democrats ever recover.

I'm so glad MSNBC is getting rid of that bloviating shrill, Dylan Ratigan.

Couldn't happen fast enough!

Gotta disagree with you on this one;

I would suggest MSNBC replace him with Dr. Michael Eric Dyson and give Martin Bashir another repeat time slot

I'll stick with getting Martin for two full hours...

MSNBC continues to flounder in the ratings. Of course, some of you who are not in touch with mainstream U.S.A. seem to go there for your daily talking points.

It is the most frustrating thing to watch Romney be "excused" by the media.

Feisty, definitely that is change for the good on MSNBC. I like Martin Bashir because it isn't about him, it's about fairness, in getting at the truth and Bashir isn't afraid to call a liar, a liar on air; he's not afraid to offend someone of either political persuasion. Amen for that.

Romney is smart not to disclose too much. Let nosey Americans (Liberals) continue to wonder.

Yea! Let's keep voters in the dark about who they are really voting for. Brilliant!

June 13, 2012

This will be a tight one, and my current Projection: (Currently the states that will play the biggest in November are Michigan, Ohio, Virginia and Wisconsin. However, if the election were held today, Obama would sweep Michigan, Ohio, Virginia and Wisconsin.

The key months for this race are going to be September and October. And as far as the debates, Romney may have a problem in this area.

For now, I’m still sticking with these numbers

Projected Winner Obama 297

Projected Loser Romney 241

Northstar: "Hope he is ready to tell the voters what is his PLAN for jobs, the Middle East, healthcare, immigration, education."

Northstar, I get the feeling it's the same as his campaign plan - running out the clock. Someone should probably clue Romney in at some point that the problem with running for President is that if you win, then you actually have to BE President for four years. And as former President Bush could no doubt tell him, "And it's hard work. I understand how hard it is".

I know Romney wants to win the election. I've yet to see any evidence that he has any idea what's going to happen after that. But I don't think running out the clock for four years is gonna be as easy as he apparently thinks it is.

Jack Mack: "All Mitt has to do is say "Obamacare" and everyone freaks out."

And all the media or the Democrats have to do is say "Romneycare" when he's finally forced to, ummm, Meet The Press and Face the Nation - without his own teleprompter and canned stump speech - and he'll be the one freaking out trying to explain why he was for it before he was against it. And he won't be able to hide from his own record and his history of questionable remarks once the real tv ad season starts, either.

By the way, I was a bit older than you during the Watergate hearings. And I agree it was a fascinating time in our history. But to suggest that this administration even remotely compares to that bunch of sneering, arrogant, "I'm above the law" bunch of criminals is just laughable.

JoAnne in PA, you may be right that Mitt will have a difficult time explaining his about-face on the healthcare mandate. It may not matter, as the Supreme Court seems quite likely to rule it unconstitutional.

To clarify, I didn't intend to compare the current White House team to Nixon's at all. Nixon presided over a gang of criminal monsters (by the way, this past Sunday's Woodward & Bernstein retrospective of the Nixon admin is well worth reading). Obama presides over a crop of total incompetents. Where Nixon's downfall was his vindictive, acid narcissism, Obama's downfall is his insular thinking, rejection of outsiders, and dependence on people who clearly aren't capable of rendering sound strategic advice. What they do have in common is that both administrations are examples of what I say is one of only two lessons in all of human history: pride goes before a fall. The Republicans may yet be served this lesson but it sure does seem to be taking a long time. It's good to have the press completely in the bag, while continuing to serve up the canard that the press tilts leftward.

In my opinion, Obama COULD have been a great President - truly, an historical figure - under some circumstances. Instead, he's been an epic failure and he'll go down in history as the guy who handed the country to its worst elements just as the crisis began its crescendo.

I built an electoral college map over at RealClearPolitics and by my reckoning Romney has 301 electoral college votes pretty well sewn up. It's very difficult for me to see a realistic path to an Obama victory. Looked at in simple and broad terms, absolutely no one who voted for McCain in 2008 is going to vote for Obama in 2012, and quite a few million people who voted for Obama in 2008 are definitely not going to vote for him again.

He should've announced in late 2010 that he wasn't going to run for another term, and given the Dems a chance to pull a rabbit out of the hat.

yeah let's get back to when the republcians ran things...you remember don't you? Started wars their own kids wouldn't go fight in, gave gramps near FREE VIAGRA FOR LIFE, cut taxes, increased spending, increased the debt and brough us the housoing bubble..no thanks

"...enjoy the carnage" Jason? Wow--I have never seen so many "patriotic" Americans taking so much glee in the destruction of their fellow citizens and their country.

"We have met the enemy and he is us!" Pogo by Walt Kelly

we have met the enemy and he's headed back to the peaceful land of Chicago.

peaceful land of Chicago.

As opposed to the peaceful land that is NYC?

I think it's hilarious that FR says Romney might be running out the clock when based on the current polls he is still behind in key states.

Check the scoreboard. Obama is still way ahead in electoral votes.

Obama 2012

Tnsevol,

But then there would not be any reason for this particular thread. :)

Except that the Dems won a special election in AZ last night. WI is last week's news.

Yes, Obama is ahead in the electoral map.

It's called "trend analysis" TNSEVOL ... they can see a trend of Obama's self destruction.

Jason In NYC

we have met the enemy and he's headed back to the peaceful land of Chicago

Pay attention to the news. Mittens is headed back to his fantasy world of elevators according to electoral votes. The very fact that the Teabaggers, the core constituent he is pandering to, tea baggers are going DOWN; and that proves it.

NorthstarDFL

Tnsevol,

Except that the Dems won a special election in AZ last night. WI is last week's news

Just wait until, the Joe Doe ivestigation, the FCC, and the factual J-0-B-S Numbers news cylces come out on June 28th to dominate the news cycle.

Recall Walker: Smoking gun proving Scott Walker is John Doe ready to be indicted (video

http://scottwalkerwatch.com/2012/06/04/recall-walker-smoking-gun-proving-scott-walker-is-john-doe-video/

Walker said the federal government had signed off on the positive jobs numbers and provided some information that supports Walker’s claim.

But his statement leaves out the fact federal officials publicly will not verify the numbers, and the fact that the emails released do not contain any numbers, let alone the ones cited.

http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2012/jun/01/scott-walker/gov-scott-walker-says-federal-officials-verified-h/

Did Walker win; I doubt it?

Wisconsin voters came out in support of the GOP, but exit polls show they still prefer Barack Obama.

Scott Walker Pulls a Palin and Stabs Romney In the Back.

Scott Walker pulled a Palin today on CBS’s Face the Nation,
correcting former Governor Mitt Romney on the message of the Wisconsin win and
then dissing the Republican Presidential nominee on his plan of making 2012 a
referendum on Obama.

WALKER: I know in my state our reforms allowed us to protect
firefighters, police officers, and teachers. That's not what I think of when I
think of big government.

http://www.politicususa.com/scott-walker-betrays-romney.html

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

Perhaps that's why the lying, college drop out Gov Scott Walker refuted Mittens claim

I guess we'll have to put up with Obama popping out and telling the country once again the economy is in great shape and "We're working hard every day to improve the jobs situation". Same song and dance as we've been hearing from this goof for 3.5 years now. At some point it gets to be a joke, and that probably happened 1.5 years ago. People/voters are getting tired of the 'all talk, no walk Obama'...... Results Barry..... How about some?

Or do we have to wait for Romney to take your job before that happens?

. Results Barry..... How about some?

Because he can just conjure laws out of thin air right?

Or did you just skip Government class?

Ahhhh...and what was the health care act a raspberry smoothy.