Evolution is a virtually indisputable fact. Whether evolution is an ongoing tableau of random events and mutations or whether it is God's mechanism for creation is not relevant here. What is relevant is that the effects of evolution in our politics is almost certain to bring destruction to our country.

The curious mind of man has moved us forward so fast and so far, we no longer think about fundamental issues. As a blindingly obvious example consider the use of a computer in a second-grade classroom. When was the Declaration of Independence signed? Enter the question in a search block, and voila! How many bushels of wheat in a wagon that measures 6' x 4' x 8'? Enter the question in a search block, and voila!

The "student" doesn't even have to know what the Declaration of Independence is. He doesn't even have to know how to spell declaration. The computer will fix his spelling. He doesn't have to know what a bushel is, or cubic feet, or how to convert bushels to cubic feet. Isn't our second-grader smart?

By the time our student has graduated college, he or she can punch buttons with the best of 'em. They still don't know what the Declaration of Independence is, they don't know what a bushel is, but they have a degree, and each and every day they move closer to taking total control of the country. They have no idea what they are doing.

They have absolutely no concept that there is a foundation upon which rests the "information" they routinely command. It is the evolution of the curious mind that has given us an array of pharmaceutical products that has virtually eliminated polio, small pox, and a host of other murderous diseases. Type into a search block, "What is polio?"

They have no idea that when they flip a switch and a room lights up, a coal miner had something to do with that. When they pop a pastry in the microwave, they have no idea that a farmer two-thousand miles away made that pastry possible. When they open a tap and water comes out, they have no idea it came through pipes laid more than a century earlier with shovels and back-breaking labor.

We are now dangerously close to being overwhelmed by a rising tide of ignorance, which we do not recognize, because these dolts can come up with information at the touch of a few buttons. They have no idea of the relevance of the information, because they have no idea of the complexity of the foundation from which they extracted this information.

Consider monumental idiot and slobbering sycophant Jim DeMint's remark to Jamie Dimon, an incompetent banker. DeMint was moved to observe that although Dimon had lost two-billion-dollars, well, goldurn it, the gummint did that every day or so. Memo to Senator DeMint: Government is NOT a business. So, who do you ask for advice on how to make things better in the financial world? Why Jamie Dimon of course. Please Jamie, come back and help us out.

That's like taking your car in for repair and having the mechanic return your car on a truck because it no longer runs. Then you pay the mechanic, and ask him to supervise the next mechanic who will return the car to operating condition.

And so we now have the spectacle of an American public that has no idea of the foundation on which this country is built, just about ready to elect Mitt Romney, a mechanic who knows only how to take wealth and put it in his pocket. Yesssirrreee! Second-graders rule.

Rupert Murdoch's WSJ places blame on the President?

Wow! I'm shocked. Next you'll tell me the sky is blue!

Ohio has recently repealed the same type of labor law as Wisconsin's. So Gov. Walker's recent victory should not be over-exaggerated.

In Ohio, state law allows ballot measures on the controversial labor law, and the law was repealed. But so such ballot measure is allowed. So the option for the labor was limited - so they had no other choices but the repeal option - and you know the rest of the story - majority of Wisconsin voters did not like the RECALL ITSELF, even when they disagreed with Walker's anti-labor laws.

And again, rather than anything substantive, his answer is to make a speech.

Well, it's not like he can pass legislation. Last I checked that's Congress' job.

Obama's back against the wall (again)

And again, rather than anything substantive, his answer is to make a speech.

Watch the Stock Market start to tank as soon as he opens his mouth.

Feisty---I have really wanted to believe the folks at FR were neutral but today's headline and posts are too much. Where is the scrutiny of Mitt Romney? Where is the calling out on his lies? Where are the calls for his tax returns? Where are the questions of why he doesn't take questions from journalists?

Again with another inflammatory headline eh... First Read?

____________________________________________

Now, THAT'S FUNNY!!!!!!!!

Nasty DumbFux call out FR for being "inflamatory".

LMFAO@U Nasty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I am not panicked in the least, this is a marathon, not a sprint and Team Obama has trained to go the distance!

They're off to a wonderful start trying to figure out the "resonating message" to run on...NOT.

Correction -

Wisconsin does not have the option of ballot measure on the controversial labor law - as in the case of Ohio. So the labor went ahead with the recall, which most voters opposedeven though many also disgreed with Walker' anti-labor law.

Shemp Mathews Wiffleball show had a couple of Hillaryous laughs last night. First, was a segment on the recent bad couple of weeks for the Barry campaign entitled “What, Me Panic?” with a picture of Barry next to it. Since Shemp was plagiarizing Mad Magazine’s Alfred E. Neuman line “What, Me Worry?”, he really should have used Damage123’s avatar picture of Barry.

Next, was dishonest injun, Lizzie Warren, where Shemp picked up on her populist attack the 1% line of BS asking her, if it’s only the 1% that’s against her, why is she tied with Scott Brown in the polls at about 47%, and where is the other 46% of his support coming from?? She danced around avoiding answering his question for a while trying to change the subject. No news there, and Shemp would normally give a lefty liberal Dem a free pass and move on. What was Hillaryous was that once she got done dancing around the question, he asked the exact same question again and she did the exact same dance for him all over again.

Must see TV.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

When I read a headline like this, I have no desire to even read the article. I know how badly slanted it's going to be for team Romney....

Consider monumental idiot and slobbering sycophant Jim DeMint's remark to Jamie Dimon, an incompetent banker. DeMint was moved to observe that although Dimon had lost two-billion-dollars, well, goldurn it, the gummint did that every day or so. Memo to Senator DeMint: Government is NOT a business. So, who do you ask for advice on how to make things better in the financial world? Why Jamie Dimon of course. Please Jamie, come back and help us out.

No the government is not a business.

Many more years of money printing from the world's big four central banks now looks destined to add to the $6 trillion already created since 2008 and may transform the relationship between the once fiercely-independent banks and governments.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/13/us-economy-qe-idUSBRE85C07220120613

If only our states could print their own money and then all would be good?

Fiscal problems are commonplace these days among local governments, but Chicago’s are particularly grim and far predate the Great Recession. Cook County treasurer Maria Pappas estimates that within the city of Chicago, there’s a stunning $63,525 in total local government liabilities per household. Not all of this is city debt; the region’s byzantine political structure includes many layers of government, including hundreds of local taxing districts. But pensions for city workers alone are $12 billion underfunded. If benefits aren’t reduced, the city will have to increase its contributions to the pension fund by $710 million a year for the next 50 years, according to the Civic Federation. Chicago’s annual budget, too, has been structurally out of balance, running an annual deficit of about $650 million in recent years.

http://city-journal.com/2012/22_2_chicago.html

Watch the Stock Market start to tank as soon as he opens his mouth.

Ah, yes, TexasT...if the market doesn't do well today it is OBVIOUSLY because of the President's speech.

Right.

Oh gosh, I cannot wait to hear what the teleprompter has to say about the economy....but can we get someone else to read it?

Sophia Vergara or maybe Lindsay Lohan?

,'-D

Joe in Albany -- I do blame the intransigence Republicans for stalling the economy. They are stuck on stupid. The fact is their "job bills" are anything but. That's my opinion. One opinion is as good as any other.

Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner gave this response to a question about all the money Wall Street is giving Romney: “I can't really speculate on their motives, but I suspect it's because they believe that they are more likely to get a more favorable hearing in terms of relaxing these reforms if the Republicans have a stronger hand in Washington. I think it's straightforward.”

Ironically, Wall Street usually leans in favor of the Democrats. I guess demonizing Big Business wasn't such a good idea politically, no?

To: Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL and friends.

Again with another inflammatory headline eh... First Read?

Good Morning my LIB friends. I'm not trying to annoy you but when iis it that you agree with anything that points to the President not doing so good.

President Obama is against the WALL for now. Why can't you accept that.

I guess I have to hear another speech to listens with the AHHHHHHHH and UHHHHHHH and AHHHHH, does he not hear himself?

The only ones who are panicked are the half-assed journalists trying to spin Willard into a credible candidate!

Which will make them complicit in hoisting Willards candidacy!....

Willard ignores them, lies, refuses to answer questions, and still journalists think he's just great!

....Top of the mornin' to you Feisty!

When I read a headline like this, I have no desire to even read the article. I know how badly slanted it's going to be for team Romney....

Lyn, when you lean to the far left, the straight-forward facts do appear to be slanted. I understand. Grab a cup of coffee and shake it off. Have a great morning.

Oh I see. No more kudos for Todd, Murray, Domenico, et. al. ROFLMAO. My how quickly the LWNJs turn and eat their young.

I actually feel sorry for the President, but that doesn't mean I'm voting for him... he's had a rough week!

FT: "Here’s the thing about Obama’s speeches, though: This appears to be his team’s only play sometimes. They’ve worked in the past, of course. But the question becomes: If you continually give a speech when your back is against the wall, does it inevitably have less of an impact?"

________________________________________________

Now THAT'S EVEN FUNNIER than Nasty DumbFux calling FR "inflamatory"!!!!!

Looks like FR is finally catching on to the fact that a wonderful Barry speech is just a lot of hot air that solves NONE of the nation's problems.

All is not well on Planet Liberal.

Gosh, I can't wait until Willard the empty suit has to debate President Obama.

Steeler Fan asked:

"Where is the scrutiny of Mitt Romney?"

There are several separate issues on this. First, Sarah Romney is simply refusing to answer questions that are too tough. Secondly, media types don't know enough about Romney's world to ask tough questions. (Can you imagine David Corn or Howard Fineman, or even better, Lawrence O'Donnell hitting Romney with some serious shots?) Third, the media are corporate-owned and they do not want to risk pissing off a guy who has a chance of winning in November.

However, there are debates coming. For virtually his entire Presidency, the right-wing has underestimated President Obama. Most of the public - and that includes the press - thinks that what Romney did at Bain Capital is something akin to calculus and theoretical physics. That's BS. It's plain, simple arithmetic. President Obama gets this stuff. His research staff knows all the in's and out's of Romney's years as Governor in Massachusetts, and his Olympics "success".

I won't predict the outcome of the election, but I will predict the outcome of the debates. President Obama will puree Mitt Romney.

Gosh, I can't wait until Willard the empty suit has to debate President Obama.

At this point he might be better off not doing it. Obama would slaughter him in a debate, and he is doing surprisingly well just repeating "Obama is bad" rhetoric.

But yes, if it does happen I will very much enjoy watching it.

@Lady Tom -- You left out his main jobs -- fund raising and golf.

Gosh, I can't wait until Willard the empty suit has to debate President Obama.

Me neither, Job 1. When Governor Romney destroys President Obama in the public debate it will be eerily similar to Reagan running circles around Jimmy Carter in his debates. And the "neck and neck" polls will shift away from the President. History has a strange way of repeating itself. I doubt you were old enough to remember those but hey maybe someone has loaded them up to YouTube.

Nah -- nothin' to worry about.

New claims for unemployment benefits rose to 386,000 last week from an upwardly revised 380,000 the week prior. Economists had been expecting claims to fall to 375,000 from a previously reported 377,000.

Is Romney pro-business?

Romney is against regulations, for sure. But better regulations can help stabilize the market, such as Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, enacted during the Great Depression to put a wall between commercial banking and investment (speculative) banking. This law had worked to stabilize the market until GOP - controlled Congress repealed it in 1999.

What happened after the repeal? This repeal is partly responsible for this current financial meltdown - which the Glass Steagall was designed to prevent.

Who has benefitted from this meltdown? Vulture capitalists such as Romney. Well then, everybdy is hurt by the recession, only Romney and his fellow vultures have benefitted -

He is for melt-down - which has hurt many business but has given him a lot of oppotunities as a vulture.

Then I guess he is pro-business after all - his own business fortune at the cost of all others

Looks like the FR lefty liberals are all pinning their hopes for Barry's re-election on the debates four months from now. Yeah, unlike 2008, I guess it sucks to have to try to support Barry based on him having an actual record.

Me neither, Job 1. When Governor Romney destroys President Obama in the public debate it will be eerily similar to Reagan running circles around Jimmy Carter in his debates.

"Destroying" President Obama would involve Romney actually having to use specifics, something that moron is incapable of doing.

I don't see our President fighting back enough against his rivals. I know, he's got a Country to run and an International World to contend with, but it's time for him to get tough and kick some butt. He's going to get out spent by his HATERS, but he's got so much more going for him that it will more than make up for any monetary shortfall.

California Tom, last I heard Biden had borrowed O's cape and tights for a little evening hanky-panky.

This is simply too precious ..... Obama wants to change the narrative ! But of course he does !! He is still trying to dislodge his foot from his mouth with that "private sector is doing fine" brain cramp. So what is his plan of action ? Why Obama will give us yet another "major speech".

Mr. President, talk, talk, talk is what you have been doing for years ! "Laser-like vision" on jobs ? No. "Shovel-ready jobs" ? You're shoveling it Mr. President ... but it isn't JOBS !

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Turbo Tax Timmy says he will not speculate on why Wall Street is giving so much money to Romney ...... right before he IMMEDIATELY CONTRADICTS HIMSELF and speculates on why he thinks this is happening.

Yes, the Obama administration reminds me of a dog running around in tight circles desperately trying to catch its own tail ..... and wondering why it hasn't happened !

Obama is clueless !!

Feisty Redhead

Again with another inflammatory headline eh... First Read?

It's been obvious for four years that Chuck Todd has an axe to grind with the president, ever since he tried to start a nontroversy about Obama supposedly flip-flopping on Iraq simply because Obama had said he would listen to the commanders on the ground when considering a course of action.

Todd's notroversy fizzled, and Obama made good on his promise to end the Iraq war. That might make Todd's antipathy even more intense. He seems to believe what Limbaugh said openly about wanting Obama to fail.

Most of the problems that many people feel everyday are not problems that the president should have to be focused on but has to be at this point.

Feisty is absolutely correct that First Read and a host of other sites seem to be painting a doom and gloom picture of late. The simple fact is that the president and the democrats can do only do so much before the republicans try to shut them down and they have been effective many times. The cost of that effectiveness is at the expense of the average middle/lower class person struggling to make ends meet. The president has made something like 17 different changes to laws to help small business. Small businesses are the ones employing most of the middle class in the country. Obama is doing what needs to be done in that area.

But BACKHOUSE hit on the larger problem in his comment (#1.10). When you have a country such as ours with 50 states that have the ability to govern the way they see fit (within certain parameters as outlined by federal law), the country takes on a different look. Individual states have cut the jobs of teachers, police, fire and administrative staffs trying to balance budgets. Many times these job loses didn't make the difference and more jobs were later cut again. What governors and state legislators seemingly fail to recognize is that when a job is cut they aren't really saving as much money as they think they would. When you average in the cost of unemployment, Medicaid and social service programs that the newly unemployed receive, it probably isn't much different from the average pay the person was earning. But the real difference is that the individual person doesn't have the income to make purchases. Purchases keep others employed. Purchases increase tax revenue. Purchases keep homes from being foreclosed. It is a vicious circle that far to many states have become embroiled. In turn, the country looks bad and the president who had nothing to do with it, takes the blame.

We need a president with a clear vision and President Obama is the best choice. NitWitMitt seems to be unavailable to the press about the real issues. As president, you don't have that luxury. Without that luxury NitWitMitt is toast and so would be our country.

Well, it's not like he can pass legislation. Last I checked that's Congress' job.

So, can we infer from your comment that it is your belief that making a speech is all that the President can do?

So, can we infer from your comment that it is your belief that making a speech is all that the President can do?

I don't see where you get that inference. The President can and has issued executive orders where he can. He has proposed legislation to Congress (which is summarily rejected).

What more would you like? I'll wait for you to call the mothership for a response.

@Jim -- As a result of the foot in mouth, Obama had to come to a screeching halt. Thus accounting for the noses of Feisty, Lady Tom, Beverly, Amy, Ruken, Pigotry, Lady David, Job1, et. al dripping in brown fecal matter. LMAO>

Aww Ben, you mad?

A liberal website "turning" on a very liberal President Obama ?

As the famous Johnny Carson would quip ....... "How quick they turn !" LOL !! Obama has EARNED it.

I do enjoy watching all the liberals squirm. If elections were held now, Trump would even win...Ha ha

Why do Obama's supporters think his debate performance will be a game changer? He lost almost every debate in the primaries in 2008 such that SNL actually had a sketch ridiculing the soft ball questions he was being asked in comparison to Hillary Clinton.

In the general he at best won one and the other two were ties. This against a very poor opponent.

Romney performed adequately at worst in the numerous debates in the Republican primary, being questioned by moderators that were by no means sympathetic.

I don't understand your confidence.

Kris Jansing is trying to quasi-restrain her hope that Romney has his own gaffe so the President can catch up.

Oh man, MSN-BS and these blogs are so my comedy injection for the morning. You guys rock!

I don't see where you get that inference.

If I can't make that inference, then Da Noid's original comment is non sequitur, is it not?

This morning I watched a news story about dropping gas prices. The journalist pulled a long face through the whole story and used that "this is so tragic" voice they usually reserve for mass shootings. I almost started laughing when the journalist ascribed the reason for falling gas prices to people in Europe and China not going on "extended vacations." It's all about supply and demand, she intoned, demand is down so prices fall - a mixed blessing.

Wasn't it just last month the sky was falling because gas prices were up? And this was all somehow President Obama's fault?

Oh to the contrary David (oops Lady David). I love and respect the female gender. I just believe it is disingenuous of women masquerading as men on here and then calling for honesty from others. Your analogy of my feelings are way off the mark as you try to deflect the issue I have. Nice try though.

Need further proof Willard is out of gas?

Must be pretty desperate to have to plagiarize an ad your opponent used 4 years ago;

When the Republican National Committee released a web video hours after President Barack Obama's "the private sector is doing fine" comment last Friday, it got plenty of attention for closely mirroring a 2008 ad that the Obama campaign ad ran against Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz).

But the Romney campaign released a 30-second television spot on Thursday morning that was a mirror image of the 2008 Obama ad, just with different words and a different politician saying something unfortunate.

In 2008, the Obama ad quoted McCain saying that "the fundamentals of our economy are strong," and ended with: "How can John McCain fix our economy if he doesn't understand it's broken?"

The Romney ad quotes Obama saying "the private sector is doing fine," and ends with: "How can President Obama fix our economy if he doesn't understand it's broken?"

The Romney campaign even used the same music.

Notably, the RNC web video said Obama "doesn't understand what's broken" with the economy, while the Romney campaign chose to say that the economy itself is broken.

Watch all the ads side by side here.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/14/mitt-romney-doing-fine-ad_n_1596026.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

Wonder why 5 months out, the Team Willard is out of ideas & still out of touch?

There will be no recovery with obama in the White House! The guy's too thin skinned and fixated on his class warfare theme to get anything accomplished! He still thinks that since he did nothing and got a Nobel Prize, he could do the same thing as POTUS! Wrong!

We need to clean house and the first step is to send him back to Chicago and then get the Republicans and Democrats talking again. I think the Republicans will also control the Senate after the elections, so the cooperation between Congress and Romney will be substantially better than what Barry has ever achieved!

Romney/Rubio 2012

Wasn't it just last month the sky was falling because gas prices were up? And this was all somehow President Obama's fault?

Funny I thought it was all due to speculators. Didn't the Administration launch another investigation? Are they speculating it down now?

It's all about supply and demand, she intoned, demand is down so prices fall - a mixed blessing.

And it's a mixed blessing because the reason is less demand, meaning there are less people working and not because there is greater supply.

I love and respect the female gender.

It's clearly a one-way relationship.

June 14^th HAPPY FLAG DAY

Each time I look at that flag, I'm reminded that our destiny is stitched together like those fifty stars and those thirteen stripes. No one built this country on their own. This Nation is great because we built it together. This Nation is great because we worked as a team. This Nation is great because we get each other’s backs. And if we hold fast to that truth, in this moment of trial, there is no challenge too great; no mission too hard. As long as we’re joined in common purpose, as long as we maintain our common resolve, our journey moves forward, our future is hopeful, and the state of our Union will always be strong."

President Barack Obama

State of the Union

January 24^th, 2012

It is almost funny to read the far righters on this site gloating at economic bad news - almost - but not really. They are so eager for this President to fail they fit right in with the Congressional GOP. What they don't realize is that we would be in MUCH worse shape had McCain/Palin (there is no trouble with the US economy) won. And, should Mitt win (which he won't) the country would quickly go into a depression.

We are fortunate to have a President who keeps working to improve the country - even though the GOP is working against him. Their attitude - to h**l with the country as long as it helps the GOP. How unAmerican - how treasonous- how Republican.

Gingerbread Mamma - too bad the GOP believes just the opposite of what President Obama said. Thanks for reminding us!

Obama/Biden 2012

Obama is set to deliver a major speech on the economy, again. Just like every other speech on the economy Obama will have nothing to offer in the way of solutions, but you can expect plenty of excuses and the never ending blame Bush mantra that defines his presidency. To bad blame and excuses weren't what was needed to resurrect the economy, because Obama would have had it roaring in his first month in office.

Obama campaigned in 2008 on what he would do to fix the economy, and he gave timelines. Obama came into office with the Democrats in control of both houses, and they passed everything Obama said was needed to keep unemployment under 8% and get the economy growing. None of Obama's policies have worked. Obama has failed, unless you are a fan of seeing one president add more to our national debt in one term then any previous president has in two terms.

The blame game is getting old, but it seems that is all Obama has to offer. Endless excuses have solved nothing, and Obama has replaced yes we can with why we couldn't. True leaders overcome the obstacles, they do not make excuses for why they couldn't. Obama claims electing Romney will return the country to the failed policies of the past, but re-electing Obama would be continuing the failed policies of the present. If Obama had a record to run on, he would.

Just like every other speech on the economy Obama will have nothing to offer in the way of solutions

Then you're listening to the wrong speeches. Every SOTU for example, was full of comprehensive lists of proposals that he would put before Congress (and did). What happened to those proposals I wonder?

The blame game is getting old

No, the only thing getting old is weak-minded drones repeating rhetoric they heard like it's some kind of fact.

It will be interesting to hear Obama stick out his chin and carefully parse his words, make outlandish claims of success while simultaneously blaming others for his failures, call for more spending, etc. In other words, more of the same BS from him attempting to defend the indefensible.

Hey Obama speechwriters, here's a good paragraph for you to drop in to today's speech:

"When I return to Washington tomorrow, I'm going over to Capitol Hill to talk to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. And I'm going to demand that he stop talking about boxing anecdotes on the floor, and bring these House bills up for a vote. And if they fail in vote, so be it, because this will open up the door to get these items discussed and negotiated in a two-chamber committee. We need to make progress on kick-starting this economy, and I'm sick of the blame game because it ultimately is hurting you, the People."

Ah, one can dream, cant he?

Alan #1.51:

Exactly what I was thinking. The libs are delusional if they think obama will prevail in the debates. After all, he will be without his trusty telepromptor. And we all know how that's going to affect his (non)responses.

Also libs, let's all demand Romney to reveal his tax returns just as soon as we see obama's sequestered college transcripts.

By your own logic then Amy, dropping prices would be something he should take no credit for ?

Be honest, Obama has been anti-drilling in the Gulf, he halted the Keystone Pipeline even after the Nebraska Governor had approved an alternate route and he has wasted millions of taxpayer dollars on failed "green companies" like Solyndra. He also hates coal as an abundant energy source.

None of this shows a good energy policy for American business.

Jim,

A very liberal POTUS??? Not so much. He's more a moderate democrat.

Everyone,

Gaffe this. What a bunch of baloney. Polls, mispeaks, speeches, dogs on roofs, dogs on plates, teleprompters, insulted cookies, pleeted jeans, does any of this matter???

I mean, I am WAY too young to be this disenfranchized. Where is the conversation we deserve? Where are the solutions that will keep my generation from inheriting one gigantic @!$%# burger?

Here are MY questions for the candidates...

1. Mr. Romney, in light of the austerity measures being taken in Europe, which have contributed to a double dip recession, why do you feel drastic cuts in our current economy would create jobs or speed the recovery?

2. Mr. Obama, why haven't you taken measures to revoke MFN status of China in light of their currency manipulation and unfair tariff rates? Would this not lead to greater restrictions in their manufactoring market and bring jobs back to the U.S?

3. Both candidates, seeing as we have a lack of revenue, and as evidenced over the past 30 years trickle down economics have not worked, how do you propose we reform the tax code, and how are you planning on getting such a measure through congress?

4. Mr. Romney, you claim you want healthcare in the hands of the states, but you haven't articulated why or how that is any different, or how the logistics of that will work in light of healthcare being interstate commerce. Can you explain please?

5. Mr. Obama, NDAA has some serious Constitutional conflicts, and you signed it with reservation. How do you propose to keep the executive branch in check and protect the civil rights of citizens with such a drastic statute in place?

6. Both candidates, in light of Citizen's United and Buckley v Valeo, we've seen a massive influx of money, be it private, corporate, or from non-profits, into our political system. Do you feel this is appropriate, and if so, why?

I could continue for hours, but what's the point, nobody has any answers.

He also hates coal as an abundant energy source.

You really have no clue how dirty coal is, do you?

Ruken - it's not a matter of them not KNOWING how dirty coal is, they just don't CARE!

A very liberal POTUS??? Not so much. He's more a moderate democrat.

sorry Sarah, Obama has NEVER been a moderate! He may pretend to be one during election mode, but he really can't hide the fact that he's a closet liberal and under the direction of a devout socialist - George Soros!

It's been a bad month for obama, and a horrible 3+ years for America! Our drift into a depression won't stop until Barry's reign of ineptitude has finished!

The author concludes “The pitcher’s failure to throw strikes this late in the game is not a consequence of what happened in the first three innings. It is because he is throwing the wrong pitches.”

Interesting, the WSJ has finally realized their base is the low-information crowd, and to illustrate their bash-Obama scenarios, they are forced to compare running the American economic engine to a game of baseball. I do declare, I simply had no ideer that juggling unemployment, debt, deficits, stock markets, austerity and Global markets could all be solved by simply hitting a Grand Slam.

Perhaps the GOP/TP are right; voter suppression should be enacted, but based upon IQ vs. Party affiliation. It may help avoid 'foul ball' op-ed pieces written by 'strike-out' authors.

Hey Obama speechwriters, here's a good paragraph for you to drop in to today's speech:

"When I return to Washington tomorrow, I'm going over to Capitol Hill to talk to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. And I'm going to demand that he stop talking about boxing anecdotes on the floor, and bring these House bills up for a vote. And if they fail in vote, so be it, because this will open up the door to get these items discussed and negotiated in a two-chamber committee. We need to make progress on kick-starting this economy, and I'm sick of the blame game because it ultimately is hurting you, the People."

I would like to add that Joe Biden is the President of the senate and should be helping move along the agenda of passing new legislation for the good of our country. What is he doing?

President Obama and VP Biden has shown no leadership...just inflated progress reports and blame bush....

Ben,

Why is it disengenuous for women to masquarade as men on here? Who cares? It's not like biological sex has anything to do with intellect. Even if they're calling from honesty for others, they aren't calling for them to be honest about their gender, but their thoughts.

Did I miss something?

"Damn you, MSN, for printing an accurate, truthful headline to this article."

Signed,

All of the angry First Read lib regulars.

Hilarious!!!

He also hates coal as an abundant energy source.

It must have missed the notice of Conservatives everywhere, but Barack Obama who they believe to be some sort of nearly omnipotent Antichrist isn't killing coal plants, it's the invisible hand of the free market.

Cheap natural gas is doing in King Coal. It's that simple.

I for one would love to hear ahead of time......what all the Liberal posters on this site will say "if" Mr Romney takes the debate to Mr. Obama and comes out of it as the winner, or if its a wash? Its easy to say after the fact. But i would love to see the reasons before hand just to be sure I understand your reasoning

Barry,

Right... He's just waiting for his second term to unleash his evil, pinko plan. Because that makes sense. I mean, why take the chance when you have it, when you can wait to MAYBE get re-elected?

I mean, we all know, as soon as Nov 12 rolls around we'll be forced to drive hybrids, eat aborted fetuses, and all rich people will be pushed out of planes over churches, effectively being used as bombs..

You know, when I was kid, I'd hide in my sister's closet and jump out, yelling "BOO", hoping to scare her. All I have to say to you now is...

OBAMA!!!

Nonstop, breathless, wide-eyed pontificating about Democrats supposedly being in a panic are providing me with endless amusement. It's being driven by nothing other than the need to fill a 24/7 news cycle at a time of year when very little is actually happening.

In reality the story is that the MSM has little choice to focus on the Obama campaign because Mitt Romney refuses to say anything of any significance. That can't last forever, especially with buses and planes full of reporters hungry to make their names with high-impact coverage. While there's no question the Romney campaign is anxious to run out the clock it is inevitable that the strategy will fail.

First Read posts current relevant political stories, yet carrot top fumes when an 'inflammatory' story shows up? Define 'inflammatory' carrot top? The truth hurts doesn't it? Hurts worse than a too tight redwig, lol!

I mean, we all know, as soon as Nov 12 rolls around we'll be forced to drive hybrids, eat aborted fetuses, and all rich people will be pushed out of planes over churches, effectively being used as bombs..

I knew it!!!!!

BTW what is the definition of rich to avoid the plane ride?

Mr. Obama to change his "theme"....eh ?

Yep, that "Forward" thingy sure has not worked since everything he has indicated thus far is that he will continue with his 2008 failed campaign promises.

Now Mr. Obama is going to "promise" a rosy future for Main Street America with more rhetoric and gibberish. Maybe he will not screw up his lines from the teleprompter in future camapaign stomps....nah.....that would be impossible. And of course, Mr. Biden is doing such a good job on the campaign trail as well. Sheeesh, he even thinks that plants will grow without sun, water, or soil. And this guy is next in line to be Predsident if something happened to Mr. Obama.

Too bad he is continuing to throw his voter base under the ObamaWagon. Wow, the street sure is getting cluttered.

Alan,

Anyone who works in the private sector, will be labled as "rich". Sorry.

Feisty Redhead

The day he called President Obama a liar on Morning Joke was the day I lost all respect for Chuckie T!

I guess I missed that little incident. What was that about? As far as I know, Obama has never said anything close to the malicious lies Romney tells, like the one about how Obama was secretly plotting to impose a state religion of secularism -- "according to reports" that Romney claims he read. But journalists seem to think that getting away with lies merely shows how clever Romney is.

So, Obama thinks that flapping his gums is going to be a substitute for experience and actual leadership?

Let's re-examine some of our Dear Leader's past spouting:

“The problem is, is that the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion for the first 42 presidents – #43 added $4 trillion by his lonesome, so that we now have over $9 trillion of debt that we are going to have to pay back — $30,000 for every man, woman and child. That’s irresponsible. It’s unpatriotic.”.

-Barak Hussein Obama

“today I’m pledging to cut the deficit we inherited in half by the end of my first term in office. This will not be easy. It will require us to make difficult decisions and face challenges we’ve long neglected. But I refuse to leave our children with a debt that they cannot repay — and that means taking responsibility right now, in this administration, for getting our spending under control.”

-Barak Hussein Obama

Failed POTUS

I don't put allot of stock in a reporters comments they exist for their own personal gratification and maybe a few others.

I put stock in the real feel the people who these Politicians actually effect and allot of people on both sides who have the common sense and education to realize that the money trail can work both sides of the isle aren't to happy about what they are seeing. Lets face it Democrats have money too.

I personally believe the deciding factor will be the debates and i really don't see Romney being successful he's to wishy washy and cannot control his thought process when left alone.

I believe we as Democrats need to focus more on taking back the house lets face it the Presidency is a show job.Romney loves a show and he will do anything to look good including voting with the Democrats on legislation that's why the hatchets in the Republican Party were afraid to begin with.

Steeler- Feisty---I have really wanted to believe the folks at FR were neutral

This just may be the funniest thing I have ever read here.

"...evil pinko plan." hahahaha. Good one. Right now an evil pinko plan looks pretty good to me as long as it dosen't involve giving any more power to the GOP.

Is anyone else getting tired of the phrase "job creators" or is it just me? For 30 years the GOP has been raising taxes, increasing the size of government and running up the national debt while enriching those who are already richer than Midas all while decimating the middle-class.

Trickle down economics has been shown over and over again to be a myth. When the going gets tough (for the rest of us) the rich get richer and hold onto their millions. Sheesh. And a lot of you folks who are suffering are still voting GOP! Incredible. Absolutely incredible. Lincoln is rolling over in his grave.

Saint Reagan raised taxes 11 freakin' times. GBI raised taxes despite his "read my lips" promise to the faithful. GBII created so many unfunded mandates, not to mention two unfunded wars, he nearly bankrupted the country and this is all President Obama's fault how?

The only other Democratic President in the last 30 years, Bill Clinton, left the American people a SURPLUS when he left office. Yet somehow the shaky economy is somehow the new guy's fault.

Welcome to the bizarre world of American politics where the guilty dog is always the first to bark.

Yap, yap, yap, that's the GOP herding you to the poor house while blaming the Democrats all the way.

Job creators? The biggest lie from the biggest liars in American History.

GOP Bizarro World uber alles!

Obama/Biden 2012

Skip,

I don't get it either. You can bait the Islamaphobes all you want by referring to the POTUS by his middle name, but call a rich person anything besides a "job creator" and it's like you dropped the n-bomb at an NAACP conference.

Who'd a thunk?

Not A Socialist - and not too bright either! President Obama wiped the floor with McCain in the debates and will do the same with Mitt. Didn't have a teleprompter then and won't need one this time. Mitt, on the other hand, can't talk without his handlers coaching him. Do you think he'll write notes on his palm like Palin? Those hands aren't big enough for all the notes Mitt will need!

Obama/Biden 2012

Fool:

Ironically, Wall Street usually leans in favor of the Democrats.

Wall Street always donate to both political parties to buy off whoever wins. They seem angry that their donations haven't purchased President Obama.

I guess demonizing Big Business wasn't such a good idea politically, no?

The Democrats never demonized Big Business. Despite your pretenses, I'm sure you know, Fool, that Wall Street has been doing just fine since Obama took office. But Democrats don't kiss up to arrogant CEO's like Jamie Diamon the way Republicans did in that hearing yesterday. And they don't apologize to corporations who causeenormous environmental disasters the way "Smokey Joe" Barton (R. Texas) cravenly apologized to BP for the mean treatment they were getting from the Democrats.

Feisty - You all can rile up the stuck on stupid crowd, they sure seem to love them some First Read these days...

Yes, they riled you up.

Sarah,

You are too funny. I always enjoy your posts. Keep up the good work.

"Job creators", sheesh, what a lot of nonsense.

Obama/Biden 2012

Feisty its time for you to stop dodging my question: How are you almost always the first person to post on the political articles every single day? You must live a very exciting life!

Seeking Sanity:

In order to win a debate, you have to present substance and fact. Obama has nothing to present except his (undeniable) failed policies. He can't very well blame Bush, although he is still trying desperately to do so. The platform he used in the 2008 debates will not work now and your point is moot. He has nothing positive to run on, and as far as the debates are concerned, he is in DEEP trouble.

Also, bringing up McCain and Palin is comical. That was a lifetime ago, when everyone was drunk on hope and change. Four years later and all we have is a big hangover and an empty wallet (except for Barry and Michelle, who continue to party on).

Joe HAHAHA

Today’s WSJ has an op-ed piece that explores the continuing bad economy under Barry and analyzes the “recovery” in comparison to historical norms for recoveries from past recessions. The end of the “Bush recession” (June 2009) is now celebrating its third birthday this month and the “recovery” is entering its fourth year. The op-ed piece makes the obvious case that “something is different this time”

Yeah, something is different this time. You and the nut cakes at the WSJ haven't heard that the Bush Recession was the WORST recession by far since the Great Depression, which also took a decade to recover from, and when it did recover, it was mostly due to the stimulus spending on World War II.

Economists predicted in 2009, that it would take at least four years to recover from the disaster of 2007 to 2009 because of its severity. For the same reason it takes longer for a broken leg to heal than it does to heal a paper cut, the worse the recession the longer it takes to recover, especially when there's a Republican Congress sabotaging the recovery.

Get it?

Whoops, so much for free speech, they've collapsed this thread again. What? Are you afraid of the truth?

Obama/Biden 2012

I find it hilarious that someone would ask Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner why Wall Street hedge fund managers are giving money to the Republican candidate. HELLO, they are HEDGE fund managers, maybe, just maybe, they are HEDGING their political position ?

As to this month for President Obama: every campaign goes through a slump. Its very difficult for the President to have all positive news when unemployment is still high. While we have been (technically) out of the recession for three years, the depth of that recession was so great that it is not surprising the full recovery is taking so long.

In previous recessions, the goal of President and Congress was to do what was needed to get the economy moving. The various members of Congress actually worked together to govern. The number one goal of 1/2 of the members of Congress was not the elimination of the President from office. They did not have one entire party which has signed a blood oath to never raise taxes.

President Obama and the Democratic Party are not blameless. During the short six months that they had the filibuster proof majority in the Senate, they should have enacted sweeping fiscal reforms which would have eliminated the ability of the GOP to hold the nation hostage in order to get extensions of the tax cuts for the wealthy. Hindsight is 20/20 and there was little anticipation that the economic crisis would be as bad as it was or that employment recovery would be as elusive.

The Tea Party in 2010 was very effective at pinning the blame on the Democratic party and the President. Whether it was blaming the President for the failure of the housing industry or blaming the ACA for the lack of jobs, the lies told were eaten up by the GOP faithful, who came out to vote. The Democratic party did not respond, perhaps believing that the Tea Party was the typical fringe movement which would blow away with the wind.

The Democrats did not realize the deep felt anger and resentment felt by many people towards their government which was not immediately solving the problems of the economy. The GOP, being more experienced in the politics of anger and hatred, tapped into that emotional morass and took control of the House. The problem is, now the GOP has been unable to accomplish anything because the same irrational actors which put them in control of the House actually expect the GOP to eliminate the government. Simultaneously, these people want the government to solve the problems of the economy. They literally "want the federal government out of my social security and medicare."

The only common sense approach would be for the Democratic party to retake control of the House, maintain control of the Senate, eliminate the ability of the Senate minority to filibuster, and for President Obama to be reelected. Anything less will lead to continued stagnation or, should Republicans take control with Tea Partiers leading the pack, economic disaster.

Obama is sucking wind because he sucks period end of story.

He has no leadership skills and comes off as arrogant, smug, bitter, often angry and un-presidential.

His constant stream of lies and gaffs have been covered up but finally the leftwing media outlets are turning on him we will now start seeing his constant gaffs and mispeak covered.

Sorry folks the zer0 train is finally getting the kind of scrutiny it deserves and while we are at it please shine the spot light on willard.

By November he will be all but politically destroyed just like brand Bush was for now brand Willard is on the upswing.

In his own words Obama: In February 2009, the president told Matt Lauer of NBC's Today show that if the economy did not recover in three years, his presidency would be a "one-term proposition."

Please see yourself out the vast majority of Americans have Obama fatigue the stickers are all but peeled off and be a good boy take a queue from George Bush and stay out of the spotlight.

P.S. don't even try a false flag event to rally the American people.

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

Obama has been anti-drilling in the Gulf, he halted the Keystone Pipeline even after the Nebraska Governor had approved an alternate route and he has wasted millions of taxpayer dollars on failed "green companies" like Solyndra. He also hates coal as an abundant energy source.

So you would rather have energy than clean and safe drinking water? So you would rather have energy than clean un-polluted air to breathe? So you are willing to procrastinate on alternate energy until it is too late? So you will sacrifice safety and health just to keep your lights and TV on?

Anyone who works in the private sector, will be labled as "rich". Sorry.

Ah shoot!!!!

Joe in Albany,

What the WSJ writer left out of the baseball analogy is that the relief pitcher had a defense comprised of those who supported him and those who didn't. Those who didn't sat on their hands and let the other team score all those runs.

Well, well, well! The media is finally starting to see the truth about their 2008 poster child! Obama may as well start packing for Chicago now!! Ha Ha Ha! The only thing he knows how to do - open his pie hole. And Feisty and her ilk are crying the blues. I love it!! When the media gave Obama a free pass in the last election, Ol' red didn't see any injustice in that, but let them start giving Romney a free pass and the world just isn't fair. Bahhhhwaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

All I'm seeing is:

"OMG don't watch Fox! It's not real news!"
"OMG msnbc.com linked a story with an opposing viewpoint!"

If you want nothing but liberal slanted news, go read moveon.org or something. Honestly I'm surprised msnbc allowed this on their front page.

Their are 1.4 MILLION less people working today than when Obama took offfice. Personal wealth is down 40%, since the DEMOCRATS took over congress in 2006. Foreclosures are picking up steam AGAIN! NO JOBS. And Fiesty's mad at the headline BAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH. But wait "the private sectors doing fine" BAHABAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.

After reading all the posts to this point, I've read that Obama will be debating Romney. Is that right? I don't understand this at all. I thought Obama would be debating Bush. That's where all the issues have come from in the last 3-1/2 years, so why would he be debating Romney? Fair is fair right? Left?

Obama supporters = : (

Romney supporters = : )

"LOL"

The elder world took much notice of the grand new nation. An amazing place ruled by Its citizens. Built in checks and balances whose direct relativity would expose attempted abuse, and/or circumvention, thus allowing citizen removal, even prosecution of those pilots of such perversion.

Backing this new construction, solely, to, and for the favor of the citizenry would be the Press. This Constitutionally guaranteed entity would measure the motions and directions of those checks and balances for the citizenry, report those, and if needed, arouse It. This was necessary, since the citizenry, being preoccupied with the requirements of life could otherwise be deceived.

It was at this revelation the excitement of the elder world was diminished, and the grim, cynical notion of darkness took root within the souls of the heretofore champions of rightful hope, and the rights of all human ability to self determination.

I contend today, as I logically believe those elders back then ascertained; the root cause of most of our nations failures, foolishness, and flimsy fabrications result most specifically from those dark perversions of the 4th estate, as perceived by those enlightened elders who briefly glimpsed us through the fleeting light emitted at our inception. Regards

Hugs to all my fellow Froot Loops Republicans and Democrats!

I will either gay hug you or bro hug you depending on your preference and party affiliation!

I saw an intersting interview with George Soro's partner, Jim Rogers, on CNN over the last few days. The host asked a few questions about the President and Mitt Romney. The question, "Who knows the economy better?" Jim's response, "The President was a "community organizer"- what ever that means- before he got into office. Romney knows more about the economy." Question, "Who will do better for the economy?" Answer, "Neither will do a good job on the economy."

I can see his point, Obama is an ideolog so he wouldn't change his policy to help the economy while he's segregating portions of the economy. Romney, while having a business background, is beholden to the Republican party so he'll likely fall in line rather than do what is necessary for the country. He'd get some voters pretty pissed off with the changes, which might get some republicans out of office. Well, I hope Romeny gets in and can do what is needed, not worrying about his re-election, etc.

MA! Grab the kids and head for the hills!

Granny Redhead has broke out of rehab & hitting the sauce again!
Her liver's gotta be more pickled then Aunt Bea's pickles at the Mayberry county fair.

...best just to lay low 'til Granny Red runs outta juice...

As to the Keystone Pipeline, please follow this link:

The Nebraska Gov screamed for fed intervention. He can't just say "Nevermind" when TransCanada promises to reroute it. When you call in the big dogs, procedures have to be followed and standards have to be met to convince them their job is done. It's kinda' like stirring the campfire to make sure all the embers are out so a flareup won't happen later.

Barry Kardashian wrote:

sorry Sarah, Obama has NEVER been a moderate! He may pretend to be one during election mode, but he really can't hide the fact that he's a closet liberal and under the direction of a devout socialist - George Soros!

Me:

Can you back up that statement?

Do you know what a socialist is? Hint: A socialist is NOT a communist.

Capitalism needs a hint of socialism to keep the 1% from walking all over the 99%, and to help our elders who have done so much to raise the standards for those who follow. The secret is in the mix - too little or too much socialism is not good.

In the past carrot top has always got her collapsed posts restored very quickly! It's now been a couple hours and this one is still collapsed?

Perhaps this time she collapsed her own post realizing how it made her look so foolish, again! Personally, I like it!

Romney got rich bankrupting 8 companies in 9 years. He did it by using investor’s money (not even his own) buying companies, then taking out a loan against the business to pay himself and his buddies back first. The business would not be able to pay the massive debt load along with Bain’s 20% “fee” so it would cut employees salaries, benefits, and pensions, then liquidate everything or move the business offshore. Is this your vision of American Business or is this Vulture Capitalism?

a. AMPAD - Profit: $102 million - Bankrupt: 2002.
b. DDI CORP - Profits: $36 million - Bankrupt: 2003.
c. DAMON CORP - Profits: $1.5 million - Bankrupt: 2009.
d. DADE BEHRING. Profits: $365 million - Bankrupt: 2002.
e. STAGE STORES. Profits: $100 million - Bankrupt: 2000.
f. GS INDUSTRIES. Profits: $65 million - Bankrupt: 2001.
g. DETAILS. Profits: $93 million - Bankruptcy: 2003.
h. WORD WIDE GRINDING. Profits $16.5 million - Bankrupt: 2001.

Total take: $779 million.

Even Republicans agree - Gingrich: "A story of greed, playing the system for a quick buck. A group of corporate raiders led by Mitt Romney, more ruthless than Wall Street. For tens of thousands of Americans, the suffering began when Mitt Romney came to town.”

Nobody cares what you think Bennypoo.

blearyeyed,

Under socialism a ruling class of intellectuals, bureaucrats and social planners decide what people want or what is good for society and then use the coercive power of the State to regulate, tax, and redistribute the wealth of those who work for a living. In other words, socialism is a form of legalized theft.

The morality of socialism can be summed-up in two words: envy and self-sacrifice. Envy is the desire to not only possess another’s wealth but also the desire to see another’s wealth lowered to the level of one’s own. Socialism’s teaching on self-sacrifice was nicely summarized by two of its greatest defenders, Hermann
Goering and Bennito Mussolini. The highest principle of Nazism (National Socialism), said Goering, is: "Common good comes before private good." Fascism, said Mussolini, is " a life in which the individual,
through the sacrifice of his own private interests…realizes that completely spiritual existence in which his value as a man lies."

Socialism is the social system which institutionalizes envy and self-sacrifice: It is the social system which uses compulsion and the organized violence of the State to expropriate wealth from the producer class for its redistribution to the parasitical class.

Despite the intellectuals’ psychotic hatred of capitalism, it is the only moral and just social system.

Capitalism is the only moral system because it requires human beings to deal with one another as traders--that is, as free moral agents trading and selling goods and services on the basis of mutual consent.

Capitalism is the only just system because the sole criterion that determines the value of thing exchanged is the free, voluntary, universal judgement of the consumer. Coercion and fraud are anathema to the free-market system.

Yes, there are winners and losers in capitalism. The winners are those who are honest, industrious, thoughtful, prudent, frugal, responsible, disciplined, and efficient. The losers are those who are shiftless, lazy, imprudent, extravagant, negligent, impractical, and inefficient.

Capitalism is the only social system that rewards virtue and punishes vice. This applies to both the business executive and the carpenter, the lawyer and the factory worker.

I choose Capitalism and Obama's strong relationship with Soros, who freely admits he's a socialist, worries me. Barry tries desperately to hide his liberal/socialist tendencies.... but he's not that good of a liar!

Prez O is asking "forgiveness" from America. Well HE IS the LESSER of the Two Evils. If Rommel gets in because YOU VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY NAIVE and SCARED Voters Put Dracula in charge of Guarding the BloodBank "Wincing a HOPE" Rommel will have Compassion and Mercy and "create 500,000 Jobs A Month" into our very needy economy, Better seek help from a GOOD Psychotherapist, Priest and/or Rabbi BECAUSE voting for Rommel is Bedding Down with Satan. "This Ha'ere' 'er despirt' taimes' Better READ AND HEED.

President Harry Truman in 1948: "The Republicans … will try
to make people believe that everything the Government has done for the country
is socialism. They will go to the people and say: "Did you see that social
security check you received the other day—you thought that was good for you,
didn't you? That's just too bad! That's nothing in the world but socialism. Did
you see that new flood control dam the Government is building over there for the
protection of your property? Sorry—that's awful socialism! That new hospital
that they are building is socialism. Price supports, more socialism for the
farmers! Minimum wage laws? Socialism for labor! Socialism is bad for you, my
friend. Everybody knows that. And here you are, with your new car, and your
home, and better opportunities for the kids, and a television set—you are just
surrounded by socialism! Now the Republicans say, 'That's a terrible thing, my
friend, and the only way out of this sinkhole of socialism is to
vote for the
Republican ticket.'" And that was 64 Years Ago!!!, the republicanCrimeCartel is still doing the same exploitation of people THEY ARE NOTORIUS FOR. Now, according to KingGeorgeTheVacuumBrained, it is called "free market" capitalism; with families in the streets and 21% Unemployment.......

Remember Fellow and Sister Americans: A vote for ANY republicanCrimeCartelSoldier, Rommel, is a vote Against Yours and Your Family's WellBeing

From the article:

“Our focus groups show that voters see a lot of glamour and glitz from the Obama administration; they're wondering where the vision, where the valor is going to be.” More from Hart: “[Obama] is missing the mark on the middle class. He needs to get down there. It is not just rallies; he needs to be out there feeling what they are feeling, a lot of pain, a lot of hurt, a lot of uncertainty.” And: “[The public] need a sense of a vision, they need a sense of hope, they need to be able to see that it’s not just the old Obama giving them the charisma and the cool. They need to see substance over style.”

This is the quintessential Obama the politician style. Get down there, roll up your sleeves and start pretending that you care and that you are one of the people. Then go take a week off in Martha's Vineyard before sending some tweets about whatever hollywood movie star is hosting a dinner for you.

The man has no substance. He has proved that repeatedly over the last 3 and a half years (longer if you are from Illinois and saw his false behavior there). He will do or say anything to get elected, except maybe HIS JOB!

David Walker...interesting post in 1.3. One line from it really got my attention

We are now dangerously close to being overwhelmed by a rising tide of ignorance, which we do not recognize, because these dolts can come up with information at the touch of a few buttons. They have no idea of the relevance of the information, because they have no idea of the complexity of the foundation from which they extracted this information.

I contend that we were overwhelmed by that tide of ignorance when Obama was elected in 2008. You ranted about an entire generation that doesn't know how to look beyond the immediate answer and for the root of the problems. That is the generation that votes democratic over and over again. Have you never noticed that many people as they get more experience in the real world, and as they grow older, pay their bills and learn how to make their way, start becoming more conservative? Have you never wondered that the more successful areas are conservative?

Also, for all the liberal criticism about conservatives not asking Romney what his plan is (which, if you do like David Walker suggests and look it up, it's available)...what exactly is Obama's plan?

There is no long term plan coming from this empty suit. Short term economic patches to try and win reelection is all I'm hearing. Someone ask him how he proposes to pay the interest on all the debt he's running up....no plan whatsoever.

Feisty and the FR Liberal faithful are complaining that First Read is slanting another headline toward support of Romney. I find it funny since MSNBC and First read has always shown bias in favor of Obama. Wonder if MSNBC is seeing the writing on the wall. The Winds of change are blowing and they are not in favor of the Liberals. Obama's speech will undoubtedly be polished and eloquent. I doubt it will contain any real substance. It is highly likely that the President will propose that we spend even more borrowed Money on stimulus in an attempt to buy back the votes he is loosing!

Obama is a lot like his followers, better off just staying quite. We have heard the same garbage for 3 1/2 years now and nothing has changed.

Guess that's what change is all about to the blind and deaf.

Capitalism is the only just system because the sole criterion that determines the value of thing exchanged is the free, voluntary, universal judgement of the consumer. Coercion and fraud are anathema to the free-market system.

What a crock of steaming crap. Unfettered capitalism is ruled by coercion and fraud. Al Capone and other "Mobs" are the best examples of unfettered capitalism. Unfettered free-markets caused the financial collapse of 1929 and 2008.

If you want any of the 'isms' to work for the best interest of society, you must balance the best of what socialism, communism, capitalism, fascism have to offer. In this country, we have chosen to do that through regulations.

Barry 1.116, great essay on the differences between socialism and capitalism. Clear headed Americans can see the difference. Guess that makes Obama's wants and needs a little fuzzy.... I choose Capitalism too!

Sarah-3043284

Alan,

Anyone who works in the private sector, will be labled as "rich". Sorry.

OMG... Could Sarah FINALLY be gaining an understanding of where Oblahblah is taking us all?

We have had enough of Obama's 'hope' Fiesty.... it has faded to despair....

Sick,

OMG... Could sick FINALLY be gaining an understanding of sarcasm?

Nope. Apparently not.

Whats he going to say...? 'Oh i keep forgetting how bad the economy is'...? Ha, even clinton said that median income is lower now than when he took ooffice.

Maybe you're right, it's not obamas fault. he hasn't done a thing to the economy, he's too busy giving away our sovereignty to the UN through the LOST treaty, figuring out how to raise taxes, trying to get more people on food stamps, forcing unconstitutional laws down our throats...he is a busy man

Personal wealth is down 40%, since the DEMOCRATS took over congress in 2006.

And it is so ironic now that the left tries to make this a negative talking point against former President Bush, who has long rode into the sunset and the "evil" rich. Question to liberals, did you expect the President's wealth re-distribution policies to actually raise the average wealth of the middle class? Less personal income, more living off the government teat. Does that really make you feel warm and fuzzy?

I'm mystified.

OMG... Could sick FINALLY be gaining an understanding of sarcasm?

Apparently not.

@Sarah - sarcasm, wit, irony all require an amount of intelligence to see through the nuances. Sick never graduated beyond 'fart' jokes.

I find it funny that all the liberals have their panties in a bundle over the tittle. This is what the Bush camp put up with daily. But the liberal media have been giving Obama (AKA numb nuts) a free pass and not reporting all his screw ups. You don't have to look very far to find America not liking the socialist rat bastard in office or his "change" or his vision forward.

I'll bet he blame his whole term on Bush...what a surprise.

RedDev,

In the spirit of "keeping it real", I have found the occasional fart funny. Just saying.

Barry,

I love how you typed, or possibly copy/pasted all of that, and then didn't tie any of it to Obama or his positions. You didn't show or illustrate a single example. Merely having an association with Soros (by the way, turn off the Glenn Beck, he isn't helping you any) doesn't make any of what you typed applicable to Obama.

If you really want to make the point that Obama is a socialist, within each of those paragraphs, you should give us cited examples of how Obama fits the criteria laid out in the paragraph.

@Gingerbread Mama post 1.60 I'm sure we would all feel better if we actually thought Obama wrote and believed that little blurb. Unfortunately his actions or lack thereof prove otherwise. Sorry - not buying it!

“[The public] need a sense of a vision, they need a sense of hope, they need to be able to see that it’s not just the old Obama giving them the charisma and the cool. They need to see substance over style.”

All we'll get is another speech, with emphasis on blaming someone else, after which people will say "What did he say"?

Obama's problem is that, unlike 2008 when nobody knew what he could (or could not) do, now he has a record, and the truth is "He's in way over his head".

By the way, not only was the May jobs report dismal, but even April's report was 'revised downward' from about 119,000 jobs to only 77,000 jobs.

did you expect the President's wealth re-distribution policies to actually raise the average wealth of the middle class

What wealth re-distribution policies? FYI, Obama wasn't in office during the housing bubble burst and stock market collapse. Rather a stretch to lay blame for the loss of wealth by the middle class on Obama.

You are right about one thing - you are mystified - but that is something your posts repeatedly confirm.

Someone please explain to me at what point you are supposed to take ownership of your own presidency and stop blaming it on the guy before you. If you want reelected, show me how you are part of the solution instead of constantly blaming the problem on someone else. How long and how much must we endure before we are supposed to be convinced you are headed in the right direction?

I have a question for feisty, If you see a video showing President Obama Robbing an old lady's purse, would u still make an excuse?

This is just an example, not that the president has done something like this. I just want to know if feisty has become an Obamabot meaning that she can't think for herself, I mean I figure it out my self that Obama is not doing a good job, therefore I wont vote for him anymore.

I hope that I don't get insulted peace!

Barry 1.116, great essay on the differences between socialism and capitalism. Clear headed Americans can see the difference. Guess that makes Obama's wants and needs a little fuzzy.... I choose Capitalism too!

I'll bet you do - you see, as I pointed out earlier, at the core of capitalism is coercion and fraud, and Barry shows us a shining example of this by plagiarizing 90% of what he typed.

@Sarah - don't think we will get much from Barry on why Obama is a socialist, or a good list of Obama socialist policies. They weren't in the 1993 essay he stole the typed words from.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/1558277/posts

Barry shows us a shining example of this by plagiarizing 90% of what he typed

Lie - Cheat & Steal the great GNOP way!

You're on a roll Red - keep us the good work! ☺

In the event anyone is interested in a well written, rebuttal to Barry's plagiarized 1993 essay, I would point you to this link.

http://open.salon.com/blog/ted_frier/2011/04/01/american_elites_with_us_or_against_us

In an earlier post, I drew attention to the work of political science professor C. Bradley Thompson, head of a special institute on capitalism at Clemson University, whose acceptance of a bank-sponsored chair to promote the moral superiority of bankers inevitably produced ideologically-contaminated and pseudo-intellectual drivel like this:

Socialism is the social system which institutionalizes envy and self-sacrifice...Despite the intellectuals' psychotic hatred of capitalism, it is the only moral and just social system.

TwoCents

I don't know. See when Bill Clinton was in office he actually took responsibility for the good and the bad. Too bad Obama is no Clinton. I think we knew that already. Hopefully he will take responsibility on 1/20/2013 when he is leaving DC for Hollywood to pursue a career in acting, lord knows he loves a camera and teleprompter.

In reality the story is that the MSM has little choice to focus on the Obama campaign because Mitt Romney refuses to say anything of any significance. That can't last forever, especially with buses and planes full of reporters hungry to make their names with high-impact coverage. While there's no question the Romney campaign is anxious to run out the clock it is inevitable that the strategy will fail.

LMFAO! That is EXACTLY what Obama did to get elected and it worked for him! Had Obama given any specifics, he would have risked everything.

But, it is a myth that Romney gives no specifics, he has been specific enough for me to have a few doubts as a republican.

Bottom line, your post is BS.

Barry spoke, his speech the same old song, blame Bush ans class warfare, this is how he want to be reelected, , Where is is record during his 3 1/5 years, he cant defend it is a failure, unemployment high, 360,000 more people asking for unemployment benefits, housing is down, Obamacare and excessive regulations are also killing the job market. No 4 years of the same

Romney 2012.

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL

Lie - Cheat & Steal the great GNOP way!

Feisty,

The GOP has trademarked the lie, cheating and mega stealing.

Obama is in a good position to reveal to the American people that Romney does not have an economic plan for "the rest of us."

How and where?

At the presidential debates.

During the debates, Obama will have an opportunity to flush Romney out. Romney is hoping to hide from the American people about his true plan to further enrich the elites. His plan for "the rest of us?" Push the "little people" back further. This is why he will not be specific about his economic plan to sink the middle class and to bury the poor. Romney wants to "let the sand run out in the hour glass."

It has been said, this corporate kingfish does not care about the "average citizen."

A truer statement has never been said.

Vote a straight Democratic ticket.

Obama/Biden 2012!

For all of you who keep harping on the president's use of a teleprompter.....get off of it! Presidents have used the teleprompter since it was first invented! Trying to blame it all on President Obama when he utilizes a teleprompter is just showing your ignorance! Even your Gods, Reagan and Bush, used a teleprompter.....apparently, you don't see anything wrong with that!

Obama stands for the American People! congress has done anything and everything to prevent our Country from getting back on track from their horrific do nothing behavior; failed policies: taxs cuts for

rich..

spending billions on Wars that promote wealth for cheny and the boys...

cutting Billions in taxes for the JOB CREATORS = Fail where are those Jobs? jobs creators ?

GET rid of the can't fix stupid rep/tb and get people that want to help Americans rather than the 'chosen few"

the likes of trump, cain, cheney, palin, rush beckless and the band of relgious zealots...you are a pathetic excuse for Americans...you days are coming to an end...

OBAMA/BIDEN AMERICA"S CHOICE 2012

I find it humorous that the same people who were enamored of Obama in 2008 when he only spoke in vague generalities are now the same ones criticizing Romney for doing the same thing.

The answer is obvious - IT WORKS.

By the way - Rasmussen (the most accurate pollster for the presidential election in 2008) has Romney at 48% vs Obama at 44% among likely voters. I can see why Obama & Co. are starting to panic.

But, it is a myth that Romney gives no specifics,

And what are those, specifically?

I do know that he specifically believes that insurance companies should have a right to enforce the preexisting conditions clauses that Affordable Care abolished. If that level of support for big business at the expense of average Americans is consistent it's no wonder he avoides the press except under controlled situations. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/election-2012/mitt-romney-insurance-companies-allowed-deny-coverage-pre-existing-conditions-article-1.1095585

That stance would fly in the face of public opinion. Eighty-five percent of Americans support Obamacare’s guarantee of coverage with those with pre-existing conditions, according to a recent New York Times/CBS News poll.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/election-2012/mitt-romney-insurance-companies-allowed-deny-coverage-pre-existing-conditions-article-1.1095585#ixzz1xnYurAz8

Obamacare and excessive regulations are also killing the job market.

Baseless propaganda - of the style used by the Nazis in the '30s. Of course, asking for examples of to illustrate how Obamacare and regulations kill jobs is futile. The right wing propaganda machine can't produce nary a single example.

But here is a clue as to what is driving a slow-down in the jobs market. Double-dip European recession caused by conservative austerity policies. Looming Euro bank failures caused by, yet again, conservative austerity policies. Folks, the Euro-zone is our single biggest trading partner. As they go, we can only expect a very bumpy ride.

O.K. In 2008 You morons who Voted for Obama wanted to show everybody that you did not have a BIGOTED bone in your body. In 2012 will you Morons now show everyone that you are not Stupid TOO! Don't believe a word that that Lying Scum Axelrod, Obumas Propaganda Minister is spewing out.

Mr. Goebbles, I mean Mr. Axlerod is a complete Idiot! If you looked in his closet you will find some Brown Shirts, Shinny Black Boots and Arm Bands with Funny bent Crosses.

Sarah...When Hussein put his hand on the Koran Bible to to take the oath of office, did he not use his middle name...if fisting Redhead can use the Willard label (which I have no problem with), why is not ok to call Hussein by his given name...you are more racist than you give yourself credit for. Oh yeah, google Jenny Craig...

Marxist/Alinsky/Obama....had enough?

Everybody all hot and bothered because MSNBC has to sell the ad space here on First Read. Elections are relatively a long way off, more people planning vacations now than choosing candidates.

The President is going to kill the Mittromic Rombot in the debates by making Rombot wear the congressional albatross. Should be quite a spectacle.

Stock market up after the President's speech; RWNJ's going to give him credit? Don't answer, it's rhetorical, because your heads would explode if you did.

I noticed Rombot had 200 people at this speech, President had 1500. Wow, what if the President was popular? Always remember, never forget...

Rombot.Has.Nothing.

Ok, so President Obama used the words "the private sector is doing fine" within a 46 word statement and all you on the right have gotten all silly in your pants. Very helpful.

We on the left can bring up the Romney quote "I'm not worried about the poor" and that should be fair. Fair but also not too helpful.

So let's just call it a draw and move forward in the conversation.

I just watched both speeches and can only wonder when I keep hearing Romney say that all we need to do is give more tax cuts in a structure that is already low and remove regulations from businesses and the floodgates of hiring will open and we will be inundated with prosperity. That would be great but I have to ask, why would that happen? Corporate profits are at record levels with unemployment remains at 8.whatever% month after month. What incentive is there for them to hire? The proposal will add to their profits and they still don't have to increase hiring.

OK Bob, deny this fact Romney's campaing is running on the fact that that if you tell a lie often enough the people will believe it. This is what GWB did to justify going to Iraq. You aware that this is the same tactic that Joseph Goebels used for Adolf Hitler. Like I've been saying for a long time the Republican Is the closest thing that I have seen to Nazism. They proove this to me more and more everyday. You need to take a closer look at you party lines and you will see it to be true.

Both Presidential Jokes offered nothing new, nothing real, just recycled BS for the masses!

Neither party is dealing with the fundamental problems 99%of American's face.

Both parties are funded by the 1%, you always win and get what you want if you buy both sides!

AUCTION 2012 The money is flowing for the powerful, while most American's are seeing their options and funds dwindle.

Sad Bizarro World we live in!

Bob,

All I'm asking is that if you're going to bait the Islamaphobes, at least own it. Last I checked calling Romney, Willard, wasn't a thinly veiled attempt to get away with being bigoted, without actually being called a bigot. I actually thought it was funny when what's-his-name called him Oblahblah.

If you can't see the difference there's no helping you.

Now, go google Clorox. I'd hate for your sheet to get stained when I dump my Big Gulp on it. I'm off to the store to pick up some more fried butter.

See ya!

Without conditions, the President promised the nation that the 2012 federal deficit would not exceed 229.27 billion dollars. I want the President to explain how he is going to keep his promise to the nation. There is not much time in the fiscal year.

“I think what you’re going to see is that Gov. Romney is going to be much more like Gov. Kasich, Gov. Christie, and Gov. Daniels in those states and operate with a much more pro-business, less hostile to job creators attitude,” Schriefer said, per NBC’s Garrett Haake.

Pro-business my ass. All the GOP does is strangle the economy with more tax cuts for the rich, deregulatory policies that almost sank our economy, and spending cuts that hurt the middle class. And what's with this hostility to job creators @!$%#??? Let me make this clear: the rich, and corporations in general, ARE NOT JOB CREATORS. The middle class and the poor are. Consumers create jobs. Companies only hire more people when demand rises high enough that they cannot squeeze enough productivity from their workers to service the demand. If we really want to create jobs, we should do away with tax cuts for anyone but the middle class and the poor, and even then it should be targeted at the regressive payroll tax.

Joe in Albany

Today’s WSJ has an op-ed piece that explores the continuing bad economy under Barry and analyzes the “recovery” in comparison to historical norms for recoveries from past recessions. The end of the “Bush recession” (June 2009) is now celebrating its third birthday this month and the “recovery” is entering its fourth year. The op-ed piece makes the obvious case that “something is different this time” and places the blame on Barry for “emphasizing short-run gimmicks and social goals rather than policies that could have produced economic growth and jobs.”

Okay, I wouldn't advise using a conservative, supply-side magazine as proof. And by the way, most recessions that we have faced since the Great Depression were POTHOLES compared to this. In addition, the last three recessions have had slower recoveries from the preceding one. So a slow recovery now isn't very surprising. Why are recoveries slowing down??? I would say a combination of growing income inequality, stagnant middle class wages, and supply-side economic policies. And Obama's economic policies are the same policies put forth by guys like Reagan and Bush II and FDR; higher spending and tax breaks. All of them helped us get out of the downturns of our time. All the Wall Street Journal advocates is deregulation and across the board tax cuts. To be sure, making the Bush tax cuts permanent (which Republicans advocate) would only change GDP by $.29 every year for every dollar in cuts; $.30 for cutting corporate taxes; and $.37 for keeping capital gains and dividends taxes at their current rate. Even cutting taxes across the board would , the best things economically that the GOP proposed, would only change GDP by $1.03. That's essentially wasting 60% of these tax cutting stimulus packages, or having too small an impact on the recovery. Now, cutting the payroll tax like Obama did would change $1.29 in GDP compared to the $1 in tax cuts; spending money on extending unemployment benefits (like Obama did) would change GDP by $1.64; issuing government aid to states (like Obama did and proposes to do) would change GDP by $1.36; and increasing infrastructure spending (like Obama did and proposes to do) would change $1.59 in GDP. Essentially, Obama's plans are much more beneficial to economic growth than the GOP's plans; essentially, spending money and giving temporary tax cuts like the payroll tax holiday, as Obama proposes in his economic plan, is much more effective than Romney's plan of cutting taxes. Score 1 for Obama; 0 for Romney.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

Sarah, you better hurry...if you live in New York, you will need to order 2 - 16 oz. soon to get your fix!

Will Haas, how can he keep a promise about the budget when Congress has never sent him one yet?

I have to laugh about the comment that Romney will be "much more pro-business, less hostile to job-creators attitude."

Corporate America just had it's most profitable quarter ever in history last quarter, after hugely profitable quarters for most of the last 3 years. We're not just talking about since Obama took office, or since the year 2000, or in the last half century, but in all of American history.

I know, some of you will say that if not for Obama and the Democrats, imagine how much bigger those record-breaking profits would be.

You will also say ok, but what about unemployment? It's abnormally high. So why aren't they creating more jobs? Well actually they are creating a lot of jobs here in the U.S., but let's be honest, many of the jobs they're creating are also in China.

Do you think corporate America would create more U.S. jobs if we changed the tax policies? Research suggests otherwise. Companies expand their operations when they see opportunities to grow market share, launch new successful products and increase profit. Expanding further in China is such an opportunity for many U.S. companies. By 2016, China will overtake us as the largest consumer market in the world. To not be doing business there would be corporate suicide. As long as corporate taxes are not so large that they wipe out the benefits of increasing profits, any intelligent business person will opt for more profits.

Do you honestly think free-market minded Republicans will somehow impose new regulations on U.S. companies to discourage them from hiring in China rather than here? Seriously, even the Democrats aren't that socialistic.

The best thing the government can do to create a pro-business environment is to reduce uncertainty about government policies in the future -- tax rates, spending, the cost and availability of credit, and regulations on business.

As of today, it is unclear if Congress will even be able to extend the Bush tax cuts that expire at the end of this year. Even if Obama proposed exactly that -- just renew the Bush tax cuts -- there are many Republicans who would oppose him on purely political grounds, even if that is damaging to the economy. The temporary payroll tax reduction on employees will also be expiring and again it's unclear that Congress will renew it -- because it's an election year, and every action or inaction will be geared toward making the other side look bad, rather than doing what's right for the economy and the American people.

If you want Congress to take notice that we are sick and tired of them sitting by twiddling their thumbs rather than doing something to help, then fire them all in November -- every last one, Republican and Democrat. Nobody who is there now deserves to be re-elected, because they all failed miserably at their jobs.

You still have to elect a president -- either Obama, Romney or Gary Johnson (Libertarian). But at least you can send a strong message to Congress, that message being "you're fired!"

Feisty (very Fishy) grabs a 1st comment 7 line slot that gets restored (as usual) which was written in her little cubicle at First Run before the Article was published. First Run (NBC), do you really need Tokyo Rose to push your propaganda? Just print the news, you can spin it, everyone does, but Tokyo Rose is going a bit far. And MSNBC pushes First Run to support it's liberal positions as if it was an independent source. Wake up people.

azdad48
Will Haas, how can he keep a promise about the budget when Congress has never sent him one yet?

Don't you think the POTUS should get on Harry Reid's and the Senate Democrats case?

Although the House has passed a budget every year, the Senate has not passed a budget in 1,152 days.

So NHS, you're saying it frustrates and angers you that Republican continue to filibuster budget work in the Senate?

ForePlingerStock market up after the President's speech

The stock markets were not up because of some same ole same ole speech from the President. They were up because central banks are going to act to keep any political instability in Greece from destabilizing the global economy. The Stock Markets could give a hoot about hearing President's lets blame Bush speech for the millionth time.

John - It frustrates me that the House passed budget has not been brought up for discussion or a vote in the Senate, nor has a Senate Budget Commitee drafted budget resolution been brought up for discussion or a vote.

"Of course, the context to Obama’s words is that he was comparing the private sector’s performance to the public sector’s in job gains/losses, and the statistics back that up. " - First Read

First Read, again, just stop it with the assumption that we're all drooling freaking idiots. In case you hadn't noticed, in the information age, we can easily -- within seconds -- find the transcript of what was said and see the context for ourselves. In this case Obama boasted about the "robust" job growth of the private sector and immediately followed it with, "The private sector is doing fine". The context is crystal clear. He honestly -- and extremely erroneously -- believes the private sector is doing fine. Let me also be clear on this...it is not.

The job growth rate he is boasting about is barely enough to keep up with the growth of population and does virtually nothing to reclaim all the jobs lost during his administration (and this anemic growth pace has slowed even more recently). Debt is ballooning. Foreclosures numbers are advancing again. To top it off, the economy seems to be lazily meandering through a vat of molasses as the slowest economic recovery in US history. But that's being nit-picky right?

So First Read, just because you choose to be big enough idiots and buy into Obama's post-explosion, walk-back re-explanation, doesn't mean we all are. You shouldn't assume as such.

Feisty Redhead,

I wrote this yesterday 6/14/12 but it was posted in the wrong spot. It was probably Bush that did it. lmfao. You know what I have noticed is that none of the Dem on here started calling Romney Willard until you did and you say the Dem party is not sheep this proves otherwise.

Again with another inflammatory headline eh... First Read?

You all can rile up the stuck on stupid crowd, they sure seem to love them some First Read these days...

But you cannot deny, President Obama, BEAT the Clinton machine & wiped the floor with McCain/Palin.

I can only imagine what he will to do Team Willard when the gloves come off! lol

So, in closing, keep tossing some red meat to the mob, they deserve some love too..

Obama/Biden - the only hope for the middle class!

I have noticed you only comment on things about Obama. Like him you want us all to believe that he has help America in the last 3.5 years: where is the proof. It is in fact because of him we are in the mess we are in, it is time for him to grow a pair and take some responsibility instead of always blaming Bush when it was because of Clinton that the housing bubble was created. Yes, I know you would like us to believe something else but that is just not the facts of the matter. You Libs said it was out of line for Bush to spend $4.5 trillion in 8 years and it was. Then comes along Obama who is on your side and you and it is now ok to spend $5.2 trillion in just 3 years while asking Congress for another $1.2 trillion for this year.

I like when something good about a Rep is brought up in an atrial because that means you will stay in your troll hole and not comment because when facts are show it is hard to spin them right. You have an awful mouth your mother must be so very proud of you.

Did you here three states have passed laws now that say if you receive welfare we will drug test you and then we can test you randomly as long as you are on welfare. That's how you get budgets under control because if you have enough money to drink or do drugs you don't need our tax dollars. All 50 states should follow suite ASAP.

Here are some facts about the housing bubble and about Bush spending vs. Obama spending.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/united_states_total_spending_pie_chart

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/02/06/the-true-origins-of-this-finan

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57358484/tax-dollars-backing-some-risky-energy-projects/

http://realetybytes.com/?tag=unemployment

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57358484/tax-dollars-backing-some-risky-energy-projects/

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000

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

.http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/03/obamas-magic-number-150000-jobs-per-month/

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/02/06/the-true-origins-of-this-finan

http://realetybytes.com/?tag=unemployment

VOTE OBAMA/BIDEN OUT IN 2012

They have given us nothing even when they controlled Congress the first 2 years Obama was president. What was their excess then? He could of pass on of the jobs bill that not even his own party would vote yes on but it is always someone else’s fault with Obama and that is not a LEADER. The facts are most of the Dem in Congress will not even vote on his crap bills.

I have noticed you only comment on things about Obama. Like him you want us all to believe that he has help America in the last 3.5 years: where is the proof. It is in fact because of him we are in the mess we are in, it is time for him to grow a pair and take some responsibility instead of always blaming Bush when it was because of Clinton that the housing bubble was created.

Okay, first of all the proof lies in the numbers. 4.2 million private sector jobs created. Unemployment down to 8.2% (not good, but better than 10%). 27 straight months of private sector job growth. Second of all, Obama is not the cause of this recession. It is the 30 years of supply-side economics and the uncooperative attitude of the GOP in Congress why the recovery is slowing down. That is the truth. Thirdly, Clinton didn't cause the housing bubble. The CRA contributed little, if anything, to the bubble. I don't believe that a few million people being able to buy houses over a few years would cause a doubling of home values in a matter of 4-5 years. It was over-speculation that pushed values higher, as people saw no end to the bubble, just like during the dot-com bubble. And fourth, if Bush really wanted to help the housing market, he would have focused less on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and tried to enact broad reform, like new regulations, to control the bubble. But, as Bush is a free market extremist, he didn't ask for any new regulations on the private housing industry.

Yes, I know you would like us to believe something else but that is just not the facts of the matter. You Libs said it was out of line for Bush to spend $4.5 trillion in 8 years and it was.

Then comes along Obama who is on your side and you and it is now ok to spend $5.2 trillion in just 3 years while asking Congress for another $1.2 trillion for this year.

Bush had a different situation than Obama. For one thing, Bush, while not presiding over a great economy, didn't have any recessions other than the dot-com crash. He even had positive, yet relatively modest, economic growth. The problem is, he still ran deficits. He eliminated the Clinton surplus, sabotaged our opportunity to prepare ourselves for the retiring of the Baby Boomers, and gave trillions in tax cuts that mostly benefited the wealthiest Americans. Not to mention the fact that he started two unnecessary wars and a new Medicare package WITHOUT paying for any of them. Traditional economics states that you don't run deficits during a good economy. Even if you factor in the wars, we still could have kept the budget surplus had we not cut taxes (which we have never done before a war in our nation's history). But, that's why you don't trust a supply-sider with the national economy.

As for Obama, he only increased the debt by roughly $1.44 trillion. The rest were either an extension of the Bush policies or the fiscal impacts of the recession. Even if you factor total deficits (about $5.2 trillion), most were because of either the Bush tax cuts or the recession. And as you don't cut spending or raise taxes during a recession, this debt increase was only natural. If you really wanted to cut deficits, you have to repeal the Bush tax cuts and agree to compromises in spending cuts and entitlement reform. That is the only way to fix our fiscal future.

They have given us nothing even when they controlled Congress the first 2 years Obama was president. What was their excess then?

Well, the Democrats did give this country a lot of things, more than this Congress ever will; healthcare reform (whether you like it or not, not to mention that it reduces the deficit by $200 billion); stimulus bill (which worked, according to most economists); Dodd-Frank regulation of Wall Street; extension of unemployment benefits; repeal of the unconstitutional DADT. Not to mention that they did all that with a continuous bombardment of filibusters by the GOP in the Senate.

He could of pass on of the jobs bill that not even his own party would vote yes on but it is always someone else’s fault with Obama and that is not a LEADER. The facts are most of the Dem in Congress will not even vote on his crap bills.

He passed the stimulus; that was the big jobs bill. That bought Obama time to focus on things like healthcare and regulations. Actually, the jobs bill that he originally passed was defeated by a filibuster. And the reason why many Democrats wouldn't vote for his budgets was because they didn't want to be castigated as tax-and-spend liberals, which sadly shows that this Democratic Party has a weak backbone. Stupid Reagan...

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

Freshieee, it's a waste of time trying to argue economic facts with partisan zealots who prefer to deal in opinions and misguided beliefs.

Obama can still sign up to be Mexico's First Black President!

Let him straighten out their immigration system.

As a Liberal I'm always looking to solve problems, a pragmatic sort. After all, daring to dream is useless if you aren't willing to look for some pragmatic means of getting there. For that reason I'm forced to admit that Ronald Reagan had the right approach in time of recession.

Reagan and his advisers did exactly what needed to be done when faced with recession...he spent a lot of money, and quickly, to get the economy moving again.

I find it especially instructive to look at spending levels three years into each man’s administration — that is, in the first quarter of 1984 in Reagan’s case, and in the first quarter of 2012 in Mr. Obama’s — compared with four years earlier, which in each case more or less corresponds to the start of an economic crisis. Under one president, real per capita government spending at that point was 14.4 percent higher than four years previously; under the other, less than half as much, just 6.4 percent.

O.K., by now many readers have probably figured out the trick here: Reagan, not Obama, was the big spender. While there was a brief burst of government spending early in the Obama administration — mainly for emergency aid programs like unemployment insurance and food stamps — that burst is long past. Indeed, at this point, government spending is falling fast, with real per capita spending falling over the past year at a rate not seen since the demobilization that followed the Korean War.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/08/opinion/krugman-reagan-was-a-keynesian.html?_r=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

Say, there at the end of that bit is something of particular import now. "Indeed, at this point, government spending is falling fast, with real per capita spending falling over the past year at a rate not seen since the demobilization that followed the Korean War."

Republican obstructionism, concessions made to Republicans to get ANY legislation passed, and Conservative dominance in the red states ALREADY has us in a dangerous austerity mode. Shame there are no more Reagan Republicans, people who knew when it was time to do the right thing.

Now, obviously spending on that level is unsustainable over time. That's why Reagan did the responsible thing once the economy was moving again. He raised taxes. Repeatedly. Then his hand-picked successor George HW Bush did it again.

Over the remainder of his presidency, Reagan would go on to sign a series of such increases, ultimately taking back about half of his 1981 tax cut, according to economist and historian Bruce Bartlett. The 1981 legislation marked a watershed in federal taxation, capping an era of tax cuts and starting a new one of increases. As economist Jerry Tempalski has noted, of the nine major tax laws enacted from 1968 to 1981, six reduced federal revenue. By contrast, nine of the 11 major tax laws introduced from 1982 to 1993 increased revenue.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-16/why-reagan-raised-taxes-and-we-should-too-echoes.html

So there you have it. I'm willing to be pragmatic, willing to take solutions wherever they can be found. Reagan had it right. When will today's radical Conservatives admit the same?

John B -- Count me in as well. Let those who are pragmatic govern. Marginalize the fools before it's too late.

Great post.

John B - a great, intelligent post but it will be lost on the Conservatives!

John B.....excellent post. I agree with Seeking it will be lost on the right, first off they'd have to look up the meaning of pragmatic and then sensible, as neither ever crosses into their vocabulary or their thinking for that matter.

Oh what will you all do, when your world comes to a screeching halt in Novenber? A rousing version of "kumbiya"

jolyoldsoul1- I don't know what world you live in but my world will not end in November. First, Obama will be re-elected. But, even if that didn't happen, my world will go on. Too bad you are so fixated on politics that it's your whole world!

Obama/Biden 2012

Rob in MA,

This First Thoughts column has Chuck Todd's fingrprints all over it. He has been shaping NBC's coverage to run down Obama and build up Romney, for some time now. He even slipped up on air awhile back and said "our Party" instead of saying "the Republican Party." I used to like Chuck Todd, even though he's a Republican, but lately I just consider him one of Romney's strategists. Let's face it, objective journalism is pretty much dead.

SeekingSanity, GingerbreadMama, and anyone else who states that John B's post will be lost on the "Right or Conservatives" is basically saying they don't actually agree with it themselves. How could they? By making that statement, they reveal themselves as idealogical Liberals/Democrats. Impossible to agree with anything that includes a Republican past or present. These people are the reason the country is so polarized; they and those that hold the same position on the right.

Me? I'm on the Right and Left. Depends on the issue. I was a Reagan Republican. Not affiliated with either of the "chosen" parties now.

I don't know what all of John B's political beliefs are, but I wouldn't mind talking with him about them. He's a thinking Liberal. Wouldn't be surprised if he's crossed the line once or twice in elections.

SS and GM, I bet you have an easy time voting. Don't do any research on candidates, just pick all the D's. Talk about "lock-step".

Amy...so true...Chuck Todd comes on...I flip the channel......For Chuckie poo it's all about him to say something to grandstand him into fame. Real journalists like Cronkite would report the news instead of trying to create it to further their grandiose self image! The more little Chuckie acts like this, the the less respect he gets. Would love to see Chuckie poo and Riley and Hannity run around a battlefield trying to report the news as the real jornalists used to do. If their butt was on the line, maybe they would see life of the everyday man and woman is more precious than the life of corporation greed.

Steve - but you certainly have no problem making generalizations or accusations, right? I see you didn't call out the far righters who are always putting down liberals. Hmmmmm, can you say Hypocrite? Funny how that works, isn't it?

Me, I don't usually vote a straight ticket - I do research the issues - not like many on the far right. But, again, you don't bring that up? They pick all the R's. See how that works and what it makes you? Again, Hypocrite!

I've never marched lock-step with anyone. Not like no joe, White Collar Auto, etc. Again, see how this works? Either walk your talk or shut up!

Obama/Biden

"It's the economy, stupid." ---James Carville

"Are you better off than you were four years ago?" ---Ronald Reagan

TNRebel,

Another lonely middle person here...and I agree with you.

Although I'm a deficit hawk, I think the number one problem facing this country is political polarization. Nobody seems to want to discuss the issues - they just want to spout party mantras (either for their parties ideas, or against the other parties ideas). The focus shouldn't be the party - it should be whatever is best for the country.

And before anyone says anything - I think BOTH parties are equally guilty.

Rob from Ma:

You are absolutely correct! I'm glad I'm not the only one who realizes that most of these columns are pro-Romney, and as a result, pro-Republican. I hope you and I (and many others) are not in the minority....

Thanks, folks. While I don't write for compliments I appreciate them. I notice that none of our Conservative economics "experts" have come near this one. It would appear that they're as baffled over how to deal with the incredible radicalization of the Republican Party as are the rest of us.

Goerge W increased the deficit by 4.1 billion in 8 years....Obama has increased it 5.7 in just 3.7 years...This moron has to go be for he perminently dismantles this country

Feisty and the FR Liberal faithful are complaining that First Read is slanting another headline toward support of Romney. I find it funny since MSNBC and First read has always shown bias in favor of Obama. Wonder if MSNBC is seeing the writing on the wall. The Winds of change are blowing and they are not in favor of the Liberals. Obama's speech will undoubtedly be polished and eloquent. I doubt it will contain any real substance. It is highly likely that the President will propose that we spend even more borrowed Money on stimulus in an attempt to buy back the votes he is loosing!

I am re-posting my post from the above because as I was typing it, the Romney Plumbers collapsed the thread that it was posted to.

>>>

Totally agree with CuongDNguyen. Corporate Raider Willard Romney will run this nation into the ground just like he has done all the Jobs in the USA.

Why, oh why don't the Sheep see this? Surely they know a vote for Corporate Raider Willard Romney is a vote to send jobs overseas, and the economy into the tank. If you think Greece is bad, just wait till Corporate Raider Willard Romney gets his greedy hands on this nation. God help us if Corporate Raider Willard Romney should win the white house, GOD HELP US INDEED!!!!

And thats my opinion,<<<

By John Avalon june 13th 2012 CNN.

Of course, Reagan championed lower tax rates, but he also signed off on a number of smaller tax hikes to help address revenue shortfalls and most importantly backed a bipartisan 1986 bill that closed loopholes as part of a simplification plan that raised revenues to help deal with the deficit.

This inconvenient fact is often denied by Norquist and other activists because it is their prime objection to attempts to find a "grand bargain" on deficits and debt, along the lines of the recommendations of the Bowles-Simpson commission.

We're going to close the unproductive tax loopholes that have allowed some of the truly wealthy to avoid paying their fair share.
President Ronald Reagan

In pursuit of a reality check, take a look at this quote: "We're going to close the unproductive tax loopholes that have allowed some of the truly wealthy to avoid paying their fair share. In theory, some of those loopholes were understandable, but in practice they sometimes made it possible for millionaires to pay nothing, while a bus driver was paying 10% of his salary, and that's crazy. It's time we stopped it."

That might sound straight out of President Barack Obama "Buffett Tax" playbook -- which conservatives routinely attack as "class warfare" -- but in fact it is the sainted Reagan speaking in 1985.

Add to that the fact that the first President Bush backed a bipartisan deficit reduction plan that included a 2-to-1 spending cut to tax revenue formula and you have the kind of data that drives Norquist nuts.

Obama/Biden2012

So now that elections are coming and repubs know people are against the Norquist pledge some repubs are jumping off the Norquist obstruction destroy the economy grab all the money for the 1% ..bandwagon to try and get re elected.....As if people will not forgot the Norquist Bin Laden destroy the economy plan. That's right the same plan Bin Laden put in writing, destroy the American economy to take the country down.

President Obama/Biden 2012

The line about taking Obama's quote about the private sector doing just fine being taken out of context is bogus. I watched the entire speech and he absolutely did not intend to compare the public and private sector recovery when saying the private sector was doing "fine". It wasn't until after he made the comment and caught heat for it that he went back and tried to claim he was making a comparison. It's dishonest to even pretend that Romney is taking the comment out of context because you and everyone else who saw the speech knew what he intended. The truth is that Obama is anticapitalistic and believes in extending the size of the federal government. If you haven't figured this out by now, you shouldn't be reporting.

“[The public] need a sense of a vision, they need a sense of hope, they need to be able to see that it’s not just the old Obama giving them the charisma and the cool. They need to see substance over style.”

All we'll get is another speech, with emphasis on blaming someone else, after which people will say "What did he say"?

Obama's problem is that, unlike 2008 when nobody knew what he could (or could not) do, now he has a record, and the truth is "He's in way over his head".

By the way - Rasmussen (most accurate pollster in the Presidential election of 2008) has Romney ahead 48% to 44% for Obama among likely voters. That's why Obama & Co. is starting to panic.

I want the President to explain how the 2012 Federal deficit will not exceed 229.27 billion dollars as he promised the American people when he was running for President. I want the President to present a plan for paying back all of the money that we owe. How much is it going to end up costing the tax payers and how long is it going to take. I would like the President to present a credible plan for eliminating our trade deficit. The federal government has been trying to spark the economy by injecting cash but with such a large trade deficit the money just flows out of the country. Before the stimulus bill was passed the Obama administration released a report that predicted unemployment both with and without the stimulus. According to that report unemployment has been worse than if the stimulus had not been passed at all. I want the President to explain why. In other words I want the President to put on a magic show.

What I notice about Romney is that he accuses Obama of doing the exact things he does himself. He's a projector.

When the government spend money, it's not their money they are spending. IT'S OUR MONEY!!! Our tax money. The best thing government can do is to cut our taxes and stop spending money

Worm...yeah that worked so well of the big crash in 29........Too funny. Cut taxes on the wealthy and give them more tax breaks.?.......ahahahahahahaha.............Cut taxes on the Big Oil and give them more subsidies?....Hmmmmm yeah it's our money give big oil and the 1% our tax money....so they don't have to pay any...great repub plan..uh huh!. Hey Worm...Here is your target at the end of this post. I will give you a target to bang your head against right here....because you vote against your own self interests.......>*

Will Haas: We want to see the same from Governor Romney, who refuses to answer the serious questions!! I'd be interested in knowing HIS plans for the future of this country; what HE plans on doing to help the economy (everything he's put forth so far will end up costing us trillions down the line), etc. When Romney answers THOSE important questions; then I'll ask the same to President Obama!! Does anyone agree with me on this?

Didi-376564 " I'd be interested in knowing HIS (Romney's) plans for the future of this country; what HE plans on doing to help the economy"

It will be the same thing that worked for Obama in 2008 - vague generalities.

Roy, I appreciate your honesty to admit that Mitt Romney is avoiding public scrutiny and that you support his evasiveness.

Time will tell if the American people feel the same way.

Feisty Redhead

Again with another inflammatory headline eh... First Read?

You all can rile up the stuck on stupid crowd, they sure seem to love them some First Read these days...

But you cannot deny, President Obama, BEAT the Clinton machine & wiped the floor with McCain/Palin.

I can only imagine what he will to do Team Willard when the gloves come off! lol

So, in closing, keep tossing some red meat to the mob, they deserve some love too..

Obama/Biden - the only hope for the middle class!

I have noticed you only comment on things about Obama. Like him you want us all to believe that he has help America in the last 3.5 years: where is the proof. It is in fact because of him we are in the mess we are in, it is time for him to grow a pair and take some responsibility instead of always blaming Bush when it was because of Clinton that the housing bubble was created. Yes, I know you would like us to believe something else but that is just not the facts of the matter. You Libs said it was out of line for Bush to spend $4.5 trillion in 8 years and it was. Then comes along Obama who is on your side and you and it is now ok to spend $5.2 trillion in just 3 years while asking Congress for another $1.2 trillion for this year.

I like when something good about a Rep is brought up in an atrial because that means you will stay in your troll hole and not comment because when facts are show it is hard to spin them right. You have an awful mouth your mother must be so very proud of you.

Did you here three states have passed laws now that say if you receive welfare we will drug test you and then we can test you randomly as long as you are on welfare. That's how you get budgets under control because if you have enough money to drink or do drugs you don't need our tax dollars. All 50 states should follow suite ASAP.

Here are some facts about the housing bubble and about Bush spending vs. Obama spending.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/united_states_total_spending_pie_chart

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/02/06/the-true-origins-of-this-finan

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57358484/tax-dollars-backing-some-risky-energy-projects/

http://realetybytes.com/?tag=unemployment

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57358484/tax-dollars-backing-some-risky-energy-projects/

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000

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

.http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/03/obamas-magic-number-150000-jobs-per-month/

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/02/06/the-true-origins-of-this-finan

http://realetybytes.com/?tag=unemployment

VOTE OBAMA/BIDEN OUT IN 2012

They have given us nothing even when they controlled Congress the first 2 years Obama was president. What was their excess then? He could of pass on of the jobs bill that not even his own party would vote yes on but it is always someone else’s fault with Obama and that is not a LEADER. The facts are most of the Dem in Congress will not even vote on his crap bills.

John B, Des Moines, IA "I find it especially instructive to look at spending levels three years into each man’s administration — that is, in the first quarter of 1984 in Reagan’s case, and in the first quarter of 2012 in Mr. Obama’s — compared with four years earlier,"

I checked the official government figures, and they don't agree with your 'spin'. I used total spending for Reagan's 4th year and for Obama's 4th year (adjusted for inflation), and the results are;

In Reagan's 4th year, total Federal Spending was 14.3% higher than when he was elected (1980), whereas in Obama's 4th year, total Federal Spending is projected to be 20.9% higher than when he was elected (2008). If you 'cherry picked' only one quarter of each year for comparison, that's nothing but a 'spin'.

In REAL (unadjusted) terms, Reagan increased total Federal Spending by $261 Billion in his 4th year, while Obama increased total Federal Spending by $814 Billion in his 4th year. Reagan may have been a 'big spender' by some accounts, but Obama looks like a 'drunken sailor' in comparison (apologies to the Navy).

I checked the official government figures, and they don't agree with your 'spin'. I used total spending for Reagan's 4th year and for Obama's 4th year (adjusted for inflation), and the results are;

In Reagan's 4th year, total Federal Spending was 14.3% higher than when he was elected (1980), whereas in Obama's 4th year, total Federal Spending is projected to be 20.9% higher than when he was elected (2008). If you 'cherry picked' only one quarter of each year for comparison, that's nothing but a 'spin'.

Okay first of all, this comparison doesn't make any sense. 2008 spending was authorized by the Bush administration, and that wasn't even during the recession. Obama's term didn't start in 2008, so that doesn't really help. Secondly, 2008 wasn't during the recession's main impact; that was in 2009, which you right-wingers seem to ignore. That means that, naturally, Obama's was going to be saddled with the deficits. Not to mention that those recessionary deficits were piled on top of Bush's structural shortfalls...

In REAL (unadjusted) terms, Reagan increased total Federal Spending by $261 Billion in his 4th year, while Obama increased total Federal Spending by $814 Billion in his 4th year. Reagan may have been a 'big spender' by some accounts, but Obama looks like a 'drunken sailor' in comparison (apologies to the Navy).

Now this is a bunch of crap. You cannot compare the spending increases of presidents from a generation ago with modern spending increases. They don't account for growth in budgets or even the economy. I mean, it's like comparing an increase of $150 million in spending by President Woodrow Wilson to a $40 billion increase in spending for Bill Clinton; of course the more modern president would be considered the bigger spender. The best way is to compare the increase to GDP. Essentially, the economy in 1984 was roughly $4 trillion, and the increase accounted for approximately an increase of roughly 6.5% of GDP. The Obama increase was roughly 5% of GDP, therefore Reagan was the bigger spender. And by the way, Obama never increased total spending by $814 billion; that was a natural rise in spending because of the recession. You know, when recessions happen spending goes up due to an increase in the cost of social services like Medicaid and food stamps??? Come on Roy; try using your head instead of the info that Fox News gives you.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

Roy, do you work to misuse numbers so consistently, or does it just come naturally. To claim that the only "legitimate" numbers ignore inflation AND population growth is purest balderdash.

I do, however, appreciate the way you consistently make my points for me...in this case how persistently Conservatives ignore what Reagan did while lionizing him.

John B, Des Moines, IA It would appear that they're as baffled over how to deal with the incredible radicalization of the Republican Party as are the rest of us.

Historically, the majority of our lifetime, the Presidents have worked with Congress to get things done regardless of whether there party held or didn't hold both houses of Congress.

Reagan "restructured" some of the Tax Codes, which was bold, but not 100% was good either. So although he cut taxes and eliminated certain deductions, in the end individuals paid far less taxes than anytime before him. And that is what counts, what the end result was, not how he got there.

It amazes me that when people talk about Reagan's record for support of liberalism, they never fail to take a dig at Republican Party as a whole because they fail to see that their chosen party has weaknesses also. Both Parties have been historically split since the beginning of time. The Republicans have the far conservative right to the middle of the road. The Democrats have the the far liberal left to the blue dogs. The far right is as bad as the far liberal left, neither want to compromise. Up till now this country has always chosen a leader that is the middle of the road from both parties. If this country veers off picking a leader from either the far right or far left it is those two groups that become polarized. The middle of both groups go about the normal every day lives until maybe two months before an important election. They don't get caught up in the two sides polarization.

This President is the most polarizing President we have ever had in our lifetime. I do not remember any President standing up and calling out the other party by name and being just blatently nasty and devisive. A President is the leader of all people, whether he agrees with them or not and should act as one. But this President clearly lacks maturity which is the key ingredient of being any kind of leader.

Both parties far left & far right have become more radicalized. Fortunately for the country the rest of us are the ones that ultimately decide the elections. And fortunately we have a wonderful government system that keeps these two groups in check.

Both parties have more things in common then not, its the very small percentage of radicals on both sides that will never compromise no matter what because their heads are to far up their @$#. Unfortunately now we have a President who is just as radicalized who offers no compromises. He's no Reagan, Clinton, Kennedy or Bush. He's not even a Carter.

This country need him to go home, and imo, he will go home because the middle of both parties will send him there.

Nice try at false equivalence, but your sacrifice to the alter of "compromise" was shown to be a shame when EVERY REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FOR THE PRESIDENCY indicated they would refuse to take in $1 of increased revenue to $10 in spending reductions in order to balance the budget.

Are there people on the left fringe? Absolutely. The difference is the right fringe RUNS the GOP.

Regarding your whining about insufficient "compromise" on the President's part, here's the text of an occasion at which President Obama spoke in person, whereas Congressional Republican leaders have repeatedly broken or refused opportunities to even meet with the President. http://projects.washingtonpost.com/obama-speeches/speech/173/

How many times must his hand be slapped away before he's entitled to just walk away from attempts at reconciliation?

John B....Maybe Obama could just reply to them "Hey, guys, I won.......You guys will just have to ride in the back of the bus". I wonder if he doesnt have some small regret for that attitude now...

Another try at false equivalence.

Congratulations, you've used one remark out of context to justify an agenda of obstruction that began with a meeting on Inauguration Day. Glad it works in your mind...the rest of the world sees it as rationalization, as shown by an approval rating for Congressional Republicans that consistently flirts with single digits.

Did you not want to mention the approval rating for congressional democrats?? You think that is wonderful??

Why wouldn't I want to mention the approval rating of Congressional Democrats? It's roughly 3 times the approval rating of Congressional Republicans. http://www.pollingreport.com/cong_dem.htm

Thanks for asking.

I'm enjoying the TV series "The Border" that tackles the tension you described, Ideo .. not a pretty picture when viewed from the 'other side' of the border.

Ha... Ugly Redhead... seams a little worked up this afternoon... Msnbc not pole smoking the pres anymore... Chuch Tood has ugly Fiesty wound up tight... Her black man in the empty suit will get a chance to blame everyone but himself tonight.. Nothing new here... Nothing but lies... Obama was the first black President... And by the looks of his performance... Maybe the last...

So NoJo, you hired Obama to cut the grass but you wouldn't give him the lawnmower and now you complain that the grass is not cut. Okay, okay, he should have used his teeth.

Good analogy, ideology. The sad fact is that we know that on the very night of President Obama's inauguration the Republicans sat down to plot how to defeat him IN THE MIDST OF THE WORST ECONOMIC SITUATION SINCE THE DEPRESSION. This was beyond politics as usual--it was letting their fellow citizens suffer in order to defeat President Obama. And after all that, Romney wants to go back to the same Bush policies and politicians who put us in the dire straits in the first place. How anyone could vote for him is beyond me.

Pretty clever. Well, except that, when I, and the majority of people, hire someone to cut the lawn, they have lawn mowers of their own.

That's what Obama was supposed to do- bring his own tools to the job. Those tools turned out to be rusty, inefficient, and totally incapable of doing the job for which he was hired.

He is now complaining that he got left with the tab for a steak dinner. That's fine, as far as it goes- but he neglects to add that he bought the whole damn restaurant- so, complaining about a dinner tab is somewhat, well, lame.

In this country, we fire incompetent people, and hire replacements. That's where this election is headed-but, nice try.

hire someone to cut the lawn, they have lawn mowers of their own.

Wooooosh. That's no joe not getting the analogy at all.

In this country, we fire incompetent people, and hire replacements.

Is that why you don't work?

That's what Obama was supposed to do- bring his own tools to the job. Those tools turned out to be rusty, inefficient, and totally incapable of doing the job for which he was hired.

So let me slightly rephrase NoJo. you would not supply him with the power to run the lawnmower.

NoJo

ps ... perhaps he didn't have the means to acquire a lawnmower seeing that he is an illegal immigrant according to many on your side.

You don't the the idea that, when you're in a hole, stop digging, do you?

Obama was supposed to have the skill set to do the job, but he did not. He had a democratic house and senate- and passed a 9000+ earmark, almost trillion dollar, Omnibus Spending bill in March of 2009- that was shortly followed by an almost trillion dollar stimulus bill. He also rammed through an HCR bill with no republican votes- even after the special election in Massachusetts- the main campaign point of which was that it would stop the bill from passing.

The power to do the job? The problem was not a lack of power- it was the INABILITY to do the job.

But, let's use your analogy- Obama got hired to cut the grass. He pointed out that the last guy let the grass get overgrown. After getting hired, he showed up sporadically, insisted on getting paid in advance, complained that the other guy let the grass get too high, took off for Europe, came back, complained that the other guy let the grass get too high, bought a new lawn mower, took off a few days, played a round of golf, complained that the other guy let the gas get too high, demanded more money in advance, complained that gas prices were too high to cut the grass, complained that the other guy let the gas get too high-

Meanwhile, the grass is still growing, there's no mowing- and I'm going to fire him for incompetence. You think that's unfair.

I think you're smoking more than lox up there.

I think a closer analogy would be that Obama brought is own tools but no jo and the others won't let him use them because they are better tools than they have and do not wish to be embarrassed by a lawn that would look better than it has for 8 years.

The power to do the job? The problem was not a lack of power- it was the INABILITY to do the job.

And Snooki Joe has no idea how government works, that's funny since she claims to work on campaigns and all...

LOL

no joe, no bo, nj

You don't the the idea that, when you're in a hole, stop digging, do you?

Well Nojo I have not decided where to plant you yet ... above the frost line or below it. Pre the idiocy of Dems not showing up to vote in 2010 he was doing just fine. Tell me NoJo, what was your portfolio worth at the end of 2007 and what is it worth today? Oh, say hi to your receptionist for me.

Liberals understand Grass because that is what they are smoking.... ;~P

How many times has Romney blamed Obama for an economic recovery this week? Let us count the ways (or the numbers).

sirie - while conservatives just go straight to the hard drugs - which explains why they have no clue - about anything! And, why there is absolutely no sanity in the GOP!

Obama/Biden 2012

Ruken

The power to do the job? The problem was not a lack of power- it was the INABILITY to do the job.

And Snooki Joe has no idea how government works, that's funny since she claims to work on campaigns and all...

And yet she votes for people who know how to keep government from working and openly run on that platform..

LOL, I was making a joke! Drugs are bad SS, besides I'm all out...

Obama has been President for 3.5 years. He said the "Stimulus" would keep unemployment below 8%. It did not.

Obama said he would go over the budget "line by line" to look for fraud and waste. There is no budget.

Obama also is responsible for ramming through "Obamacare" which has many employers in a holding pattern of fear.

Obama has spent more time campaigning and fundraising than any other U.S. President in history.

Obama has EARNED his share of the blame.

jim - but of course you'll also give a lot of blame to the GOP who galvanized to block everything he tried to do, right? I mean, you DO want to be accurate, right? RIGHT!

And, in your dreams about he fundraising. Where have you lived for the past 15 years?

Obama/Biden 2012

jim #'s -- Magnificent here to tell you Obama never said he would keep unemployment below 8%. You know that. What happened is someone in an advisory role made projections based on what was known at that time. When all was said it done it turned out that the economy was in a deeper ditch than first thought. Who drove us into the ditch? REPUBLICANS.

Obama has been President for 3.5 years. He said the "Stimulus" would keep unemployment below 8%. It did not.

When exactly did he say this? Citation please - or is this something that floats in your head akin to visions of sugarplum fairies.

SS, you really don't pay attention, do you? Obama has done over 160 fundraisers so far- by this time, Bush, the previous record holder, had done 89.

Clinton did less than 50, in total, during his reelection campaign.

Oh, and to the other misguided liberal, ideology, who thinks strange thoughts,

Actually, turnout was up from the 2006 midterms

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781453.html

And, as to Obama doing fine until the mid terms- what, exactly, do you think fuels a rout such as the Democrats saw in 2010?  Immense popularity?

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2010/10/21/2010-election-poll-roundup-obama-approval-rating-hits-a-new-low

You really are smoking something other than lox up there.

Regarding Obama's remark that "the private sector is doing fine," he greatly understated things. The private sector is doing fantastic! Corporate profits hit an all-time high last quarter and they've been skyrocketing ever since Obama took office. The stock market reflects that in the fact that it has nearly doubled in the last 3 years. In 1999, at the height of the dot-com boom -- a period of tremendous growth and prosperity -- U.S. corporate profits amounted to about $3500 for every man, woman and child in this country. In 2011, corporate profits amounted to $6000 for every man, woman and child in this country.

But many companies are hoarding that cash and being very conservative with investing in growth, and that includes investing in people by doing more hiring. The reason should be clear -- fear and uncertainty about the future of what the public sector will do. Will Congress extend the Bush-Obama tax cuts that expire at the end of this year? Will the automatic spending cut triggers take effect or will Congress find the wherewithal to intelligently agree on how much to cut and where? Will we have another asinine showdown when the debt ceiling needs to be raised, or will Congress again threaten our creditors with a default and cause the credit rating of the United States to again be downgraded?

Successful business executives didn't make their companies wealthy by playing these same political games that we citizens like to play -- my team is gonna beat your team, etc. They make money no matter who is in power, and they generate wealth by prudently investing, by balancing risk vs. reward. Right now, the perception of risk going into 2013 is rather high -- not because they lack confidence in their ability to provide profitable products and services that customers will buy, but because they fear that the federal government could continue to wallow in stupidity and partisan bickering and could allow or even cause the economic train to derail.

Four years ago Obama was running against Bush who couldn't run for office again and since that worked so well he is trying it again. Got to give him credit, that is a better strategy than running on his own record.

azdad48

So, the private sector is doing fantastic, it must be the public sector that has Romney up or very close in many polls...

Americans Still Blame Bush More Than Obama for Bad Economy

About half of Republicans blame Bush

by Frank Newport

PRINCETON, NJ -- Americans continue to place more blame for the nation's economic problems on George W. Bush than on Barack Obama, even though Bush left office more than three years ago. The relative economic blame given to Bush versus Obama today is virtually the same as it was last September. ......

Still, 68% of Americans say former President Bush should be given a great deal or a moderate amount of blame for the nation's economic woes -- substantially more than say the same about Obama. This suggests that Obama's argument that he is on the right track and needs more time to turn the economy around could fall on receptive ears, particularly those of independents.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/155177/Americans-Blame-Bush-Obama-Bad-Economy.aspx

So the billionaire just gave Romney 10 million yesterday, and earlier gave 21 million to Gingrich to defeat Romney.......flip flop GOP donors.... flip for flip flop Mitt Flop! Skullduggery........Skullduggery.....1 man 10 million to candidate he opposed. 31 million total to keep the 1% power over the middle class and poor.

Fun word to say huh? Republicons...skullduggery.

President Obama/Bidsen 2012

starsailing - yeah those billionaires on the right sure know how to pick em don't they - first Gingrich, now Romney? Nothing more needs to be said!

Obama/Biden 2012

Obama also is responsible for ramming through "Obamacare" which has many employers in a holding pattern of fear.

Obviously the words of a conservative. Someone who is more concerned about health care providers than those who actually need the care itself.

sirie, I could offer my opinions about why Romney is wherever he is in the polls, but that would just be my opinion.

The fact that U.S. corporate profits are higher than at any time in our entire history is a fact. I prefer to discuss facts.

azdad48

OK, fact. Obama said shortly after his comment that "of course, the private sector is NOT doing fine" So, you are saying he is a liar?

Obama has been President for 3.5 years. He said the "Stimulus" would keep unemployment below 8%. It did not.

As others have pointed out, he did not say that. Doesn't stop the right from parroting the NewsCorp talking point that says he did, though.

Obama said he would go over the budget "line by line" to look for fraud and waste. There is no budget.

And whose fault is that? Could it be an irresponsible congress whose job it actually is to put that together, vote on it and then submit it to the president once it's passed both houses? Damn Harry Reid for sitting on bills, or the Republican sponsors of those bills for inserting political "poison pills" in an attempt to generate campaign fodder in the first place, if you must. Blame Boehner and his colleagues for playing politics rather than doing their damn job when he walked away from last year's compromise just as it was on the verge of moving forward. At least Obama sends proposals every year, even if he can't force congress to do anything with them.

Obama also is responsible for ramming through "Obamacare" which has many employers in a holding pattern of fear.

They're only in a holding pattern because they don't know if they're going to have to comply with the new regulations or stick with the old -- last I checked that was the fault of a bunch of letigious righties who don't want their buddies in the healthcare and insurance industries to have to work for a living. It'll be settled shortly when the SCOTUS ruling comes out...

Obama has spent more time campaigning and fundraising than any other U.S. President in history.

Citizens United passed and you're SURPRISED that this is the result? Any reasonably intelligent person should know that anyone NOT in the pocket of big business would have no choice but to scramble to counter their monetary disadvantage. Your idiot conservative activist judges on the SCOTUS knew exactly what they were doing, and may they be damned to hell for selling us all out.

Obama has EARNED his share of the blame.

Obama is not blameless by any stretch, but his share is a lot smaller than you think.

Come on TN. Obama just wants everybody to have a fair shot. Too bad it is having everybody getting a fair shot at receiving food stamps.

jim-1455434

Obama has been President for 3.5 years. He said the "Stimulus" would keep unemployment below 8%. It did not.

Romney lie #1296

the Romney campaign acknowledged already that this 8% figure comes from a staff-written projection issued Jan. 9, 2009 so you should, too, jim.

Obama said he would go over the budget "line by line" to look for fraud and waste. There is no budget.

Budget comes from Congress but President Obama did sign an executive order calling for federal agencies to cut waste in a number of areas including travel, information technology devices, printing, vehicles and promotional SWAG in an effort to promote more efficient spending across the government.

Obama also is responsible for ramming through "Obamacare" which has many employers in a holding pattern of fear.

Just because Romney says so?

The cost of health insurance for many Americans have been climbing for years now (way before the ObamaCare), outstripping any growth in workers’ wages and adding more uncertainty about the pace of rising medical costs for average Americans.

Obama has spent more time campaigning and fundraising than any other U.S. President in history.

No other president in the entire history of United Stated had Super PACS and one guy writing $35+ and counting worth of checks. So take it up with the Supreme Court for jobe "well" done.

sirie

OK, fact. Obama said shortly after his comment that "of course, the private sector is NOT doing fine" So, you are saying he is a liar?

what he should have said is that the private sector is doing better than any other time since at least 2001.

Tony_Baloney

You beat me to it and it looks like I cheated off your post :)

Next, jim will call you a liar, prove nothing, and disappear. If you ask him to prove your lie, he will not because he cannot.

He will also do his 3rd grade "bayl lie." I know becuase he does it all the time so he is very predictable ...almost boring.

That's our jim-1455434

Steeler Fan 380417:

BINGO!!!

OK, fact. Obama said shortly after his comment that "of course, the private sector is NOT doing fine" So, you are saying he is a liar?

Yes, he's a liar. He understated it to begin with, and then backpedaled even on the understatement when he apparently realized his comment was going to be intentionally misunderstood and used against him.

What he should've said was "American companies are making more money than at any time in history, but uncertainty about what the public sector will do or not do is restraining investment in growth and investment in hiring new employees."

The first part of that statement about record corporate profits is an undisputable fact. The second part about why companies are being cautious is speculation, but interviews with various CEOs and small business owners indicate that "uncertainty about government policies" is a major reason many of them are being cautious.

azdad48 I'm just toying with ya AZ dad, and congrats on the election Tuesday! ;~)

I know what he said was taken out of context, it is funny how ppl (including the press) love to jump on a person even when they know what was really meant! Much like the people that I work with...

It is correct to say that Obama has lacked the tools to get the job done. Other than the fact that the Congress was democrat controlled his first 2 years, there have been other presidents who have had to deal with a Congress that was of the opposite party and have made it work. Obama himself emphasized repeatedly during his campaign that he would be the one to unite the parties and get them to work together - yet Congress and the country is more divided than I can ever remember. Now, Congress is far from blameless for the mess we're looking at right now, but you cannot place the full blame at their doorstep either - and keep in mind if you choose to do that, then you have to give Bush a free pass for actions in his last 2 years, as he was dealing with a Congress controlled by the democrats.