Wait, what?

Politicians playing politics?

No Way!

Ohhhh yeah, the HALLIBURTON crowd. You hated Halliburton during the Bush years, didn't ya, Feisty? I remember Obama saying how sick HE was of the sweetheart deals for Halliburton too. He said that those types of deals would be OVER once he was in the White House.

Interesting that he awarded a no-bid contract of over $500 million to Halliburton later on during his Presidency, isn't it?

JH-479998, I guess you don't read or don't want to read what is written. The Military cuts and tax break expirations where agreed upon bypartisan. That means it took both sides majority to agree. Make sure you blame the right people. Obama is simply going to make them stick to what they agreed upon. It is still not too late for the Republicans to turn this around. All they have to do is play ball. What a wierd concept. Actually play ball and be part of the solution instead of all of the problem. Hmm, now that would actually be history if they did that.

brenda1964 You are right. GOP do the honorable thing for a Change and put Americans first instead of Corporations.

Where are the tax returns Romney? What are you hiding?

I guess the chickenhawks really want to go back to war in the middle ease (say Syria).

brenda

I believe the looming cuts are the result of the parties not reaching a deal. I guess NBC would write that as bi-partisan, but NBC will write anything to make Obama look good. They were an enforcement mechanism established to force the parties to make a deal. Now that they are looming at the end of the year our President is blaming the republicans. His leadership didn't produce a deal when it was necessary.

He is pathetic.

I guess the chickenhawks really want to go back to war in the middle ease (say Syria).

Phine,

They are not particularly picky about where we go - as long as we keep sending our youth off into the meat grinder...

So what kind of *bling* did you get? Earrings, pendant, ring...?

Inquiring minds need to know! ;o)

Necklace, ring and earrings - opal & diamonds. Yummy! (Opal is my birthstone)

EVERYTHING Mr. Obama says now is: "It is about politics."

Anything to deflect from the major issues our country faces.

It is getting rather boring to hear him over and over and over again saying the same tired RHETORIC.

Hey, recall the Secretary of the State back home. Wait a minute, she just gave away $ 150,000,000 to combat aids and guess who is in Africa now setting up re-distribution of this American taxpayer handout ? Yep, Mr. Clinton is in Africa with his Clinton Foundation which "supports fighting HIV" hat on. Crooks one and all.

Get a set, Mr. Obama......stay home and do your job.

Wow, social media comments from the Dakotas/Florida to Illinois.

JH,

You seem to forget..

The automatic triggers were part of the debt ceiling bill. But sides knew that going into the sequestration or "super committee" work last fall. The committee could not agree on both spending cuts and revenue. therefore the triggers.

So today the GOP still do not want to take the presidents deal of extending the tax cut for those making under $250,000 and let the tax cuts expire fro those making over $250,000.

The only thing that is the same is that there will be an August recess for both House and Senate. Boehner must not be too worried if it is still business as usual.

So the GOP now at this late date are complainging about what they voted on last summer.

Jr, call your Congress person and complain.... tell them to take the presidents deal.

(Opal is my birthstone)

Go figure... mine too! ☺

Interesting though that recent numbers show an overwhelming advantage of Romney over Obama when it comes to likely voters among veterans/current service military.

Northstar

As soon as I heard that Patty Murray was going to chair the "super committee" it told me the democrats did NOT want a bi-partisan agreement. Just name ONE thing that Patty Murray has agreed with republicans on. She has always voted 100% party line. The super committee was a joke.

President Obama's idea of extending the tax cuts for under $250K and increasing over $250K is also a joke. It will not solve anything. He is a failure as a leader. He is a pathetic liar in campaigning.

FYI, the gift from my hubby was to make me feel better from all my cancer treatments. I am not on any kind of government assistance. I would appreciate an apology. Knowing nothing about me, to make such a statement is beneath contempt. Shame on you.

Yet, the republicans and their anti-president, bush, have brought on the huge debts we are now facing with the two wars and huge military spending for over 10 years. Take away the $8,000,000,000,000 it has cost us and the 7,500 American service men and women who wasted their lives and you cut our debt in half. Now John McPain wants us to get involved in Syria. We have become the policeman of the world and we are ruining America in the progress. Wake up!

Feisty,

I am afraid to hold my breath in case I don't start again (yes, I am a coward - kinda like breathing and living)

JH,

You can believe the super committee and all of Congress is a joke...

but come Dec 31,2012 all the tax cuts expire and the spending cuts will start to take effect in 2013.

The president told Congress the tax cut deal he will sign, it is in the party of No court....

So let your congressperson know how you feel.... and go vote in Nov.

but the lamb duck Congress of Boehner needs to get their act together because the clock is ticking....

Phine,

your gift sounds beautiful, good to see you on the thread today.

Lost one of my favorite buddies in the chemo room yesterday. Needed all of you (both on the right and left) to lift my spirits. She was a wonderful woman.

Republicans would risk defense cuts in order to cut taxes for the wealthiest Americans.

Bingo!

Phine, If you in fact are going through cancer treatments I sincerely wish you the best and hope you have a full recovery. My barbs are targeted at the typical liberal hypocrites. This being an anonymous board, you don't know who the other posters are specifically, and while my comments are probably on target the vast majority of the time they could be off the mark now and then for a specific poster.

Fisty, I am confident that my taxes are going to subsidize you.

Since Oblameo ignored the recommendations of THREE (3) special committees on how to cut the deficit and rein in spending, NOW he wants to blame everybody else BUT him! How much more the Blamer-in-Chief can you people stand?!?!

If this man EVER does ANYTHING that does NOT have a political motivation, please let me know so that I can have a heart attack and die immediately, because at the point I will have seen everything. If Obama could just talk out of the same side of his mouth for more than one consecutive, I would be absolutely amazed. It is his ignorance, small-mindedness, silliness, and arrogance that have led us to the edge of fiscal disaster. He is the ONLY president that has added over $6 trillion to our national debt in less that 4 years.

And now he is blaming adding thousands of highly trained military men and women to the millions of civilians that are unemployed on anyone but himself! It was his idea to ignore Congress to begin with. Now he has been to over 100 fundraisers and not had a meeting of his job council once since the campaign began.

Oh, and don't forget "Betting on America!" What are we betting on, anyway? How many million voters he can fool this time around?

Romney/anybody in 2012

Fisty, I am confident that my taxes are going to subsidize you.

Red Sox,

Phine is legit. Fisty on the other hand is an MSNBC Staffer.

If she wasn't she would have been banned long ago.

RedSox - What a despicable thing to say. You have no idea what you are talking about or who you are talking to. Shame on you.

Fiesty on the other hand is an MSNBC Staffer. If she wasn't she would have been banned long ago.

Exactly right Brockton Barlow. Either that or part of Obama campaign. I've always said if "she" was one person, she would have to be the biggest loser to sit online 24 hours a day posting for Obama.

Kumar,

MSNBC is the Obama Campaign!

kimH-1330542....."RedSox - What a despicable thing to say. You have no idea what you are talking about or who you are talking to. Shame on you."

Wow, the Liberals scream bloody murder at other posters but it is OK to post obnoxious and name calling posts to other posters who identify themselves as Independents, Libertarians, or Republicans.

Wait a minute....let's use one of Mr. Obama's favorite quotes in response to this article:

• "It is the Republicans playing politics again", or
• "It is all Bush's fault", or
• "Let's not even think about just one report on the Economy, numbers get confusing", or
• "It is an European problem and completely out of my control", or
• "Let's see you IRS tax forms (forget about my College Student Loan paperwork)", or
• "Gov. Romney is a true capitalist, which I despise, making all that money while I slaved to be a community organizer", or
• "Washington D.C. is where the real money is at", or
• "Let's wait until after the election, then I can really barter the issue", or
• ........ (to be continued until tomorrow after a review of Mr. Obama's recent campaign speech).

JH-479998

brenda

I believe the looming cuts are the result of the parties not reaching a deal. I guess NBC would write that as bi-partisan, but NBC will write anything to make Obama look good. They were an enforcement mechanism established to force the parties to make a deal. Now that they are looming at the end of the year our President is blaming the republicans. His leadership didn't produce a deal when it was necessary.

He is pathetic.

Bull@!$%#. The failure was because of the Republicans' no-tax pledge. And by the way, Obama had a $4 trillion "Grand Bargain" agreement that he was trying to strike with Boehner, but Cantor refused it and the deal went in flames. Now Boner has the gall to blame the President for his failure. If you want info on the President's plan, check out the white house website.

Bob in KC-545426

Since Oblameo ignored the recommendations of THREE (3) special committees on how to cut the deficit and rein in spending, NOW he wants to blame everybody else BUT him! How much more the Blamer-in-Chief can you people stand?!?!

In case you haven't noticed, Obama's grand bargain deal that he was trying to strike with Boehner was based off of Simpson-Bowles. Check Politifact.

I say let the fiscal cliff happen. The defense budget definitely needs some large cuts, and the defense industry can kiss my ass; they have had record profits thanks to Bush's defense spending binge. And we need to lay off the tax cut drugs for a while; our fiscal future depends on it. Let it happen, Congress; do nothing. For once, your inaction and political polarization will help the country...

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

The way this is going to play is this,

Obama: "You take these defense cuts, and I'll consider half of the Bush tax cuts to expire later this year. In exchange I want opposition to the ACA to go away, and unemployment compensation extended another year."

Boehner: "Hell NO!!!"

Obama: "Then twist in the wind you little cracker bitch!"

Boehner: "Gaaaaaaaaaahhhhh" (head explodes).

Can somebody tell me what "RETROACTIVE RETIREMENT" is, that Mitt Romney did when he was at Bain Capital? How does one "RETIRE RETROACTIVELY" from a Company?

It doesn't sound like a very "Manly" thing to do, now does it?

Really, Mitt Romney should be telling all the American people what's he Hiding in his "lost" Tax Returns. Perhaps his shady financial dealings with known Middle Eastern Terrorist Groups? As they say: "It is possible".

Also, what's this I hear about his hidden Swiss Bank accounts, and his phony Cayman Island, off-shore, shell companies, where he "laundries" all his questionable income. Is that true? KLet me know.

RepublicansForObama-6186389#1.35: How does one retire retroactively, yet remain in the position? Gotta be a republican. Gotta have people like "Karl Rove" helping you. Then you put out a gwaddamned outrageous lie in the form of an illigocial fairy tale and feed it to fools. If doubt remains, add a little more bullsh^t. Remember, bullsh^t is a republican staple, used to salve and sooth their base. Regards

You notice Red Sox Doesn't Rule - White Sox Rules - has nothing but cheap shots

Opal is the birthstone for October hope you are covered with this beautiful magnificent stone phine - the colors are like a beautiful rainbow as are you

Can someone please explain to me why Republicans are so against America?

Can someone please tell me something good about Romney that will make me want to vote for him? Something true? Not some lie about something that is bad about Obama. Something good about Romney.

Paris Hilton has started more businesses and created more jobs than Romney has, maybe the Republicans should run her for President. She doesn't outsource like he did, either. Nor does she rob peoples pension funds like he did. Not that running a business is like running a government, but her smile is more sincere, and less Reptilian, his creeps me out.

Obama got Bin Laden. Obama saved the auto industry. Obama started to do something about healthcare, but not near enough to keep insurance companies from profiting on misery and death. Obama fell flat on other things he led me to expect. I'd like some sort of alternative.

Den

Paris hilton has done more to create wealth and prosperity than the current clown in the white house. I will give you that.

Why do democrats hate America?

I hope you know how to operate a weapon because when the military get cut, the soldiers go home. We'll have a useless pile of material sitting there for any opponent to use against us. Get rid of the Programs that aren't producing results and strengthen the ones that have delivered.

Oh! What will the soldiers do when they get home? Join the unemployment ranks? No one thinks anymore.

Won't have to join the unemployment ranks if we stop outsourceing and start creating in America again. See thats the problem, we outsource and then create this big army and send everyone overseas to die. No one thinks anymore.

Freshieee

You're full of crap... Simpson Bowles had entitlement spending cuts... something the Squanderer-in-Chief knows nothing about....

Brenda - do you understand anything about the economy and how it works? If companies could make things profitably in the US they would. The computer you are using to type your comments - was that made in the US? I doubt it. The smart phone maybe you are using to show you don't understand how the economy works - was that made in the US? Funny how liberals and Dems only seem to mind if Bain has outsourced jobs (after Romney left there) but don't seem to mind that all the products that they want to buy cheaply are made overseas. Hypocritical.

Den O'Synn - I can give you lots of the reasons to vote for Romney - from his successful tenure at Bain (creating thousands of more jobs than Paris Hilton has ever created), his successful running of the Olympics, and his successful time as governor (lowering the unemployment rate - Obama admin distorted his record and when called on it notice how they don't mention it again - working with the Democrats in one of the bluest states in the US), etc. He has had successes. Obama gave the order to kill Osama but did not do the military planning or risk his life so don't say he got him. Does a diservice to the military. Auto bailout - do your research about how successful that has been. We are still owed billions by GM, the stock is signicantly lower than the taxpayers paid, etc. Saved a lot of jobs but they should have been allowed to do a structured bankruptcy and lower their costs. Union jobs and benefits were saved but the rest of us are paying dearly for it.

If you can answer this question I will keep an open mind about voting for Obama - why should I support a president who in the past 6 months has found time to have over 100 fundraisers and 10 rounds of golf but no time to meet with his jobs council?

The Obama appointed Secretary of Defense Leon Penetta has stated publicly on a number of occasions that the automatic cuts to defense will be "disastrous." Yet another issue where it seems no one in the Obama administration is on the same page with everyone saying something different. It is almost as if they are just playing politics with the issue.

The republicans agreed and may have even introduced these defence cuts because they were afraid that their handler Norquist would oust them from congress if they voted for the tax increases Obama and the dems had proposed. It was an easier pill to swallow then to have additional revenues. So when they again decided on no new revenues during the "Super Committee" negotiations, this was the result of saying no. We all know this. This only happened 1 year ago and people here pretend something else occurred. Wake the bleep up! Republicans created this for them selves and now say the president is playing a dangerous game.

I say let all the taxes and cut go into affect and invest some of that additional revenue on infrustructure to absorb any job loses that may occur.

BTW did you hear that Romney also disposed of key records of his handling of the Olympics? Which was one of the most expensive Olympic expenditure per athlete in any Olimpic games? So this guy disposed of records as Governor, Cant really say when he actually left Bain, wont release his TAX RETURNS, and cant be specific on a number of issues.. and the media want us to believe this is going to be a close race??

Be An Informed Voter

Brenda - do you understand anything about the economy and how it works? If companies could make things profitably in the US they would. The computer you are using to type your comments - was that made in the US? I doubt it. The smart phone maybe you are using to show you don't understand how the economy works - was that made in the US? Funny how liberals and Dems only seem to mind if Bain has outsourced jobs (after Romney left there) but don't seem to mind that all the products that they want to buy cheaply are made overseas. Hypocritical

I guess you don't seem to understand how the economy works. Right now it's set up so that we can outsourse to china sweat shops to make items at a cheaper cost. With this in mind, it's more profitable for a company to outsourse then to make in the good old USA. In this you are correct. What you fail to see is that we need to change that. We need to change the terrif laws to make it un profitable for companies to outsourse to china sweat shops and start manufacturing these same items in the good old USA for "YES" a higher price, but making jobs here instead of sending them overseas. I don't own a cell phone, but i am sure the house phone has some parts made overseas. You can hardly buy anything in the USA that isn't made somewhere else or has parts made somewhere else. That is the Corperate greed thing for you and the reason people can't find jobs. When will the Republicans wake up??? We went from a industry nation to Outsourse USA in just 2 generations. We need to get back to being an industrialized nation again and get our own working and not creating jobs for other nations. So it's not me that doesn't understand the economy, its you that doesnt want to be part of the solution.

2008: Hope and Change

2012: Mope and Blame

This is just another point of proof that you cannot and should not trust the Republican Party.

The Republicans are not fit to govern period.

I have some advise for you Boehner man up to your agreements.

To the repugnicans spending on defense (going directly to Lockheed, Raytheon, Boeing, etc.), fossil fuels (Enbridge, Keystone, etc.), undercutting financial regulations, de-fanging the EPA and all 162+ anti-abortion/anti-contraception bills are ALL jobs bills. When one of the two (unfortunately for We the People) political parties (aka repugnicans) works NOT for its easily duped constituency but instead for the special interest groups that bribe them via campaign contributions this type of BS is what you can expect. The repugnicans cost the US 1.3 BILLION dollars because of their idiocy on the debt ceiling. If they were truly concerned about the deficit and reducing spending instead of sabotaging the US economy to make POTUS look bad then they would be singing a different tune.

You non 1%-ers who vote repugnican (and bluedog dic_khead democrap) are voting against your own best interests and do not even realize it because you "buy" the hatred and animosity that douchebags like Rush limbaugh, Beck,m Palin, bachman, Rove, Kock brothers, Walker, Orielly spew. You foolish fools.

AMF

You take allot of Middle class, Low income families and you talk to them about how great it used to be. Then you Parade the latest President in front of them and you say HE is to blame for your lot in life. He is the reason your out of work. When in reality it was the Republicans blocking everything he tried to do to make your lot in life just a little better. Republican = Corperate greed. Simple math.

Fed Up-2683606

Freshieee

You're full of crap... Simpson Bowles had entitlement spending cuts... something the Squanderer-in-Chief knows nothing about....

Well, according to the Fiscal Times, Obama's grand bargain had entitlement cuts. Plus his healthcare reform had some tweaks to deal with Medicare... You're also forgetting that Simpson Bowles had tax increases, which is the GOP's kryptonite.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

Article Four, Section Four of the constitution states that the “United States shall guarantee to every State a republican form of government and shall protect each of them against invasion.” In other words, even if the federal government chose to exercise no other power, it must, under the Constitution, provide for the common defense.

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL

We already have enough bombs to annihilate this planet 10 x's over, why do we possibly need any more?

A missile defense is to stop those ICBMs. Did you even read the article? Have you been keeping up with the news on successful missile tests by countries that want us annihilated? If you hear on the news that in 2 hours your city is going to be an ash cloud, are you going to just blame Bush with your dying breath?

Allen-968499 - A missile defense is to stop those ICBMs. Did you even read the article? Have you been keeping up with the news on successful missile tests by countries that want us annihilated? If you hear on the news that in 2 hours your city is going to be an ash cloud, are you going to just blame Bush with your dying breath?

Allen, your so funny. First of all, if we where going to be wiped out in 2hrs, you can bet you will never hear from the government that it's about to happen. They will not want to cause a mass riat. Secondly if it was to happen and I had 2hrs notice, the last thing i would be thinking of is President Bush. Lastly, Feisty is right, we have enough bombs to blow ourselves up 10 times over and they know it too. So if a bomb drops on us, you can guarentee we are not just going to sit here. We drop them too and the world ends so I could care a less one way or the other because i wont be here to care. You however live in fear all the time and want to create more and more bombs and attack first ask questions later. Thats a standard Rush L or Republican Move .

Let's call Romney what he is: A draft dodging, 4 time deferment obtaining shicken sh*t, son-of-a-b*tch....how can a draft dodger like Romney, Cheney, and alot of "chicken hawk", you know who's, get up and give a speech to the VFW or any Veteran for that matter, about anything having to do with war and foreign policy?? So while he was riding a bike around France for 2 years, my friends and I were fighting our way through the jungle in Vietnam at 17 years old after enlisting to serve our country honorably. Hey Mitt, how many of oyur sons are serving their country?? ZERO Well, I guess the apple doesn't fall to far from the tree now does it!! ROMNEYS: The great American Chicken Hawk family. While not having served in the military, Obama's leadership and direction of the military has been honorable and commendable as a Commander In Chief and I'm proud of his leadership!!

OBAMA/BIDEN 2012

Only a total idiot will vote for Romney. The man is a flip flopping etch a sketching phoney.

He represents a main element of what went wrong with our economy, the destruction of our well paying production based jobs and sucking out US equity and sending it to Asia. Basically he helped create the main impediments to growth — the gaping trade deficit with China and self-destructive corporate-outsourcing hysteria. Note that the companies he proudly points out he saved and are thriving are all retail companies that they ensured remained operational to sale Asia's goods to us via over extended credit. The biggest crime is that Bain unlike companies in German took no effort to reeducate and retrain those workers whose jobs went to Asia so that would continue to have productive lives. Romney and his buddies only care about those 3 billion new Customers in Asia and developing their middle class.

Guess that fake housing/credit bubble that only produced service and labor jobs and placed people more in debt was suppose to replace the jobs lost to Asia. Yeah, that plan, which created $162 trillion in fake worthless credit default swaps, worked for about a decade until it blew up in our faces. Notice that the wallstreet banks who created this mess are his staunch supporter.

I pray to God each day that people open their eyes and see thru his crap. Everytime I see that big grin on his face while he thinks, "these people are buying this," I want to smack it right off him. LOL This is not coming from a liberal demagogue, but someone with an MBA who successfully worked in accounting and finance for 30 years.

Yes the President has done more for veterans, we have more on disability than ever before in history. It is quite easy to apply for PTSD money.

He has done more for food stamp recipients, we have more collecting than ever before in history.

He has done more for unemployment, we have more on unemployment than I can remember in history.

He has done more for the poor, we have more Americans living below the poverty level that I can remember in history.

Yes he's doing a wonderful job.

Pathetic man.

Really? Care to name a few? What benefits? Do you know Obama's plan for Tri-care? News flash, more veteran vote Republican than Democrat.

JH - Paul - ignorant replies - I would almost expect better but not really. Yes, JH there are more disabled vets - thank you Bush/Cheney. We have safety nets to help those less fortunate - always have had. Your point?

Paul - veterans benefits were increased by President Obama - even though a number of Republicans - including McCain - voted against the increases.

And, more veterans in the last election and in the next have/will vote Democratic!

Obama/Biden 2012

Ah Sanity,

Care to expand on your statement that this president has done more for veterans than any other president in history?

From what I have seen, that's not a true statement.

I look forward hearing your comments.

Still never answered the question. What benefits were increased? Answer the Tri-care question SS. Do you even know what Tri-care is?

USNEWS has Romney at 54% and Obama at 34%, but again what benefits were you talking about?

...

Seeking

My brother is a disabled vet who can't stand president Obama. And he is very liberal. He spends a lot of time in VA clinics and hospitals. He gets very upset at what he sees as more and more service people returning and claiming false problems in order to collect the easy Obama money. We have so many Americans who are just loving the easy Obama money these days that we are getting further and further in debt. I am all for safety nets for those who need it but I get pissed off at those who file false claims and that is what we are seeing in Obama's America.

You called my comment ignorant, please tell me what was not right about it.

1/20/2013 - the end of an error

retiredceo - check his legislation for veterans. It will clearly be a great education for you!

JH - that's unfortunate and I am sorry your brother was wounded.

I can name at least 20 veterans who would NEVER again vote for a Republican - and that's without trying.

I hope you are right. I hope 1/20/2013 is the end or an error - the error of having the GOP block everything our President has tried to do. I believe it will be as we vote their sorry a**es out and keep our President for 4 more years.

Obama/Biden 2012

Seeking

And I am sorry for your 20 friends who have lost their minds.

Over 22 million veterans and Romney can't count on 20 of them. He might as well give up now.

You better keep seeking, you need it.

Poor Sanity, never does seem to be able to back anything she says up.

Just more generalities and conclusions.

Please, please, please continue to entertain Sanity. You really do seem to have a talent to amuse.

JH,

You're spot on!

I'll educate you SS on Tri-care. Starting Oct 1st Tri-care rates will go up and up and up until the Veteran can't afford it and in turn force the veteran to get Obamacare and in turn have to wait a long time to get treatment, see a lot of our injuries require Specialist and with Obamacare the Government will decide when WE can see such Specialist. OK, I gave you one, what benefits did Obama increase for my brothers and sisters?

Spanky -- Seeking fits the definition of a troll to a tee. I believe the "intentional" version of troll. P.S. -- the Rasmussen poll proves her way wrong. Romney's support among likely voters who are veterans/current service is overwhelming.

Pual

I do know from my own brothers problems that our veterans have been treated OK. Some get lost in the cracks but all in all the VA hospitals do a good job.

I have also heard about your complaint and the fact that more veterans will be forced into Obamacare. that bothers my brother. I don't really know if Obama has increased any benefits but I do know that he talks a good game. But that is the problem, it always seems like a game that he is playing with words.

A fool agrees with the GOP House, who has hamstrung every single bill that Obama has put ou there to help our economy. The bill to eliminate tax breaks for those who send jobs offshore and that would have helped small businesses here, the bill to give women equal pay, the jobs bill, you can go on and on. The house wants Obama to fail, and bring in their bastardized version of christian law. It's not even based on Jesus' teachings!Idiots.

Serving over 20 years in the Military and assigned as Squadron Tax Assistant I can tell you 80% of those serving Vote Republican. Care to know why? Because the majority that join the military do so because they love their country and want to serve. They are some of the most generous people I have ever met. That should tell you all you need to know about those on the left, you know the ones that would never risk their lives for this great nation. Protest the military, spit on those that come back, etc.

Seeking -

As a veteran, I can guarantee that I will not be voting for Obama.

I don't trust the Chicago political machine - and Obama reeks of it! As a kid, I grew up in Illinois and we knew Chicago politics were only one step removed from organized crime at that time. I doubt that it has gotten any better since then - especially as at least 4 of their recent governors are now serving jail time.

While I may not agree with everything Romney says or does, his views, fiscally, are much closer to my own. Additionally, Romney has a record to run on as a successful businessman and as a governor able to work with the other party.

Obama has a record of failure and increasing taxes as President, a do-nothing senator (voting 'present' at the state and federal levels), and as a lawyer that had to give up his license to practice law because he lied on his application to the Illinois Bar Association (I actually looked that up, while it did not state unequivocally that he lied, the implication was there - he resigned rather than face an investigation).

Now, can you give me even one good reason why I should vote for Obama given his record?

Well Tammy, this certainly isn't one:

Remember Obama’s earlier brain child that since men and women in the military volunteered they should provide their own insurance? Then of course his brain child of cutting combat pay unless a soldier was being shot at?

Just ran across this, thought I'd share. :)

ellen

Yes the former President Bush has done more for veterans, [by starting two wars, one under false pretenses] we have more on disability than ever before in history. It is quite easy to apply for PTSD money. [But you can't prove it.]

He [President Bush and the Great Recession] has done more for food stamp recipients, we have more collecting than ever before in history.

He [Bush] has done more for unemployment, we have more on unemployment than I can remember in history.

He [Bush] has done more for the poor, we have more Americans living below the poverty level that I can remember in history.

Yes he's doing did a "wonderful" job [Brownie].

Pathetic man.

Remember how rightwingers wanted to add Dubya to Mount Rushmore? Hahahaha!

According to The Hill poll released today a majority of Americans blame Obama for the bad economy.

Not Bush, not the Tea Party, not Republicans,, not Europe, not the tsunami, not Congress!

They RIGHTFULLY blame Obama!

JFK-2112 -- I have three members in my family currently serving in the military. They joined because of the poor economy and job market. My nephew was going to serve to get his education paid for, then changed his mind. Not all sign up for the same reasons, and not to diminish their service, but love of country is not something only one group in this country owns.

When I've gotten into conversations with these members of my family about pay etc., even they admit Democrats have done more over the years on their behalf compared to Republicans. Still they vote Republican, and this is due far more to a profile--also applicable to police and similar lines of work and predisposition to a conservative belief system, and in their case religious-Right beliefs.

Ultimately, folks in the military like so many rightwingers vote against their own best interests. They can't see beyond the rightwing Echo Chamber and Cone of Silence they live in.

el-1372142 -- If you can't provide a credible source for what you post, then don't post. In this forum you can have your own opinion, but not your own facts.

el-1372142 -- If you can't provide a credible source for what you post, then don't post. In this forum you can have your own opinion, but not your own facts.

el-1372142 did provide the source tap on the underlined phrase and it takes you to the CNN story.

As if one needs a source to figure out that Obama has nothing but contempt for our military!

The Hill being only one of many polls found:

When it comes to the economy now, there is enough blame to share:

1. George W. Bush (He is hiding because he knows he contributed largely.)
2. President Obama (The incumbent is supposed to make it better.)
3. Congress (As much or more than the President, their dysfunction sunk the nation’s credit rating.)

Yet, the “majority of voters blame the president for the bad economy,” according to The Hill Poll.

Centrists still blame Republicans and favor Obama.

Quinnipiac has the best record for predictions, but odds in Vegas are always the most reliable. And a more interesting question would be which Party policies people support or blame as a predictor of who they will vote for.

?TruePatriot: First off, Don't even propose to tell me what I can/should post. This is a public discussion board. For everyone. Got it?

Secondly: Thanks for "allowing" me my opinion *rolls eyes*, But I got those little facts from CNN. Stay classy!

ellen

You have a link? I would like to read it on my own like the poll above. Sorry if I don't "just trust you with that" ellen.

TP

Reread El's post 3.17. Tap the underlined phrase and it links to the CNN stories.

Brockton Barlow -- Thanks, it was so light with the rest of the text in bold. Okay so here is more from that article:

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said no decision has been made.

"The president and the [veterans service organizations] had a good conversation, and veterans can be assured that the president understands any concerns that they would have," Gibbs said. "The budget the president has proposed represents an historic increase in discretionary spending to take care of our wounded warriors: those that have been sent off to war, have protected our freedom and have come back wounded."

He added, "this president takes very seriously the needs of our wounded warriors that have given so much to protect our freedom on the battlefields throughout the world."

If one reads the entire article (which is brief and lacking details), it appears the plan is to shift a lot of people to affordable coverage via the ACA Exchanges, including military families for non-military medical issues. So they could still receive government subsidies, but can choose their own doctor, etc. And the president is keeping an open mind in the meantime. What's the BFD?

So really ellen should copy text and put it in quotation marks rather than providing her own biased interpretation.

Obama has a record of failure and increasing taxes as President,

Hmm, the income tax rates are the lowest they've been since 1950, and the payroll tax has been reduced - and you're trying to pretend he's increased taxes? Reality obviously isn't your strong suit.

Obama has had a long string of successes, most notably the health care act, but virtually all of his "failures" can be traced directly back to the Party of NO.

CM: we would all be better off if the President really did fail...to implement his radical policies.

For ALL those that THINK they know ANYTHING about veterans and what the President has and has NOT proposed let me educate you at bit.

First off I AM a 20 year veteran of the Greatest Navy in the World and for too long I have seen my brothers and sisters come back wounded and with issues that will last them a lifetime. If you have NOT been to Iraq and Iran or ANY war/campaign for that matter or even served this once great country, I would advise you to keep your mouth shut as you know nothing as to what we as veterans go through when we come back home.

Second JH, Thank your brother for serving our country and as for your comment about "free Obama money", You are so wrong. You want EVERYTHING to be Obama's fault when the truth is right in front of you. The corruption lies within the VA NOT with Obama so get your facts straight. The VA(and I know first hand) is trying to keep their funding from being cut (which will hurt veterans even more) by signing up anyone that even claims to have an issue when they return home from serving in the two senseless wars Bush and Cheney created. On a side note do you even know the real reason Bush wanted to go to war with Iraq? It will truly shock you. If your brother really wants to blame someone, blame the system, NOT the President.

Tammy - I understand completely with you regarding the president but as an Independent, I see both sides and not just the right or left. When I look at both candidates, I can't in good conscience vote for someone(Romney) that has stated in so many words he will cut taxes for the wealthy while raising taxes on everyone else. Do away with medicare and Social Security, Slash funding to education and take away a woman's right to choose. If you look at HIS job record, most of the jobs he created have been overseas. If he holds true to his "business" record, there will be a lot more Americans out of work than now AND they won't have unemployment or any other government assistance to fall back on as the Paul Ryan budget plan which he backs will all but eliminate those. So if these are your fiscal views then you must be part of the 1%. Also, what taxes has the President raised while in office?

JFK-2112: You comment about most military personal voting republican is part true. It's NOT that the left hates and doesn't want to do anything for the military they just believe the military is bloated and grossly over funded which is partially true. The main reason they vote republican is that they back larger pay raises for the troops than democrats. Always a winning argument when you want to give them more money.

Paul: You obviously haven't done enough homework regarding the Tri-Care increases like I have. The actual increase is only $13 annual for family coverage and $9 for individual this fiscal year. Hardly a dramatic increase as you are portraying. The increases are only suppose to increase up until 2017 at the rate of the cost of living. These minor increases(remember there hasn't been an increase in Tri-Care in 10 years) are NOT going to send retirees and veterans rushing to the AHCA aka Obamacare like you assume as the rates will be lower than the typical insurance plan on the outside.

As far as what the president has done to help veterans, He has ensured that when our veterans come home they have access to their education benefits so that they can "retool" for the corporate world. He has given an incentive for companies that hire veterans so when they return home they have an opportunity to find a job instead of being told you are "over qualified" and be out of work for nearly a year like I was. Boosted funding for veterans care which makes it easier for them to receive the care the so desperately deserve(I believe this is where you were going initially JH).

I welcome any rebuttals......

First off I AM a 20 year veteran of the Greatest Navy in the World and for too long I have seen my brothers and sisters come back wounded and with issues that will last them a lifetime.

Navy casualties are extraordinarily low so it is doubtful you saw many brothers and sisters coming back with injuries. Most of the casualties have been sustained by the Marines or the Army, not the Navy.

The corruption lies within the VA NOT with Obama so get your facts straight. The VA(and I know first hand) is trying to keep their funding from being cut (which will hurt veterans even more) by signing up anyone that even claims to have an issue when they return home from serving in the two senseless wars Bush and Cheney created.

Two senseless wars? Obama himself has said one of those wars those wars was necessary.... As far as being the VA's fault, who has ultimate responsibility for the conduct of the VA? That is a question, I'm not sure.

On a side note do you even know the real reason Bush wanted to go to war with Iraq? It will truly shock you.

I seriously doubt anyone on this thread knows the real reason Bush wanted to go to war with Iraq, but my personal opinion is it was because he saw his father defeated in the election because Democrats held it against him that he did not go into Iraq. Yep, Democrats swore in 92 that Bush senior did not deserve to be president because he did not go into Iraq and in 2004 swore Bush Jr. did not deserve to be president because he did! Mind telling me what is the "real" reason you believe he went into Iraq?

Tammy - I understand completely with you regarding the president but as an Independent, I see both sides and not just the right or left. When I look at both candidates, I can't in good conscience vote for someone(Romney) that has stated in so many words he will cut taxes for the wealthy while raising taxes on everyone else. Do away with medicare and Social Security, Slash funding to education and take away a woman's right to choose.

You claim to be an independent then you rattle off five straight talking points of the Democratic party....

Also, what taxes has the President raised while in office?

There are two ways the government can tax you: one is the direct way that you are referring to, the other is by printing money which will cause inflation. Your liberal friend Freshiee has enough economic literacy to tell you that is correct if you want to check with him. Notice how prices have gone up? That is the taxes that Obama has raised. Obama did raise your taxes, you just don't have the economic literacy to realize it.

You obviously haven't done enough homework regarding the Tri-Care increases like I have. The actual increase is only $13 annual for family coverage and $9 for individual this fiscal year. Hardly a dramatic increase as you are portraying. The increases are only suppose to increase up until 2017 at the rate of the cost of living. These minor increases(remember there hasn't been an increase in Tri-Care in 10 years) are NOT going to send retirees and veterans rushing to the AHCA aka Obamacare like you assume as the rates will be lower than the typical insurance plan on the outside.

Do you have a reference for that? The figures we've been quoted are significantly higher than what you are quoting. As far as the prices have not been raised in 10 years, as a 20 year vet you must remember that Tri-care was not supposed to cost us anything so why should they be raised?

He has ensured that when our veterans come home they have access to their education benefits so that they can "retool" for the corporate world.

Obama has weakened the education benefits. We used to get paid for the times when school was not in session for example, but now we don't. I see your point that it is not a big cut, but they are still weaker than before.

I welcome any rebuttals......

As do I :)

Still seeking sanity forgets, conveniently, that it was Democrat President Harry Truman that sent the first US servicemen to Vietnam in July of 1950. Democrat Presidents that followed escalated the war, and 58,000.00 US servicemen died. More then all wars and conflicts that have followed, combined. Exactly what did the Democratic Party do for all those they sent to Vietnam after they returned?

Or is Vietnam just ancient history because it is a blight on your beloved hypocritical party? War has an ugly history in both political parties. It takes a real scumbag to try and paint one side of the isle as holier then thou.

Rick

I'm sorry but the first "Advisers" in what was then Indochina were ordered there by Eisenhower. Do a little research, it'll give you clarity.

I'm a huge fan of Ike's. He was the last Republican President who was a true statesman. The rest have been at best hacks.

I spent 18 months in Vietnam and it was not pretty. I was injured and had to come home. When I first started going to the VA Hospital they were he!! holes. They quickly started improving and now are a model of how efficient things can actually be. Can they get better? Definitely. They are light years ahead of almost everybody else, especially considering how many Vets they see every year. That volume would cripple most hospitals.

At this time they are building polytrama wings at VA hospitals to care for the soldiers coming home with unimaginably horrible injuries. So, I can tell you that this President is doing wonders for us. I go to the spinal cord injury service and it is first rate with incredible staff.

Rick, I apologize. When I originally replied a little bell was going off in the back of my mind and after it posted I went and did some research. I do apologize Rick.

The first advisers were sent by Harry Truman to assist the French. If people have never explored the timeline of events in Indochina/Vietnam I suggest they do so. It is not a positive example of how to conduct foreign policy.

Here's a good place to start then you can go from there.

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

I know many don't trust Wikipedia but this seems to be about as complete as you're ever going to get. Especially the very earliest timelines.

Robert -

Navy casualties are extraordinarily low so it is doubtful you saw many brothers and sisters coming back with injuries. Most of the casualties have been sustained by the Marines or the Army, not the Navy.

First off if you were in the military you would understand that "brothers and sisters" mean ALL services and NOT just the Navy. Yes I was in the Navy for 20 years but I have served in several Joint Commands that entailed all branches of military service so YES when I say brothers and sisters, I mean just that. Oh and just so you know there are and have been Navy personnel serving side by side Marines, Army AND Air Force on the ground in Iraq AND Afghanistan.

Two senseless wars? Obama himself has said one of those wars those wars was necessary.... As far as being the VA's fault, who has ultimate responsibility for the conduct of the VA? That is a question, I'm not sure.

Yes two senseless wars. There was no evidence that Iraq had WMD other than the faulty intel and Bushes repeated rantings that we should go to war. We were already in Afghanistan fighting the REAL terrorist that attacked us on our soil. THAT war became senseless when our great President Bush FAILED not one, not two, but THREE TIMES to capture Bin Ladin when he had him in sight. This I personally know for a fact. As far as who controls the VA, that question is so easy I figured you would be able to answer that on you own but I'll give you a hint, It's NOT the government.

Mind telling me what is the "real" reason you believe he went into Iraq?

Look for the attempted assasination of Bush 41 and you will get your answer.

You claim to be an independent then you rattle off five straight talking points of the Democratic party....

As an INDEPENDENT, I have the luxury of looking at both sides of the spectrum and making my decision based on the pros and cons of each candidate. If someone came to you and rattled off talking points or issues from one side BUT can't give you any on the other side then I take it as my duty to remind if not educate by representating the other side therefore bring the conversation full circle. IF the script was reverse, I would have done the same thing. I have that luxury, sadly some of you don't.

Do you have a reference for that? The figures we've been quoted are significantly higher than what you are quoting. As far as the prices have not been raised in 10 years, as a 20 year vet you must remember that Tri-care was not supposed to cost us anything so why should they be raised?

Let's see Tricare.mil, Armytimes.com, Stars and Stripes (stripes.com) just to name a few. I will clarify for those that are retiring now their enrollment rates will be significantly higher than mine when I retired BUT those rates are smaller than the average insurance plan currently out there not to mention the co-pay is also. As for Tri-care being free, It IS for active duty personnel AND their dependents BUT when you retire you are like everyone else and have to pay for insurance. The great thing is their rates are better than those on the outside and the notion that they shouldn't go up, I for one don't have a problem with it as I know if I tried to get insurance on the outside, I would pay double annual preminum and maybe triple in co-pay so THIS vet is not complaining.

There are two ways the government can tax you: one is the direct way that you are referring to, the other is by printing money which will cause inflation. Your liberal friend Freshiee has enough economic literacy to tell you that is correct if you want to check with him. Notice how prices have gone up? That is the taxes that Obama has raised. Obama did raise your taxes, you just don't have the economic literacy to realize it.

WOW really? That argument again? Let's dispel this once and for all. Who regulates the Fed AS PER THE CONSTITUTION? NOT the President. Who has the ultimate authority to tell the Fed to print more money? NOT the President. Your "economic literacy" should have told you that. It should have also informed you how inflation spikes and declines. As for prices going up? I guess according your "economic literacy" it's the President's fault. If so, PROVE it or stop trying to insult my intelligence.

Obama has weakened the education benefits. We used to get paid for the times when school was not in session for example, but now we don't. I see your point that it is not a big cut, but they are still weaker than before.

You still do get paid for time when you are not in school AS LONG as it's not longer than 30 days. You must still be enrolled in order to receive the benefits. If you skip a semester, guess what YOU DON'T GET PAID. I've been around the world with this issue for a long time when I was unemployed and this is a long standing policy BEFORE Obama took office. If I'm wrong prove it to me.

Anything else you would like to debate as I'm just getting started.........

Commonsense

Forget it. Robert is so stuck on hating President Obama that he won't believe a word you post. People like him are all over the vine lately. All they can do is hate President Obama, no matter what he does. Unfortunately they have taken to making things up even though we always catch them when we ask for proof of what they're saying.

I didn't like President Bush because I saw what he and Cheney were doing and it scared the he!! out of me. That being said, I never said the terrible things they say about President Obama. I would never have said those things about President Bush, as much as I disliked him. The most telling post I saw was one marginal guy who said that Obama needs to get out of "his" White House. Unfortunately that is a very prevalent theme amongst the tea party types. I have zero time to deal with that level of hatred. People like that are an embarrassment to this country. They shame us all.

Anyhow, thanks for all the good information and thank you for your service.

Robert-385246

Also, what taxes has the President raised while in office?

There are two ways the government can tax you: one is the direct way that you are referring to, the other is by printing money which will cause inflation. Your liberal friend Freshiee has enough economic literacy to tell you that is correct if you want to check with him. Notice how prices have gone up? That is the taxes that Obama has raised. Obama did raise your taxes, you just don't have the economic literacy to realize it.

Ha. Trying to drag me into your mess, eh Robert??? Lemme set the record straight; yes, you can raise taxes via inflation. But that doesn't put money into the Treasury, at least not directly. Printing money (which doesn't exactly happen; it's the creation of intangible money on a computer) usually is pumped into the economy. And as for Obama raising taxes, only a small section of the population (smokers, tanning customers, etc.) will be affected by whatever taxes Obama raised. If you're gonna talk about Obamacare, let me stop you right there because most of those taxes don't go into effect until 2014. And as for the inflation, the Fed hasn't enacted any major monetary stimulus since the expansion of the Fed's balance sheet to $2.8 trillion. Yes, they are buying long-term bonds, but that's minor. So is Operation Twist; injecting trillions of dollars into the economy by buying securities and bank bonds is major, and we haven't done that since 2009 during the financial crisis. Common Sense is pretty much on solid footing; you, however, are a blob of jello on a cloud.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

First off if you were in the military you would understand that "brothers and sisters" mean ALL services and NOT just the Navy.

First of all, my credentials as a vet are better than yours and I never disputed the “brothers and sisters” part, I’m disputing that you saw “many of them come back wounded and with issues that will last a lifetime”. As a retired Marine from a designated ground combat specialty (in plain English females were not allowed in my unit) I think it is safe to say I had more friends in harm’s way than you and I only saw two with issues that will last a lifetime, one friend had to have hip replacement due to an IED and an acquaintance who had his spine snapped by a bullet.* One acquaintance who was non-fatally shot and several other friends who had minor wounds are downright proud of those so I don’t think they count. I know it is popular in your circles to exaggerate, but I am really having a hard time believing you saw more casualties in the Navy than I saw in the Marines. I had two years seven months and ten days career sea time so I’m very familiar with the Navy life too. As one Navy guy said “it was a brutally tough day; the chocolate ice cream machine was broken so I had to eat
vanilla ice cream instead and you know how much I hate that.” Yeah, tough day.

Yes I was in the Navy for 20 years but I have served in several Joint Commands that entailed all branches of military service so YES when I say brothers and sisters, I mean just that.

Oh you served in several Joint Commands did you? In other words when your brothers and sisters were out doing the tough jobs you were hiding in one Joint Command or another? And please don’t regale me with how you “deployed” in the Middle East from a Joint Command. In order to get the tax exemption and combat pay Joint Commands send themselves to Bahrain where alcohol is legal, the hotels are five star and full per diem is paid. But hey, the chocolate ice cream machine was broken so I guess that made it a brutally tough day right? To put our careers in perspective, I never served in a Joint Command and I served longer than you and in a much harder job. As a Navy vet I’m sure you are familiar with the term “pogue.”**

Oh and just so you know there are and have been Navy personnel serving side by side Marines, Army AND Air Force on the ground in Iraq AND Afghanistan.

I’m well aware there are a small number of Navy personnel in the Middle East and that is why I said it is “doubtful”. I left the possibility open just in case, but it is obvious I was correct :)

Yes two senseless wars. There was no evidence that Iraq had WMD other than the faulty intel and Bushes repeated rantings that we should go to war.

First of all, the intel is the only thing that counts!! What were they supposed to go on, the National Enquirer? For the record, the CIA director, who is a staunch Democrat and was appointed by President Clinton said it was a “slam dunk” Iraq had WMD’s so I think Bush had a better rationale for attacking than you give him credit for.

We were already in Afghanistan fighting the REAL terrorist that attacked us on our soil.

I had already broken it down as simply as I could so this will be tough to explain it in even simpler language, but your own post disputes your earlier assertion that there were two senseless wars. According to you, “we were already in Afghanistan fighting the real terrorists that attacked us on our soil.” That hardly sounds like a senseless war to me….. Think about it for a minute, you will realize I am correct. Are you seriously arguing Afghanistan was a “senseless” war???

THAT war became senseless when our great President Bush FAILED not one, not two, but THREE TIMES to capture Bin Ladin when he had him in sight.

We never had Bin Ladin in our sight once, much less three times but go ahead and post your reference and I will waste ten minutes out of my life looking at it. Can you please try to make it a reputable source?

This I personally know for a fact.

No you don’t.

As far as who controls the VA, that question is so easy I figured you would be able to answer that on you own but I'll give you a hint, It's NOT the government.

???? Of course the government controls the VA. I’m not sure exactly who in the government, but to say the government does not control it boggles the mind.

Look for the attempted assasination of Bush 41 and you will get your answer.

That might have played some part in it, but again, if you have a reputable source (home made youtube accounts do not count as reputable) go ahead and post it and I will do the research.

As an INDEPENDENT, I have the luxury of looking at both sides of the spectrum and making my decision based on the pros and cons of each candidate. If someone came to you and rattled off talking points or issues from one side BUT can't give you any on the other side then I take it as my duty to remind if not educate by representating the other side therefore bring the conversation full circle. IF the script was reverse, I would have done the same thing. I have that luxury, sadly some of you don't.

Really? So you don’t have any problems posting where you have defended Republicans? I’m a true independent*** and I’m riled that a Democrat is trying to speak for me. Here let’s play a game, I’ll link to a post where I said something nice about Obama or something bad about the Republicans, then you link to a post where you said something bad about Obama or good about the Republicans, we’ll continue to alternate until one person can no longer link to
a post, then that person admits he is a partisan hack who is posing as an independent. Sound fair? I’ll go first:

"I think this was a classy move by the President elect." That was post 10 of this story: http://beefviper.newsvine.com/_news/2008/12/25/2247122-obama-visits-military-base-on-christmas?commentId=4555202#c4555202

Your turn.

Let's see Tricare.mil, Armytimes.com, Stars and Stripes (stripes.com) just to name a few. I will clarify for those that are retiring now their enrollment rates will be significantly higher than mine when I retired BUT those rates are smaller than the average insurance plan currently out there not to mention the co-pay is also. As for Tri-care being free, It IS for active duty personnel AND their dependents BUT when you retire you are like everyone else and have to pay for insurance. The great thing is their rates are better than those on the outside and the notion that they shouldn't go up, I for one don't have a problem with it as I know if I tried to get insurance on the outside, I would pay double annual preminum and maybe triple in co-pay so THIS vet is not complaining.

I spent a fair amount of time on Stars and Stripes webpage and I can’t find what you are referring to so I googled “Obama tricare increase” and the lead story that popped up was “Obama Thanks Military for Service by Tripling Tricare Premiums.” Here is the link: http://news.yahoo.com/obama-thanks-military-tripling-tricare-premiums-235100402.html
See, it isn’t hard to actually post a reference :) The internet is full
of stories of the Republicans blocking Obama’s attempts to substantially
increase TriCare so as an independent I’m sure you have no problems crediting
Republicans with this right?

WOW really? That argument again? Let's dispel this once and for all. Who regulates the Fed AS PER THE CONSTITUTION?

Uh, the constitution doesn’t say anything about the Federal Reserve and I’m not sure why you are shouting. If it is the only thing keeping you from having a stroke though, feel free to shout away, I’m a humanitarian at heart :)

NOT the President. Who has the ultimate authority to tell the Fed to print more money? NOT the President. Your "economic literacy" should have told you that. It should have also informed you how inflation spikes and declines. As for prices going up? I guess according your "economic literacy" it's the President's fault.

Okay, Econ 101 lesson. When a government spends more money than it takes in from taxes the difference has to come from somewhere. The government at that point has two choices: it can sell bonds or it can print money (though Freshiee is correct when he says printing money nowadays really means adding some digits to some account on a computer). President Obama stimulus
package, among other generous spending programs, has forced the Fed to make up the difference. Oil is traded in dollars so a lot of the gas price increase you have seen is simply the oil producers being forced to raise prices to make the same amount of money. President Obama’s economic policies (which are failing by the way) has raised your taxes, you just don’t have the economic literacy to realize it. Don’t feel bad, Freshiee has a lot more econ classes than you do and he doesn’t have the literacy to realize it either. Nor are you two alone, several students in my master’s-level econ classes also had problems
understanding this. For such a simple concept it has proven hard for some
people to grasp :(

If so, PROVE it or stop trying to insult my intelligence.

I have no need to insult your intelligence…..

You still do get paid for time when you are not in school AS LONG as it's not longer than 30 days. You must still be enrolled in order to receive the benefits. If you skip a semester, guess what YOU DON'T GET PAID. I've been around the world with this issue for a long time when I was unemployed and this is a long standing policy BEFORE Obama took office. If I'm wrong prove it to me.

What you typed was correct until 2010 when President Obama signed the Veterans Education Assistance “Improvements” Act of 2010 (quotation marks are mine). From the article:

“Break or interval pay is no longer payable under any VA education benefit program unless under an Executive Order of the President or due to an emergency situation such as a natural disaster or strike. Entitlement which previously would have been used for break pay will be available for use during a future enrollment.

• This means that if your semester ends December 15 your housing allowance is paid for the first 15 days of December only. Your benefits will begin again when your new semester begins (e.g. January 15) and you will be paid for the remaining days of that month and term.
• Students using other VA education programs are included in this change. Monthly benefits will be prorated in the same manner.”

Here is the link: http://military-education.military.com/2011/01/va-offers-more-details-on-gi-bill-changes/#ixzz21cN0uzKK
You should also have received a letter from the VA explaining the changes, unless you have already used up your entire benefit.

Anything else you would like to debate as I'm just getting started.........

I think you already have enough explaining to do that some people will start calling you Lucy :)

*You specified “came back” so I left out my friend who died in Iraq, God bless his soul.

** For the people who were never in the military, a pogue is a disgusting, lower than whale $#!& slime ball who uses any means necessary to maneuver himself in the cushiest jobs, leaving the rest of us to carry his slack. The Army term REMF probably describes it better than pogue, but that is the nautical term.

***Full disclosure, many years ago I registered as a Republican.

Forget it. Robert is so stuck on hating President Obama that he won't believe a word you post.

Same game I offered above. I’ll link to a post where I said something nice about Obama or something bad about the Republicans, then you link to a post where you said something bad about Obama or good about the Republicans, we’ll continue to alternate until one person can no longer link to a post, then that person admits he is stuck. Sound good. I already posted mine above so it is your turn.

People like him are all over the vine lately. All they can do is hate President Obama, no matter what he does. Unfortunately they have taken to making things up even though we always catch them when we ask for proof of what they're saying.

I’m the only one who has posted references so I’m not sure why you are criticizing me for not offering proof. You should be criticizing common sense…

I didn't like President Bush because I saw what he and Cheney were doing and it scared the he!! out of me. That being said, I never said the terrible things they say about President Obama. I would never have said those things about President Bush, as much as I disliked him. The most telling post I saw was one marginal guy who said that Obama needs to get out of "his" White House. Unfortunately that is a very prevalent theme amongst the tea party types. I have zero time to deal with that level of hatred. People like that are an embarrassment to this country. They shame us all.

I’m seen quite a few Democrats that have topped that one.

Anyhow, thanks for all the good information and thank you for your service.

Aw, I don’t get a thank you?

Ha. Trying to drag me into your mess, eh Robert???

No, I was actually paying you a compliment. As a liberal, I figured your word would carry more weight with common sense than mine and I knew you had the literacy so I used you as a reference. Sorry you got so upset.

Common Sense is pretty much on solid footing; you, however, are a blob of jello on a cloud.

Gee, another liberal who thinks blatant insults are a legitimate form of debate. And this after I complimented you on not doing that the other night. I took it easy on you because of that, but I clearly made a mistake.

Lemme set the record straight; yes, you can raise taxes via inflation.

That is the only economic argument you have made yet that is actually correct.

But that doesn't put money into the Treasury, at least not directly. Printing money (which doesn't exactly happen; it's the creation of intangible money on a computer) usually is pumped into the economy. And as for Obama raising taxes, only a small section of the population (smokers, tanning customers, etc.) will be affected by whatever taxes Obama raised. If you're gonna talk about Obamacare, let me stop you right there because most of those taxes don't go into effect until 2014. And as for the inflation, the Fed hasn't enacted any major monetary stimulus since the expansion of the Fed's balance sheet to $2.8 trillion.

Yes, let’s close our eyes and pretend the 2.8 trillion expansion means nothing and let’s say the health care taxes don’t mean anything either since they won’t take effect for a couple of years (strange how Obama timed that one until after the election). Hey, let’s just click our ruby shoes together and wish ourselves back to Kansas (bonus points to you if you get the reference).

Yes, they are buying long-term bonds, but that's minor. So is Operation Twist; injecting trillions of dollars into the economy by buying securities and bank bonds is major, and we haven't done that since 2009 during the financial crisis.

Once is too many….

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

Why? I have seen nothing to indicate that they deserve another four years.

Freshiee, I should show some class and leave you alone but you did call me a blob of jello on a cloud (???) so I'm going to continue to show you how little you know about economics. Please try to explain the recent increase in gas and food prices without linking it to an increase in the money supply, which is my theory. Classical Keynesian economists believed inflation is caused by an overheated economy, but that theory fell apart in the 1970's when we had stagflation(a bad economy and inflation together). New Keynesian and Post Keynesian economists acknowledge that an overheated economy can cause inflation, but added that a supply shock could also cause it. Looking at today's economy, we have almost no growth so that could not be the cause of the price increases we have seen since Barack Obama became a household name, and supply is the same as it was back in 2008 so that cannot be the cause of it either. So, what is causing the price increase if not an increase in the money supply?

Whether you like it or not, Milton Friedman's theories perfectly explain what we are seeing right now. Add in Japan's experiences over the last two decades and I would have to say the evidence is overwhelming that the economic theories you worship simply do not work.

Yes, they are elegant theories and I know the people who espouse them mean well, but it's obvious that your theories met the real world, and the real world won :)

Robert - As it stands there is one thing I would address and that's "credible" service. First off. Thank you for your service to our country. I would say you are far braver than me for enlisting in the Marines but I was a lil smarter in Joining the Navy so we'll leave it at that. As as far as your jabs to paint my joint command tours as "vacations (that's how I took it) you are greatly mistaken. I was part of the EOD command in Bahrain who on March 23rd I believe was the first unit in the initial invasion of Bahrain. All but 1 made it back and I had the sad/grateful honor of preparing and escorting his remains back to his family. I also served at Centcom and Socom (where it was confirmed that we had Bin Laden in our sites three times in a 2 year period 05-07) and volunteered not once but twice to be deployed in Iraq. One thing about me is that I joined to serve my country and NOT sit in the shadows and allow others to do the dirty work in fact I despised those that were only there for a "paycheck". Also to question one service to their country is to question their honor and as a Marine, You SHOULD know what honor is and because you "claimed" to have served I won't stoop to your level to question your service.

As far as Independent, I seriously doubt that. You have done nothing but spew hatred for Obama and praised for Bush and I'm sure you will for Romney when he officially becomes the nominee. As an independent, you should be able to see the minor(and I do mean minor) progress that has been made since Obama took office. I agree that he has NOT done a good job and should have done more BUT he has done the best he could with the opposition of the "party of NO" and even his own party that are too afraid to back him for fear of not being re-elected. Just to clarify something for you I was all but ready to cast my vote for McCain in 08 as I loved that he was a Maverick and wasn't afraid to stand against his own party and do what was right for the country and not just his party but that changed when he started doing what the "establishement" told him to do and stopped being his own man. It was sad to because I defended him until the bitter end.

Since you couldn't find the article from Stars and Stripes (which was very easy to find by the way), I took the pleasure in posting it here for you. The article was published in the Stars and Stripes on 24 July 2012. Just to validate my point.

The new fees go into effect Oct. 1, the first day of fiscal 2013, a Tricare news release said. Individual retirees will now be charged $269.28 for a year of coverage and families will be charged $538.56, up from $260 and $520 for those who joined the program since the beginning of the 2012 fiscal year, and $230 and $460 for those who joined prior.

The new fees are based on the cost-of-living adjustment retirees received in 2012, the release said.

Enrollees can pay their fees monthly, quarterly or annually. However, Tricare cautioned that, in most cases, enrollment fees are non-refundable, and Congress could change the fees in the 2013 budget, so annual payments are discouraged.

Active-duty servicemembers and their families have access to the program at no cost, the release said. Survivors of deceased active-duty sponsors, as well as medically retired servicemembers and their dependents, are exempt from fee increases.

If this not enough for you, then how about this link for the tricare site. It will give you the actual cost of enrollment and even breaks down the monthly and quarterly payments. Since you are an economic major I'm sure that your Eco101 will show you that these increases are hardly what your yahoo article from February actually entail..

As for playing your little game, Here you go, here's one of mine where I do bashed the President and have had not problem doing it in several of my post. I can sadly say that I don't have one regarding Romney because from what he has shown us (or lack there of), I honestly don't know where he stands or what his intentions are if he is elected president. I still believe that John Huntsman was the better candidate and I would have voted for him hands down simply because he had no problem putting out issues and where he believed he could take the country during all the numerous debates but we see what happens when you play to the far right. (referral)|utmcmd=referral|utmcct=/_news/2012/07/23/12910214-obama-gop-playing-politics-with-call-to-halt-defense-cuts&__utmv=238145375.|8=Earned%20By=msnbc%7Cpolitics%7Cnbcpolitics=1^12=Landing%20Content=Original=1^13=Landing%20Hostname=nbcpolitics.msnbc.msn.com=1^30=Visit%20Type%20to%20Content=Internal%20to%20Original=1&__utmk=98649565#c66723732

As far as economics go I will conceed that you are far better equipped with your ecomonic classes and what not but I will contend that what you read in books is only a base for what goes on in the real world. You can tell me what the book definition says all day long but I sure(if you are a rational person) will agree that what you read isn't always what is played out in the real world.

Oh and if you read what you quoted regarding education benefits, you will see that you proved my point.....

My apologies, I forgot the tricare link.....

Robert - I will have to apologize to you as we were talking about two different things in terms of education. You were talking about the VA education assistance and I was talking about the GI Bill. But if you still read what you quoted you did make my point. and for some reason it will not allow me to post the tricare link so let me type it out for you.

Common Sense, first of all my apologies, my last few posts were a lot meaner than they should have been. That apology also extends to freshieee and Dennis Price. I have to learn not to post when I'm in a bad mood.

I'm really sorry to hear about your shipmate who didn't make it back and I admire you for bringing his body back to the states. I've never done that myself, but everyone who has done it says it is far tougher than actually being in the fight. I don't know how much smarter you are though, because if you were truly smart you would have joined the Air Force. Of course, if I were truly brave I would have joined Spec Ops so I guess neither one of us deserves too much praise :)

Take a few minutes and review my history, I was brutal on Bush and McCain after the bailout. I have defended them when I think they did nothing wrong, but I defended Obama when I didn't think he did anything wrong either. I don't see much point in hoping the President fails, it's definitely cutting off your nose to spite your face as the old saying goes. I will stand behind my economic analysis though, I believe we are rapidly hitting the point of no return with the deficit, especially with the baby boomer generation about to start drawing SSI, and I don't see either party doing anything to help the situation :(

Don't worry about the education link, I already said it was a minor reduction and not worth wasting any of your time on. Take care and I'm sure we will run into each other again, hopefully on something we can agree on.

Robert-385246

Freshiee, I should show some class and leave you alone but you did call me a blob of jello on a cloud (???) so I'm going to continue to show you how little you know about economics. Please try to explain the recent increase in gas and food prices without linking it to an increase in the money supply, which is my theory.

Simple; gas and food are commodities whose prices are determined by a number of factors including supply and demand but also things like speculation and domestic/foreign events; i.e they are a lot more volatile in prices than the basket of household goods that the CPI looks at when determining "core inflation." Let's say, for example, the U.S. government rescinds all farm subsidies on the agricultural industry; speculators in financial markets will assume, based on the recent info, that farmers will have to increase their prices, so they speculate that prices will rise by x%. Now, the farmers will raise their prices by x% due to the speculation, unless they have locked in insurance for a certain price. Food prices will rise by x+y% because retail stores will have to make a profit and will markup the price to make that profit. As for gas prices, let's take the example from earlier this year and model a situation from that. Let's say that the U.S. government, along with the E.U. and both China and India decide to issue sanctions on Iran, particularly on it's petroleum exports, with the buyers severely reducing or even ending the purchase of Iranian petrol. Then, let's say Ahmadinejad and his cohorts in Tehran threaten to blockade the critical Strait of Hormuz, prompting the U.S. to send the Sixth Fleet to protect the strait. Speculators will be worried about the prospect of an Iranian blockade of the strait, jacking prices to over $100 a barrel. That will force Arab companies to charge higher prices, forcing U.S. refiners and sellers of gasoline to increase prices at the pump. And by the way, I didn't say that changes in the money supply can't affect food and gas prices; I just said (or implied) that it didn't happen this time. And by the way, if food and gas prices were based heavily on the money supply, then (based on current inflation levels) they should be roughly stable instead of volatile.

Classical Keynesian economists believed inflation is caused by an overheated economy, but that theory fell apart in the 1970's when we had stagflation(a bad economy and inflation together). New Keynesian and Post Keynesian economists acknowledge that an overheated economy can cause inflation, but added that a supply shock could also cause it. Looking at today's economy, we have almost no growth so that could not be the cause of the price increases we have seen since Barack Obama became a household name, and supply is the same as it was back in 2008 so that cannot be the cause of it either. So, what is causing the price increase if not an increase in the money supply?

For food prices, let me state it right here that I am not sure of the reason for the increase in prices, although I would probably blame the recession's effect on consumer demand. For gas, let me set the record straight that the supply of oil has been steadily going down until very recently, after the discovery of shale oil and the technique of fracking. And the low price of gas in during the Bush administration was caused primarily by low demand due to the recession's effects. Gas has risen due to the recovery's increase (however pitiful) of consumer demand, which is still low. Gas rose to a peak due to the speculation that pervaded during the showdown with Iran on sanctions. Personally, if it hadn't been for the discovery of shale oil and oil sands, current gas prices would be, in my opinion, the new norm for the foreseeable future. Now, however, the price will be determined by government policy on these new sources of oil and the quantity of oil extracted, not to mention the fact that this oil is extremely expensive to refine and extract and the possibility of an Israeli preemptive strike on Iran.

Whether you like it or not, Milton Friedman's theories perfectly explain what we are seeing right now. Add in Japan's experiences over the last two decades and I would have to say the evidence is overwhelming that the economic theories you worship simply do not work.

I can agree, in part, with some of Friedman's theories, including the impracticality of a pure gold standard and that countering deflation requires "dropping money from a helicopter." But I cannot understand how fiscal policy does not work. For God's sake, it worked during the Great Depression, which we got out of thanks to the massive government spending during World War II.

Yes, they are elegant theories and I know the people who espouse them mean well, but it's obvious that your theories met the real world, and the real world won :)

Actually, I'd say that monetarism has some similarities with Keynesian economics. While Keynesian economics focuses on fiscal policy, I do think that a Keynesian like myself can agree with some monetarist views.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

Robert-385246

Ha. Trying to drag me into your mess, eh Robert???

No, I was actually paying you a compliment. As a liberal, I figured your word would carry more weight with common sense than mine and I knew you had the literacy so I used you as a reference. Sorry you got so upset.

Common Sense is pretty much on solid footing; you, however, are a blob of jello on a cloud.

Gee, another liberal who thinks blatant insults are a legitimate form of debate. And this after I complimented you on not doing that the other night. I took it easy on you because of that, but I clearly made a mistake.

Sorry; when I get ticked I can be a bit offensive. I am sorry that I misunderstood you; I just was trying to show how you were (in my opinion) a bit shaky on your argument.

Lemme set the record straight; yes, you can raise taxes via inflation.

That is the only economic argument you have made yet that is actually correct.

We shall see about that, my friend ;).

But that doesn't put money into the Treasury, at least not directly. Printing money (which doesn't exactly happen; it's the creation of intangible money on a computer) usually is pumped into the economy. And as for Obama raising taxes, only a small section of the population (smokers, tanning customers, etc.) will be affected by whatever taxes Obama raised. If you're gonna talk about Obamacare, let me stop you right there because most of those taxes don't go into effect until 2014. And as for the inflation, the Fed hasn't enacted any major monetary stimulus since the expansion of the Fed's balance sheet to $2.8 trillion.

Yes, let’s close our eyes and pretend the 2.8 trillion expansion means nothing and let’s say the health care taxes don’t mean anything either since they won’t take effect for a couple of years (strange how Obama timed that one until after the election). Hey, let’s just click our ruby shoes together and wish ourselves back to Kansas (bonus points to you if you get the reference).

Technically the $2.8 trillion expansion was a $2.1 trillion expansion from an original sheet of $700 billion, and as for the Obamacare taxes I believe that it was delayed so that the costs would be lower, buying some support from some conservative Democrats.

Yes, they are buying long-term bonds, but that's minor. So is Operation Twist; injecting trillions of dollars into the economy by buying securities and bank bonds is major, and we haven't done that since 2009 during the financial crisis.

Once is too many….

Once is a lot, I have to admit, but when it is not enough, you have to keep trying. That Rooseveltian resolve helped us out of the Great Recession.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

Why? I have seen nothing to indicate that they deserve another four years.

I could try to tell you why I think Obama should be re-elected, but just to keep it short, he helped us out of the recession; he did what he could to help the economy, which he did (considering the political troubles he faced); and I trust him with the economy a lot more than with Romney.

Simple; gas and food are commodities whose prices are determined by a number of factors including supply and demand but also things like speculation and domestic/foreign events; i.e they are a lot more volatile in prices than the basket of household goods that the CPI looks at when determining "core inflation." Let's say, for example, the U.S. government rescinds all farm subsidies on the agricultural industry; speculators in financial markets will assume, based on the recent info, that farmers will have to increase their prices, so they speculate that prices will rise by x%. Now, the farmers will raise their prices by x% due to the speculation, unless they have locked in insurance for a certain price. Food prices will rise
by x+y% because retail stores will have to make a profit and will markup the price to make that profit. As for gas prices, let's take the example from earlier this year and model a situation from that. Let's say that the U.S. government, along with the E.U. and both China and India decide to issue sanctions on Iran, particularly on it's petroleum exports, with the buyers severely reducing or even ending the purchase of Iranian petrol. Then, let's say Ahmadinejad and his cohorts in Tehran threaten to blockade the critical Strait of Hormuz, prompting the U.S. to send the Sixth Fleet to protect the strait. Speculators will be worried about the prospect of an Iranian blockade of the strait, jacking prices to over $100 a barrel. That will force Arab companies to charge higher prices, forcing U.S. refiners and sellers of gasoline to increase prices at the pump. And by the way, I didn't say that changes in the money supply can't affect food and gas prices; I just said (or implied) that it didn't happen this time.

You listed those things as separate from supply and demand, but the reality is they are factors that contribute to supply and demand, not independent variables. The factors you just mentioned, all of them, affect prices only because they affect either supply or demand. You are correct that if you raise demand or cut supply prices will rise. Unfortunately for your argument, supply is high and demand is low so we should
be seeing prices fall, not rise. Due to this year’s draught, we should see prices rise next year and that is in line with normal economic theories, but what we have seen virtually the entire term of Obama is not normal. Prices should not increase during bad economic times!!! One more thing on gas prices, you are correct there was turmoil in the Middle East and it looked like it would affect supply, but Obama restarted off-shore oil drilling, released oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, Saudi Arabia vastly increased production and we issued waivers to Japan, Korea and China that allowed them to buy Iranian oil. The waiver to China was downright comical, as the Chinese had already told us to go #@!% ourselves – they were buying Iranian oil whether we liked it or not. Yet another “fix” designed to fool the American people into believing our government was doing something, when in fact it was utterly meaningless. Reminds me of the Dodd-Frank bill. By the way, I do have a problem with Obama releasing oil from our reserves – one of the few times Bush thought long-term was when he pumped oil into the reserve, releasing it for times other than its intended purpose is just silly (especially since we both know it was done only for political purposes). Now that your pet theory about others factors being at fault has been shown to be just a subset of supply and demand, do you still think it is simple to explain the price increases we have seen without linking it to the huge increase in govt. spending?

And by the way, if food and gas prices were based heavily on the money supply, then (based on current inflation levels) they should be roughly stable instead of volatile.

No, because food and gas prices are not counted toward inflation figures. If inflation was still calculated the way it used to be, the inflation rate would be somewhere around 10%. Prices other than food and gas are being supressed by the bad economic times - people are spending for necessities (food and gas) and not much else.

For food prices, let me state it right here that I am not sure of the reason for the increase in prices, although I would probably blame the recession's effect on consumer demand.

That doesn’t make any sense, prices should fall, not rise due to the recession’s effect on consumer demand.

For gas, let me set the record straight that the supply of oil has been steadily going down until very recently, after the discovery of shale oil and the technique of fracking.

No, supply is at a high right now, a combination of the factors I listed above and the fact that the slowing world growth has stunted demand.

And the low price of gas in during the Bush administration was caused primarily by low demand due to the recession's effects.

Uh, gas hist an all time high during the Bush administration, in the midst of the recession! http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/04/chart-of-the-day-gas-prices-retrace-5-year-gains-in-2-years/237547/

Gas has risen due to the recovery's increase (however pitiful) of consumer demand, which is still low. Gas rose to a peak due to the speculation that pervaded during the showdown with Iran on sanctions. Personally, if it hadn't been for the discovery of shale oil and oil sands, current gas prices would be, in my opinion, the new norm for the foreseeable future. Now, however, the price will be determined by government policy on these new sources of oil ....

I agree with you, but the current administration seems pretty hostile to this form of oil so we could be in for some rough times. Personally, I agree with Obama on this one, we need to learn exactly how much environmental damage is done and until we know for certain we shouldn't do anything. What can I say, I am conservative at heart :)

....and the quantity of oil extracted, not to mention the fact that this oil is extremely expensive to refine and extract and the possibility of an Israeli preemptive strike on Iran.

I don't know enough about refining shale oil to know if this is true or not, but I will agree with you that as long as there is the possibility of a strike on Iran (or any other major oil producer) gas prices will be higher than they otherwise would be.

I can agree, in part, with some of Friedman's theories, including the impracticality of a pure gold standard and that countering deflation requires "dropping money from a helicopter."

I believe Friedman was making fun the other side when he suggested dropping money out of a helicopter. Can't say for certain though, since Friedman did start off as a Keynesian.

But I cannot understand how fiscal policy does not work. For God's sake, it worked during the Great Depression, which we got out of thanks to the massive government spending during World War II.

You cannot say for certain massive spending on WWII got us out of the Great Depression. The Great Depression had been going on for over 12 years so it is certainly possible the effects of the Depression worked themselves out. Our experience with depressions during the 1800's suggested depressions usually ended within three years and no later than 5 years after they started so 12 years is plenty of time for a depression to work itself out. Fiscal policy so far has failed miserably.

Actually, I'd say that monetarism has some similarities with Keynesian economics. While Keynesian economics focuses on fiscal policy, I do think that a Keynesian like myself can agree with some monetarist views.

There will always be some similarities between economic systems, but these really are two distinct theories.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

He's had his four years and has failed to impress. The only reason anyone would vote for Obama at this point is because they believe the other guy would be an even bigger failure.

Sorry; when I get ticked I can be a bit offensive. I am sorry that I misunderstood you; I just was trying to show how you were (in my opinion) a bit shaky on your argument.

No problem, I am the same way, but I'm still waiting to hear why you think I was on shaky ground.

We shall see about that, my friend ;).

We shall indeed.

Technically the $2.8 trillion expansion was a $2.1 trillion expansion from an original sheet of $700 billion, and as for the Obamacare taxes I believe that it was delayed so that the costs would be lower, buying some support from some conservative Democrats.

So you argument is that the increase was "only" 2.1 trillion so it is okay? You know as well as I do there is no such thing as a free lunch. We will pay for that 2.1 trillion in one of three ways: higher taxes that will impede growth in the future, inflation or an enormous decrease in spending in future years. None of the three is a pretty option. As far as delaying the cost to win votes, what does that say about the program when your own party wants to pass the cost off to their successors before they will vote for it? I knew this was a bad idea when Obama had to spend billions to bribe his own party into voting for it....

Once is a lot, I have to admit, but when it is not enough, you have to keep trying.

Once is too much.

That Rooseveltian resolve helped us out of the Great Recession.

Possible, it is also possible his actions delayed us getting out of depression in the normal 3-5 year time-line. I will say this again, after the Asian crisis of 1998, South Korea bit the bullet, allowed the effects of the depression to work itself out and were back to normal growth in a few years. Japan has tried our method of throwing money at the problem and is now in their second decade of a stagnant economy.

I could try to tell you why I think Obama should be re-elected, but just to keep it short, he helped us out of the recession;

Did it occur to you that maybe Obama caused the recession? Why did credit markets that functioned normally during the other seven years of the Bush administration suddenly freeze up? It is possible the pending election of Obama scared investors, who then pulled their funds out and started a run on the bank. I admit that explanation relies heavily on the theory of rational expectations, but rational expectations is unique in economics - it is one of the few theories accepted by Keynesian's of all stripes, classicist's of all stripes and monetarist. I know of no serious economist who questions the theory of rational expectations. You yourself alluded to the theory in your explanation of why gas prices were rising. By the way, this theory also explains why Obama can not solve the bad economic times in spite of spending trillions - Obama can't solve the problem because he is the problem...

he did what he could to help the economy,

All politicians will do what they can to help the economy, that by itself is hardly a reason to vote for a politician.

which he did (considering the political troubles he faced);

All politicians face opposition from the other party. I have seen no serious attempt by Obama to negotiate with the other party. Here's a hint, in order to negotiate you have to give the other party something that their party members would shoot them for if they turn it down. So far Obama has not been willing to do that.

and I trust him with the economy a lot more than with Romney.

Fair enough and you might be right, though I will point out the economy depends on many factors that the president cannot control so I think voting for or against a presidential candidate based on the economy will probably be flawed. I prefer to look at actions that a politician has direct control over to determine if I will vote for him. For example, Obama had control over whether or not to allow off-shore drilling, he had direct control over releasing oil from the Strategic Reserve, he had direct control whether or not to nominate a racist (Sotomayor) for the Supreme Court, he had control of the health care bill and he had control of whether or not to enforce our immigration laws, those and many other tests he has simply failed at. He did have a few successes IMHO, but he has fundamentally changed the Presidency in two ways that I think will be disastrous in the future - he has implemented a policy that forces individuals to buy goods from private companies (that policy is way too easy to abuse) and he has repeatedly instructed his justice department not to enforce laws that he does not agree with. Are you really comfortable giving those powers to Republicans? If not, then I suggest you don't give them to Democrats.

Now that your pet theory about others factors being at fault has been shown to be just a subset of supply and demand, do you still think it is simple to explain the price increases we have seen without linking it to the huge increase in govt. spending?

Technically, most of our increase in government spending are on social safety nets, which serve as a backup pillar to consumer demand. It certainly isn't simple to defend my position, but I am not quite convinced that the increase in government spending is causing higher inflation levels. I am perplexed by this increase in food prices, although gas is becoming more abundant in supply thanks to recent discoveries. Obviously, as you can see, I am a bit early into my travels in the world of economics.

And by the way, if food and gas prices were based heavily on the money supply, then (based on current inflation levels) they should be roughly stable instead of volatile.

No, because food and gas prices are not counted toward inflation figures. If inflation was still calculated the way it used to be, the inflation rate would be somewhere around 10%. Prices other than food and gas are being supressed by the bad economic times - people are spending for necessities (food and gas) and not much else.

But then again, if we counted them as inflation, the public (or most likely Congress) would demand extremely tight monetary policy over the long-term, damaging our ability to react to recessions (at least from the monetarist point of view).

For food prices, let me state it right here that I am not sure of the reason for the increase in prices, although I would probably blame the recession's effect on consumer demand.

That doesn’t make any sense, prices should fall, not rise due to the recession’s effect on consumer demand.

Let me rewrite that: I would probably blame a drop in food supply thanks to droughts and increases in business costs caused by the recession as the culprit for rising food prices. Consumer demand is steady on necessities, however.

For gas, let me set the record straight that the supply of oil has been steadily going down until very recently, after the discovery of shale oil and the technique of fracking.

No, supply is at a high right now, a combination of the factors I listed above and the fact that the slowing world growth has stunted demand.

That is what I said; we have another potential glut in our oil market due to oil sands and shale oil, and this, coupled with a slow but steady movement of people from oil to things like biofuels and green energy, might push gas prices down once oil production begins to surge.

And the low price of gas in during the Bush administration was caused primarily by low demand due to the recession's effects.

Uh, gas hist an all time high during the Bush administration, in the midst of the recession!http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/04/chart-of-the-day-gas-prices-retrace-5-year-gains-in-2-years/237547/

Well, that was caused in part by a scare with Iran, as they threatened to block the Strait of Hormuz and push oil to above $200 a barrel (another supply subset). Prices dropped when the crisis ended, and soon dropped farther due to the recession.

Gas has risen due to the recovery's increase (however pitiful) of consumer demand, which is still low. Gas rose to a peak due to the speculation that pervaded during the showdown with Iran on sanctions. Personally, if it hadn't been for the discovery of shale oil and oil sands, current gas prices would be, in my opinion, the new norm for the foreseeable future. Now, however, the price will be determined by government policy on these new sources of oil ....

I agree with you, but the current administration seems pretty hostile to this form of oil so we could be in for some rough times. Personally, I agree with Obama on this one, we need to learn exactly how much environmental damage is done and until we know for certain we shouldn't do anything. What can I say, I am conservative at heart :)

Plus, we cannot continue to rely on fossil fuels forever. The fear that many liberals, including myself, have after the discovery of these new sources of fuel is that they will relax us too much, so that we won't be as aggressive as we should be in throwing off the burden of reliance on fossil fuels.

I can agree, in part, with some of Friedman's theories, including the impracticality of a pure gold standard and that countering deflation requires "dropping money from a helicopter."

I believe Friedman was making fun the other side when he suggested dropping money out of a helicopter. Can't say for certain though, since Friedman did start off as a Keynesian.

Monetarism is based off of some Keynesian principles, like the use of monetary policy during recession. It is essentially Keynesian Lite for the first conservative Republicans. I do believe, however, that people advised Japan to inflate the yen in order to get out of the deflationary spiral of the 90s.

But I cannot understand how fiscal policy does not work. For God's sake, it worked during the Great Depression, which we got out of thanks to the massive government spending during World War II.

You cannot say for certain massive spending on WWII got us out of the Great Depression. The Great Depression had been going on for over 12 years so it is certainly possible the effects of the Depression worked themselves out. Our experience with depressions during the 1800's suggested depressions usually ended within three years and no later than 5 years after they started so 12 years is plenty of time for a depression to work itself out. Fiscal policy so far has failed miserably.

That is true. But then again, the Depression was different than most other depressions; for one thing, it was the first major global depression that impacted most countries. Plus it was the first major depression that took advantage of the complex financial institutions of the 1920s and 30s. The Depression could have worked it

Actually, I'd say that monetarism has some similarities with Keynesian economics. While Keynesian economics focuses on fiscal policy, I do think that a Keynesian like myself can agree with some monetarist views.

There will always be some similarities between economic systems, but these really are two distinct theories.

They are closer than you think. The real distinction is between Keynesian and Classical economics (I say Keynesian because monetarism and supply-side are merely modern theories that are closer to Classical laissez faire economics), as one advocates government and the other is literally "hands off."

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

He's had his four years and has failed to impress. The only reason anyone would vote for Obama at this point is because they believe the other guy would be an even bigger failure.

True, part of the reason why many people are voting for him is because Romney, in their opinion, will be worse. But Obama did accomplish some things; the stimulus helped us out of the economy (that includes monetary stimulus by the Fed); he accomplished healthcare reform, which was a conservative idea to promote "individual responsibility;" he at least attempted to regulate the banks; and repealed DADT.

I could try to tell you why I think Obama should be re-elected, but just to keep it short, he helped us out of the recession;

Did it occur to you that maybe Obama caused the recession? Why did credit markets that functioned normally during the other seven years of the Bush administration suddenly freeze up? It is possible the pending election of Obama scared investors, who then pulled their funds out and started a run on the bank. I admit that explanation relies heavily on the theory of rational expectations, but rational expectations is unique in economics - it is one of the few theories accepted by Keynesian's of all stripes, classicist's of all stripes and monetarist. I know of no serious economist who questions the theory of rational expectations. You yourself alluded to the theory in your explanation of why gas prices were rising. By the way, this theory also explains why Obama can not solve the bad economic times in spite of spending trillions - Obama can't solve the problem because he is the problem...

Well, even if this theory is correct, you cannot assume that Obama is the problem per se. You would probably have to blame the markets, at least in part, for not giving the guy a chance. And the credit markets were flawed; the housing bubble and the easy credit that ensued masked the problem of too big to fail institutions and unregulated financial markets. And you still would have to explain for the burst of growth in late 2011 and early 2012, which lifted financial markets. Technically, Obama spent only around $1 trillion on actual stimulus, and most of that was stretched out over several years. Most of the deficits that people claim to be from Obama's "spending binge" was actually caused by a severe drop in revenues, which were already shaky due to the Bush tax cuts. The only major year of spending was 2009, when Obama continued TARP and his stimulus began to take effect; and that was the peak of the recession. But, if your theory is correct, you would have to blame the markets not only for not giving him a chance but for not regulating themselves properly, which wouldn't have caused the recession or at least weakened it's effect.

freshieee, first of all my apologies - it is late, I'm tired and I simply don't have time to go through this line by line like I normally would. I'll address the highlights and let me know tomorrow if you want me to go back over anything.

Technically, most of our increase in government spending are on social safety nets, which serve as a backup pillar to consumer demand.

Yes, the automatic stabilizers kicked in and rightfully so, but let me ask this - why do we have both a stimulus and social safety nets? I will accept one or the other, but not both. Remember these safety nets did not exist when Keynes wrote his General Theory so I'm not sure even he would have asked for both.

But then again, if we counted them as inflation, the public (or most likely Congress) would demand extremely tight monetary policy over the long-term, damaging our ability to react to recessions (at least from the monetarist point of view).

What you say is true, but misleading the public just causes more problems in the long run IMHO. I say let's calculate inflation the way it used to be calculated and let people judge for themselves. I'm uncomfortable using statistics that I know are misleading.

That is what I said; we have another potential glut in our oil market due to oil sands and shale oil, and this, coupled with a slow but steady movement of people from oil to things like biofuels and green energy, might push gas prices down once oil production begins to surge.

Okay, we both say supply is high and demand is low, so why have gas prices doubled since 2006?

Well, that was caused in part by a scare with Iran, as they threatened to block the Strait of Hormuz and push oil to above $200 a barrel (another supply subset). Prices dropped when the crisis ended, and soon dropped farther due to the recession.

The stories I've read said they were caused by speculators (who might have been gambling on a war with Iran). Ironically, Bush wanted to regulate the speculators out of business and the Democratic-controlled Congress argued for free-market principals! Talk about a reversal :)

Monetarism is based off of some Keynesian principles, like the use of monetary policy during recession. It is essentially Keynesian Lite for the first conservative Republicans.

No, these really are two distinct theories. Both Keynesians and monetarists believe an increase in the money supply will increase economic activity, but Keynesians believe it does so by influencing interest rates while Friedman believed it affected the economy by what he called the demand for money function (a combination of permanent income, ratio of non-human to human wealth, interest rates, the price level, the expected rate of change in the price level, and tastes plus preferences for holding money). Another key point was Keynes believed the cure for inflation was his income-expenditure model, but Friedman believed the cause of inflation was the income-expenditure model. These theories might be the same to laymen, but to economists these are two competing, not complimentary, models.

They are closer than you think. The real distinction is between Keynesian and Classical economics (I say Keynesian because monetarism and supply-side are merely modern theories that are closer to Classical laissez faire economics), as one advocates government and the other is literally "hands off."

You have an interesting viewpoint, I would have picked the main difference to be Keynesians focus on demand and classical economists focus on supply. Maybe we can pick up this again later when I have more time.

True, part of the reason why many people are voting for him is because Romney, in their opinion, will be worse. But Obama did accomplish some things; the stimulus helped us out of the economy (that includes monetary stimulus by the Fed); he accomplished healthcare reform, which was a conservative idea to promote "individual responsibility;" he at least attempted to regulate the banks; and repealed DADT.

I would not brag about any of those accomplishments if I were you. I believe at least three out of the four will cause us more problems down the road.

Well, even if this theory is correct, you cannot assume that Obama is the problem per se. You would probably have to blame the markets, at least in part, for not giving the guy a chance. And the credit markets were flawed; the housing bubble and the easy credit that ensued masked the problem of too big to fail institutions and unregulated financial markets.

Believe me, I am blaming the financial institutions for this mess. I still cannot believe none of them are in prison for this. I hate to turn this into a blame game, but the justice department has failed us miserably IMHO.

And you still would have to explain for the burst of growth in late 2011 and early 2012, which lifted financial markets.

What burst of growth? The markets should be through the roof after all that money was spent. Spending a dollar to get a nickel's worth of growth does not seem very smart to me....

Most of the deficits that people claim to be from Obama's "spending binge" was actually caused by a severe drop in revenues, which were already shaky due to the Bush tax cuts.

You mean the Bush tax cuts that Obama extended? Or was this a horrible idea when Bush did it, but a brilliant idea when Obama did it? Sounds like the health-care bill you mentioned earlier.

But, if your theory is correct, you would have to blame the markets not only for not giving him a chance but for not regulating themselves properly, which wouldn't have caused the recession or at least weakened it's effect.

Again, I do blame the markets and I think most of the CEO's should be in prison right now, but that does not excuse Obama from the actions he had control over.

And every single time a budget attempts to be passed, bho, through scare tactics, tries to paint as bleak as a picture as he can for the people on social security, the military not getting their much deserved paychecks, and the rest of the entitlement society getting the shaft. Now exactly who is holding who hostage? Have a great day you silly liberals, or whatever it is you do during the day, besides obviously work...

"Remember the GI's searching through dumps to find armor for their vehicles."

You were there GT? See I remember in '94 when the military was gutted. I was rolling in Bosnia with no doors on my vehicle because they broke. Fast forward to 2003/04, a weapon called IEDs sprung up. Most couldn't understand what was happening. See, I was dealing with IEDs since '91 when I switched to EOD. A couple of deployments to Iraq, Soldiers never trained for IEDs and they knew it.

You're a smart guy and seems to understand what's going on, educated me and post that list that goes on and on. See this has nothing to do with a D or R thing, but humor me anyways.....

Ouch.

That had to leave a mark.

Paul -

I wasn't serving at the time, but I do rember when Clinton signed the legislation gutting all branches. Many areas that had base closures still haven't recovered. Small towns that went from 15,000 inhabitants down to less than 1,000. Property values plunged, and are still dropping.

It seems that whenever democrats gain control, they gut the military to pay for their 'social engineering'. The 'social engineering' doesn't work. It's just a money pit used to bribe the ignorant masses into voting democrat.

Spanky:

Do everyone and the nation and your kids a favor and...STFU. You are a miracle!!! You have NOTHING to offer!!! Every single one of your posts are "one liners"! No information. No meaningful debate. No links. NOTHING!!! Not one damn thing in your posts leads ANYBODY to NOT think you are an ignorant turd. Here's some advice you should use when you post next. HAVE A POINT. HAVE NEW INFO. Have a link relative to your argument! IF not then STFU!!!

Paul - for once I agree with you regarding the funding during 94 and 2002 although the situations were vastly different. I served in an EOD squadron/detachment, some bad@$$ men and women that I have much respect for. They were the first group to deploy when we invaded Iraq and they didn't have all the equipment necessary BUT they made it work with what they had.

Tammy - Still SMH at your comments. The property value agrument you are making is so very different from when the BRACs started and the housing collaspe of 2009. They can't even be put in the same category but I thank you for your effort. As for the "social engineering" aspect, give me an example of the social engineering you are talking about? The ignorant masses are two-fold on the far right and if you came to the middle you would see for yourself.

Stunt - Murtha was a democrat

This is for JD Still on the Obama's law licenses

The Truth:
The law license of Barack Obama was
voluntarily retired and Michelle Obama's
license was voluntarily placed in inactive status according to the Attorney
Registration and Disciplinary Commission of the Supreme Court of Illinois
(IARDC). Neither of them are practicing law at this time nor do their present
jobs require a law license. Both records indicate no public record of
discipline or pending proceedings and we have not found any evidence of
malpractice.

Per the State of Illinois

greatpretender - what a totally ignorant post. You should be embarrassed to actually have made that post. Bet you voted Bush - twice! Why isn't that surprising?

Obama/Biden 2012 because we can live through more ignorant Republicans running the country!

SeekingSanity, you need to seek harder.

No sanity in the GOP? I suppose there's sanity in the Democratic half? If Joe Biden is the best you've got for a 'sane' VP, I pity you, pal.

There is no sanity in politics.

CubsFan - and yet he's heads above EVERYONE in the GOP. Must be very disappointing to know yours is the party of lowlifes! But, that's what you support so I guess that says it all!

Obama/Biden 2012

greatpretender, unless you can prove your statement about a "plan to dismantle the military along with our country" then it's a lie.

If you are bold enough to make a statement like that (and not just simply a troll), then you should be bold enough to back it up.

Go for it

Matthew - I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you. Just sayin....

Matthew, how about the fact that our navy now has one third of the ships it had under Bill Clinton? Or the fact that we spend half as much on defense as we do on healthcare?

Sounds like a bit of 'dismantling' to me.

"I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you. Just sayin...."

Hmm.........funny statement coming from you, veterans benefits? Tri-care? I would like to know these such benefits. I know I'm losing benefits, but that's just it right, benefits?

Personally, I like breathing. Want to continue to do so for a while longer.

matthew..

I can back it up..

1.this pos is a communist and associated with known communists

2. he is cutting our defense budget

3. he hates america (read dreams from my father) check his college transcripts.

he sought out socialists/communists professors in college

what else do you need, genius?

greatpretender

Did you even read the article?! The GNOP are the ones that put in the "poison pill" to cut the defense budget. Quit pretending and get with the program.

Twit.

CubsFan2012 - it's true the navy has fewer ships, but you are confusing capacity and capability with numbers. Example, a 1980's destroyer does not have the capability or capacity that a current destroyer has. Ships have been retired because they were no longer as effective as new ships and the cumulative operational expenses could not be sustained.

I'll also point out that the original expected life expetency of the shipw was over-rated by the Navy. Example - the orginal plans called for the cruisers to have a life span of 40 years. The first five Ticonderoga class crusiers were retired after 19.

So we have two primary reasons the number of ships has dropped. Technology and bad planning from 20 years ago.

Ans]s respectfully Cubsfan, I need to challenge your assertion that that "we spend half as much on defense as we do healthcare." Per the President's FY 2013 budget (located @ http: //www. whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Overview ) the Department of Defense is slated for a total budget of $672,880,000,000 and the Department of Health and Human Services the slated budget is $860,335,000,000.

Note that DHHS handles more than health care. It also does Head Start, funds the FDA, energy assistance programs (LIHEAP and WAP), lead remediation grants, etc. It also provides over 540,000,000 in preparing for natural and man made disasters in coordination with Department of Homeland Security.

I'll argue the 1/3rd number also. We have about 47% since 1989. That was our "high year" with 592.

source: http ://www .politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/jan/18/mitt-romney/mitt-romney-says-us-navy-smallest-1917-air-force-s/

great pretender. pretty retarted statement. you are whats wrong w/this country. no respect.

That isn't backing up your statement, greatpretender. That's called "making additional unsubstantiated allegations."

Matthew -

How about cutting the Navy to less than 1/2 its size?

You know, the navy that is mandated by the Constitution? Ships are not being replaced at the proper rate so many that are old enough that they should be moth-balled are being kept in active service far beyond what they were designed for because they aren't even funding enough shipbuilding to even meet the reduced requirements.

Oh, and Matthew, I am aware of current requirements and of the capabilities of our ships - I work in a shipyard that is closing sometime next year because of those cuts!

There haven't been any real new contracts since Obama has been in office, and the options for additional vessels of the class we build has been slowed down so much it is causing massive layoffs in engineers and craftspersons.

Why don't we just cut our armed forces to zero and then see who starts whining when communist Chinese armies start marching through the streets of San Francisco? Democrats are going to "socially engineer" us into the biggest welfare state in the world while continuing to scream that we spend too much on everything else.

Then the Dems will start continue to call anyone with a shred of sanity names since they won't have anything left in the arsenal.

Tammy, yes I did know that. Article 1, section 8 references Army and Navy.

Are you aware that there is no legislated size to the Navy? Do you also acknowledge what I said about the difference in technology is true?

If you have a fuss about how the Navy chooses to spend its budget how about referencing: http ://www .navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=58606 from last year which says -

"Mulloy also pointed out that even with the streamlining of the DoN budget and through captured efficiencies, the Navy will still be able to purchase five more ships than planned, extra F/A-18 fighter jets to help modernize the aviation warfare, and more P-8 aircraft."

or .navytimes.com/news/2012/02/navy-budget-request-avoids-deep-cuts-021312 from this year which says -

"The budget calls for 192 new aircraft next year. It includes six F-35Bs, a jump-jet variant Marines will use, and four F-35Cs, a Navy version with bigger wings and sturdier landing gear for carrier operations.

Spending is going up for research and development for the F-35, going from $1.310 billion to $1.481 billion. It’s unclear if the figures included in Navy documents refer to all three variants or just the Navy and Marine versions. As the P-8 Poseidon moves closer to entering operations, research and development funding for the next-generation maritime patrol aircraft is dropping from $609 million to $421 million.

The Navy wants 26 new F/A-18 E/F Super Hornets, the biggest fixed-wing purchase. It is unclear if those planes will be used by the Navy or Marine Corps.

The Navy also plans to buy 37 MH-60 helicopters."

Also note the discussion by Admiral Mulloy about retiring ships early to save money from operational expenses. This is part of where the drop in fleet size is coming from too.

You can fuss all you want about fewer ships being built, but other areas are increasing. Yes, this means job layoffs at shipyards but an increase of jobs at aviation facilities.

But now comes the trick question. If you want to increase the DoD budget, without increasing the deficit, where do you propose it come from? PPACA is a non-starter, currently legislated entitlements can't happen, discretionary spending isn't enough.

Please understand that I support and treasure our military folks. They deserve the best we can give them when both in active duty status and when retired.

Regarding contracts, please see that in both 2012 and 2013 comments about the Navy budget about more ships were ordered/built. Did your shipyard lose out in that bid process? If so, how is that the President's fault? Is that the "free market" thing that a lot of people are screaming about?

I know this doesn't help you and for that I truly sympathize. I was unemployed a few years ago and its a scary damn thing.

Tammy so that is your beef? Whats in it for You? I know "to hell with the rest of the country...as long as I don't feel the pinch" Spoken like a true me, me, me ,me. Blame the GNOP for playing chicken with all of us. They like Willard will say what ever to get their way. I would by far rather see more Police, firemen, teachers, roadcrews than more hawk toys.

The US defense budget is approximately as much as the rest of the world combined. We could cut our defense spending by 25% and we would still outspend the next 10 countries put together. How could anyone with any common sense defend runaway military spending as Mitt and the GOP are doing now? It's insane.

http://www.globalfirepower.com/defense-spending-budget.asp

I don't blame Tammy for being concerned about her job. It makes sense and it's right for people to think about how things will impact them and their families.

Tip O'Neil once said "All politics are local." This simple statement accurately reflects how we perceive things that we expect will have impacts on our lives.

CubsFan2012

Matthew, how about the fact that our navy now has one third of the ships it had under Bill Clinton? Or the fact that we spend half as much on defense as we do on healthcare?

Sounds like a bit of 'dismantling' to me

Got any proof??? And did you realize that healthcare is MORE IMPORTANT than defense????

greatpretender

matthew..

I can back it up..

1.this pos is a communist and associated with known communists

If he is, then Bill Clinton is a disciple of Stalin (as Obama is to the right of Clinton on healthcare) and Republicans are Nazis (Republicans are anti-Communist, so was Hitler and the fascist Nazi Party).

2. he is cutting our defense budget

So was every Republican who agreed to the defense cuts (i.e., most of them). And by the way, Obama offered a plan that would include far fewer defense cuts, but the GOP Speaker of the House John Boehner chickened out after Eric Cantor refused to play ball. So the Republicans caused the defense cuts with their anti-tax pledge.

3. he hates america (read dreams from my father) check his college transcripts.

Then how come under his presidency America's image among other nations has gone up???? How come America has improved a bit after the chaotic Bush decade??? And maybe we should check Romney's tax returns; after all, he may have skimped on his taxes and thus committed treason.

he sought out socialists/communists professors in college

Got any proof??? And by the way, Romney was a bully in high school. Doesn't make a damn difference.

what else do you need, genius?

Proof, and real facts. Unfortunately, I wouldn't expect either coming from you.

Folks, let it be known that I love the military; I also advocate for a strong army, navy, air force, etc. But in a time of budget cuts and fiscal restraint, every department has to face some cuts, and that includes the military. Especially since we aren't in World War III or in an arms race with the Russians or the Chinese.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

How many of you RWNJ's are members of Militias, Patriot Groups, Arian Nation or KKK organizations? I know all of you have been listening to Rush Limbauh and Glenn Beck.

Cubs Fan - I always knew your thinking was inferior to the White Sox Fans

In case you haven't noticed we are no longer fighting on the seas - ergo less ships are needed

Modern warfare has evolved - yes ships are still needed for blockades - however it's all about the drones baby - and seals - and focused targets

Johnny doesn't have to come marching home again!

Carriers are a big problem they cost so much and are so vulnerable - get it?

Jeez keep up or fall behind!

Steven B - what we need is to move that money into jobs that help the country - not waste it on weapons we never use.

Obama/Biden 2012

Sorry to burst your bubble, but America is a war economy.

And the military, along with the technical exploration that goes hand in hand, develops the technologies we use.

What would you invest the money in? Food stamps? 'cause that's where the money is going when the defense workers and the merchants they support lose their incomes...

Oh boy Steven, you went there.................good point, but this crowd doesn't believe it and won't.

Peraonally, I would invest in cancer research (but I have a vested interest there, so not a fair comment)

I'm one of those defense contractors facing a job cut. Guess I can go work for one of those sacred job creators...oh wait, they forgot to create any jobs.

Sorry, phinephancy, but cancer research requires an education through either an MD or a PhD or both and that means importing lots of people from places like India or China to staff all those slots you would create. I want to see cancer eradicated, too, but your dog not only hunt, but can't, on that one.

Try reading a book titled Freakonomics and get back to me on this one, please. And don't respond to me by just calling me names again. I spent almost 40 years as a pharmacist and I can't believe the changes in educational levels that the profession has adopted in those years.

Invest in physical and educational infrastructure.

Invest in and support opportunities that ease access to the market for start-ups by creating agglomerative effects of co-location of utilities and resources. Build in redundancies in distribution systems to make sure that businesses don't get bottle necked. Rebuild and reuse existing lots in cities (in-fill development). Remediate brown fields and re-use them. This allows for existing mass transit to actually get people to jobs in the CBD.

Invest in our children's education. Teach them to think instead of memorize for tests. And definitely, get those Ph.Ds here for people like Ms. Phancy to do research that benefits us all.

BobinKC,

The word welfare means a lot of thing to lots of people.

if you mean federal dollars going to certain groups of people or persons you need to list them all: corporate , education, social services.

In the area of research, it is the NIH, NASA, to name a few who provide grant money to research scientists. These scientists could have easily gone into Pharma, or private industry with the education they had at the graduate level.

But many did not. Your comment that we need more home grown scientist is well taken. Maybe the states who want to ban critical thinking, evolution etc in the school curriculum are naive and anti -science., but they are hurting the education level of future students.

In the meantime, here in Mn we have one pharmacy school which is hard to get into, and four law schools that willl take anyone's money as long as they are at least a c student and pass the entrance exam.;)

Steven B - That is the problem. America IS a war economy and until we change that manner of thinking(like the president is trying to) we will be in this vicious cycle for a long time.

As for your comment regarding food stamps, I agree wholeheartedly BUT can you kindly remind everyone why we do have so many on food stamps and government assistance? I guess 10+ million jobs that were lost in 2007-2008 didn't play a part in that. I guess the fact that the so called "job creators" that were suppose to create jobs according to a certain party that fought for them have been reaping profits for years by shipping jobs overseas doesn't play a part. Could it be those Corporations that refuse to create jobs here in the America because they have to live up to the regulations currently in place that protect not only the worker but environment doesn't play a part either.

Don't get me wrong, I don't like this current "welfare state" no more than you or any other American at all but if Congress won't get off it's lazy @$$ and "legislate" as required by the constitution, then the country will continue to suffer and remain in a sad state.

Obama's the king of playing politics. And where did he get his training? The same place that David Axelrod, Rahm Emanuel, and Hilary Clinton got theirs. Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals. All four of these folks QUOTE the book in their speeches. Hilary even wrote her senior thesis on it.

Interestingly, do you know who Alinsky dedicated his book to?

Go ahead and make a guess. Hitler? Nope, worse. Stalin? Guess again. Pol Pot? Try again. Mao? Worse.

The Devil.

Hey, Cubby, I think you hit the nail on the head in your first line: he wants to be king of the USA. I just hope he doesn't get another term because he will issue an executive order and crown himself.

Bob in KC - Cheney already claimed that title - that is President Cheney - remember transparency - like backroom deals with the Oil Barons and then claiming "executive privilege"

Ah sure you remember that and not a squawk from you

Hail to the Chief President Cheney!

Our Great Obama will be crowned King of the 50 states and then he will take over the world!! He is the greatest and everyone KNOWS that!!!

Everyone is afraid to acknowledge his greatness. No one will vote for Romeny - that is obvious. Everyone will vote for Obama - everyone loves him!!!!

Obama has kept Bush tax cuts and added new ones. He only even asked to cut one brackets that gives squat anyway for politics,

Job -

I have a question for you - What about all of the times that the democrats asked for and got the republicans to sign on to a tax increase in return for spending cuts in the future, only to have those spending cuts never materialize?

With a record like that, why should the republicans ever trust the democrats to keep a promise?

About as far as Oblameo can throw the USS Enterprise one-handed!

"all of the time"

Care to share these times with us reality based creatures? We both know I'm not suicidal so I won' be holding my breath .. but find some for me please. Oh and having them occuring in this century we are living in would help. Come on .. you said Republicans agreed to tax increases .. what ones
?

Tammy

Hey cupcake again you open your mouth...but can't back up what you say.

The Party of "NO" has Never agreed with Anything that would help this country...why start now. Sick.

Care to mention all those bills in the Senate?

Do you know what the Walz Job bill is? See that Bill was an American Bill, both sides wanted it.

paul-florida turn off fox, the Only jobs bills that has come out of the party of No has ties to cooperate welfare. They have shown time and time again they Only care about the big boys...so Paul , that lets you out. Remember "A sucker is born every minute and two (think Teas/Rep) to take him.) You sir can be the Poster child.

GNOP party out in 2012.

If you really want to get into the ties of our respective candidates, should we dredge up Reverend Jeremiah "God D America" Wright? Or what about Bill Bomber Ayers? What about the fact that you can sign up for a local protest mob in your area by going to BarackObama.com? What about the fact that the Teamster union leader told Obama during a speech (at an event that Obama also spoke at) "President Obama, this is your army! Let's take some of these S.O.B's out!" I could go on, but I think you get the picture.

And would you care to share with the class what exactly you're using to justify your vitriol about Mitt being the Devil? It's a somewhat serious charge, and those types of charges usually come with some sort of supporting argument. I'll wait.

CubsFan- SS spews garbage all day, every day. Kudos to you for having more patience than I do to even reply to him/her.

Well I thought he or she was actually reading my posts at least, but his latest comment where he says I called Obama the Devil proves me wrong. He's quickly dropping below my radar. I prefer Liberals like BillyBob who are actually capable of rational exchange.

Exactly. I like discussing things with elvis pa.. too.

I don't usually. He's too flirty. >.>

How about this: Romney is a fool because he believes in magic underwear. Romney is a fool because he thinks he can stonewall his tax records. As far as Mitt being the devil I'm sure there is some theology in the Christian community somewhere that could find reason to brand him with that term-after all he did go out and try to convert good Christian folk to his cult. But the thing that is worst are his insulting lies. Do you like your intelligence insulted? He expects you to believe that the President actually said that business owes everything to the government or whatever nonsense. And that's just one example out of many. If he were pres how could you believe anything he said. I really believe it is a step toward a 1984 kind of doublespeak. It is very worrisome for our democracy when you can lie so blatantly with very little accountability.

B White, actually, any religion believes in something that sounds crazy. Magic underwear for the Mormons, 72 virgins for the Muslims, nothing EXPLODING into everything for atheists, Hindus don't even believe we're real, Christianity (my religion) believes a dead man came back to life. So we all believe something that sounds crazy.

But as for the issue at hand, Romney isn't doing anything with his tax records that the majority of Congress including Nancy Pelosi aren't doing with theirs. Of the 535 members of Congress, only 17 have actually released their returns. And Obama gave a new definition to 'stonewalling' with the birth certificate issue.

As for what Christians think of Mormons, let's go into what Muslims think of Mormons (or any non-Muslims). Anyone who doesn't believe in Islam is an infidel who should have a knife shoved through their throats according to the Koran.

Romney is far more trustworthy and far more business-competent than Obama. He knows what he's doing and actually has executive experience. Obama's only 'experience' is as a community organizer in Chicago. He claims he learned more there than at Harvard. That ought to tell you something. Lol.

Sorry, cubsfan, just gotta say "Go Rays"

Lol. Until our disastrous three game sweep by the Cardinals, we were the hottest team in baseball for the last 19 games. But being outscored 23-1 over three days kind of cools that off.

But I tolerate the Rays as well. We got Garza from them, and he's been one of our best.

The only teams I truly despise are the Cardinals, White Sox, and yes, Gem, the Yankees.

I agree about the Yankees. Like the Reds. And Marlins. Not a big Red Sox Fan. More into football.

Yankees Rule! Jeter is AWESOME! I will greatly miss Mariano Rivera:(

↑ Nobody's perfect, I suppose. ;-)

But you come very close, Gem. ♥

cubs fan. (sorry to hear that) get off the birth certificate thing. no one has an original. it sits in a town hall where you are born. It was a waste of time to deal with. And even though there were two birth announcements in local papers in 60 and he sent over to have a republican in charge of the vault get the form out and bring it to show, still people are to ignorant to believe its real. talk about something else, like pototics maybe

and what a surprise. german is a yankees fan

Merci beaucoup CubsFan. I'm gonna sign off for a bit and hit some tennis balls. See you later?

bugman- I like the Sixers too, does that help?:)

Sorry Cubs Fan You are right on with Seeking, all bluster but no links to facts and a lot of pat repetoire of the same insults in every post.. I do however have to go with the Cardinals and David Freese being one of our hometown guys.

Lol. Cardinals aren't nearly the team they were now that they've lost Albert and LaRussa, but they're still strong enough to be a thorn in our side, KSW.

And I'll be here, Gem. :)

BUT THE SIXERS??? NOOOOOO, NOOOO, NOOOO, DEAR.

You're a Bulls fan.

And after the Bulls, you're a Celtics fan.

I made a comment about Obama being the Devil? Dude, scroll up and reread everything I've said. I'll wait for your retraction. I said that Alinsky dedicated his book to the Devil. He did. He dedicated his book to Lucifer because he said that Lucifer was the first person to encourage rebellion to the point that he literally won his own kingdom. So try reading a little slower next time.

Obama above Mitt in integrity? Obama lied about lobbyists, earmarks, withdrawal rate from Iraq, the unemployment rate, no-bid contracts, convoking commissions, eliminating the capital gains tax for small businesses, the mandate being a tax, voting against the anti-infanticide bill in Illinois, the Lockerbie bomber, taking over GM, etc., etc., etc. Obama lies more times than we can even keep track of.

Oh, things were so bad under Bush? Let's check the unemployment rate under Bush. Did it top 10%? Let's check the Black unemployment rate. Was it at 14.3%? Let's check how much Bush added to the debt in eight years. Now check how much Obama has added in THREE AND A HALF (it's more). Shall I go on?

Cubby, you want to much: you expect Democrats to be able to read! That's one of the reasons Pelosi said Congress had to pass Obamacare to be able to read it: she was hoping nobody would find out she can't read.

Marshal, republican president's have handled SS and Medicare as all other presidents since Lyndon Johnson in the late 1960;s.

THe invasion of IRAQ was funded by a bipartisan vote in Congress.

SS and Medicare has been broke all along for the last 40 years.

Matthew - I really hate it when you're right.

I could easily reply with - What planet do the democrats live on? It certainly can't be reality!

MLK,

Thats only ten terms in sanity's eleven posts. What happened to #11?? Sanity slipping??

I think I was one or two of those fools and possibly also the nitwit, but I'd have to scroll up to check. Lol!

Don't forget, though, that the Left is the party of tolerance, understanding, peace, and love, Mlkbone.

Hey Cubby,

I am also a Cleveland Indian fan. What's wrong with wanting love and peace and wishing everyone gets along? FYI (I stand in the middle politically)

Well, there's nothing wrong with wishing that everyone would get along and sing Kumbaya together around the camp fire, I suppose, but it's rather annoying when the people claiming to advocate bipartisanship, love, transparency, and cooperation are the same people slinging insults (SeekingSanity), stabbing knives into dinner tables (Rahm Emanuel), urging their opponents to commit suicide (Montel Williams), fantasizing about the death of those who disagree with them (Ed Shultz), etc.

@ Mlkbone Seeking has a canned repetoire of insults she likes to spout rather than facts. In addition to the above "liar, stuck on stupid, ignorant, demented". It is because she cannot debate with actual supported facts and she thinks it makes her look smarter than the rest of us. She is taking lessons from Feisty.

Probably.

I wonder how much bigger the wage difference would be between the millionaire corporate masters and the low-wage workers if Romney became President. Luckily we will never find out, as that essense of mediocrity can never win the election.

FYI -

The democrats are just as 'owned'. You do realize that Obama's Secretary of the Navy is a former governor of Mississippi and democrat? He is part of the reason the shipyard I work at is being closed - even though our sister shipyard, in Mississippi, can't build ships as well as we can or on budget.

Tammy,

Your example sounds like it has everything to do with your states politics and nothing to do with our president.

BTW has your current governor decided to expand Medicare and set up the health exchanges to help the uninuserd in your state get affordable health insurance?

Eric,

You sound like cute little alien. Are you green? Any special powers? I have a soft spot for cute little aliens.

In a cute little green alien voice:

"The clawwwwww! The claw is our master. The claw chooses who will go and who will stay."

"You saved our lives! We are eternally grateful!"

Yes, I'm a Toy Story fan. The third one was awesome.

Cubs, that was a great response!

The Republicans need to remove the religious crazies and regain their moral compass.

Hiya Eric!

History is not going to look kindly on the time when these right wing nitwits mainstreamed bat @!$%# crazy! :o)

PS: I ♥ ♥ ♥ your beautiful city! Many great memories of the people & culture!

↑ Awwww . . . Eric's made a friend.

There goes Fiesty again! Now she's namecalling, too.

I'm thinking Feisty is part of the multi-million dollar department of bloggers and social networkers that Holder put together in order to defend Obama in places like this. She posts the same old talking points and rarely bothers to interact with responses.

Cubs some times remarks are sooo stupid they don't warrant a response

Hey, but troll on.....

hey, bozo, I'm a veteran and the republicans are veterans best friends!

the demorats will throw the veterans under the bus!

bless you both

I agree it's a very large problem. Another problem I have identified is the support the military receives after they get back home .. especially the wounded.

If you look at the bills voted on in the last 10 years .. I find it hard to believe the men and women of the military can imagine the Republicans care about them. Anyone that doesn't believe me needs to go look at the voting records.

great Pre tend er...you sure are. That crap make work for the drooling Teas...but not here.LOL

And Obama said he would hold everyone to this. No compromise. I want him to, but will he? I don't trust him anymore though I would never vote for Romney. (I don't want the Koch Bros/ALEC for president--they did say they didn't care which face won--just so he did what they told him and signed their legeslation. They have absolutely no intention of creating jobs in America. NEVER,NEVER. They want Corporate America of the US and Globe. All the worlds peoples will be equal in their BigBusiness Plantation. No one will be able to move up except by Marriage.)

The politics part seems to be that Obama really does not want to cut the Military. So he gets his cabinet to advise him not to and then will capitulate and (as he thinks) save the votes from the Left. Its already making me Angry. I bet no one here really knows how much they spend and for what!

1st credit downgrade in U.S. history. Thank you Obama.

1st credit downgrade in US history - thank you republicans. The ongoing decade of "my way or the highway" is what is going to defeat this country, not anything or anyone else. Just ourselves.

Can't be a banana republic. We don't have any banana plantations here. Wait, I know, we can become a cornstalk republic! Except the corn around here has all died in the heat.

GermanGem

1st credit downgrade in U.S. history. Thank you Obama.

You need to do your homework. S&P stated the reason for the downgrade was the result of the Repukes stance. Google is your friend.

I am sick of all this party-line finger-pointing. Not one of the plans proposed by any politician or faction - Reid, Boehner, Obama, TP, GOP, Dem, not one – even pretended it would keep the debt from increasing. Stop trying to assign blame; this was truly a bi-partisan goat rope.

The plan that was passed, increases the national debt by $92 billion per month, with no end in sight. So why is anyone surprised that our rating has been downgraded?

Standard & Poor's managing director John Chambers said it very clearly: To recover our AAA rating, "It would take a stabilization of the debt.” The only things that will accomplish that are to 1) Pass a Balanced Budget Amendment; or, 2) Not raise the debt ceiling. Both of those options were rejected, and we were downgraded.

Greatpretender, I know how you feel, but it isn't Obama. Its Corporate. They need us to become a third World country and compete with all the third World labor for low paying jobs with no rights. They want us happy to work for room and board and say "thankyou". This is how they like it. They will not change. They will not give up one penny of profit for this country. Don't any of you wonder why corporations are making Record Profits while the rest of us are experiencing Recession and Austerity? They now own the Government because of Citizens United. There is no Big Government. Its Big Corporate. Even Obama with his Bankers, Wall Street, Monsanto and "His" Military. Our goose is cooked by Corporate and they love to see us fight about the mythical Repubs/TP vs Democrats. It keeps us busy while they get richer and give us lame excuses.

My way or the highway? O'bummer is the biggest petulant whiner I've ever seen. If he doesn't get his way he takes his taxpayer funded ball and goes home. What planet are you on? And what are you taking?