Why is Willard & his cronies running away from the Ryan Budget Plan like a scalded cat?

When he has previously given it a giant hug and called it MARVELOUS…

Since the MSM is fawning all over themselves with the BOLD choice Willard made (even though conventional wisdom says it was a mandate), here are some things John Q. Public should be aware concerning Paul Ryan;

Ryan embraces the extreme philosophy of Ayn Rand

Ryan wants to raises taxes on the middle class, cut them for millionaires.

Ryan wants to end Medicare, replace it with a voucher system

Ryan thinks Social Security is a “Ponzi scheme.”

Ryan’s budget would result in 4.1 million lost jobs in 2 years.

Ryan wants to eliminate Pell Grants for more more than 1 million students.

Ryan supports $40 billion in subsides for big oil

Ryan has ownership stakes in companies that benefit from oil subsidies .

Ryan claimed Romneycare has led to “rationing and benefit cuts.”

Ryan believes that Romneycare is “not that dissimilar to Obamacare.”

Ryan accused generals of lying about their support for Obama’s military budget.

Ryan co-sponsored a “personhood” amendment, an extreme anti-abortion measure.

Read the full details @ http://thinkprogress.org/progress-report/12-thing-you-must-know-about-paul-ryan/

We don’t need a right wing social engineering ideologue anywhere near the White House!

Not Much Has Changed:

Last Saturday Mitt Romney pleased everyone by selecting Paul Ryan; a candidate whom the conservatives love and the Democrats love to hate. The reality is that the Romney camp was experiencing the same problems as John McCain experienced four years ago. They were losing and they needed a game changer. Boring guys were not going to turn the campaign around as Romney was sliding down a slippery slope to defeat.

Some less sophisticated pundits might proclaim that Romney's choice of Paul Ryan somehow proves that Willard is now a conservative. But I don't believe that is an accurate assessment. Romney continues to be Romney and is still the wishy-washy, flip-flopping candidate who without any qualms will distort and twist the truth. Paul Ryan was picked because Romney believes a fired-up Tea Party is his ONLY ticket to the White House. The choice had nothing to do with ideology and everything to do with shrewdness and ambition. In short, Romney has nothing in common with the Tea Party: He is simply using them.

It will not be surprising to see a short-term bump in the polls which may last through the GOP convention. But after the Democratic convention and we see candidates sprint to the finish line, the Romney brand will again start to falter.

The reason is very clear. Romney will again have to face his personal issues of caring more about money than working-class people, sheltering his money in off-shore bank accounts, hiding his tax returns, destroying American jobs and outsourcing them to China, and being a habitual liar. On policy issues, Romney will fare no better: Dismantling the American safety net of Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, self-deportation of immigrants, continuing his war on women and raising taxes on the middle-class so he can pay fewer taxes are not winning positions. On the poll that counts in November Romney will lose and Paul Ryan will contribute to that loss and no longer have a job.



Gutting Welfare Reform – A Legitimate Criticism

The professional left is falling all over themselves attacking the Romney campaign ad charging the Obama administration with gutting the landmark welfare reform law. Some joker from the NYT waxed eloquent that many governors – including Republican governors such as Romney – have requested waivers from the law in the past. Therefore, says the left, the criticism of the recent HHS policy to grant waivers to states on the law's work requirement smacks strongly of a bunch of hypocrites with very short memories. Needless to say, the leftist lemmings around here have blindly embraced that narrative to proudly proclaimed (yet again) their vast superiority over those incapable of confronting the truth – just take a look at their dismissive commentary on my welfare post from last Friday. Good grief, lifting the veils of ignorance from these people is a never ending and thankless task. But someone's gotta do it.

Waiver authority per se is not the issue. For gosh sakes, waiver authority has been a part of the welfare reform law from day one and governors have been legitimately using that provision to appeal for relief from some requirements all along. So there's nothing to see here, let's move along. The pertinent issue is how the Obama administration has chosen to ignore the intent of Congress regarding work requirements in the original law by unilaterally opening the door to relaxation of those work requirements. And they accomplished this feat not by publicly debating this hot button issue or by soliciting congressional input into this hot button issue. Instead, behind closed doors they stretch the language in the law beyond reasonable bounds to undermine the intent of Congress through a purely administrative action. So at the end of the day what we have is a bunch of faceless bureaucrats who ginned up a thinly reasoned rationale that lets the Secretary of HHS get away with diluting the welfare reform law's work requirements -- and the rest of us can only bow to their will.

That's not participatory democracy, that's governance by dictatorial fiat. And that's the same strong armed approach HHS is using to implement Obamacare (see contraceptives and religious institutions) and the same approach EPA is using to get around the inconvenience that Congress chose not to pass cap and tax. So what Obama is doing is using the machinery of the executive branch to neutralize the legitimate prerogatives of the congressional branch in his crusade to impose a leftist vision on the country. Dare I point out, that's not a good thing.

But while the overarching issue in play here is the Obama administration's approach to governance, let's get back to the specific issue of relaxing work requirements. Arguably, the most distinguishing feature of the welfare reform law – the feature that allows this law to be described as "landmark" – is the work requirement. Gone are the days when welfare queens (real or imagined) could live off the public dime indefinitely. But the HHS action opens the door to going back to the bad old days by chipping away at the very concept that was central to welfare reform in the first place. Whether that door is wide open or just slightly ajar is irrelevant, what's relevant is there is now opportunity for sympathetic Dem governors to undermine a requirement the left never liked anyway. And from that perspective, criticisms that HHS is "gutting welfare reform" have strong conceptual merit.

As for Romney's ad, by the standards of contemporary political advertising his ad on this issue is just fine. These ads have only 30 seconds or so to communicate a big idea and the Romney ad does that by accurately speaking to the erosion of the core concept on which the welfare reform law was built. Good grief, compared to trash ads like the one that blames Romney for the death of a worker's wife, the Romney welfare ad deserves an Emmy! And let me take this a step further, whether you agree with the ad or not the Romney spot actually highlights a key policy and philosophical difference that distinguishes him from Obama. Nowhere to be found is unsubstantiated muck like accusing the president of not paying taxes for the last 10 years or implying he's a felon. So the ad functions to raise the level of debate in this sordid campaign by highlighting an issue that actually deserves to be debated.

And on those grounds the ad works wonderfully since so many are talking about it.

P.S. Glen Kessler, the WaPo Fact Check guy, gave this Romney ad 4 Pinocchios. I'm a big fan of Kessler because I think he's one of the few journalists out there who does his homework and plays it straight. But on this issue, I'm going to agree to disagree with him for the reasons stated in my post.

Remember the debt ceiling debacle? Keep this in mind when it comes up again!

Ryan is not a “fiscal conservative.” A fiscal conservative pays for the government he wants. Ryan never has. His early “Roadmap for America’s Future” didn’t balance the budget until the 2060s and added $60 trillion to the national debt. Ryan’s revised plan, passed by the House in 2011, wouldn’t reach balance until the 2030s while adding $14 trillion in debt. It adds $6 trillion in debt over the next decade alone — yet Republicans had the chutzpah to say they wouldn’t raise the debt limit! (I remain mystified why President Obama never hammered home this reckless contradiction by insisting that the GOP “raise the debt ceiling just by the amount it would take to accommodate the debt in Paul Ryan’s budget.”)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/matt-miller-the-talented-mr-ryan/2012/08/12/1afaaaa2-e4ad-11e1-936a-b801f1abab19_story.html?hpid=z2

Republicans hypocrites be thy name.

So this is what 5 Decades of Democrat rule gets you:

DETROIT (CBS Detroit) Got kicks? Every Detroit student who shows up on the cash-crucial Student Count Day will be able to answer “yes” thanks to a donation from Bob’s Classic Kicks in midtown.

BCK, 4717 Woodward, made an arrangement with the school district to give away a free pair of black leather Nikes to every student who comes to class on Oct. 3, the day when students are counted and their numbers used as the basis for per-pupil funding from the state and federal government.

Don't Democrats ever get tired of giving stuff away?

When Mitt Romney made his pick many of us from the other side of the isle were questioning why. After all, President Obama has been talking about his objection to the Ryan budget for 3 years so why would Mitt Romney give his opponent the author of the plan to run against. The Ryan budget was already a bone of contention since Mitt Romney basically adopted most of it and said if he were elected President and it came to his desk he would sign it.

Since the announcement there has been much talk about how happy both sides are with the pick. On the Left most assumed the pick was made to please his base but they were already going to vote for ABO. Paul Ryan does not provide help with any group that adds votes for Mitt Romney except the possibility of putting Wisconsin in play. But you have to wonder why any Presidential candidate would risk losing FL to win WI.

But now we see that many Conservative political professionals are concerned even angry about Mitt's pick …

POLITICO: Away from the cameras, and with all the usual assurances that people aren't being quoted by name, there is an unmistakable consensus among Republican operatives in Washington: Romney has taken a risk with Ryan that has only a modest chance of going right — and a huge chance of going horribly wrong.

In more than three dozen interviews with Republican strategists and campaign operatives — old hands and rising next-generation conservatives alike — the most common reactions to Ryan ranged from gnawing apprehension to hair-on-fire anger that Romney has practically ceded the election.

And the more pessimistic strategists don't even feign good cheer: They think the Ryan pick is a disaster for the GOP. Many of these people don't care that much about Romney — they always felt he faced an improbable path to victory — but are worried that Ryan's vocal views about overhauling Medicare will be a millstone for other GOP candidates in critical House and Senate races.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0812/79697.html?hp=t1

You have to wonder how long before the Conservative political professionals take a step back from the Presidential Race and place much more focus on saving the House and winning the Senate.

How the rich and ultra rich pay little to nothing in taxes:

Edward Kleinbard, professor of law at the Gould School of Law at the University of Southern California, explained it this way, “You start with income dominated by tax-preferred income — capital gains and qualified dividends. That gets you to 15 percent. Then you use charitable contributions of appreciated securities to reduce ordinary income. But the charitable contribution deduction is capped at 50 percent of adjusted gross income. Now you’re way down, but you’re not at zero.”

What does it take to get to zero, or close to it? According to Professor Kleinbard, there are only two additional ways: tax loss carry-forwards to offset capital gains, and tax shelters, many of which have been deemed abusive by the I.R.S., to offset any remaining ordinary income after other deductions.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/superrich-clues-might-romney-returns-135603513.html

Perhaps they should be made to pay a mandatory minimum tax of 20%.

How many in the middle and upper middle class get hammered with the AMT?

Why does Congress allow the rich to get away with paying little to nothing?

Dennis:

Excellent narrative! Well said.

Well they scared the heck out of Mo. Romney dropped 8 points in Mo. from +9 to +1, in one of the few states that voted for McCain/Palin, and who loves to elect republicans to the state house and senate. For some reason for a state that loves republicans so much, they sure cooled off on Romney in hurry. The democratic Governor is up by 14 points. Mo will go into the Romney column but it will be by no means be a blowout, the point is that Romney is not gaining any momentum and now that the ticket is set he is losing steam, even old republicans don't want their medicare screwed with, especially the ones born in 1958 or later who have paid in for years. The best demographic group Romney had going for him was older white people and the Ryan pick has thrown a real scare into them. I think Mo calls itself the Show Me state, Romney must have shown them something they don't like so much, because an eight point drop is pretty dramatic from one of the few states that went for McCain in the last election.

Paul Ryan's Family Is Rich Because of the Federal Government

Ryan's family has deep roots in southern Wisconsin, and that his family made its fortune with a construction business, Ryan Incorporated, which was once "Ryan Brothers." And that it "built roads."
http://www.ryancentral.com/history.html

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

"Huh"
Hey those roads usually aren't built by private funding or God!"

Why doesn't MSNBC cover the story of the heckler who attempted to rush the stage while Paul Ryan was speaking and actually punched a campaign worker?

Is vehement hatred really what we have been reduced to as a nation instead of respect for fellow human and different ideas?

I guess the propoganda machine did not want to draw attention to this.

Bill in Fairfax -- You're so concerned about the poor getting help.

What about all the HELP the rich get?????

Let's do away with the welfare for the RICH and for Business.

The best demographic group Romney had was older white people and with the Ryan pick he just changed the subject from "the economy" to "my economy", oh snap, that is a whole different subject, now that he wants to get in my knickers.

FR: But there also was an obvious downside for Romney: You turn the race into a conversation about Medicare, entitlements and the role of government, relegating a discussion about the economy to the back seat -- at least for the time being.

This is how out of touch the FR writers have become. The entitlements and massive expansion of the government is the economy. The government is taking the life blood out of the private sector to support more and more entitlements. No matter what Obama says about the private sector doing just fine, it is the private sector that must pay for the failed programs of the government. This is why the private sector is not doing fine, the government is nothing but a parasite that is destroying private business.

You guys, FR writers, really need to pick up your game.

I love Paul Ryan but ... nah I dont'.

I vacationed in Nova Scotia recently and was awed by the sheer majesty of wind farms. The quietness and cleanliness of an energy source that can never be depleted. Throw every dime that can be scraped together to support this industry. Do it for your kids if you want to leave them something. Do not worry about the carbon companies, they will own the wind companies.

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL

Why is Willard & his cronies running away from the Ryan Budget Plan like a scalded cat?

Because "MYTH" Romney has no substance and "MYTH"is a scary cat. That dude has the scariest, nervous, laughter in the world.

4 more years for 44 without a doubt,

Obama/Biden 2012

GO JOE.

Can't wait until the debates.

OBAMA IN 2012.

The Romney campaign continues to flounder in the shallow end of the pool, with it's newest anchor wrapped around it's neck, Paul Ryan.

Be careful Mitt! You're moving closer to the deep end!

No Joe,

My comment is 100% opinion, nothing less as is the Politico article I referenced.

Politico stated in the article that they only gave their opinions off the record.

FEISTY, those are 12 points to repeat as often as possible; they define who Paul Ryan is.

RON, great assessment; in less than 48 hours Mitt Romney was doing a flip flop away from his VP choice; he and his surrogates were trying to distance themselves from the Ryan Budget as fast as their mouths could open and close.

DCIA, Ryan claims to be fiscally responsible yet voted "yea" for every single unfunded piece of legislation from 2001 through 2008 including the two wars, the Rx Program for Medicare as well as TARP and the Auto Loans. Ryan was one of 32 republicans voting for the auto industry loans.

FORREST, terrific information; hadn't heard about Mitt's nose-dive in Missouri yet.

DENNIS, excellent opinion post.

Ryan has zero foreign policy experience. He's been in a think tank too long.

That's not experience, it's indoctrination.

NJNB -- But the MATH backs up those opinions! Ryan's budget does indeed increase the DEBT and the RICH and Ultra RICH get away with paying ZERO taxes. Data from the IRS confirms this.

Romney's campaign changed course and decided not to stop in the Orlando area on his Florida trip. There are way too many seniors in the area. Instead they stopped in Miami. How smart! Like, there are no seniors in south Florida?

TOO FUNNY!

Bill in Fairfax claims he is "lifting the veil of ignorance" by repeating the same lie as Romney about the Welfare Work Requirements, again refusing to realize that the memo in question clearly states that a waiver will ONLY be granted if the alternative plan puts more people back to work.

Seems Bill has his own blinders firmly in place.

JAS and WCA claim that a discussion about entitlement reform IS a discussion about the economy.

Apparently they feel Tax Cuts for the wealthy and Benefit Cuts for the poor are more relevant economic issues than getting people back to work.

What happened to all the glowing posts about how Paul Ryan would save the Romney ticket? Is the Honeymoon over already?

no joe, no bo, nj

Well, bcwc has, obviously, never actually seen-or been near enough to hear- a wind farm. "quiet" is not one of the hallmarks. A proposal to build just one wind turbine near my home has met with nothing but protest- and most of the real, scientific, arguments are centered around the noise. Seems the decibel level is way out of the DEP range.

Actually NoJJo I have and not only in Nova Scotia. Yes there is noise when you are in the immediate vicinity but most wind farms are set far from residential areas. Each new generation of turbine has lessened the impact of noise pollution and there is no evidence of health related issues other than anecdotal. Perhaps you prefer fracking the daylights out of the continent? No environmental issues there? Hey you can boil your water while it comes out of the tap!

blackcat - agree with you - we went to Nova Scotia (as well as touring the New England Coast of the US) this past July as well, lovely country, they happen to love their wiind farms in Nova Scotia, and we did not meet anyone in New England (especially in Philly and Boston) who did love mitt.

@Sickofthebickering,

Obama has 4 years of foreign policy experience, and got Bin Laden.

All Ryan has tried to kill is the "middle class".

"Kill Medicare Ryan" was not a bold choice, but a stupid choice.

Gee, we sure have a bunch of "experts" telling us how glad they are that Mitt picked Ryan and how this will doom his campaign. When the dust settles and the debates begin it will be very clear who has a plan to get this country going again and Mitt/Paul will pull away from the clown who gave us NOTHING but empty promises the last 4 yrs. AND, I can hardly wait for old "biteme" to debate Paul Ryan, that will be a hoot as Ryan will tear him a new one.

I do not trust Romney. That is all I need. I trust President Obama.

Yes, and they delayed the Farm Bill to cut 33 billion in Food Stamps........

Thanks Republicans, the farmers appreciate it....... (rolls eyes)

Most of these Republican campaigns were looking for ways to distance themselves from the Ryan budget without alienating the base. They no longer have that option, which is why there’s so much GOP handwringing.

Hey, we didn't get the Republicans into this mess. They needed no help, and they can accept all the blame. They went with the empty headed suit because he 'looked Presidential' (until he made a fool out of himself in his little field trip overseas). 'Looking Presidential' got him the backing of the rich fat cats, that knew they could pull whatever strings they needed if and when they got Willard installed. Then Willard threw cold water on everything by making a 'bold choice' (whatever the hell that means - he was just sucking up to the teabaggers), and now that 'bold choice' is interfering with 'looking Presidential'. "Hey, how can I 'look Presidential' and criticize Obama for reducing Medicare expenditures when my new pet's plan has the same reductions? Gosh."

ADT: Eighty years from now, history will still record it was THE BUSH (R) ADMINISTRATION that brought us The Great Recession.

History is history. That's just the way it is.

History has shown that deep recessions are followed by strong recoveries. In fact, the "Obama Recovery" after a deep recession, is the worst ever. In fact, we're on the verge of a double-dip recession.

History is history. That's just the way it is.

Dennis (starts and ends with the same letter as dumbass)

When Mitt Romney made his pick many of us from the other side of the isle were questioning why.

Are you in Hawaii or Purto Rico?

I love this one:

------

Terry Branstad have criticized Romney’s campaign for opposing these tax credits, calling his staffers a “bunch of East Coast people that need to get out here in the real world to find out what's really going on.”

------

Yeah, those of us from the east coast who grew up squarely in the middle class who have attended college, grad and phd programs have no idea of how the real world world works or how to make it sustainable (i.e. energy independent?) better for future generations. But......Terry in Iowa does.

Feisty Redhead Roselle, Il

And the earthquakes which follow... Snookie-Joe enjoys the tingle they send up her leg! ;o)

As my mother would say, son, if you can't get fracked get shrugged. She was wrong, if you get one you get the other.

In fact, we're on the verge of a double-dip recession.

Which is because of Europe. Familiarize yourself with the term "global economy" please.

You have made the first post a collapse. Why don't you stay on topic for once?

Romney and Ryan are both hunting a mutual running position. Ryan wishes to disqualify the other sides running back by sucking up to the referees, then floating in to score unchallenged. Romney wishes to have the other sides defensive line lay down and allow Him to go around It, by having the referees tote him into the end zone. Course, the other side ain't having any of it. Even if the Obama team did, Romney and Ryan couldn't win. Romney is so backward He would have the officials tote him to the wrong end zone. Ryan's feet haven't been on the ground in years, and He just can't float that far. End up flailing around on his face well before the end zone. Romney took a detour through what He was told was a "tea bag" mudhole, but it's really a gator infested swamp. Both must now give their attention to staying alive, winning a race be damned.

Uh, Union Baya? You're pretty geographically challenged. See, "Philly"-as in, Philadelphia- is in Pennsylvania, which is a Mid-Atlantic state, (Commonwealth, actually)- NOT a New England state.

Geez.

JAS1-

Obama's plan is working, albeit slowly.

A few key facts:

Unemployment: 10.1% in October 2009, the highest rate since 1983 and roughly twice the pre-crisis rate. Since then, steadily reduced to around 8.3%

Stock Market: Dow Jones was at 6,600 in March 2009. It has since recovered - over 12,000 during most of 2011, over 13,000 in 2012.

GDP: GDP growth of 2.2% in Jan. 2008 rapidly declined to a negative growth rate of -5% in 2009. Growth rates have been positive since then to a high of 3.5% before settling to a rate of around 2% growth per quarter.

Home Values: US Home Values declined by almost 25% from Jan. 2007 thru Feb. 2012. The rate of decline slowed and homes values have increased for the last 4 months, with June reporting the first year-over-year increase since 2007.

Fools Gold -

Until the ACA is repealed, the current reality is that $700 billion was cut from Medicare

$700 billion was cut from Medicare spending, ZERO was cut from Medicare benefits.

...and, the ACA will not be repealed in my liifetime, only "tweaked" like Medicare and Social Security.

Paul Ryan: The Deficit? I Built That!

Eric

Ryan has zero foreign policy experience. He's been in a think tank too long.

Not exactly. Being the Budget Chair, the budget is full of appropriations not only for defense, but for aid to other countries. You cannot make decisions on these without understanding what foreign policy is and how it is handled.

Paul Ryan is also on the ways and means committee which has it's hand in everything that is done, including foreign policy.

I would also think that being he is elected in a predominantly democrat district and able to get 60% of the vote, he will have no problem dealing with foreign leaders.

Also, having worked for an past AIA president, dealing with foreign leaders is not that difficult provided you take the advice of your advisors. In the case of Obama, he continually showed an arrogance by not listening to what the state department told how to act and what to give.

What is really sad is there is a quite detailed book on how customs, and protocol on how to act in every country.

Ryan will have no problem.

hey xaber, outstanding, its bushes and europes fault.

Why is it GOP fascist posters have on average 3x more grammatical errors than others?

So did Obama cut 700B from Medicare?

David Axlerod...no it's a dirty lie

Stepahanie Cutter...The President is proud of his 700B in cuts

Which is true? Can the Obama campaign get on the same page?

Obama campaign Senior Adviser David Axelrod contradicts Deputy Campaign Manager Stephanie Cutter on President Obama cutting nearly three quarters of a trillion dollars from Medicare.

David Axelrod on saying Obama cut $700 billion from Medicare: "You're repeating what is a misstatement by the Republicans. I would call it a lie."

Stephanie Cutter: "I heard Mitt Romney deride the $700 billion cuts in Medicare that the President achieved through health care reform."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/08/13/axelrod_says_obama_hasnt_cut_medicare_cutter_proud_of_medicare_cuts.html

Meanwhile Debbie Wasserman Schultz get called out by Wolf Blitzer on lying about the Ryan Medicare proposal.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/08/13/wasserman_schultz_vs_blitzer_on_how_ryans_reform_plan_hurts_seniors.html

I thought this was a slam dunk for Democrats and they get called out by Wolf?

BTW NBC Why no coverage of this interview?

So did Obama cut 700B from Medicare?

David Axlerod...no it's a dirty lie

Stepahanie Cutter...The President is proud of his 700B in cuts

Which is true? Can the Obama campaign get on the same page?

Why does it matter? The GOP wants those cuts, but when the cuts go through they're all like: ZOMG OBAMA CUT UR MEDICAREZ

I wish to thank Romney for his choice in the Veep. He and Ryan have just handed the White House to Team Obama.

Romney touts his business experience. Ryan, 41 years old, has been in Congress since he was 26, right out of college. His college was paid for my help from SSI after the death of his father.

Ryan never worked a day in his life. His lips have been sucking on the public teat since the age of 11, and still is.

And on another Obama "success"..the auto bailout

The auto industry bailout’s price tag has jumped a whopping $3.4 billion more than what the Treasury Department had previously estimated, according to a report.

The department announced in a report sent to Congress on Friday that the $85 billion bailout is estimated to cost taxpayers $25.1 billion, Reuters reported Monday. The Treasury’s last quarterly estimate placed the total at $21.7 billion — and the new $25.1 billion loss is 15 percent higher than that previous forecast, according to the Detroit News.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0812/79701.html#ixzz23X2qx9oR

Obama is the greatest, I mean just look at what he's done. If re-elected we'll have the winter of rebound followed by the summer of recovery 2. As long as he keeps ignoring medicare and SS we don't have to worry about it, and jobs hay I got one, and if you feel depressed we still have Joe.

$700 billion was cut from Medicare spending...

Vol

A friend of mine had to move his mother (a stroke victim) out of the Adult Family Home that she lived in because of these cuts. You can call them anything you like, but they are real. I should tell you though, that the cuts that affected him were actually from Medicaid. You see, DSHS where we live did not bother making a distinction. Faced with less money to spend, they made cuts across the board.

...and, the ACA will not be repealed in my liifetime

And doesn't this only further refute the above article's contention that it was somehow wrong for Ryan to assume the cuts in his budget?

Why does it matter? The GOP wants those cuts, but when the cuts go through they're all like: ZOMG OBAMA CUT UR MEDICAREZ

Because instead of using the cuts to reduce the deficit the Administration turns right round and spends it on Obamacare.

Because the pundits focus on differences in policy between Romney and Ryan and ignore differences in the "facts" put out by the Obama campaign.

Joe from Albany

Excluding autos, sales climbed 0.8 percent.

so you're bitching that Americans are no longer buying the Chinese crap in bulk? While companies want to pay Chinese workers to manufacture their product so that their bottom line increases, they expect us, Americans, to pay premium price for their crap?

Bill in Fairfax -- Start advocating for cutting the welfare for the Rich and Business then. Quit trying to take the last pennies from the poor.

Alan NJ -- The difference is ACA doesn't cut benefits from Medicare, Ryan's plan will.

Isn't it known that the liberals and the media would do anything but talk about real issues that effect everyone?

Instead, they insinuate a "rift" between Mr. Romney and Mr. Ryan (almost automatically) and also insinuate the focus of the Romney campaign is no longer about our current administration's record and economic policies (if you would call them that, I personally don't consider destruction as a "policy") that have put us in the bind we are currently in.

Maybe we should focus instead on the class warfare that was incouraged by our current administration, if we don't want to focus on real issues. Although, I think that could be considered a real issue. Last time America was so divided, we went into Civil War!

I don't want to live through Civil War II!

Oh boy! I'll bet John Boehner is glad he's left the building. Mitt had better watch his back... Ryan just may forget his place on the ticket.

Alan NJ -- Ryan's plan does nothing to CUT THE COSTS of healthcare, if anything it will INCREASE the cost of healthcare. It will fatten up share holders though.

READ UP:

http://www.kff.org/medicare/upload/8191.pdf

Speaking of, Politico is the latest to note plenty of GOP handwringing about the Ryan pick. Said Mark McKinnon in the piece: "I think it's a very bold choice. And an exciting and interesting pick. It's going to elevate the campaign into a debate over big ideas. It means Romney-Ryan can run on principles and provide some real direction and vision for the Republican Party. And probably lose.

And that's from a Republican. that says it all.

Romney/Ryan...I mean Ryan/Romney - the scary ones.....

Nice video, Alan, on Debbie Wasserman Schultz

Republicans and Democrats have decided that politics is advertising and that is why they have also decided that it is more important to stick to your guns wrong, than change and be right. Even in a TV interview.

The future of America right there in a handbasket.

And why do we care who we elect if no matter what the candidate did in the past, what they WILL DO is never change even when they are wrong?

Your past success or failure makes no difference to me when you promise to fail in the future.

why is it the kuklos members at First read aka liberals make up 3x more shlt then others?

do you know what fascism is or is it a talking point that you get from that dumb clubhouse you libs hang out in having virtual popcorn and virtual box wine?

Keep boosting your average. You're doing a fantastic job.

Hey liberals, answer this, Hows the private sector doing?

bitterhawk -- When it comes to Medicaid the Republican plan will block grant it, giving STATES the ability to no longer cover nursing homes etc. That will literally throw Grandma in the street.

Paul Ryan’s extreme budget includes a tax “reform” plan that would make the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy permanent, and give millionaires an additional tax cut worth over $250,000 a year. Paying for these tax cuts for the most fortunate families would require higher taxes on the middle class, gutting investments in our future, and ending Medicare as we know it.

Don't Republicans ever get tired of giving stuff away?

Oh god, apparently some people don't get the message.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz is no different than any Republican caught not understanding an issue. Look it up on YouTube yourself, there are plenty out there.

So I'LL SAY IT AGAIN. Since we know Democrats suck, let us re-emphasize:

Republicans, you suck too.

Just as much. Nice job. Congradulations, losers.

thanks xaber, that's what i thought

thanks xaber, that's what i thought

Nah. Pretty sure you didn't do that.

Bitterhawk-

A friend of mine had to move his mother (a stroke victim) out of the Adult Family Home that she lived in because of these cuts

I am sorry to hear about your friend and his mother, but that had nothing to do with the ACA.

The Medicare Advantage cuts are in payments to providers, NOT in the healthcare benefit services guaranteed to seniors by Medicare law. It's essentially a cut in extra corporate profits extracted from Medicare thanks to a Bush-era corporate welfare program. By reducing overpayments to vendors but maintaining benefits to seniors, the ACA cuts actually STRENGTHEN guaranteed health benefits to seniors.

In comparison, the proposed Ryan budget cuts actual benefits to seniors, while expanding corporate welfare for health insurers. Ryan would guarantee payment of a certain amount per senior to each insurance vendor, while completely removing Medicare's guarantee of actual health services for seniors.

www.democraticunderground.com/10021120658

and more.....

"Medicare Scare Ad Makes False Claim of Cuts for Seniors

By Heidi Przybyla - 2012-06-28T16:27:45Z

"Florida seniors will be living a 'nightmare' because Senator Bill Nelson voted for $500 billion in Medicare cuts, the anonymous voice warns in the most-aired advertisement in his re-election race -- a message repeated in similar spots targeting other Democrats across the country.

It's also wrong, according to a Republican health-care expert and independent analysts. 'There are no reductions in the Medicare benefits promised in law,' said Gail Wilensky, who served as administrator of the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare under President George H.W. Bush and is a senior fellow at Project Hope, a health-research organization in Virginia. ...

President Barack Obama's 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, ... the core of which was found constitutional today by the U.S. Supreme Court, ... slows the growth of Medicare payments to hospitals and other health providers. Seniors' benefits weren't reduced in the legislation. That hasn't deterred Republican-aligned groups such as Crossroads Grassroots Policy Strategies and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce from the benefit-cut assertion in campaign television commercials targeting the law ...

www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-06-28/medicare-scare-ad-makes-false-claim-of-cuts-for-seniors.html :

Someone is not telling the truth - either you, your friend, or those who justified the decision

Caesar Augustus-

Hey liberals, answer this, Hows the private sector doing?

2012 - 1,059,000 jobs created

2011 - 1,840,000 jobs created

private sector profits at historic records

stock market: Dow 13208.53, Nasdaq 3033.64

so Bayllie the private sector is fine? How many jobs lost under Obama? whats unemployment again? BaylLIE you're a top and spinning again. Fact check it if you dont believe me.

bayllie 8.3% UNEMPLOYMENT 16 TRILLION DEBT highest number of people on FOOD STAMPS 1.5% growth first ever rating reduction S&P, scandal followed by scandal White House leaks, Fast and Furious,Solyndra, yeah Obama's doing a terrific job

This is absolutely about the economy considering we won't have one unless we change course and fundamentally restructure our failing entitlement programs. One side wants to continue unchanged on the course to fiscal catastrophe while the other wants to discuss the modifications necessary to keep us from continued economic malaise and eventual collapse.

Caesar Augustus-

so Bayllie the private sector is fine?

you tell me because I am not sure what YOUR benchmark is. As compared to the 2008/2009 financial collapse that took our economy down, went around the world, and came back to us for round 2?

How many jobs lost under Obama? whats unemployment again?

compared to the 2,600,000 jobs lost in 2008, and another 2,000,000 jobs lost btw Jan - March 2009????

That's over 4,600,000 jobs lost in a 15-month period. That's something to be proud of, huh rereg?

BaylLIE you're a top and spinning again. Fact check it if you dont believe me.

prove that I'm lying, rereg. you sound just like JH and jimbo or the rest of them calling us liars BUT NEVER PROVING s*it. have some balls and post under one account.

and no, I don't believe you because you have not provided one shred of evidence, and before you call me or anyone else a liar, have somethin-ANYTHING - that proves that lie. other than that, STFU.

Typical rightie BS...

Blame the poor for everything the banksters and the 1% F'd up.

Mike in SA -- One side wants to do away with them and the other side wants to make them solvent.

That's the truth.

Bwahahahahaaaaa (evil laughter)...mmbwahahahahahaaa

Hey there, what's that sound?

Lemme tell you. It's the sound of people RUNNING AWAY from the R&R ticket that's what it is. R&R ....(w)reck & replace, rack and ruin, rich and richer. You pick the one you like.

Run and Re-Run, Romney and Ryan. A historical footnote from the early 21s Century.

We are now in a position to take back the House of Representatives and shore up the majority in the Senate. We're on the verge of an election that will give our President a mandate from the people. It is going to be an historic win, a landslide of dramatic proportion.

Yes, America, we're coming to save you in numbers none of us could ever have dreamed of before last weekend. And we've all got Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan to thank for your salvation. Who would have thought they could be so foolish?

I have never felt so positive about something in my life. I have never felt so confident that we would win and win BIG, ever before in my 62 years.

Stay safe Mr. President, we're about to make history and pull our country back from the brink of destruction. Our long nightmare of Bush/Cheney, Tea and Antipathy is about to end

Obama/Biden 2012

The topic has turned from the economy to Medicare, but only in the media, who are paid by the Whitehouse and DNC to change the subject of Obama's economic failures. I attended a large outdoor concert/bbq Sunday, and a golf tournament yesterday, and I can assure you that jobs & housing are still top priority among real people.

The mistake Republicans are making is the assumption that seniors, on medicare, will support the Ryan plan because they are exempt from the changes.

The problem is: all those seniors have children, and grandchildren.

The only thing seniors hate more than f***ing with their medicare is f***ing with their children. But go ahead, GOP... run with it. Tell all those seniors that THEY will be safe, but their children are f***ed. Let's see how that works out for you.

Someone is not telling the truth - either you, your friend, or those who justified the decision

Vol

I know you couldn't be so cynical that you'd think somebody would actually lie about such a thing on a two-bit forum to make a barely significant political point, so I'm going to ignore the obvious implications of the above statement.

I think the problem some people have when making these analyses is that they don't understand the concept of the fungibility of money. You can say that the money only comes from the reduction of money offered to providers of Medicare Advantage (which by the way, only reduces the number of businesses willing to provide the necessary goods and services and therefore the options available to seniors--simple supply and demand), but the bottom line is that you took money from one place and moved it to another. It doesn't matter what you claim the movement was for, DSHS has less money available to it both now (since this part of the ACA is already in effect) and in the future. Unlike the Federal Government, DSHS is required to live within it's means which makes the across the board cuts a reasonable response to theoretical savings they may or may not realize, because the cuts to their budget were real.

Ryan Releases Teapublican Energy

Sen. Scott Brown, Nevada Sen. Dean Heller, Michigan Rep. Justin Amash, Montana Rep. Denny Rehberg, , Florida Rep. Connie Mack, North Dakota Rep. Rick Berg, Massachusetts candidate Richard Tisei, Connecticut candidate Linda McMahon, Rhode Island candidate Brendan Doherty and North Carolina gubernatorial candidate Pat McCrory are all energized by the selection of Paul “Cheesehead” Ryan’s selection to the Teapublican national ticket. They have so much energy, in fact, that they’re using it to bolt 180 degrees from the electoral nightmare that the Ryan plan represents.

Like a festering, sun-drenched globule of rancid, moldering Limberger, Teapublicans can’t beat their feet fast enough to leave this Randian homunculus of American destruction in the dust. It’s everything that Teamaster extra-ordinaire Norquist says it needs to be, yet still they flee. Why and how can this be? All they’ve ever wanted was a President with enough digits to sign this type of legislation, yet now they disavow it with every feckless and calculating political breath they wheeze, like a one legged marathoner who has had to drag a bloated, maggot laden, slime dripping, pustulent whale carcass behind them.

Will the Democrats stick this horrid abomination upon every Teapublican candidate this fall? As some say in Alaska, “You betcha’.”

Enjoy lying in that bed of lies you have to lay in. Next stop, political dirt nap.

P.S. Rombot.Has.Nothing.

P.P.S. Mitt Romney/Paul Ryan = T. Money Trim ‘N’ Rapy Luau

Caesar Augustus-

We have BaylLie saying the economy is fine. BaylLie loves the USSR too

hey, whatever your name is, you asked: Hey liberals, answer this, Hows the private sector doing?post #1.96 - Tue Aug 14, 2012 11:02 AM EDT.

you called my answer a LIE so I asked you to proved which YOU CANNOT (like always) so you give me this crappy line about economy and USSR.

Stick to the topic, rereg. I'm still wating on you to prove my big fat lie.

BTW economy does not equal private sector, and the pricate sector does not equal economy - you should know something that simple.

"One side wants to do away with them and the other side wants to make them solvent." - Dont_carry_it_all

Absolutely correct. It is known that the path the entitlements are on leads to their collapse in the not too distant future. Dems want to stay on that path -- the path to bankruptcy -- fighting to block any change. Conservatives want to make the necessary adjustments to them to make them solvent and still available for both current seniors (in the current form) and the younger generations (in the modified form). I agree with your statement whole-heartedly.

The truth.

Joe in Albany

Looks like Barry’s Commerce Dept. is taking its cue from USDOL Secretary Broom-hilda Solis and cooking the books on the July retail sales numbers in order to boost Barry’s re-election prospects.

Job creation has been dismally low recently, Q2 GDP has dropped from a miserable 2% to a pathetic 1.5%, AND consumers are celebrating the good news by going on a shopping spree??

Yeah, right. No magic tricks here, and pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, all hail the Wizard of Obama.

This is how Barry interprets the “power of incumbency”.

Producer Prices, Retail Sales Both Post Strong July Gains

Reuters

| 14 Aug 2012 | 08:35 AM ET

U.S. producer prices rose in July at the fastest pace in five months while retail sales rose in for the first time in four months as demand rose broadly for everything from cars to electronics.

Retail sales rose 0.8 percent last month, the Commerce Department said on Tuesday.

It was the biggest gain since February and well above analysts' expectations. Economists polled by Reuters had expected retail sales to rise 0.3 percent.

The report bolsters the view that the slowdown in economic growth during the second quarter will prove temporary.

It also offers some relief for President Obama, whose November re-election bid has been imperiled by a weak jobs market. Republican challenger Mitt Romney is focusing his campaign on the weak economy that has plagued Obama's presidency.

The report could also splash a bit of water on hopes the Federal Reserve could soon launch another bond-buying program to help the economy.

Job creation in the United States slowed dramatically in the second quarter as consumer spending cooled and economic growth slowed. Job creation accelerated in July although the unemployment rate still rose to 8.3 percent.

Pointing to a strong increase in consumer spending during July, the so-called core measure of retail sales - which excludes autos, gasoline and building materials - rose 0.9 percent. That was the biggest gain since January.

Sales of motor vehicles and parts rose 0.8 percent last month. Receipts at electronics and appliance stores increased 0.9 percent. Sales of building materials gained 1.0 percent, while receipts as gasoline stations advanced 0.5 percent.

Excluding autos, sales climbed 0.8 percent.

I gave you a thumbs up.. thanks for the info.. Looks like little by little things are improving. And after those 8 years of republican destruction things are finally looking up.

its all guess work with you libs, just like with economy. Hope and change my azz. economy sucks baylLie

Yup, the economy is horrible. I mean, just look at this... (checks stock market)... HOLY S***, I just made a ton of money. Did you see where the market is at? WOW.

What were we talking about again? I can't seem to hear you over my portfolio.

Never under estimate the Republicans ability to steal elections.

How about some FACTS for once:

The Estimated Net Cost of the Insurance Coverage Provisions Is Smaller Than Estimated in March 2011 CBO and JCT now estimate that the insurance coverage provisions of the ACA will have net cost of just under $1.1 trillion over the 2012-2021 period-about $50 billion less than the agencies' March 2011 estimate for that 10-year period. (For comparison with previous estimates, these numbers cover the 2012-2021 period; estimates including 2022 can be found below.)

The net costs--specifically the combined effects on federal revenues and mandatory spending--reflect:
Gross additional costs of $1.5 trillion for Medicaid, the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP), tax credits and other subsidies for the purchase of health insurance through the newly established exchanges and related costs, and tax credits for small employers, Offset in part by about $0.4 trillion in receipts from penalty payments, the new excise tax on high-premium insurance plans, and other budgetary effects (mostly increases in tax revenues).

Those amounts do not encompass all of the budgetary impacts of the ACA. They do not include federal administrative costs, which will be subject to future appropriation action. Also, they do not include the effects of the many other provisions of the law, including some that will cause significant reductions in Medicare spending relative to that under prior law and others that will generate added tax revenues relative those under prior law.

Mike in SA --Nice twist on words but it's not reality. Ryan calls the entitlements hammocks that lull. He wants to end these programs as do most Republicans. His plan is the first step in dismantling all safety nets.

READ and read some more Mike. START HERE:

http://www.savingthedream.org/about-the-plan/plan-details/SavAmerDream.pdf

Okay, first of all, to every Republican who points out how millions are on government assistance programs, I have something to say about that: what the @!$%# did you expect??? This was the LARGEST recession since the Great Depression (which by the way took 10 years to get out of). The fact that millions are on these programs should be thought of as a moderately good thing; sure, it's extremely unfortunate that they cannot find jobs or make ends meet, but at least they are not below the poverty line. THAT is what these programs are built for; to care for millions so that they don't go into the poorhouse.

Secondly, the reason why this recovery is slow is because MOST of the economic growth is going to the top 1%. In 2011, 93% of new economic growth went to the 1%. Consumers have large debt burdens that they are paying off, and they are not quite ready to spend money because they are wary of building up more debt. If you want to boost the economy, spend money on things like infrastructure improvements or aid to states or something like that. THAT is how you get out of a recession; not by coddling businesses with gifts, but by telling the private sector to either invest or stand back while the government does the spending.

Thirdly, Democrats (at least not all Democrats) don't want to see SS and Medicare collapse. We already have proposals to save Social Security (raise payroll taxes by 2% points, eliminate cap on employers and raise the cap on employees to 90% of earnings. As for Medicare, my proposal is to replace the fee-for-service mechanism with a fee-for-health system and have Medicare deal only with non-profit institutions like Kaiser Permanente until the for-profit providers can significantly lower costs and become more efficient. Debate that if you want.

Finally, Paul Ryan's plan WILL NOT produce prosperity, except for the wealthiest Americans. How exactly can you achieve broad prosperity by cutting things like education and the social safety net while cutting taxes for those at the top??? That is supply-side economics on steroids. It reduces demand in the short-term, reducing job growth and depressing the economy. THAT is class warfare; not raising taxes on the rich.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

PolitiFact made the Democratic Party’s claim that passage of the Ryan plan by the House was a “vote to end Medicare” the “Lie of the Year” for 2011. “PolitiFact,” its writers noted on Dec. 20, 2011, “debunked the Medicare charge in nine separate fact-checks rated False or Pants on Fire, most often in attacks leveled against Republican House members.”

Please stop feeding the troll, Bayllie.

JAS: Your comment about President Obama raising the deficit is totally incorrect. According to FactCheck.org, the national debt rose 190% under President Reagan. It rose 52% under President George H.W. Bush, 37% under Bill Clinton, and 86% under Bush II. During his first three years in office, President Obama has presided over ONLY a 45% increase in the national debt. As David Lazarus (of the LA Times) states: "As these numbers make clear, Republicans are just as fond of government spending as Democrats." My issue is with "just as fond." These numbers show that under Republicans, government spending increases are significantly higher. Am I missing something???

If you're going to make such widespread comments about the deficit and the national debt under President Obama, please do your fact checking first -- you only make yourself look stupid!!

Politifact (which I like because they APPEAR non-partisan) on the claim that "obama never passed a budget":

Politifact calls this claim "mostly false":

www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/apr/06/mitt-romney/romney-says-obama-failed-pass-budget/

Our ruling

In his speech, Romney faulted Obama for failing to pass a budget. He was correct that the two times Congress voted on the president’s budget requests, both times they were voted down. But the job of passing a budget resolution is not the president’s. That responsibility falls to Congress, and even then the president doesn’t sign it. As Ellis, our expert, put it: "The president has no role in passing a budget. The president can cajole Congress about passing a budget and advocate for positions and funding levels, but in the end, Congress approves the budget resolution for their own purposes." That’s the difference between this and other claims we’ve rated which blamed Congress for inaction on the budget.

Romney’s statement contains a grain of truth, in that two of Obama’s budget requests failed to pass. But citing those votes leaves a wrong impression -- namely that the votes were anything more than political theater. Romney omitted the more critical information that passing a federal budget is the job of Congress. Given all that, we rate his statement Mostly False.

border joe

And is still the largest TAX increase in World History!!

Stop being a deadbeat and buy your own god damn medical insurance, so we don't have to pay for you. Do THAT and you will NOT pay this tax. Problem solved.

I will not pay this tax, because I am responsible and have my own medical insurance. If YOU pay the tax, that is because YOU are a deadbeat.

Ryan plan looks like it was done by a third grader, this guy is a Worm !!!

Ok you genius democrats. Tell me, let's give Obama his tax increase on those making over $250,000. Now what? Do you really think that paltry $80 billion over 10 years is going to fix the economy? What does it accomplish? How does that keep this bloated, oversized, overstepping government from spending that in a day and a half on another High Speed Rail that will never be built?

What I'm trying to illustrate is that this administration has NO plan whatsoever. The entire democratic party has no clue how to budget, or how to fix this deficit spending that is driving us to bankrupcy.

The Ryan plan is tough. It has a lot of cuts. But, it is the only plan on the table that MAY save Medicare and Medicaid. With Obamacare, Medicare is doomed in 5-10 years...and that is assuming the doctor payment cuts actually do happen (which is another disaster in the making).

If the republicans were smart, they'd give Obama and the democrats their tax increase....then they could look as ask "yeah? what did that fix?"

It is the ONLY talking point Obama has in this campaign...and it's a weak one that only the shallow minded don't see through.

With the Ryan pick, the economy -- at least for now -- has taken a back seat…

Thats laughable since the economy has taken a back seat for the last 4 years under Obama!

Obamacare cuts Medicare by $700 billion and threatens seniors’ ability to keep their doctors. Even worse, it empowers unelected bureaucrats to establish price controls, effectively telling seniors what treatments and procedures they can and cannot have.

The Democrats hate the Ryan pick because it is going to force them to ACTUALLY talk about the economy and their lack of guts. They haven't had the guts for the last 3 years to even put out a budget, because they are afraid to actually put into writing their priorities. Ryan is the only one who has had the nerve to put out their own plan. So they don't like the Ryan plan...so what... they haven't given us one of their own. Cowards!

They haven't had the guts for the last 3 years to even put out a budget, because they are afraid to actually put into writing their priorities. Ryan is the only one who has had the nerve to put out their own plan. So they don't like the Ryan plan...so what... they haven't given us one of their own. Cowards!

The EXACT same thing was said about Republicans for not putting out their own health care plan.

So when YOUR TEAM does it, it's ok... when the other side does the same thing, they are "cowards".

Got it. Thanks for clearing that up.

Thanks Freshieee! But don't expect facts or the truth to matter to the right.

Romney can see Russia from his offshore account.

Ryan can see Milwaukee from his kitchen window.

Romney picked his moneymate to give more taxes to the rich and make the middle class and poor pay for them. Both plans attack the middle class and poor to give tax breaks to the rich like Romnet and Ryan.

Vote Obama/Biden and democrats, save the middle class and poor from the class warfare .

Romney the tax dodger show us your taxes!!!!

I attended a large outdoor concert/bbq Sunday, and a golf tournament yesterday, and I can assure you that jobs & housing are still top priority among real people.

Well Spider, you might have a better chance at getting a job if you weren't going to concerts/bbq's and golf tournaments.

As an independent I immediately started pouring over web documents and such trying to understand what Paul Ryan represents. I can't really distinguish his record from the likes of Eric Cantor, they argue and championed TARP as the great savior but challenged and ridiculed Auto Bailouts? Its the argument that defines our Nation really, Wall Street or Unions?

I just think Romney pigeon holed himself with this pick. Ryan can only be the far right representative he is, Romney on the other hand could have move to center once the Convention ended and probably had enough juice to sway moderate Democrats and get some stuff done. With the Ryan pick both sides will double down and nothing will budge.

I have that now, why should I vote for the Romney ticket? Yea I get the message about a direct contrast but that just means gridlock and four more years of Watching Reid and Boehner piss.

Far right wing conservative Christian Republicans still cannot get over the fact that a "Black Man," a man of mixed race, won election as POTUS.

Rather than trying to do positive things to help other people, all they can think about is finding every way possible to discredit, denigrate, and try to illegitimize President Obama.

I am a moderately conservative Republican, but I am not part of that crowd.

However, the fact is: Mr. Obama's election is the direct responsibility and fault of the Republican Party. The Republican Party hung their hopes on a cranky old fart who could not remember how many houses he owns, and what's her name from Alaska.

Those two were very bad, extremely poor, choices. The same thing is going to happen this year, IF the Republican Party selects Willard & Ryan as the nominees.

The Republican Party needs to get very serious, and quickly, about finding a better-qualified candidate to oppose Mr. Obama.

Willard is running around as if he has already won the nomination, prior to the convention, and that is fueling his penchant for making goofy statements such as those he made in London recently. Oh, and Willard’s announced choice of VP. (Prior to the convention, I believe that is not acceptable.) Plus, Willard has the charisma of a rutabaga.

Religion aside, the basic bottom line: Willard is not a good choice.

The best thing that could happen at the GOP convention, would be to have the delegates select a different candidate, and leave Willard in the dust, wondering what happened.

I do not support Romney or Ryan, because both of those "good Christians" want to tell everyone else how to live their life. If it is up to Romney and Ryan, women would be pregnant during summer, and barefoot during winter. Women better wake up and realize that.

The Republican Party hierarchy needs to rethink their goals. Instead of tax cuts for the rich, the GOP needs to focus on creating jobs, bringing the troops home - with honor, reducing the deficit, balancing the budget, and becoming more caring toward others who are less fortunate. Unless and until that starts happening, the Democratic Party will be in power for a long time.

The pertinent issue is how the Obama administration has chosen to ignore the intent of Congress regarding work requirements in the original law by unilaterally opening the door to relaxation of those work requirements.

It is not the pertinent issue. The Obama Administration is not a court. It is the courts that are required to examine the intent of Congress.

The only thing the Administration is required to do is to follow the letter of the law within the constraints of what is possible. Don't like it? Then vote the guy out. That's what we did with Bush.

nojo,jobo,nj:

Uh, Union Baya? You're pretty geographically challenged. See, "Philly"-as in, Philadelphia- is in Pennsylvania, which is a Mid-Atlantic state, (Commonwealth, actually)- NOT a New England state.

Geez.

Sorry, nobrains, but Pennsylvania was one of the 13 colonies, which certainly would make it a New England state.

It would appear you are the one who is geographically, as well as historically, challanged. Do yourself a favor and try a little reading. :)

Obama/Biden 2012 4 more 4 44 !

• 3

• !

WhistleBerries

The Republican Party hierarchy needs to rethink their goals. Instead of tax cuts for the rich, the GOP needs to focus on creating jobs, bringing the troops home - with honor, reducing the deficit, balancing the budget, and becoming more caring toward others who are less fortunate. Unless and until that starts happening, the Democratic Party will be in power for a long time.

You make an excellent point.

The main problem is that the Republican party has gone SO FAR right that they alienate moderate Republicans. If the GOP wants to regain power, they need to stop all their social agenda bull-s*** and focus on jobs ALONE.

That means stop wasting time debating birth control. Stop telling people what "morals" to follow. Stop shoving their religion down our throats. Stop wasting time debating the state-based property and asset legal contract they call "marriage". Stop attacking Planned Parenthood. Stop telling people what to do in their bedroom. And overall, just mind their own f***ing business.

This is common sense. People do not like some hollier-than-though, Bible-thumping, religious HYPOCRITE, government official telling them how to live their life. People hate it when hypocrites tell them how to live... like when a red-neck lady told people that they should only promote abstinence, while her own daughter craps out a kid and proves that it does not work.

If the GOP abandoned this religious-focused social agenda, and learned to mind their own f***ing business when it comes our personal lives, they would get more support. But that will never happen. They LOVE big government in our personal lives.

"He wants to end these programs as do most Republicans. His plan is the first step in dismantling all safety nets.

READ and read some more Mike. START HERE:" - Dont_carry_it_all

I do read prodigiously and perhaps you should too -- even a little -- for once. If you did you will know this passage from the 6th paragraph of the 1st page -- the foreword: "Saving the American Dream therefore does not end these programs; instead it focuses them on those who need them." It describes a system where the poor elderly are highly subsidized, but the rich elderly pay their own way with absolutely no subsidy.

This is much like welfare reform of the mid-'90s. We ended subsidizing of those who did not really need welfare and who were skating by on it so that we could spend much more per person on the smaller group who really did need it. I shouldn't have to tell you that welfare reform of the mid-'90s was wildly successful.

Nowhere in the document you link to -- which Ryan had absolutely nothing to do with BTW -- does it advocate ending either SS or Medicare. The document advocates redesigning them from their currently fatally flawed form so that they are around for future generations.

You know...if you actually read the document you linked to.

BTW...I would recommend everybody read the document "Dont_carry_it_all" linked to: http://www.savingthedream.org/about-the-plan/plan-details/SavAmerDream.pdf

It not only describes a workable and fair plan to save entitlements, it outlines the ridiculousness of the other status quo, more-of-the-same "plans" the Dems champion, which will lead us directly into European-style bankruptcy. Thanks for reminding me of that paper "Dont_carry_it_all"!

RE: 1.136:

Politifact calls this claim "mostly false":

www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/apr/06/mitt-romney/romney-says-obama-failed-pass-budget/

Our ruling

In his speech, Romney faulted Obama for failing to pass a budget. He was correct that the two times Congress voted on the president’s budget requests, both times they were voted down. But the job of passing a budget resolution is not the president’s. That responsibility falls to Congress, and even then the president doesn’t sign it. As Ellis, our expert, put it: "The president has no role in passing a budget. The president can cajole Congress about passing a budget and advocate for positions and funding levels, but in the end, Congress approves the budget resolution for their own purposes." That’s the difference between this and other claims we’ve rated which blamed Congress for inaction on the budget.

Romney’s statement contains a grain of truth, in that two of Obama’s budget requests failed to pass. But citing those votes leaves a wrong impression -- namely that the votes were anything more than political theater. Romney omitted the more critical information that passing a federal budget is the job of Congress. Given all that, we rate his statement Mostly False.

Mike in SA

It describes a system where the poor elderly are highly subsidized, but the rich elderly pay their own way with absolutely no subsidy.

You mean we PAY for the poor, while the "hard working" rich don't get anything? Hold on... let me consult my GOP handbook. Let's see here.... hmmmmm... "Obama is evil"... "Obama is the devil"... "put gays behind electric fences"... no, that's not it. Sorry, I am just skimming through it, here.

AH HA! Found it. Article 5, section 3: Anytime a proposal redistributes money from those who have worked to those who are considered "poor", this shall immediately be deemed as "socialism" and thus opposed on all levels.

Nice try, but according to the GOP handbook, that idea can not be supported. Sorry.

"RE: 1.136:

Politifact calls this claim 'mostly false':" - FZknew

I'm not sure what you think your comparing her statement to. "Michelle from the woods" said nothing about Obama. She -- unlike you -- is informed enough to know that for the past nearly 4 years -- while the Republican House has -- no Democratically controlled body of Congress has passed a budget as required by law.

If only mguy had something substantive to say. Sadly, all he/she has is lame, typical, drive-by, liberal rhetoric...*yawn*.

If you have something thoughtful to add to the discourse then please do, but if all you have is the weak, baseless, rhetorical come-back, do yourself a favor and don't bother.

BTW, good thing I'm not a Republican then.

Mike in SA

Ok, I'll make it simple. If you think a Republican... ANY Republican... will EVER support a measure that redistributes from the rich to the poor, then you are on hardcore drugs.

Think for yourself-2400717

Please stop feeding the troll, Bayllie.

I know, I'm sorry. But it's like driving by an accident...

"Ok, I'll make it simple. If you think a Republican... ANY Republican... will EVER support a measure that redistributes from the rich to the poor, then you are on hardcore drugs." - mguy

Let me make it simple...again, you have nothing substantive to say. It's nothing more than rhetorical demagoguery. It's intellectually lazy. Want to make a substantive claim? Name a major Republican proposal over the past 75 years that was not in any way progressive. Hint at why you won't be able to back up your rhetorical claim by finding a substantive one: Even all the flat-tax proposals had large personal deductions built in to ensure the poor would pay very little or no income tax while the rich would pay taxes on larger portions of their incomes.

Every income tax proposal supported by Republicans in the past century or so has redistributed wealth by being progressive. Just because it's not as much redistribution as you would like does not make it untrue.

Thanks, WhistleBerry. It's great to be able to agree with a true conservative--as in conservation. This is not Reagan's or Goldwater's party anymore--this is a party that passed 2,100 bills against women's reproductive rights and access to legal healthcare in the last year alone.

Fiscal conservatives wanting a balanced budget need look no further than the sacred cow called the Defense Budget (Defense, THAT's a laugh!) Cheney brought in his own corporation, Halliburton, unlawfully with no bids as required by law, to take over jobs the military does more effectively and for far less money. First, we cut unnecessary private contractors from the military/industrial complex.

Next, we make cuts the Pentagon has requested but the Republican Party insists on paying for, anyway--the planes the Pentagon says are obsolete and unnecessary. No more military pork.

Ryan's position is: we cannot afford to feed the poor children of America because we need to feed defense contractors. Horse manure.

We have military bases in over 170 countries. We insist on policing a world that wants our money, but not our interference. Every empire in history that took to policing the world collapsed in 200 years. We're at 238, & counting.

Ryan came from money but lived on SS after his father died, and SS paid for his only four years of college. His father's influence got him a job in D.C. in 1992, and he's only been employed by the fed. But he wants to strip YOUR kids of those opportunities.

Not only does his plan for Medicare include Obama's cuts (to providers, not benefits), he then goes on to so drastically reduce benefits; those born after 1958 may be paying approximately $14,000 extra per year for health insurance. And unlike the ACA, Ryan's plan does nothing to increase leverage to lower costs, because it does not rely on economy of scale, as Obama's does.

Ryan likes to read economic books that are 40 to 100 years old, already disproven, and that do not take into consideration a global economy. And it's a con to claim to balance a budget--while increasing the debt--in 28 years! It's pure fiction.

Under Ryan's plan, he & Romney would both pay less than 1% in taxes. These people do not create wealth. People who rake in money by investing do not add to the economy; they do all they can to take every advantage of tax loopholes and offshore accounts. With any money left over, they buy a factory-- in China.

Visit DirtyEnergyMoney.com to see how much Ryan takes in from Big Oil. Who benefits MOST from Ryan's plan? Big Oil.

As to Caesar: Employee earnings are only 18% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), the lowest in almost a century. Corporate profits are over 50% of GDP, the highest in the same period. The average CEO takes in $10 millions per year, 363 times what the average American employee takes in.

The wealthy have extracted 40% of the nation's wealth from our economy--removed it altogether--in the last 40 years.

Ryan wants to cut all safety nets for people who've paid into them for years--although he personally used them, even though his own family was rich. He wants to allow seniors to go bankrupt as they try to pay for increasing healthcare costs, because his growth rates for 'premium care,' a misnomer for what amounts to newspaper grocery coupons, is tied to the nation's slow economic growth, not to actual double digit inflation per year we're seeing in the for-profit healthcare industry.

Want to really balance the budget? End for-profit healthcare! Every healthcare dollar includes more than 30 cents in profit. The CEO of Blue cross/Blue Shield (which was once a non-profit) took less in salary this year: a mere 4.6 million!

Do you think a CEO works at 363 times your capacity as an employee? If you do, by all means, vote Republican.

If you think the only way to reduce the deficit is on the backs of the working poor--half the families in America earn $50,000 a year or less--while allowing the wealthy to pay 1% in taxes, as we the people continue to pay for even bigger tax 'refunds' to Big Oil, already raking in 41 billions per quarter in sheer profit--while paying zero taxes--

Then vote Republican. And don't whine when it's your financial head, or your children's, on the chopping block.

At least the party of 'just say no' (to everything the guy with the wrong paint job offers)--has lost any pretense of 'compassionate conservatism.' I love how teabaggers want government hands off their Medicare (as in 2010), only to discover later Medicare is, in fact, a government program. Hoe they demand smaller government, but when fires are sweeping across the nation, they cry about the lack of sufficient government response.

We will get corporations out of our government. We will not allow 120 billionaires, the Sheldon Adelsons-- who make tons of money off poor people's gambling illness--to dictate the future of this nation! (Even Adelson admits he believes it's immoral for the wealthy to have so much influence in politics--and he followed that up immediately with, "But as long as it's legal, I'm gonna do it."

Either way, we win. If Romney/Ryan win, expect an American, not an Arab, 'spring!'

Now let's get behind the Democratic ticket and sweep the House & Senate into a Blue Congress so we can get to work for real.

Mike in SA -- I've read the entire "PLAN". You put a mighty spin on it. Fact is it fundamentally changes every program so it's unrecognizable.

They institute a flat tax system -- VERY REGRESSIVE

They tax all employer provided benefits/insurance -That would be taxing most of the middle class BTW.

They phase out SS and Medicare as we know and privatize it.

And on and on. While this is not Ryan's Plan it is the REPUBLICANS. This is where they are heading if given a chance.

I encourage everyone to read that PLAN.

Trick is that the congress is REQUIRED BY LAW to pass an annual budget and yet have failed to do so for the entire duration of this president's term. The Republicans are not required to put out a healthcare plan (though I dispute the idea that they did not put their ideas out in the public forum, isn't that what everyone is yelling about the Ryan pick for?) The desperation on the democrat side is getting ridiculous. It seems they think all they have to do is yell lies louder and everyone will believe them. I hope that is not true.

Romney = The Scarecrow from The Wizard of Oz.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nauLgZISozs

"With the thoughts you'd be thinkin'
You could be another Lincoln
If you only had a brain".

Don't you think that Romney even looks like the Scarecrow?

What a pair! Mitt outsourced and eliminated jobs, and now, VP pick Ryan wants to cut out the "safety net" that Mitt spoke of, and tell all those people to go back to work! Doing WHAT?

just tell ryan/romney that:

"AMERICANS DON'T NEED NO STINKING VOUCHERS"

Are we already playing the collapse game this morning? Right-wing trolls hard at work!

Bill Fairfax, defending Romney's lie about Obama's welfare policy:

As for Romney's ad, by the standards of contemporary political advertising his ad on this issue is just fine.

Yeah, it's just fine because Romney's campaign figures that lie will motivate angry white racists to get to the polls to vote for Romney. If it wasn't for Obama using white people's taxes to pay for the welfare checks he hands out to lazy "blah" people for not working, those angry white guys would all be rich.

Almost every one of my posts was collapsed yesterday, and I don't know how you could call them inflammatory. LOL!

What a bunch of BABIES!

Yep, they collapse it and it gets restored in about 2 hours.

It makes me feel all warm and "fuzzy" to know that I bother these POOR, POOR CHILDREN this much! :)

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL Comment collapsed by the community

I see the collapse cowards have arrived...

When will you stop calling the kettle black? be thankful no one has the power to get you banned. it appears other posters disappear after you make your threats

it appears other posters disappear after you make your threats

Feisty, I'm working on a list of people for you to threaten!

If you break the code of conduct, you go bye-bye! It's not that hard to understand.

Posters from BOTH sides have been suspended and banned!

We do Not need a Liar, Tax Cheat, and Pension Fund thief in our White House.

So when the Obama administration robbed the pensions of 20k Delphi workers during the GM bailout you were incensed right? And when the Dems accused Romney of responsibility in the death of a steel worker's wife you were angry right?

No because it's phony anger because you are ok when your guy lies, cheats and steals.

There's nobody on this board in the top 10%, that's rather obvious.

Speaking of, Politico is the latest to note plenty of GOP handwringing about the Ryan pick. Said Mark McKinnon in the piece: “I think it’s a very bold choice. And an exciting and interesting pick. It’s going to elevate the campaign into a debate over big ideas. It means Romney-Ryan can run on principles and provide some real direction and vision for the Republican Party. And probably lose.

And that's from a Republican. that says it all.

Romney/Ryan...I mean Ryan/Romney - the scary ones.....

Sorry WCA,

I just thought that this site was for us to post our opinions. Not name call and collapse for no reason other than disagreement.

Nobody wants to read President Obama's college papers. But we do want to see MittWitt's tax returns. Why is he hiding them again? Oh yeah, because he didn't pay any US income tax for 10 years, received paychecks from Bain after 1999, more offshore bank accounts, and huge chunks of money going into his IRA - how is a 100 million dollar IRA even possible?

Paul Ryan’s extreme budget includes a tax “reform” plan that would make the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy permanent, and give millionaires an additional tax cut worth over $250,000 a year. Paying for these tax cuts for the most fortunate families would require higher taxes on the middle class, gutting investments in our future, and ending Medicare as we know it.

Don't Republicans ever get tired of giving stuff away?

Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are really scary.

For Republicans it never was about the economy... just about power. I'm not sure Democrats are a whole lot better, but let's be honest here - BOTH parties are just special interest junkies that only care about being re-elected.

Romney Broke The Law By Raising Money From Foreign Donors. Should He Be Disqualified?

August 14, 2012

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/08/14/romney-broke-the-law-by-raising-money-from-foreign-donors-should-he-be-disqualified/

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

Yes, Romney should be disqualified. Really, it doesn't matter. He won't be President anyhow.

4more for 44

Obama/Biden 2012

For millions of hard-working Americans who are out of work, the Economy obviously has not taken a "back seat"

Although it obviously has taken a back seat when it comes to Obama planning his next negative attack ad.

When was the last time you saw Obama release a positive ad?

Yeah, me neither. I guess there isn't much positive worth talking about when it comes to his last 4 years?

Ryan hasn't done anything great in all of his years leeching off the taxpayers except yell about more tax cuts for the wealthy and let's destroy medicare and social security. What has he done? They talk like he is some super star. Give me a break. He is nothing but an arrogant snot.

Max^108

There are less than 600 people in DC that control 300Million of us. I don't think any of them have Americas best interest in mind, only their own personal power and wealth.

Interestingly the majority of states that have greater than 35% of their population covered by Medicaid/Medicare happen to fall within, wait for it...states that have Republican leadership!

Arizona, Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, West Virginia.

Why do you combine Medicare and Medicaid? Do you see them as the same kinds of entitlements? Because I think Medicare is the only health care seniors can get (except for supplemental coverage) so obviously states heavy in retirees (like most on your list) will have a greater number of people on Medicare. Big deal. You have to ask yourself why retirees move to states run by Republicans rather than Democrats. Got any pithy answers to that one?

Ironically the highest taxed states are run by Democrats. Not surprisingly, the states in the worst financial trouble are also run by Democrats. Why is that?

Mr. Q, Republican Governor Christy Cream has an unemployment rate of 9.6% in his State of New Jersey.

A fine example of Republican ideas working the way they were intended.

Is Romney ineligible to become the next President of the United States of America? It’s a very real possibility, especially since he threw a few fundraisers during his disastrous little overseas meet n’ greet a few weeks ago. These fundraisers were extremely private, with no journalists present (with a single exception, who did not have access to the donors), no filming or photography allowed, no diligence done, and no donor ID’s checked. If money changed hands at these rich shin-digs (which is quote probable, being fundraisers and all), Romney could be in a lot of trouble.

But why? Let’s ask the Supreme Court and their 9-0 decision in Bluman v. Federal Election Commission:

(a) Prohibition

It shall be unlawful for —

(1) a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make —

(A) a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election;

(B) a contribution or donation to a committee of a political party; or

(C) an expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication (within the meaning of section 434(f)(3) of this title); or

(2) a person to solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation described in subparagraph

(A) or (B) of paragraph (1) from a foreign national.

2 U.S.C. § 441e(a).[fn2] The statute continues to define “foreign national” to include all foreign citizens except those who have been admitted as lawful permanent residents. Id. § 441e(b).

Huh. Very interesting, Supreme Court, thank you.
Romney, already having to evade the demands of the American people to see his tax returns, will now have to prove that he hasn’t accepted foreign money to fund his campaign. Considering no records were apparently kept, that could prove difficult. If he has taken foreign money, then he is ineligible for the CoChief position, but very eligible for a cozy jail cell in some white-collar prison.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/08/14/romney-broke-the-law-by-raising-money-from-foreign-donors-should-he-be-disqualified/

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

Yes, Romney should be disqualified. Really, it doesn't matter. He won't be President anyhow. I wonder if "MYTH"Romney likes the size of that court decision????

4more for 44

Obama/Biden 2012

thetotas, yeah it promised my banishment. It has threatened, only time will tell right, tic toc indeed. However lets see what the left has to say about the private sector? what about rising gas prices? How about that unemployment and shovel ready jobs? Where is the laser focus?

Hey Fuzzy see Feisty's post above for exhibit "A". White Collar is 100% right on the issue. start at the foundation

ryan/romney 2012

Proof that you can make big plans even with

Electile Dysfunction.

Q22 - nice try but it applies to any school - including Harvard. If the parents have enough money - the student can get in - including graduate school.

Bush accomplished NOTHING on merit - including his National Guard "service" which was also bought and paid for!

The man is an absolute loser and always will be the worst President in the history of the country.

To all the poor, middle class, and elderly that's going to vote republican, I would like for you to do one thing, Put aside your dislike for President Obama for just one moment and actually listen to what republicans are saying. They are not sugarcoating anything, they are telling you right to your face what they are going to do to you.

Republicans say they want to raise 10 trillion dollars over a 10 year period to balance the budget and give the rich a massive tax cut.

Think for a minute, how are they going to do that? They told you what they will do, programs that millions of americans need to carry on their daily lives will be ended. Republicans want to give the entire Social Security budget to a private company and let them issue out the monthy checks. Do anybody really believe that a private company can issue out over 50 million checks a month like the government does and not have very big major problems. NO BODY running any government program makes a multi-million dollar yearly paycheck, but if given to a private company the CEO will, and those under him will. It has been predicted that if they are allowed to do just that, then Social Security will be bankrupt within 10 years. But, before your retirement money is gone, republicans have said they will end SSI, and Disability, if you are on either one of these and you vote them into office and they do what they told you they would, how are you going to live when they have just ended your only source of income?

Republicans told you they are going to make medicare and medicade a voucher system, that means they will give you X amount of dollars for all your healthcare needs, but if your healthcare needs actually cost XXX dollars, then YOU are responsible to pay what your voucher don't.

Republicans told you they want to end the veterans administration, and Postal Service. Like millions of other people, I'm a vet and I need the VA.

If you put aside your dislike for President Obama, you will see that the republicans are not trying to hurt President Obama, (he's already rich and set for life) republicans are using the President as a decoy, the real republican target is us, the poor, the middle class, and the elderly.

Another

The last time I looked, Arkansas's Governor is a Democrat! So are the leaders of both the state House and Senate Check your facts before you shoot your mouth off again. I noticed that you didn't include Bankrupt California in your list

4. Democrats have not yet paid off the huge national debt that Republicans have created.

This is factually wrong on every level, but you are too burdened with ideology to accept anything outside of your world view.

World view, hell! The facts support this! George W. Bush started with $5.7T in national debt; his last budget left us with $11.9T national debt. face, the Bush administration was responsible for 40%+ of our current national debt. The numbers are public domain, check them yourself! The numbers don't lie, Republicans do!

5. Democrats have not yet stopped all the wars that Republicans started.

So stop them, the president can do that, he can close Gitmo too. Why don't you ask Obama..

Not true. Google it, it is out there!

Congress has used its spending oversight authority both to forbid the White House from financing trials of Guantánamo captives on U.S. soil and to block the acquisition of a state prison in Illinois to hold captives currently held in Cuba who would not be put on trial - a sort of Guantánamo North. The current defense bill now before Congress not only reinforces these restrictions but moves to mandate military detention for most future al Qaeda cases

6. The poor have too much money

Why are there 100 million Americans on welfare? Throwing money at the poor only keeps them poor.

Ahhh, yes! Another Republican propaganda piece!

Not that it matters to those who such pre-conceived views, but this graph is a blatant example of political propaganda. Read the fine print:

"Figures include anyone residing in a household where at least one person received a program benefit." In other words, if your disabled brother lives with your family of six, and was a recipient of Medicaid (not to be confused with Medicare), all seven of you are listed as having received a welfare benefit.

Eighty programs, excluding Social Security and Medicare? Well, what are they? Certain means-tested veterans programs? Vocational rehabilitation for the injured? Foster care payments? Benefits for disabled children? Programs for the elderly? How much is overhead and how much is actual benefits? We don't know exactly what these 80 programs include because the chart doesn't tell us. The chart and accompanying information doesn't want to tell us, because its creators are certain that there's not that much critical thinking out there. They're relying on those who have the pre-conceived, propagandist-driven notion that Welfare Queens and Homeless Bums -- and what many typically envision "welfare" to be (food stamps, Section 8, cash assistance) -- are really the biggest root of America's disintegrating economy.

Wake Up Now - isn't this always the same? Republicans make a mess then blame the Democrats when they can't just walk in, snap their fingers and clean it up instantly. Then of course, the GOP will just make another one.

This is the history of the country - the Democrats are always cleaning up after the GOP. If you guys learned how to do things right, the country wouldn't be in the mess we're in!

Obama/Biden 2012 because we need level heads to straighten up the GOP mess - again!

More anger and hate (along with theft, rape and violence) at OWS event than at any Tea Party rally. More anger and hate in your posts than mine.

Republican official carries Obama's head on a spike, Secret Service pays a visit

Republican Councilman Paul Smith, of Sterling Heights, Michigan, has found himself at the center of controversy after video of him holding a sign that depicted President Obama's head on a spike surfaced after being recorded at a Tea Party rally more than three years ago in April 2009. He also had other signs that included Nancy Pelosi with bullet holes in her head, and a noose around the neck of former Michigan Governor, Jennifer Granholm.

The sign that depicted a decapitated President Obama with blood dripping from his neck contained the statements, "@!$%# on a stick", and "One more day is too many!" and "He changed American into Uganda." which was scrawled out in large letters

The sign that depicted a decapitated President Obama with blood dripping from his neck contained the statements, "@!$%# on a stick", and "One more day is too many!" and "He changed American into Uganda."

http://cdn2-b.examiner.com/sites/default/files/styles/image_content_width/hash/ca/72/1344717424_5481_Smith.jpg

http://www.examiner.com/article/republican-official-carries-obama-s-head-on-a-spike-secret-service-pays-a-visit

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

There is not racism depicted here the T-Potty (wink wink) just says and does racist things!!!! ☺

The truth hurts more than a LIE.

RWNJ's go kick rocks.

If you ask me I think they the RWNJ's pay people to post trash on a liberal blog. LMAO How stupid are they? Very because it shows you there theories is not working on their own sites so they must expand. LMAO.

What rational person thinks having rich people paying NO TAXES and having our women be put in jail because they had an abortion because they were rape, incest or have a life threatening medical condition is good for our country?

If you think that is rational I have a bridge to sell you again.

wlee - Obama wasn't old enough to be drafted. Mitt was. The proposals for Medicare and Social Security are public knowledge - look it up. Our President's proposal reducing the deficit is also public knowledge. His jobs bill has been presented over and over and over again to a Republican congress which refuses even to bring it to the floor.

What happened to his Law Degree? Nothing happened to his Law Degree. He is an "inactive" lawyer as is Michelle. In order to remain "active" they would have to take continuing education courses every year and pay malpractice insurance. Clearly that's ridiculous while he is in the White House. They can activate their licenses when they leave the White House in 2017 by taking courses and paying for insurance. But, this is very easy to look up - if you weren't so lazy!

Obama/Biden 2012

topane725

Republicans say they want to raise 10 trillion dollars over a 10 year period to balance the budget and give the rich a massive tax cut.

Okay, topane I'm listening. Would you please cite your sources so I can make a fair evaluation of this statment.

Republicans want to give the entire Social Security budget to a private company and let them issue out the monthy checks... republicans have said they will end SSI, and Disability,

I've been a long standing Republican since I first voted for Reagan. There is always talk about how to better manage government programs including SSI, one of those ways is privatization. I've never heard a GOP representative suggest ending SSI and Disability though, could you give me some sources for that as well?

Republicans told you they are going to make medicare and medicade a voucher system, that means they will give you X amount of dollars for all your healthcare needs, but if your healthcare needs actually cost XXX dollars, then YOU are responsible to pay what your voucher don't.

Actually this is a misrepresentation of the voucher system. Vouchers allow you to use the money, for those that don't want to remain on Medicare, toward a private insurer. If the private insurance cost more than $6500/year then you'll pay the difference for that health insurance. This was co-sponsered by US Senator Ron Wyden (D) Oregon who is a progressive.

Republicans told you they want to end the veterans administration, and Postal Service.

As a stand alone comment, this sounds very damning doesn't it? It scares the hell out of vets. It also makes for great campaign fodder. The veterans Administration is bloated with bad management, cost overruns and poor care for our veterans. The suggestion was NEVER to eliminate veterans care but could our vets be better served if they could go to their local hospital rather than a veteran hospital.

As far as eliminating the Postal Service, it's not a government agency. It's private, yet is running in the red and needs a huge bailout from the government. Why is it other private carrier companies, like UPS and FedEx can make a profit but the US Postal service can't?

Bentbrass -- The Republican "PLAN" is very clear. This answers all the questions you have.

http://www.savingthedream.org/about-the-plan/plan-details/SavAmerDream.pdf

End SS. End Medicare. End Medicaid. Flatline SS payout for everyone until it's phased out completely. Immediately cut off anyone from SS making over 100K in income. Tax employer sponsored benefits to pay for their "PLAN".

GermGem,

Have you finished ironing my shirt?

Do I need shot after that?

Seeking Sanity, maybe you should do a little research on why both Obama's Law Licenses weren't renewed. Who said anything about being drafted? Have you ever heard of volunteering? Public knowledge, why haven't I heard of them then? Love your lazy comment ,typical name calling by a Liberal when they have lost any real idea's. Funny every time I read your comments it contains name calling, how old are you?

Q22

Thats right...

Hate clouds human reasoning and no one hates like a GOP/Tea Tool jazzed up on fear.

The GOP sells fear, lies and hate like a carnival barker sells tickets to see the circus.

More anger and hate (along with theft, rape and violence) at OWS event than at any Tea Party rally. More anger and hate in your posts than mine.

I guess you forgot the comparison of Obamacare to Nazism....

Republicans told you they are going to make medicare and medicade a voucher system, that means they will give you X amount of dollars for all your healthcare needs, but if your healthcare needs actually cost XXX dollars, then YOU are responsible to pay what your voucher don't.

Actually this is a misrepresentation of the voucher system. Vouchers allow you to use the money, for those that don't want to remain on Medicare, toward a private insurer. If the private insurance cost more than $6500/year then you'll pay the difference for that health insurance. This was co-sponsered by US Senator Ron Wyden (D) Oregon who is a progressive.

I don't really see the difference. You get a voucher; you get a private insurance plan, and if it costs more (which it most likely will), you get the bill. And the bill will continue to rise, faster than the voucher will.

As far as eliminating the Postal Service, it's not a government agency. It's private, yet is running in the red and needs a huge bailout from the government. Why is it other private carrier companies, like UPS and FedEx can make a profit but the US Postal service can't?

First of all, the Postal Service is a government-run corporation, much like Pemex is a Mexican state-run oil company. Secondly, a major reason why the Post Office is in the red is because they have to pay for 75 years-worth of retirement funds in 10 years; costing $5.5 billion every year. You can add in the stuff about it being obsolete, but the biggest reason for it's shortfall is the retirement payment.

wlee-950886

Seeking Sanity what branch of the military did Obama serve in? Whats the Liberal idea for saving SS and Medicare? Whats the Obama solution for reducing the deficit? What about lowering the unemployment rate? What happened to his Law Degree?

Didn't serve in the military, but served his country as a community organizer. Liberal proposal to save SS: raise payroll tax, remove cap on employers, raise cap on employees to 90% of earnings. Medicare (my proposal): end fee-for-service mechanism and replace it with fee-for-health system; end all contracts with private hospitals and work only with non-profit care providers until for-profit institutions significantly lower costs. Reducing the deficit: Grand Bargain deal of $4 trillion in savings; $2.8 trillion in cuts, $1.2 trillion in revenue increases. Lowering unemployment rate: spend money on rebuilding roads and bridges and invest in education and clean energy (along with R&D). And I frankly don't give a damn about Obama's law degree.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

ClearVoice2

EDUCATION… America’s education system is in crisis. Test scores show us that students across America are performing at levels FAR BELOW their peers. Union political strength is based in the democratic party. In order to save our children, our educational system and the future of America we need to break the power of the unions in education. The first critical step requires a political regime change in Washington. We must remove the democrats from positions of power and break the power of the unions. Union policies prevent the use of performance standards for employment that hold bad teachers accountable and favor tenure over performance. Union corruption favors an overinflated base from which to collect dues.

Not really. While unions are indeed an issue, education reform requires more than performance standards. We need full federal funding of education, stronger federal involvement in education, merit-based pay, programs to find the best people qualified to be teachers, and responsible spending for education (which requires more prioritization, but also more funds) to lower class sizes and improve the schools technologically. Some of those things are strongly opposed by conservatives, and some of them even seek the removal of the public school system. So to say Democrats are the problem is not entirely accurate.

As a result, labor unions have metastasized into a pathological cancer on the American educational system. Our union dominated educational system has failed miserably over the past three decades. This failure reflected and exacerbated the deteriorating ethics and morals of our society. It is reflective in the Obama administration where we bear witness to the core doctrine which endorses, supports and encourages a failed welfare state mentality within our borders.

Read what I said above. And the welfare state HAS NOT FAILED: it has significantly reduced poverty levels. The only reason why poverty is high today is because the middle class is getting hammered by things like higher costs for healthcare and higher education and stagnant wages. Finally; America is still a productive society; yes, we may have fallen on hard times, but that should not stop us from regaining the edge in things from science to energy to technology.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

Dude from Nowhere: I believe it was the GOP that decided in 2010 to make President Obama a "one-term" president rather than concentrating on solving the problems with the economy, jobs, etc. Talk about dissention in the ranks...I believe it was the Republicans that stated this dogfight...not the Democrats!!

The Ryan plan is for the 1% high-rollers, this loser would carpet bomb the middle class !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Odumbo = Cheatah from Tarzan shows.

You know why all these Libtards are always first on the vine?

None of the handouters have jobs.

Get a job libtards/turds.

This post by Jerry40yeardemocrat poses a question. When an obvious Obama hater makes a post that refers to President Obama as a monkey, what conclusion should we draw from it?

Romney Lies -Obama cuts 700 Billion from Medicare:

FROM: mksinsa.blogspot.com/p/slaying-zombie-romney-lies-part-ii.html

On 'Obama cuts $700 billion from Medicare'
· Prebuttal: The claim that OBAMACARE cuts $700 BILLION from Medicare is TRUE and the GOOD NEWS is that in doing so, it INCREASES HEALTHCARE FOR SENIORS while AT THE SAME TIME cuts fraud, WASTE and abuse. President Obama and the Democrats found those EFFICIENCIES that Republicans have been looking for for over 20 years.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office determined that the Medicare provisions in President Obama's health care law would save $700 BILLION over a decade and EXTENDS THE LIFE OF MEDICARE.

GOP Talking Point: Mitt Romney also laid out commonsense reforms that will make good on our promises to today’s seniors and save Social Security and Medicare for future generations.

Rebuttal: The ROMNEY-RYAN plan takes $700 BILLION AWAY FROM SENIORS but does NOT use it to fund HEALTH SERVICES for ANYBODY. Yet Republicans in the House voted to strip that $700 BILLION FROM SENIORS ENTIRELY. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates under the ROMNEY-RYAN plan, new Medicare beneficiaries will pay more than $1,200 OUT OF POCKET by 2030 and more than $5,900 more by 2050 and SHIFT ADDITIONAL COSTS to seniors by RAISING the eligibility age to 67. This NEGATIVELY impacts today's middle-aged, middle class HARD WORKING Americans while giving the wealthiest 1-percent HUGE TAX BREAKS.

Festerhawg: Hate to pop your proverbial bubble, but California is not bankrupt....of course, a couple cities have or are filing bankruptcy, but that's because they did not plan ahead for contingencies (like the city I live in....in California). And, some of the cities that have filed are now back on their feet and surviving. So, you need, once again, to check your facts before you spout off with inane stuff that is not true!! Sure, we're budget crunching, but so are many other states in the U.S. -- it's become a way of life for EVERYONE, including states.

ClearVoice2: Your comment above about the national debt is untrue. According to FactCheck.org, the national debt rose 190% under former President Reagan. It rose 52% under President George H.W. Bush, 37% under Bill Clinton, and 86% under Bush II. During his first 3 years in office, President Obama has presided over a 45% increase in the national debt. David Lazarus, (LA Times), writes: "As these numbers make clear, Republicans are just as fond of government spending as Democrats."

My issue is with "just as fond." These numbers show that under Republicans, government spending increases are significantly higher. Am I missing something? Or, are YOU missing something.

Before you spout off about things you apparently know nothing about....please do some research so you don't make yourself look totally like a fool, okay?

Seeking Sanity, maybe you should do a little research on why both Obama's Law Licenses weren't renewed. Who said anything about being drafted? Have you ever heard of volunteering?

Wlee, read and weep:

Since the President is getting traction on his tax returns, offer a deal- 4 more years of tax returns for all of the Presidents college records (financial, applications, transcripts, etc.). Say I'll give you 4 years for your records.

NYJoe, how about we get Romney's tax returns AND his college transcripts too? We'd like to know how he did in school too and how Romney got his deferments for Vietnam running around in France.

By STEVE PEOPLES 06/05/12 12:53 PM ET

Though an early supporter of the Vietnam War, Romney avoided military service at the height of the fighting after high school by seeking and receiving four draft deferments, according to Selective Service records. They included college deferments and a 31-month stretch as a "minister of religion" in France, a classification for Mormon missionaries that the church at the time feared was being overused. The country was cutting troop levels by the time he became eligible for the draft, and his lottery number was not called.

President Barack Obama, Romney's opponent in this year's campaign, did not serve in the military either. The Democrat, 50, was a child during the Vietnam conflict and did not enlist when he was older.

But because Romney, now 65, was of draft age during Vietnam, his military background – or, rather, his lack of one – is facing new scrutiny as he courts veterans and makes his case to the nation to be commander in chief. He's also intensified his criticism lately of Obama's plans to scale back the nation's military commitments abroad, suggesting that Romney would pursue an aggressive foreign policy as president that could involve U.S. troops.

A look at Romney's relationship with Vietnam offers a window into a 1960s world that allowed him to avoid combat as fighting peaked. His story also demonstrates his commitment to the Mormon Church, which he rarely discusses publicly but which helped shape his life.

Romney's recollection of his Vietnam-era decisions has evolved in the decades since, particularly as his presidential ambitions became clear.

He said in 2007 – his first White House bid under way – that he had "longed in many respects to actually be in Vietnam." But his actions, Selective Service records and previous statements show little interest in joining a conflict that ultimately claimed more than 58,000 American lives.

Still, he repeatedly cites his commitment to public service and the nation's military while campaigning for president.

"Greatness in a people, I believe, is measured by the extent to which they will give themselves to something bigger than themselves," Romney said in San Diego last week to a Memorial Day crowd of thousands, flush with military veterans of all ages.

He did not address his own Vietnam history that day. And his campaign has refused to comment publicly on the subject over the past week.

Political rivals, military veterans among them, suggest that Romney's own decision not to serve in the military is in conflict with his pro-military rhetoric.

"He didn't have the courage to go. He didn't feel it was important enough to him to serve his country at a time of war," said Jon Soltz, who served two Army tours in Iraq and is the chairman of the left-leaning veterans group VoteVets.org.

Critics note that the candidate is among three generations of Romneys – including his father, former Michigan Gov. George Romney, and five sons – who were of military age during armed conflicts but did not serve.

As a presidential candidate in 2007, Romney told The Boston Globe he was frustrated, as a Mormon missionary, not to be fighting alongside his countrymen.

"I was supportive of my country," Romney said. "I longed in many respects to actually be in Vietnam and be representing our country there, and in some ways it was frustrating not to feel like I was there as part of the troops that were fighting in Vietnam."

Indeed, Romney strongly supported the war at first. As a freshman at Stanford University, he protested anti-war activists. In one photo, he's shown in a small crowd of students, smiling broadly, wearing a sport jacket and holding up a sign that says, "Speak Out, Don't Sit In."

But the frustration he recalled in 2007 does not match a sentiment he shared as a Massachusetts Senate candidate in 1994, when he told The Boston Herald, "I was not planning on signing up for the military."

"It was not my desire to go off and serve in Vietnam, but nor did I take any actions to remove myself from the pool of young men who were eligible for the draft," Romney told the newspaper.

But that's exactly what Romney did, according Selective Service records. He received his first deferment for "activity in study" in October 1965 while at Stanford.

As Soltz notes, the younger Romney was under no obligation to seek a college-related deferment.

"Vietnam was a war that the poor and the people who couldn't afford to go to college had to go to," Soltz said.

After his first year at Stanford, Romney qualified for 4-D deferment status as "a minister of religion or divinity student." It was a status he would hold from July 1966 until February 1969, a period he largely spent in France working as a Mormon missionary.

He was granted the deferment even as some young Mormon men elsewhere were denied that same status, which became increasingly controversial in the late 1960s. The Mormon church, a strong supporter of American involvement in Vietnam, ultimately limited the number of church missionaries allowed to defer their military service using the religious exemption.

But as fighting in Vietnam raged, Romney spent two and a half years trying to win Mormon converts in France. About that same time, Romney's father would famously speak out against Vietnam, declaring that he had been "brainwashed" by military officials into supporting the conflict.

Young Romney's comments indicated his support had waned, too.

"If it wasn't a political blunder to move into Vietnam, I don't know what is," a 23-year-old Romney would tell The Boston Globe in 1970 during the fifth year of his deferment.

His 31-month religious deferment expired in early 1969. And Romney received an academic studies deferment for much of the next two years. He became available for military service at the end of 1970 when his deferments ran out and he could have been drafted. But by that time, America was beginning to slice its troop levels, and Romney's relatively high lottery number – 300 out of 365 – was not called.

Romney - the scary one.

That's right Wlee. Your candidate Romney is a draft dodging, soldier killing wannabe. He has no regard for the military and doesn't deserve to be Commander in Chief. He walks funny, flip flops on every issue there is and is a light-weight T-party drone that has been hijacked by the Republican right-wing neo-cons. At first, I though he was a good guy, but since his carpet-bombing negative ads and sole mission to grab power for the rich has turned me off. At first, I though we would at least be able to stomach a moderate Republican, if he won, but now it would be the biggest mistake this country has made. He, and Ryan are really scaring every middle-class American.

Any other questions?

The conversation shifts to what, the upcoming NFL season?

Romney won't talk about his work experience, he won't talk about his religion, he won't release his taxes, he can't talk about Medicare without phucking it up, and he sure as hell cannot talk about the economy when his consort belongs to the lowest rated Congress in American history.

I don't know, 49ers and Ravens in the Super Bowl?

Good morning IR -- I see we are on the same page today. These guys are FAUX conservatives when you get to the nitty gritty of things. Their hypocrisy is getting downright ridiculous. Funny, the NYT had a piece today stating how Ryan had a conference call with the Koch brothers detailing his budget. Math must not be their strong suit or debts and deficits don't matter to TP/Republicans anymore.

Ryan, "Now if you spend another billion trying to win the race then......."

Koch Brothers, "Now your plan completely decimates the middle class right?"

LOL Eric! So true!

IR -

It seems like even some Conservatives have come to the conclusion that Ryan's voting record and plans don't add up. He claims to be a "deficit" hawk, but he voted "Yes" on every major piece of legislation that created this deficit.

Paul Ryan Voted in Favor of Obama's Stimulus: Ryan's Voting Record Will Raise Questions About His Own Conservative Label

Saturday, August 11, 2012

It's nice to see that Paul Ryan is not being given a free pass with the label "conservative". Ryan is another disappointment that went to Washington claiming to be a conservative and then choosing big government's ways.

W.E. Messamore writes:

Though many commentators are calling it a bold pick and a breath of fresh air, the move may signal the Romney campaign’s desperation to energize Republican voters ahead of the Republican nominating convention and the general election later this Fall….

Picking Paul Ryan certainly changes the entire dynamics of this race as well, and not necessarily in Mitt Romney’s favor. Instead of going with the safer bet and making the race a referendum on President Obama’s performance as president, Romney’s campaign has chosen to put Paul Ryan’s budget plan front and center in the national discussion. He’s banking on Ryan’s reputation in the Republican Party as something of a celebrity policy “wonk” in Congress who has the mathematical and rhetorical skills to out-debate Democrats and prove that limited government is better for the struggling US economy.

Remember here the conservative Club for Growth gave the Ryan budget a failing grade because it didn't begin shrinking government, balancing the budget, and reducing debt until the year 2040. Of course, we can't forget Paul Ryan voted in favor of Obama's stimulus bill part II, another $192 billion.

But like Mitt Romney, whose inconsistency, even insincerity, on the issues was epitomized by the Etch a Sketch comment his spokesman and top adviser made on live television earlier this year, Paul Ryan’s limited government rhetoric appears at odds with his big government voting record during the Bush Administration.

The Wisconsin congressman actually voted with the Bush Administration’s agenda of unprecedented federal expansion 94% of the time, and it may surprise his fiscally conservative fans to know that Paul Ryan’s voting record includes votes for the TARP bailouts, the auto bailouts, the massive Bush Medicare expansion, the unprecedented federal intrusion into public education via No Child Left Behind, the 2008 stimulus package, and the $192B 2009 stimulus package.

As the general election campaign heats up and Paul Ryan is vetted by members of his party, those of rival parties, and Independent voters, his number one asset to Mitt Romney’s campaign– his status as poster boy for limited government and unwavering, even radical, fiscal conservatism– may prove hollow. It shouldn’t be long before Democratic operatives put together an ad featuring something Paul Ryan said while asking his House colleagues to vote for the politically toxic TARP bill on the House floor: “Madame Speaker, this bill offends my principles. But I’m going to vote for this bill in order to preserve my principles.”

The statement is oddly reminiscent of one George W. Bush made regarding the bailouts: “I’ve abandoned free market principles to save the free market system.”

No doubt, as the November election approaches, Paul Ryan and his record will be held under a microscope like never before, and he will have some tough questions to answer. With his reputation for fiscal conservatism, questions about his TARP and stimulus votes are almost certain to be asked during interviews and any vice presidential debates. By then, Mitt Romney’s campaign and members of the Republican Party will miss the earlier days of the campaign when they were only dogged by questions of consistency for one of the candidates on their ticket.

I dare my fellow conservatives to defend Paul Ryan's record, especially with his support of Obama's stimulus. Congressman Ryan himself knowing the Obama stimulus was failing voted to appropriate close to another $200 billion to give it a jump start.

Posted by Bungalow Bill

Paul Ryan: The Deficit - I Built That

IR, cheers for the article and especially those redneck pearls of wisdom. Paul Ryan is not a fiscal conservative, he just talks the talk.

Ryan voted "yea" for every unfunded piece of legislation that came out of the Bush/Cheney years--every single one including the much maligned TARP and Auto Industry Loans.

Why would Paul Ryan vote to bankrupt the US Government, vote to bankrupt medicare by adding a huge unfunded mandate? Simple, because what better way to eliminate the hated government and hated social safety nets than to starve the beast and add to the financial burdens of both. What is troubling is the fact that it never occurs to the Ryans in the GOP that such an ideology leads toward a further decline of this country.

Did everyone catch Romney's top surrogate Sununu yesterday on Chris Matthews show. He said he would rather have private insurance than a government run insurance program.

Ask everyone on Medicare, would you rather follow Romney's top surrogate Sununu and have private insurance where you have to fight them for every medical expense or would you rather have government run Medicare?

I sure hope Sununu didn't use government health care when he worked for the government. In fact, I hope he's not on Medicare since that is a government run insurance program.

Thanks folks always nice to be on the same page with so many. I think that much to Ol' Paulie's chagrin he's going to find it a whole lot harder to tell his lies to We the People than it is to a narrow base that is going to take anything he says as the gospel just because he says it is.

I have always heard Democrats criticized for having a 'Tax and Spend' mindset. George Bush and his Republican buddies going back to Ronald Reagan have been 'Borrow and Spend'. Which is worse - spending as you go, as Clinton did, or borrowing and handing the bill to your kids, like Bush and Ryan advocate?

Romney, "If I only had a brain..............."

"With the thoughts you'd be thinkin'
You could be another Lincoln
If you only had a brain"

At least Ryan has had the stones to document a budget proposal that can be debated. As with anything of this magnitude (and before anyone makes comments - yes, I read the whole thing), there are parts I agree with and parts I disagree with - but at least there is enough detail to start an intelligent debate.

For those of you saying "he doesn't even balance the budget for X years", that's true - but it's a start, and it's far better than anything else I've seen from other politicians. Personally I prefer the recommendations from the presidents commission - but neither party has supported these suggestions.

Starderup

I have always heard Democrats criticized for having a 'Tax and Spend' mindset. George Bush and his Republican buddies going back to Ronald Reagan have been 'Borrow and Spend'. Which is worse - spending as you go, as Clinton did, or borrowing and handing the bill to your kids, like Bush and Ryan advocate?

I agree that "tax and spend" is better than "borrow and spend", but the problem is, the leadership in both parties now use the "borrow and spend" approach.

Concerning Clinton (who I liked as president), I think what worked in the 90's was the dynamic of Clinton AND the fiscally conservative Republican congress. I give Clinton a lot of credit for showing leadership and working with Republicans on solutions - but I don't think it's fair to give either Clinton or Congress sole credit for the 90's.

Also, the Republicans from 2000 to 2008 were not fiscally conservative. I think some of the 2010 crop are truly fiscally conservative, but the group for the first part of the decade were free-spending big government politicians.

Ron - the GOP won't let anything from this President even get to a vote. They filibuster everything he proposes - including a jobs bill that would have raised taxes on companies that continue to outsource jobs and lower them on companies that bring jobs back. It's time to get rid of the obstructionists!

Obama/Biden 2012

Ron Beg to differ. Ol' Paulie sat on the Commission. He voted against it's solutions and has repeatedly shown an unwillingness to even discuss it. How is this the start of an honest discussion?

Ron -

So how do you reconcile the Ryan plan to address the deficit with his voting record that help to create the deficit?

Paul Ryan voted for the Bush tax cuts, the Bush Medicare expansion, No Child Left Behind, and supported bth of Bush's wars.

Ryan also voted for the 2008 stimulus package, TARP bailouts, the auto bailouts,and the 2009 stimulus.

So Paul Ryan SHOULD be an expert on the debt and deficits - He voted for all the major legislation that caused it!!

Paul Ryan: The Deficit? I Built That!

TNSEVOL --

Paul Ryan: The Deficit? I Built That!

PRICELESS, lol.

I am going to have, Paul Ryan: The Deficit? I Built That!, put on a tee shirt.

Hey Wade, I'll be you could make some extra money doing that if you go to CafePress.

DCIA- It's even funnier because it's true!

Wade - Use it however you like. Although I did think that one up on my own, all I ask is for a portion of the proceeds to go to Obama's re-election fund!

That's a wonderful idea TNSEVOL. If Wade doesn't want to, you should.

Somebody should capitalize on that.

You Liberals say the Repubs are blocking everything yet forget that Reid has pocketed everything sent his way, amnesia the Liberals favorite excuse

I was not planning on making more then one shirt, but since I am joining a pro O'bama student group at USF, I will suggest the group makes the tee shirts for the campus and off it through cafe press, and all the proceeds will go to the O'bama reelection fund. Ty for giving me more ideas. I had not intended to profit in any way from your comment TNSEVOL. I will see that you get credit for the idea TNSEVOL, Dont_carry_it_all.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/14/us/politics/paul-ryan-has-kept-close-ties-to-conservative-and-libertarian-donors.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

The worse is at it's best.

Democrats are clearly JOB CREATORS! lol

Coal, it's the new whale oil.

Get used to it.

Renewables, best energy innovation since fire.

Get over it.

Hope and change, works for me.

Four more for Forty Four. The most powerful President on Earth, and in all the excitement you have to wonder; "did he fire six policy shots or only five?".

Rombot's got to ask the question, "Do I feel lucky?"

Well, do ya, punk?

Don't carry it all, yeah 8.3% unemployment more people on food stamps ever

TNSEVOL

Ron -

So how do you reconcile the Ryan plan to address the deficit with his voting record that help to create the deficit?

I believe in evaluating ideas based on their merit, not the messenger. I never agree with everyone's policies, and I'm fine with people changing their positions (I know I change my position on topics from time to time when I get new information or just rethink my perspective).

If our country is going to solve it's problems, people need to stop looking at the R/D label and what's happened in the past, and start focusing on real solutions to our problems.

To date Wlee all the house GOP has focused on is mostly one anti abortion bill after another. The house GOP promised to work nonstop on Jobs for the American people. Reid is doing what I would be doing if I had his job, blocking the useless stream of garbage the GOP is passing off as Jobs Jobs Jobortion, ty Rachel Maddow for that tag line.

Ryan wants to fashion Medicare into a plan more like a 401 K, steering retirees into private insurance plan with a voucher, what a shameful waste for a VP pick !!!!!!!!!!!!

"W" try to put Social Security into a 401 K and it backfired on him, don't "F" with or S.S. & Medicare, this note is from the Seniors of America !!!!!!!