Negative 10% GDP (worse since the Depression by double) to positive 1-2% GPD

Loosing 700,000 jobs a month to adding 165,000 a month on average for 23 months.

He’s run out of ideas,” he said. “And so that is why he’s going to be running a campaign based on envy and division, based on frustration and anger. Hope and change has now become attack and blame.”

Wonk!....He's got those talking points (Lies) down. I wonder when he'll use his wonkiness to answer real questions about the RomBot/Wonk policies.

The DOW was about 8270 on Jan 20th 2009 - the day Obama took office. Look at it now 13090. YES THINGS ARE MUCH BETTER TODAY!

A selfish liberal says things are better because his stocks went up. Greedy 1% er, no doubt.

"In the most recent Associated Press-GfK poll, 28 percent said they were better off than four years ago, while 36 percent said they were worse off and 36 percent said they were in about the same financial position..."

Quite an indictment of President Obama....the class warfare crap wont work, because hardworking middle class voters see the failure of Obama first hand...

The fact is I am much better off than where republican leadership left me, I was a big loser under GW Bush, I lost $480,000 of my retirement portfolio, it was cut in half, I have gained all that back and then some, the last four years have been a real winner for my personal wealth coming back.

Same here, Forrest. Almost identical numbers too. I for one am glad that Bush is gone for good. Now, let's not let a carbon copy back in power.

Unemployment, under-employment, misery index, housing starts, foreclosures, inflation, GDP, debt, deficit, gas prices, oil prices, food stamp usage, food prices, labor participation rates, real unemployment, youth unemployment, have ALL gotten worse under Obama.

And still we have self-deluding left-wingers (is that redundant?) claiming that things are better now. Bizarre!

Bob - I'm no where near being a 1% er and I never will be. Frankly I'm quite happy. We are retired and fortunate that our house is paid for and we have no debt. That was no accident. It was 46 years of hard work and planning for the future.

This was already said by a poster a few days ago but is too funny not to repeat: "No mas pantalones"

What really burns my butt is that we here in Canada have no control over the things that happen in the US. I was never able to vote for those A$$HOLES that you voted for and that brought us this mess. Like I've said before on this site. America sneezes and we catch cold!

That old "are you better off now than four years ago?" no longer applies. The question now is are you better off with Democrats or with Republicans, and comparing how great things were under Clinton compared to Dubya. Because the Great Recession was so severe and the recovery so difficult, the four year thing is meaningless.

I've mentioned the Lost Decade multiple times, so found this study very interesting: The Lost Decade of the Middle Class - Fewer, Poorer, Gloomier by Pew Research -- http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012/08/22/the-lost-decade-of-the-middle-class/

After the dot-com bust of 2001 and 9-11, we could have recovered if Bush/Cheney had not started an unnecessary war and worse cutting taxes instead of paying for the wars. The housing bubble gave people a false sense of prosperity. But things have sucked since 2001 and are only now starting to improve under the Obama administration -- And would be improving more quickly without Teapublican obstructionism in congress.

There's no way folks want to go backward to the failed GOP/Bush-era voodoo economics and warmongering. Nothing could be more disastrous than to have Romney/Ryan the 21st Century Robber Barons at the helm.

Hey Tony, are you a 1 percenter, or are you a guy like me that worked 28 years under a fair and equitable collective bargaining agreement to amass those funds?

Bob in Virginia-5210392

A selfish liberal says things are better because his stocks went up. Greedy 1% er, no doubt.

I don't know TonyBreeem, but my guess is he's more like me, just an ordinary middle class guy who saw his retirement saving evaporate in 2008 while the wealthy criminals who perpetrated the economic disaster of the Bush years got rewarded with fat bonuses and golden parachutes. The greedy 1% are all backing Mitt the Twit and Lyin' Ryan. They're not backing Obama. Despite doing well under Obama, they know they'll get more money if Romney wins and removes the regulations that prevent them from doing what they did under Bush.

Ryan can, however, tell you that you are not better off because he personally voted against everything that would have helped.

I can say I'm better off now then 4 years ago. I have a steady job, my health care premiums are lower, and I have preventive care incentives. My 401k has doubled, I'm lowering my debt and refianced my home to a lower rate. Gas has stayed relatively the same, and is actually less than when I went on a cross country vacation in July 2008 with my kids. My children are going to college part-time, and working part time, without going into high debt. I'm a middle class income female, and again, yes I'm doing better than I was 4 years ago.

We are better off than 4 years ago; but there are problems, for sure: here is a list of problems:

Mitt the Outsourcer-in-chief and his fellow vultures have sent more jobs overseas;

Mitch McConnell has succeeded in uniting his fellow Repugnants to stop job growth;

Republicans have destroyed the golden chance of putting more regulation on the Wall Street, thus the story of Jamie Dimon and JPMorgan hurt market confidence

I wonder has anyone asked either MITT Or Paul if they are better off now then they were four years ago??? or would they lie about this TOO???

Could MITT tell us while under BAIN CAPITAL how many jobs did he and company save and then tell us how many jobs were loss during the same time?? give us a comparsion of how good a job he did.

If Obama shows us his birth certificate will Mitt show us the last five years of FED tax returns?

... for sure: here is a list of problems: cont.

5. Mitt and his fellow vultures have refused to pay their share of taxes, hurting social security and Medicare which rely on tax revenue

6. GOP refused to work with the President on debt limit deal in the summer of 2011, thus Standard Poor lowered US credit rating for the first time ever.

7. The Euro Zone has been in trouble, taking less exports from the US.

8. Japan was hit with a nuclear disaster, thus hurting US exports there

9. or wait...GOP policies, such as repeal of Glass-Steagall of 1933, hurt the economy and brought the entire world economy down in the drain and a recession started with bank failure has always been hard to overcome.

Now why are we where we are, if you don't feel good?

more to come...

Forrest

-no bargaining agreement here. But there were divisions in the Company I worked for that did have unions. There is a cross-over effect when there are unions. Even companies that are non-union have to be competitive in the workplace to keep good people. So I'm all for unions.

Hey Forrest, I just got back from marching down Michigan Avenue in Detroit with my Union for our Labor Day parade. I can categorically assure you that Labor is alive and well,.....and is thirsty for Republican jugular in November!!

Personally, I am going to invent a machine that'll grind up Republicans to put into my gas tank. It will be the greatest invention known to civilization. Once it takes off here we can introduce it to other countries. :o)

Pat: thanks for posting that.

This idea that lyin' Ryan is a "serious thinker" with "solutions" is patently absurd. If he were, he would have answered the questions.

One wonders if he is capable of doing that?

Hey Tony, are you a 1 percenter

Hardly. And to be honest, wouldn't want to be either. Money can't buy happiness. I've known wealthy people my entire life and to tell the truth, they're the most miserable bunch of folks possible.

or are you a guy like me that worked 28 years under a fair and equitable collective bargaining agreement to amass those funds?

More like 40 years. Not really a union guy but my dad was and the life we had as children was because the union fought for them. Let's say I respect them. Much more than what guys like Romney and Ryan have in store if they get elected.

and don't mind Bob in Virginia. His ship is sinking and he knows it. I suspect the vitriol will be much worse as the election nears.

I agree Great White unions set the bar, the non union companies have to pay a little more to keep good people and management expects to at least a little more than the people they manage. That is exactly why when unions suffer a setback so does the non union, and so does middle management. Just look at the right to work for less, and less, and less states, income has declined for all workers in those states not just the union members.

Happy Labor Day

The engineers used to come up to me at contract time and ask me, "Hey,....did you guys get any other benefits or Holidays,..cause whatever you get,..we get."

The engineers were smart enough to get it.

Happy Labor Day one and all.

Thank You Tony, I agree money does not buy happiness, but to be honest about it, I can't think of any situation I have ever been in where having money would have made it worse.

Gary Johnson 2012! The people's President!

Tony & Forrest - I'm with you - if I won the lottery I wouldn't turn it down. It would make my kids life a whole lot easier.

The only way you can say you are better off is .You are a union worker and the tax payers saved your ass,or you jumped in to one of Husain's new Gov jobs,or your son came home from the war.

Romney-Ryan 2012

Sorry Mike Ritter - YOU ARE WRONG ON ALL COUNTS! Its called "living within your means." We never tried to keep up with the Jones' Our house is relatively small compared to some I see - about 1250 sq ft. - but its perfect for us and best of all its 100% paid for.

Hey, thanks, Pat, for the primer- it is obvious from that that Ryan knows how to turn away a provacateur. Good job!

Dennis, what can I say? Once again, your numbers do NOT match your spin.

Uh, guys? The network that got $700 million in stimulus dollars have polls so heavily skewed, they showed democrats winning the House by two points- when republicans won by seven.

Now, had I hired them, they'd have been fired- but, in Obama world, you keep the people who tell you pretty lies close.

What happens when Romney wins, and no tax dollars flow to this network?

Ugly, ugly, ugly.

mike: I AM better off than I was four years ago.

I was working in the housing industry. I'm not a union worker. After being in the industry for 15 years, I was out of work. The industry itself, like the company I was with, is gone. The housing industry of 2008 does not exist. Hundreds of thousands of painters, carpenters, roofers, cement contractors, carpet layers, painters, appliance manufacturers, loan officers, secretaries, accountants, office managers, housing builders, realtors, general contractors, lenders, brokers and others were wiped out by the greed and fraud the Bush administration allowed to happen. 30% to 40% of the economy simply shut down--- GONE, and it will not return to that level of production for a LONG, LONG, time.

I have changed industries and I am back to work. What's left of my 401k is better than it was in 2008.

Am I as optimistic as I was in 2008, NO. I'm worried that the GOP will still have control of the House and obstruct any attempt to improve this country. The only thing that will help this country is to get the Republican party out of the Congress.

Am I better off than I was in 2008. Yes I am.

If we have Democrats in control of the entire government I will be in even better shape in 2016.

I agree money does not buy happiness, but to be honest about it, I can't think of any situation I have ever been in where having money would have made it worse.

Right, I wouldn't turn it away, but it's not worth killing yourself or others to get it. just sayin'

"I'm better off". Starting 5 years ago I was in a world of @!$%#. Lost my business, my investments were eaten up, and gave my house back to the bank 3.5 years ago. Today, my investments are recovering, and we just purchased a home. We're not all the way back, but we are getting there.....

-

O&Joe 2012

no joe, no bo, nj

Uh, guys? The network that got $700 million in stimulus dollars have polls so heavily skewed, they showed democrats winning the House by two points- when republicans won by seven.

Um, $500,000 but don't let a few zeros get in your way NoJo

One last item: my niece and my nephew were, as part of national guard units, each doing second and third tours of duty in Iraq. The "Mission Accomplished" was going strong, with soldiers dying daily. My sister worried every time the phone rang after 10:00pm and with every time someone came to the door unexpectedly.

They are both home, recovered from their injuries and working.

YES, I am better off than I was FOUR years ago.

Ryan: Obama 'can't tell you that you are better off'??????

Why?? Ryan is against constitutional Freedom of speech? Especially when the President is telling the truth that we are better off ... just because GOP can't handle the truth?

Obama's got nothing to do with the stock market. Something else his know nothing base gives him credit for because you can sum up his accomplishment in one sentence.

He eventually gave the order for the members of ST 6 to kill bin Laden.

After four years if someone's not doing the job, you've got to let him go.

Obama's got nothing to do with the stock market

And he's got nothing to do with the price of gas, but somehow that comes up anytime you guys have nothing else, which is 99% of the time. And yes, the President and the Executive branch of the government does have influence on the stock market. Look it up.

Well Mitt has at least three ways to boost the
economy:

1. Start paying his fair share of taxes [back
dated also].
2. Invest his ill gotten gains in the US instead of the
Caymans.
3. Stop his friends at Bain and the like sending US jobs
abroad.

Where was Donald Trump? The GOP Platform did justify that Barrack Obama is an American citizen.

See, the GOP stated to allude that where a "person" is conceived makes that person a citizen of that country. Does it matter if a Japanese couple comes to America for a honeymoon and the young wife begins a "person" in America, that person is essentially an American Citizen Person. Does it also means the same if an American goes to France for the honeymoon. The "person" began its life in France, it is French. Hmmm, wonder how it can be if the "person" begins its life on a Carnival Cruise Ship in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean.

Now Johnny Doe republican don't play games with me. Don't tell me if the mother is an American citizen then it does not matter. Unless its Barrack Obama's mom.

See Jane Doe republican, Barrack was conceived in America.

Are you willing to rethink applying The Personhood to the 14th Amendment?

In reference to 1.44 I could not agree more, as I have said in the past I will punish republicans at all levels of government, because not one of them stood up to their leadership and called them on that BS. If you vote for Romney or for any republicans you are giving the green light for any political party to neglect their oath of office, and blackmail the American people into voting the way they wish to force upon you. I'll never forget or forgive them for what they openly and proudly have conspired to do, they are not worthy of your vote, and a lowly grunt in the military would be court marshaled for less.

no joe, no bo, nj

Hey, thanks, Pat, for the primer- it is obvious from that that Ryan knows how to turn away a provacateur. Good job!

yes, this "provacateur" asked Paul Ryan really unreasonable questions like :

Constituent: OK, I just really need to ask you a question.

Constituent: I know, and you think the same as Bush, and that’s what I don’t understand.

Constituent: So, what should I have to work for to get a job? Should I have to work for the same wages as in China? Should I have to work for one dollar an hour?

Constituent: Is that the competitiveness that’s needed?

Constituent: in the community. What is deregulating going to do?
What, should we allow corporations to do whatever they like?

Constituent: Is that the goal?

Wow, those are some really "gotcha" questions! I guess, according to you, asking Paul Ryan anything is off limits. Thanks for clearing that up for us...

Banks No Longer On The Verge Of Collapse, Auto Industry No Longer On The Verge Of Collapse, Housing Market "Slowly" Stabilizing, Millions That DID NOT Have Access To Health Care, Now Do, The Market Is UP From The Date "O" Took Office. If Anyone Can Say That As A Country We Are NOT Doing Better......Your A Rich Republican That Doesnt Want To Pay His Fair Share, Looking For More Short Cuts To Your Taxes So That The Burden Remains On The Middle Class As It Has Since Ronnie Deregulated Wall Street.

The Dow hit a low of just over 6500 in March 2009. Now it's over 13,000. The Dow has doubled since Obama's $700 billion stimulus was passed with only 3 Republican votes in the Senate. Republicans tried to block it with the filibuster rule which forced Obama and the Democrats to get 60 of 100 votes in the Senate.

What was the Republican Plan for stimulating our economy?

Back in the Recession of 1982-1983, Reagan proposed massive stimulus to get us out of it. Our annual budget deficit increased by 250% from 1981 to 1983 through a combination of massive tax cuts and increased government spending. And this against a backdrop of a Fed high interest rate driven recession to curb inflation that allowed the Fed to use monetary policy to end the recession by slashing the discount interest rate from 14% in May 1981 to 8.5% by the end of 1982.

At the end 0f 2008, the Fed had a discount rate of .5%. Monetary policy was off the table when it came to fixing our economy. Job losses were at 750,000 per month in Dec. 2008, yet most Republicans chose not to support the only government action, stimulus, that could stop the continued decline of our economy. We recently learn that on Obama's inauguration day, the Republican brain trust was plotting to derail any Obama efforts to fix the economy, so they could defeat him in the next election.

Shame on you, Republican brain trust. Shame on you, Frank Luntz, Newt Gingrich, Paul Ryan, Eric Cantor, Coburn, Kyl, Sessions, McCarthy, Hensarling, Lungren, DeMint, Ensign, and Corker. You plotted against America's economic recovery. You tried to gain political advantage during America's greatest financial crisis since the Great Depression.

Let's all send them the message that this cannot be a winning strategy. OBAMA 2012.

U6 unemployment is up double since January 2009 to about 16%, would be 20% if Republicans had not taken over the House in 2010. Also, black male youth U6 unemployment double to about 30% since January 2009. Who are the winners? White guys like Kaiser at Solyndra who got $556 Million in return for a $28 Thousand Obama campaign gift in 2008, and zero jobs not more jobs as promised, just one example.

Honestly, I don't see why black male youth (or new college graduates) are still in line with Obama, they are the biggest losers of all.

Even more important in this whole debate about if U R better-off -

the traditional constituents of the GOP are even better off today than most other demographics ... because they have made more money buying foreclosed homes, buying dipping stocks - although the stock prices have IMPROVED SO MUCH under Obama - the Dow Jones Average from 7,000+ to 13,000+, but still below the all time high of 14,000+.

So, as former pres. Clinton said, Republicans should all vote to put Democrats in office for a better financial and fiscal future...remember the good old days of prosperity and budget surplus of 1990s. We are getting there soon. We will absolutely see it in Obama's 2nd term.

The reason we are not there yet is many-fold: one of the most important is GOP policies have caused so much damages that it's so hard to recover.

Gee, island guy, I thought liberals were all about the collective?

So, you are doing better- but median wages have fallen, and the bottom has dropped out of the middle class- so, should you not be out there demanding that Obama resign?

I just love liberal hypocrisy. You guys make it SOOOOO easy.

Gee, island guy, I thought liberals were all about the collective?

Gee, Snookie-Joe, I thought right wing nut jobs were all about personal responsibilty?

Oh, how the once mighty have fallen... lol

no joe: why do you think it is necessary that the tax code be reformed to reverse some of the theft from the middle class that the wealthy have built into the system.

Seriously $ 20,000,000 + income and you only pay 13% federal taxes ? WTF, I don't make anywhere near that and I have to pay 15%, plus SS and medicare.... and you know Myth Robme aint payin no social security taxes.

but median wages have fallen,

No joe blo -

Don't blame O, median wages have been on the decline since the Reagan days,along with the gap between the rich and the middle class, you stupid twat.....

-

O&Joe 2012

Marathon times are important now? Well then, since Ryan is faster than Obama, he will also make a better President.

Marathon times are important now?

They are when the guy who wants to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency can't even tell the truth about something as innocuous as a marathon....

Makes you wonder what else he's willing to lie about...

So far, we have;

The Janesville, plant closing.

His request for stimulus funds.

His NO vote on the Simpson-Bowles commission.

His plans to eliminate MediCare & privatize it into a Groupon system.

Have I missed anything?

And, that is only in the past three weeks...

The hits will only keep on rolling... lol

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL

Makes you wonder what else he's willing to lie about...

Ryan loved to go fishing, this is where and how you start telling whoppers ... and start smelling fishy.

It's the lying that's important Feisty?

During the debate over raising the debt ceiling, President Obama said that 80% of Americans support including higher taxes as part of the deal. But a Rasmussen poll taken the same week showed that only 34% supported a tax hike. He lied!

“I will close Gitmo within one year!” He lied!

When Obama was selling his $787 billion stimulus package, he consistently bragged about how shovel-ready construction jobs would be funded across the nation. He later admitted that was a lie, when he told the New York Times: “There’s no such thing as shovel-ready projects.”

“We have the chance to tell all those corporate lobbyists that the days of them setting the agenda in Washington are over. … I don't take a dime of their money, and when I am President, they won't find a job in my White House.” At least a dozen former lobbyists got top jobs in his administration at the beginning of his presidency, according to Politico, and National Public Radio reported the Obama administration was granting waivers to lobbyists to circumvent the ban

Obama: Liar-in-Chief

Have I missed anything?

Actually I think you have Feisty.

Ryan has touched all the bases but one. There is only one other thing that some men tend to lie about and that one is below the waist.

:o)

I always wonder why they bother to lie about something that is easily proven false? What can the advantage possibly be in doing that? Do they really just not know what the truth is?

When Obama was selling his $787 billion stimulus package

Research that one again Kanin.

That "stimulus" was signed by George W. Bush.

Most of it was outright gimmes to the banksters!!

Bush was blowing the wealthy class one last big bye-bye kiss before he left office.

I always wonder why they bother to lie about something that is easily proven false?

Shhhh... they haven't caught up to the information highway yet!

I ♥ feeding them the rope...

Really GOP, hmmmm from NBC.com:

DENVER — Racing to reverse the country's economic spiral, President Barack Obama signed the mammoth stimulus package into law Tuesday-2/17/2009

You're confusing TARP with the waste of money Obama blew. Research is b!tch eh?

How cute...

When you got nothing, Kanin trots out the tired old BS which has been thoroughly debunked so many times it's NO longer funny!

PS: You forgot, 57 states, teleprompter & birth certificate!

*yawn*

Redhead -You like sucking on a rope?

Marathon times are only important when you are running from the truth.

Romney and Ryan have been running from the truth since 2006.

@GOPisextinct Research that one again Kanin. That "stimulus" was signed by George W. Bush.

"The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, abbreviated ARRA (Pub.L. 111-5) and commonly referred to as the Stimulus or The Recovery Act, is an economic stimulus package enacted by the 111th United States Congress in February 2009 and signed into law on February 17, 2009, by President Barack Obama."

Obama lies; Obama supporters lie. Not coincidence ...

And Feisty's posts are exactly what her logo says they are.

Research is b!tch eh?

Yes, it is.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p09X8hohvVo&feature=player_embedded

News today...obama is "struggling" with the question of ARE U BETTER OFF NOW OR 4 YR. AGO!!

That is a yes or no question!! How do you struggle with a yes or no question??

Clint Eastwood summed it all up in 10 minutes!! No One can afford another 4 years of this Craziness!!

BozoHussan==NBC=GE= Chicago MOBpolitics=lie,cheat, steal ,twist every crises to benefit your Pravda Press PROPAGANDA!!

Just like Biden said, Osama is dead and GM is alive. Go ahead righties argue with that! I know you will

You dare talk about lies? Ridiculous! Obama is well known as the Liar-in-Chief.

"I will cut the deficit in half by the end of my first term" FY 2008 Deficit: $459 billion; FY 2012 Deficit: $1,327 billion. He lied!

Obama's campaign website states: “Fact: Barack was never an ACORN trainer and never worked for ACORN in any other capacity.” In 2004 article, Toni Foulkes, a Chicago ACORN Leader, said “we have invited Obama to our leadership training sessions to run the session on power every year, and, as a result, many of our newly developing leaders got to know him before he ever ran for office.”

"I can no more disown [Rev. Jeremiah Wright] than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother.” (March 2008) The following month, when it became apparent that America wasn't as enamored as he was with Wright's blatant racism, Obama said he is "outraged" by the comments of his former minister, and is "saddened by the spectacle." He lied!

"I've done more for Israel's security than any President ever".....oooops a LIE as he is the FIRST President ever to demand that Israel go back to their indefensible 1967 borders.

Of course the most egregious instance of a broken promise came when Obama promised he would not raise taxes on the middle class, yet his Obamacare “mandate,“ now ruled a ”tax” by the highest court in the land, results in the the most “massive tax increase in U.S. history” and directly affects the middle class.

Of course the most egregious instance of a broken promise came when Obama promised he would not raise taxes on the middle class, yet his Obamacare “mandate,“ now ruled a ”tax” by the highest court in the land, results in the the most “massive tax increase in U.S. history” and directly affects the middle class.

that's bs and you know it. Quit with the Hannity spew.

Other "misspeaks" by President Obama that were awarded Pinnochios were pertaining to:

Governor Romney’s economic record in Massachusetts; shipping jobs to China or overseas; Gov. Romney being a corporate raider; SEC documents indicate Gov. Romney is a criminal; Bain Capital was implicit in the death of Mr. Soptic's wife.

And then there's this ugly site:

http://obamalies.net/list-of-lies

Yikes.

Romney said that the health care mandate was not a tax. I didn't see you call him a liar.

President Obama has not raised taxes on the middle class. The fee for not having health insurance is not the most massive tax increase in our history. If a republican told the truth about anything I would be totally shocked.

What is truly a lie is the republicans saying that President Obama took the work requirement from welfare. If a governor has a better ideal to get the people working, President Obama has said he would give the governors a chance to put people to work. Even Romney when governor wrote the then President and ask for the very same work requirements to be put in the governors hands.

How about the medicare lie? The big one of the republicans claiming they are going to fix medicare by turning it into a voucher system. The 700 billion in savings, President Obama put back into medicare and extended medicare for 8 years and the republicans want to take that same money and pay for more tax cuts for Romney and his rich friends.

Republicans have voted to take away your voting rights, have voted to take away women's rights to choose about her own body. The republicans want to make women into second class citizens and then lie to you and tell you that is freedom.

The republicans voted to keep the special tax cuts for the corporations that are moving our jobs out of America and then lie to you and tell you how they care about American jobs.

The republicans voted to not create jobs and then lie to you and tell you that they now know how to create jobs.

Romney didn't know how to create jobs when governor and now lies to you and tells you he is now the job creator.

Romney after bragging what a good businessman he is, then lies to you about the reason he can't let you see just what kind of businessman he was with releasing his tax returns. First he can't release them because of the big bad democrats might pick on him,(so manly he is), then he lies he can't release them because of his cult church right to privacy.

Why is it that Romney's tax returns get more privacy that women's vagina's?

VOTE FOR WOMEN'S FREEDOM...VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT 2012

One more thing is interesting about the unemployment rates in the chart I got my figures from. The WORST unemployment rate since the end of World War II was 10.8% in December, 1982. That was almost two whole years into the first term of Saint Ronnie of Reagan as president. I'll bet Repubs would say that must have been Jimmy Carter's fault. Reagan gets a two-year gimme, and Obama gets none. Obama was supposed to wave a magic wand and make everything all better instantaneously on taking office.

This is the chart i referenced:

http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=z1ebjpgk2654c1_&met_y=unemployment_rate&idim=country:US&fdim_y=seasonality:S&dl=en&hl=en&q=unemployment+rate+chart

Why are you "averaging" the Bush years?

Doesn't it make more sense to look at where we were on the day he left office, after his policies had time to "work their magic" on the U.S. economy?

Intellectually dishonest much?

Nope Spartan - to pick a single point in time that seems to support your point of view is intellectually dishonest. Overall job performance should be based on what they did during their administrations.

During most of the Bush years, unemployment was in steady decline, averaging 5%. When the Democrats took over Congress in 2006, the decline was first halted and then reversed. After Obama's failed "stimulus", unemployment rose even more.

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

Let's hear about 2008 when President Obama took office. Was the unemployment 5% then? Were we bleeding millions of jobs with a stock market crash? I do believe that 2008 was still during the bush administration.

What you are forgetting to mention is the deficit. The deficit was climbing the entire bush term. Bush inherited a budget surplus and in 8 years managed to turn it into the largest deficit in our history. Why is it republicans never want to talk about the rest of what bush did during his administration?

What if the democrats took control in 2006, nothing could get by President bush if he didn't want to sign it. So anything that passed and was then signed by bush was bush's responsibility. Just like when the democrats voted to leave Iraq immediately, bush vetoed it.

VOTE FOR EDUCATION...VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT 2012

"Just like when the democrats voted to leave Iraq immediately, bush vetoed it."

Did you know what the Democrats put in that bill?

"The legislation includes over $100 billion in war funding, plus some $20 billion more for domestic items ranging from $1.6 billion for Gulf Coast storm damage relief to $100 million to pay for security at the 2008 Democratic and Republican conventions."

Something like this?

It's intellectually dishonest to not attribute the jobs losses and economic impacts of the first year of President Obama's administration to President Bush. This is because the new administration's economic policies hadn't had time to take effect yet. Here is a graph that shows the curve being established (through 12/2008). bls.gov/opub/ted/2009/jan/wk2/art02.htm

Even Gov. Romney agrees with this thought process as he explained while Gov. of Mass. He directly stated stated that you can't hold a person responsible for the first year of job losses after he is elected. (source: http :// recessappointment.com/2012/07/05/mitt-romney-admits-that-you-cant-blame-obama-for-job-losses/ )

So what? Retirement funds have to invest in one or another of these financial outfits that do the same stuff that Bain does. Under the regulations that the Democrats are trying to get passed against Republican resistance, at least these financial firms won't be able to wreck their pension funds again while the corporate overlords walk away from the mess they made with fat bonuses in tact.

It's not that people want much more, Lyn. People just want their jobs back.

Candice-

It's not that people want much more, Lyn. People just want their jobs back.

Most people never lost their jobs. But a lot more would have if Obama had followed the do-nothing policies of the GOP.

Most people never lost their jobs

Really? Then to whom were we paying up to 99 weeks of unemployment benefits? Was there always 12 million people unemployed?

Or do you mean with 8% unemployment, 92% are still working?????

Candice:

Hate to disagree with you, but on this one I will. Most of the jobs lost were in 2008-2009, mostly under Bush's administration, not Obama's. We stopped losing jobs by the tens of thousands by April, 2009 at the very first start of Obama's administration, and have been steady, not great, increasing jobs since then. I agree, that the job increases are not the great paying jobs, but people are getting off unemployment.

Many of those who lost their jobs were in manufacturing and tech jobs. Guess what, many of those have had to relearn skills or go back to school to get a new career. We probably will not get a lot of those lost jobs back, but, we can retrain, re-school, and encourage those to learn and get a job in another career path.

We just need congress to work together, discuss like we do, compromise, and pass legislation that will help the middle class get those jobs.

Candice:

Your welcome for the other day. I enjoy having a discussion with posters who don't insult one another and have a civil, adult conversation. I do enjoy our discussions, hope to continue through out the coming weeks. Hope you had a great holiday.

Candice-

Or do you mean with 8% unemployment, 92% are still working?????

Uh, yeah. You subtract 8 from 100% and you get 92%. Of course, there are also people who are underemployed, but even so, about 80% of the working population are still fully employed. Maybe the Republicans in Congress can get that down to under 50% if they work real hard at their strategy of defeating Obama no matter how badly it hurts America.

Okay, Houston.

You rally against the 1% and hang out with the happy 79%.

And I'll worry about the 20% still struggling in America. That 20% that President Obama doesn't mention talk about anymore.

And I'll worry about the 20% still struggling in America.

Yeah, I'll bet you lose a lot of sleep worrying about the unemployed. So does Mitt Romney. That' why he wants to ease the suffering by giving more tax cuts to the crazy billionaires who are funding his campaign.

That 20% that President Obama doesn't mention talk about anymore.

Obama browbeat Republicans in Congress into extending unemployment insurance. Contrary to what you claim, Obama has repeatedly spoken about the unemployment problem, but his actions speak louder than words.

Because 99 weeks is not long enough? How about IF employment benifits get extended that person goes to school or a trade school? Doesn't that sound fair? That's almost 2 years of school.

Obama browbeat Republicans in Congress into extending unemployment insurance.

Yes, I remember that. "Why don't you lazy leeches get out and find a job? You just want to suck off of the government teat!" Now it's, "there's no jobs to be found, people are living in the streets, and it's all because of that big old nasty Obama!" Hypocrisy knows no bounds to a rwnj.

JackieK, I agree with you. I also believe that in order to make a serious dent in the unemployment numbers (and increase the middle class) we need to bring manufacturing jobs back to the US. We need to "in shore" and not "off shore" jobs.

That's why I was sincerely disappointed when the "Bring Jobs Home" bill failed cloture. (source: http ://www .govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/s3364 )

He will note how the GOP blew his surplus

If President Clinton talks about "his surplus," he'll need to be careful how he phrases the point. If he doesn't phrase it properly, the fact checkers will have a field day.

The fact is there was never a surplus. There was a projected surplus. There was a projected surplus that never materialized.

Candice:

How can you state such an obvious LIE? We had a surplus for THREE STRAIGHT YEARS (1999, 2000, and 2001). At one point, the actual yearly surplus was about 200 billion dollars. Nice try. I know it's hard for the reality challenged, but W. screwed up a perfectly good budget and a perfectly good economy while needlessly getting killed 4500 American soldiers and 300,000 Iraqis! The theft of the 2000 election was a national tragedy, from which we may never fully recover. Go smoke some more crack!

BeyondDEMOCRAT,

Google "Clinton Surplus Myth." There's lots of articles on it. From many different organizations.

The surplus issue depends on whether you are talking about the deficit or the debt. (Not the same thing) The deficit is the difference between annual receipts and annual expenditures. The debt is the cumulative borrowing to cover the annual deficit. There was a surplus rather than a deficit for three straight years which reduced the debt. The surplus, if continued, was projected to eventually pay off the debt. Unfortunately George W. Bush reduced the annual receipts and increased the annual expenditures, thus eliminating the surplus, thus increasing the debt. If one did not come from a background of unlimited funds, one might have realized that reducing the receipts and increasing the spending would have resulted in an unsustainable situation. If we continue to put someone who comes from such a background in charge, thus perpetuating the fallacy that we can continue to spend more than we bring in, eventually the whole system will collapse. Don't tell me about Republicans claiming they will cut spending. We will not get out of this situation by cutting spending without increasing revenue. That is delusional.

Google "Clinton Surplus Myth."

Sure, and i'll bet they aren't just a bit slanted to the right either <rolls eyes>.

Candice-

Those who are pleased with their fat market returns are in fact praising Wall Street, capitalism, cheap labor, high unemployment. Impressive stock portfolios thanks in part to the 12 million yet unemployed.

is this the new Republicon talking point to solve Romney's problem with the stock market's recovery? (Good for average people with 401Ks means bad for Mitt). As I noted above, the unemployment rate is DOWN 1.7% from it's high point of 10% eight months after Obama took office.

Candice:

Nice to talk with you again. I think they are using the stock market because investors are not jittery because of the unemployment numbers, and are investing because of the steady, though not great, job increase for over 26 months straight. I also watch the stock market, due to how my 401k is doing, since the majority of Americans now have these instead of traditional pension plans. Most 401k's are invested in the stock market through mutual funds; and most are what middle America rely on for retirement, including IRA's. Just my thoughts.

For once you are making some sense, Candice. Profits are relatively high, inventories are low, and even the greediest of employers will have to hire more soon. Happy days are here again! And they will hire even if we go back to the CLINTON tax rates. And it is true that the stock market is generally better under Democrats. Reagan is the only Republican President in the last eighty years to have a decent record regarding the stock market. You see, putting money in the pockets of the underclass and the middle class LIFTS ALL BOATS!! The only fly in the ointment is that the current corporate ethos provides support for those obscene CEO and CFO bonuses. ATLAS (instead of shrugging) would like to make 1000 times what the worker on the plant floor makes. And you love that!

Hi, Jackie.

I'm afraid investors are not jittery because of the unemployment numbers because our current state of unemployment seems to be the new normal. We're getting used to conditions because we've been in this so long. It's interesting this past earnings season. The mood of the market has been so apathetic. No one expected much from corporate profits. If companies came in higher - that was great. If companies came in lower - the reports were shrugged off since no one expected much any way. We've been climbing a wall of complacency.

I work in the stock market actually and over the years there's been times of conflict in feelings. I remember in the 80's companies were running lean and mean and we all made lots of money in stocks - but that was because most middle management jobs were cut and plenty of people were out of work. Now stocks are profitable for much the same reason. So should we be happy and wealthier or sort of concerned?

With the sluggish economy, the Fed has kept interest rates near zero and intends to keep rates this low for some time. We should be happy because low rates might spur the housing market, the huge debt we're accumulating is coming to us cheap, and for those who refinance, low rates are great.

But then there's the senior population who supplement their income with the interest from investments. They can't live off insured paper or CD's that pay less than 1%. If they want to stay safe, they take a huge cut in their income. If they want to keep up with rising healthcare costs, utilities and property taxes they have to take on more risk - corporate bonds and dividend stocks. Seniors who don't take fluctuation to their principal very well are forced into investments they're not comfortable with -- ones that might add stress to their lives. I'm convinced Mr. Bernake has no clue how his policies effect seniors.

Over the last three years, I've sent a lot of money out of IRA accounts and 401k rollovers prematurely to people who've lost their jobs and need to raid their retirement accounts just to get by. Some of these folks will never be able to accumulate those retirement funds again. And since they had to pull out, they've missed much of the stock market move. There's a lot of sad stories out there.

In one way it's great 401k and brokerage statements are healthy again for a lot of us. On the other side of it - it's nothing to celebrate.

Candice:

I agree with your post. But, I do want to ask, and several good friends have told me this, the stock market is always volatile. I was encouraged many years ago while setting up my 401k, that while young, I should be in a high risk portfolio, but when the time comes for retiring, I should change to a more balanced portfolio. The reasoning was this, the stock market traditionally has fairly high returns, has it's ups and downs, but that I was investing for the long haul. When closer to retirement, I should be more conservative, and lessen the risk taking. From my understanding, that's what the stock market is all about, risk taking vs. conservative(bonds, CD's, treasury notes). Just wondering...I'm still in the high risk portfolio category.

Jackie,

You've asked a question that has answer that would take up this entire thread!! The answer is it depends. It depends on what your needs are, what you cost of living is, how much you save, what your assets are. I have young clients who save like crazy, don't spend a lot, so they don't have to invest aggressively. I have older clients who haven't accumulated much so they have to be a little more aggressive to catch up.

Generally, the advice you received is correct.

The stock market is volatile and has had traditionally high returns. I remember when we used 8-10% per year for projections. Those days are gone. We use 5-6% now to err on the side of caution. I'm afraid for those depending on pension plans for their future. General Motors, for example, and municipalities (Chicago) are still using 10% return projections. That means they're pushing the limits on expected returns and making promises based on scenarios unlikely to happen. They won't be able to keep those promises and future retirees --- or we, the taxpayers, --- are going to be very disappointed.

Candice & JackieK: It is nice to see intelligent post. Keep it up. I am very glad I followed that advice. ☺

Obama/Biden 2012

Exito - I agree. Great to read!

Candice:

Thanks so much for your response. You've made my night. Nice talking with you again.

Exito - Feel free to join us anytime!

Matthew - I missed the opportunity to respond to a couple of your posts in the past couple of days --- those discussions would have been good! Thank you for your kind words. It's a pleasure bumping into you.

Jackie - Thank you! When you get a chance...you work as an RN in an outpatient surgery center--- Do your doctors, etc. express any concern over any of the changes due to the pending implementation of ACA? I'd be interested in your experience.

Amber:

I feel safer....we are winding down the war in Afghanistan, we have combat troops out of Iraq, and where have you been regarding Obama and Israel and Iran??? Obama has had talks with both Israel and Palestine leaders, and has publicly stated that the U.S. stands behind Israel. Obama has publicly stated that economic sanctions are working, along with the U.N. sanctions, and has the backing of the rest of the world (excluding China and Russia) regarding Iran. He has been using diplomacy, not incendiary language, with the rest of the world. What more do you want?

Threatening Iran with bombs, war, or worse does not make me feel safe. Threatening our enemies is not how to run a country. What exactly is Romney/Ryan going to do to decrease the deficit and increase jobs???? Got any specifics, because I certainly have not heard anything. What exactly will Romney/Ryan do regarding Iran? What exactly will Romney/Ryan do regarding Israel and Palestine.

You bring up valid points however, I have to disagree that sanctions are the best policy, especially with a leader (Ahmadinejad) who has stated publically he wants to destroy Israel and drive it back into the sea. We'll just have to see how good that all works out. So, you actually trust Russia and China?...Aww, good for you. I can see we disagree on how much to trust those around us. Last I heard Obama has been closing down border stations on the southern border and trying to disarm our nukes. Makes me sleep much sounder at night. I especially like that my hard earned savings is soon to be worth nothing when another credit crunch happens. Many economists are on record stating something big is coming in 2013, yet no one in this government wants to do anything about it. I think Bernanke is planing some more QE (money printing, propping up treasuries) and keeping interest rates at low rates. Definitely not a real fix by any means. Regarding Romney, I do know some of the things he stands for and there are a lot of things I don't. I am sure in time he will state his policies and plans more clearly. He probably already has, but he doesn't get the sympathetic media coverage as Obama does. I am sure he will do a more competent job than the man before him, it won't be difficult to improve upon a man who doesn't know how to lead and only knows how to blame others. I do know if Obama is elected again, he will have to start accepting responsibility for his economic policies. Blaming bush and the Republican congress will not wash a second time. Harry Reid and the Democrats have controlled the senate for his entire presidency, so the whole blame thing is just not working for me. Besides, the Republican party does not have much of a spine so how could they possibly block everything? Some democrats have also not been on board with him, so he needs to learn how to work with everyone on both sides of the aisle. Thanks for a respectful discussion, I am done for the night:)

I guess everyone has forgotten that a few months before Bush left the country was sliding into a depression and we were losing jobs at an increasing rate all this while Republicans like McCain were saying the economy was "fundamentally strong". We are now creating jobs (not losing jobs). Romney wants to give money to millionaires and billionaires that don't need it just like Bush. Bush's welfare to the wealthy didn't work and neither will Romney's.

In the fall of 2008, I was unemployed, looking at the housing industry falling apart. No jobs were available anywhere in the housing and related industries. Hundreds of thousands of people were being put out of work each week.

Is America bettter off, YES, WE ARE.

We don't need Myth Romney and Lyin Ryan tryin to destroy America.

I don't want to live in a homophobic, misogynistic, plutocratic theocracy thanks. These two are losers who believe in cults and yet cannot agree on which cult is the right one.

They have no good ideas - Romney is just a sock puppet for the rich. Ryan lies more than any Democrat and is even more clueless. Romney has changed his mind so many times it makes you head spin.

Presumably the only reason you want to vote for him is because he is a white Christian. Racism is still here - you can read it on the right wing blogs

REALLY, CHRIS? We're better off with 10% unemployment than we were with 4% unemployement??? We're better off with small business under attack??? (info that I get from a good friend who IS a Small Business Owner). We're better off that we don't know who the 'Czars' in DC are - friends of Obama's never cleared by the Senate??? We're better off with gasoline $2.00 more a gallon??? We're better off that GOVERNMENT IS ALMOST TWICE AS BIG AS IT WAS JUST OVER 4 YEARS AGO??? We're better off that there is a 'health care' plan in place that will blend politics in with medical decisions between you and your doctor??? (please especially read page 107 of Obama's 'heath care plan'). WE'RE BETTER OFF??? REALLY???

Karen, I feel like there are a bunch of dnc mouthpieces on this site today. They just keep telling us over and over how great everything is and they are hoping we are all dumb enough to believe it. I am just afraid if we keep Obama in office our nation is going to end up bankrupt and in debt, just like the great state of California (AKA, the great liberal utopia). Romney isn't perfect, but he is better than what we have now. Good post:)

Even though Obama has made some missteps here and there, his
policies pretty much saved the country from what could've been a Depression of
epic proportions. Bush's spending on idiotic wars and irresponsible tax cuts
were certainly detrimental to America's capacity to face these events without
dangerously increasing the deficit, and Obama did a few things that were
similarly unwise ( Solyndra, continuing the wars, renewing the Bush tax-cuts,
etc.).

I'm hearing lots of rhetoric but not seeing any substantive
results based on past or current actions. Ryan is another Palin. You won't hear
any "Mama Grizzly" or "you betcha" talk but you'll get tons
of skewed figures on how privatizing the world is going to allow you to reap
tons of benefits that haven't materialized in the past and resulted in the
American people paying dearly to socialize the 1%er's. Ryan is against
"entitlements" yet his record has been to maintain entitlements for
Wall Street, Corporations, big oil, and of course Congress!

What do the Teapublicans and Romney want? They want a
hand-out from you, the middle class and working poor. They have had over a
decade of unpaid wars, a decade of tax cuts for the rich, a meltdown of our
economy because of deregulation of Wall Street. And they want YOU to sacrifice
Social Security and Medicare to pay for their mismanagement. They tell you
Social Security and Medicare is "free stuff" but it is not -- YOU pay
into these trust fund programs.

Why in the hell would you take a cut in programs you've paid
for so that the GOP/Romney can increase spending on defense, can increase tax
cuts for the rich, can continue with corporate welfare -- In other words get
their "free stuff" and YOU have to pay for it?

If America wants to get its economy back on track, it needs
to have a strong domestic market where people spend their money with
confidence, rather than hoarding it. If businesses stop selling their products
and services because people with the means to buy them are too scared to spend,
then you can only expect the economy to go on a downward spiral. And this idea
that the unemployed, by getting 300$ per week in unemployment benefits they no
longer have an incentive to work, at best only reflects how little the rich
understand of how it is to be poor, and at worst it reflects how the rich would
behave if they were in the same circumstance.

Stop being fooled. Throw out the Teapublican oligarch.
Romney the plutocrat -- He's not in it for you.

Karen - two quik points:

1) Yes we are better off with now with President Obama than with Bush/Cheney took US to brink of 2nd Great Depression:

a. Nearly above ZERO job creation during Bush/Cheney 8 years in White House, last two years they lost 3 MILLION jobs per US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). Last month in office, they broke record for most jobs lost in one month per BLS 756,000, the most since they began keeping records. Unemployment rate when Bush/ Cheney left office approx. 8 % per BLS.

b. Bush/Cheney uncontrolled / unpaid for spending (all passed by GOP Rep. -Paul Ryan & rest of GOP Congressmen - Sr. Drug prescription program which will surpass Social Security as most expensive entitlement program of the future. Bush Tax Cuts for wealthy. Two wars Afghanistan & Iraq (war of choice, Congress & public fed misleading intelligence). Bush took US surplus and ended with nearly $ 6 Trillion of deficits, more than double of an US President in recent history.

c. Financial Collaspe of 2008 occured on his watch. Honestly, Clinton & GOP Sen. Phil Grahmn elimination Glass-Seagull Act helped start the deregulation ball rolling. The horrfic impact of collaspe was $ 14 TRILLION dollars of personal wealth of middle class destroyed (retirement acct., IRA's, pensions) and 16 Million jobs eliminated. Pres. Bush passed TARP, Bush Stimulus and left a horrfic financial situation and zero money to fix-it with and meet US Budget.

2. President Obama

a. Pulled US Economy out of depression, Stimulus (per 9 independent studies) saved/created 3 million jobs.

b. Stabilized & placed US Banking industry on sure footing.

c. Dow Jones (DJIA) & NASDAQ have recorded eleven (11) year HIGHS during Pres. Obama's third year in office.

d. Auto Industry Recovery - govt. forced restructing of auto cos. saved 2 millions jobs, returned them to profit and their are hiring more folks. All US states are financial impacted by auto industry.

d. Affordable Healthcare Act of 2010- insurance companies cannot remove sick people or with pre-existing conditions, preventative & wellness program for all, addition of citizens that did not have coverage, older children covered under parents program & etc., etc., etc. No stupid make believe GOP "death panels". Extends solvency of Medicare.

e. Ended GOP war of choice in Iraq, and winding down Afghanistan War, continue to eliminate terrorist leaders around the war.

f. Brought justice 9yrs, 7 months & 21 days after 9 /11 attack on US. Bin Laden was eliminated by Special Ops. mission ordered by Pres. Barack Obama.

g. Under President Obama we have gone from losing 500,00 jobs a month to 35 months of positive job gains. Much work is let to do to build more American jobs, but our momentum is in forward direction.

i. President Obama has had to deal with GOP Congressmen who have their no. 1 goal of making him a one term President. They hav consistently voted against all his proposals to improve US conditons. The Stimulus Program passed Jan. 29, 2009 passed with ZERO (0) GOP votes, they rather our people / their families suffer, so the can achieve their political goals. GOP & Tea Party placed their party ahead of the good of the United States. That is un-American & criminal.

Yes, we are better off now -Ryan is lying as usual-Thank you for asking.

Yes Karen really.

And truthfully that's not a praise of President Obama's administration, but a serious indictment on the previous administration.

And I seriously fear that a Romney/Ryan administration is going to be like the last Republican administration. To go back to those policies and philosophies, in my opinion, would be a disaster. And strangely that's just what we seem to be discussing. Even though Romney and the Republican Party, as a whole, has all but disavowed any physical relation to President Bush, the policies, which are that of the party, are still haunting me. Why?

So then the question begs, What would be so different between a Bush/Cheney and a Romney/Ryan presidency.