• CTrain7
    Government..The only difference between GOP and the Democrats is the slice of the pie and where it goes….Republicans want government when they want to ban gay-marriage or flag burning.
    You seem to twist words to suit your liking..:) I never said tax cuts were a bad thing…This is what I have been saying for several years…The Bush tax cuts of 2001 & 2003 were geared to the top 2% ,in hopes it would somehow trickle down..It did not, the rich got richer, firms kept wages staganent, benefits were being slashed, and companies were outsourcing the jobs overseas. The middle call was being squeezed, so I said let this round of tax cuts target the middle-class.
    Show me a poll that bears out the 75%..I know you can’t because this president remains popular and the voters soundly rejected the policies of the last eight years…Republicans were unseated all across this nation…We passed that socialism label a long time ago, with Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare…Those are just talking points.
    Thanks for commenting, never give up, and continue to keep it civil.

    March 12, 2009 at 3:15 p.m.

  • Government, government, government?  Why do you Democrats expect "solutions" from the government. 
    No I am not a Ron Paul supporter, but thanks for the laugh.  He does have very good ideas in theory, but yes our country would criumble because the handouts would end.  The American people must take this country back.  As long as we look to government to solve our problems we will continue to have problems.  I am as middle class as middle class gets, and I did not get left behind.  Please explain o me why tax cuts are a bad thing.  For the rich or not, tax cuts do not hurt anyone of us.  Obviously there are two different schools of thought that will never mesh.  I truly believe whole heartedly that the majority of Americans, maybe 75% or more, think that electing this bunch of yahoos was a great mistake.  I think it just played out much earlier than anyone would have ever expected.  Socialism has arrived and it is getting bad.

    March 12, 2009 at 12:47 p.m.

  • Hello Ctrain7
    As I was reading your post, I just knew it was written by a Ron Paulite. Why? All the labels were used, without any real solution. That’s why he only had 42 delegates, and his own party did not support him.
    1) Kennedy, 1960s, and Reagan is living in the past; let’s move forward..That is coming from someone 63 years old…We have not seen a steep worldwide recession such as this. That’s why I am not surprised we don’t have a single answer.
    2) Right-wing borrow and spend shifted the pendulum to the wealthy (tax cuts for the rich) and left the middle-class behind…Trickle down does not work..Look at the difference between CEO pay and worker pay since the republicans took office.
    According to all the polls; people trust democrats over republicans, when it comes to economic issues, by over 30 points…..The last elections bore that out.
    Arianna Huffington of the Huffington Post pegged this economy with a quote: Donald Rumsfeld famously claimed: "There are known knowns. There are known unknowns.

    March 10, 2009 at 12:54 p.m.

  • Whether this is a conscience move towards socialism or an uncionscience stummble in that direction........... it is what it is.  We are in a fine mess, as the American public, politicians, and many Washington insiders have immediately lost faith in any ray of "HOPE" Mr. Obama promised.  Do I lay this blame completely at his feet, maybe not all, but the Democratic party is driving this train to socialism, and its holding the American people hostage.  It doesn't take a political genius to figure out that the Democratic party is nowhere near what it used to be.   Kenedy's administration would be considered conservative Republicans compared to todays Democrats.
    I think a majority of the American public would agree that we have to stop this madness.  We obviously need to abandon the spending and let time and the American people work through this.  Congressman Paul may be exactly right.  It lookslike we are going to have to let people fail, in order for the pendalum to swing back in the right direction.

    March 10, 2009 at 12:08 p.m.

  • Hello JD
    This not exactly apples and oranges; nor is it a tit for tat.
    Democrats were complaining of fighting two wars; while cutting taxes for the wealthy and Bush continued to borrow and spend. Obama included the war costs in his budget ‘unlike Bush, who used off budget emergency supplements to finance both wars.
    Obama inherited a huge deficit and most economist believe we have a demand problem because of an abundance of supply….The stimulus package throws cash out there to try and jump start a failing economy…The worse it is; the money it takes . This meltdown did not happen overnight, so it is disingenuous to think it will be fixed in 50 days.
    Inaction is not the answer.
    BTW all this spending is scaring me too ,so if it does not work then they should be thrown out of office.

    March 10, 2009 at 10:16 a.m.

  • Bush spent something like $700 billion over eight years and was deemed by the democrats to be irresponsible for doing so. Yet, Obama has spent nearly $2 trillion in his first two months and these same democrats don't see a problem with it.  Come on. Throwing more and more money (that we don't have) at the problem is not the answer. The dollar is simply being devalued and this will haunt us for decades or longer. I have come to the conclusion that the Obama administration doesn't really know how to fix this mess, but they feel the need to do something, so they do what democrats have always done, tax and spend and create short-term government jobs.

    March 10, 2009 at 9:23 a.m.

  • Agree Bighorn,not a big shock but if you go to today's Advocate Viewpoints B4 Joseph E. Spiglitz (2001 Nobel prize winner in economics) describes my position much better that I could ever hope to.
    One of these days you will realize ,we are the government (we the people) and we are not the enemy.
    No this is not the only way we got here but that's for the after we get out of this mess we are in.

    March 10, 2009 at 9:11 a.m.

  • Big shock, Mike that you think the federal government should spend money it doesn't have, and will take decades to even come close to paying off. Weren't you the same one who constantly ridiculed Bush for breaking our backs with deficit spending. Bush whizzed away major coins on a war of his morality, while allowing Congress to have their way with a domestic runaway budget.
    Isn't that how we got here?
    Bush's Bank Bailout=Dow Down 2,000 points.
    Obamas's Bailout=Dow Down 2,000 points and counting.
    And the answer is to piss move away in government spending and destroy private wealth? More insanity, anyone?

    March 9, 2009 at 10:52 p.m.