Comments


  • I can't speak for other Unions. I did say that not all Unions are the same...even within Alcoa. Each Local Union has their own way of doing things.
    The Union at Alcoa took many cuts to keep the Company competitive when things started going down. But now, I think they are at the end of what they can agree to and still keep their members.

    November 24, 2009 at 6:03 p.m.

  • suzy thats alcoa what about the teamsters or the UAW. to work at the big 3 you must be a member. sure business donates money and that should be unallowed too. give that money to the shareholders/members and provide a better wage instead of donating millions like both sides do. right now we need it more than they do.

    November 24, 2009 at 5:27 p.m.

  • Holly, you are not forced to join the union and you are not forced to pay dues. It is a choice. Many people do not belong to the union at Alcoa.
    Unions are there to protect it's members rights, even through the political process.
    It's no different that other Companies sending its lobbyists to advance their political agenda, by using money that should be put back into the Company or paid to the stockholders.

    November 23, 2009 at 9:55 p.m.

  • my view of unions is this. the union is good for protecting the rights of its members. but when they force people to join to work in a job or pay dues that supports agendas not their own then the unions loose there usefulness. not everymember joins the union because they want to but must do so to get the job. using due to pay off politicians to get "special treatment" should be illegal. unions are there to protect the worker not buy votes.

    November 23, 2009 at 9:38 p.m.

  • You have a distorted view of most unions. Most unions members know the chain of command and they are grateful for their jobs and don't want to cause a stink. You will have some of those lazy people on every job, but the union, as a whole, is not like that.

    I am not belittling anyone. People go into the armed forces for many reasons and yes, some of them go in for that college education, the sign-up bonuses, the free healthcare, and the steady paycheck, and the traveling that they get to do for free. I did not say that "everyone" goes in for monetary advantage, but more and more are going in for that reason, because they see no other option during this bad economy.
    I could not belittle anyone because that is why most unions members go union...because they want the stability of knowing that they have affordable healthcare, cannot be fired or laid off due to age, or an accident, or sickness. They will do the sorriest, most dangerous jobs, for that security. They want a pension to help them after they are no longer able to work.
    How is that different than why a lot of people go into the armed forces? You see, it is very similar.

    November 23, 2009 at 9 p.m.

  • suzy
    I never have claimed to be better than anyone. I do however take offense to you belittling all our brave men and women who serve by saying they do it for the money. each and everyone of them knew the inherant risks of their service. most have joined even when they knew they would most likely end up in combat. so for the money come on get real. They do not join up for the money! Those who do should stay home if they dont want to fight, after all its the military.. suzy freedom aint free the fighting men and women gave/give each and every one of us the right to speak our mind. The taxpayers had nothing to do with that!!! As far as " more like unions than business" In the military its called a chain of command. orders flow downhill, once ordered you follow that order. there is no debate or strike. if there is, thats called mutiny punishable by up to death. so how does that compare to a union??????

    November 23, 2009 at 8:37 p.m.

  • I was going to let this pass, but dang, I just can't do it.

    Holly and legion, do you realize that the armed forces are run more like a Union than corporate america would run it? I wonder what it would be like if big business was in charge of the army? Oh, that's too depressing to even think about. I'm thinking there would have to be a draft for sure because no one would enlist for just their wages. And, do I hear you both right? Is the government doing something right?

    Holly had this to say....

    ..."So where do you get off preaching they do it for the money. Did you ever serve? I bet not! so when you say thats its for the money think again. most of the people for what ever reason have no problem with being sent over seas its part of the job. those who do should not have joined in the first place. They weren't forced to sign the papers or take the oath.

    You cant't speak for everyone and as the economy tanks, those bonuses, wages, insurance, and other perks sound like the only option for many, if they do not want to go on public aid or live in the streets.

    ....Like i said before every american is required to do 6 years of service its just not enforced. When you enlist then maybe you have the right to complain.

    ...So the men who joined the armed forces did it all by themselves? Wow, they muct be rich to be able to supply their own equipment, or was it the taxpayer that provided it? Hmmm, that would include me, I suppose.

    ...."OOPS people like me gave you that right and protected it with our lives. So next time you whine about it thank everyone who has served for that right, You did not earn it they did.

    sorry, they did not do it themselves. We are all part of the equation, so get off your high horse. You didn't earn the right to decide you are better than everyone else.

    November 23, 2009 at 5:58 p.m.

  • Mike...No, I don't have any affection for corporate America. I used to work for an outfit called Gulf Oil. Remember them? I was gonna retire at 55 from Gulf but T-Bone Pickens and his green mail stopped that idea from happening. It's just sorta one fight at a time and the government is it right now for me. The protesters were hypothetical. I don't think Congress would care WHAT a group of a 100,000 people were protesting -- they would only care if they were contributors. If not, then the representative or senator would only care about the traffic problems.

    I do take exception, however, to your reference to the F-22 as a "port barrel project." We've been here before, you and I. The F-22 is needed as a replacement for the F-15's which are wearing out. They are scheduled to be phased out completely by 2025. If the F-22 isn't to replace them, what is? The F-35 is a strike fighter which is a replacement for the F-16. You can't say the Air Force doesn't get it's money's worth out of it's airplanes. The F-15 was introduced into squadron service in 1976 and the F-16 first flew that year and are somewhat younger. Boeing ceased production of B-52s in 1962. The "H" version is still in service and in combat today. Along with the B-52, the KC-135 and C-130 are all veterans of over 50 years service.

    The taliban doesn't have an air force to tangle with the F-15s and -16s, but the Russians are developing new fighters as are the Chinese. Both are suppliers to countries that don't like us. You tell USAF pilots that they have to use planes that aren't the best we can produce to fight for our country.

    If there's money for bailouts of companies that are "too large to fail" then there should be money to provide our military with the best equipment int the world. Of course, BO doesn't seem to mind that our service men and women come last in line for funding. If inferior equipment costs some of them their lives, well, after all, they were volunteers. It's pathetic.

    November 23, 2009 at 10:47 a.m.

  • We need term limits and maybe an end to gerrymandering - for example this is John Murtha's congressional district. This is not representative government. This is a way to keep people in office - it's just another way of reducing competition.

    http://www.unityparty.us/pennsylvania...

    November 23, 2009 at 9:31 a.m.

  • Waywardwind, I have never adopted a " either or" or "you are with me or against me” philosophy, so you're taking my words out of context because I have never insinuated that I have complete trust in the government.. I have way too many shades of gray..lol.. I can see the evil ways of corporatism and government on equal footing…. You have a single enemy (government) but I give equal blame to the corporations and how they have scaled back on pay, benefits, and jobs to the middle class. I think you take that as being on the side of government.

    I have written numerous posts complaining about lobbyists and campaign reform but that is like Congress and the corporate polluters policing themselves….

    I don't know what protesters you are talking about but if it's about the recent Tea Parties, I think those people lose their credibility when they continue to be economically illiterate, have no knowledge of history, use the platform for personal grievances, and most of all they are financed by lobbyists, advertised by a single network, and their leaders are not credible. If the protests were grassroots organizations with solutions or ideas; then they would be taking more seriously.

    I don't know if Congress is any different now than what it used to be because "sweeteners” and “pork” have always been around as well as lobbyist’s money. The F- 22 project and the military-industrial complex that you favor; it just another government pork barrel project.

    November 23, 2009 at 9:27 a.m.

  • This comment was removed by the user.

    November 23, 2009 at 9:23 a.m.

  • Mike have you been to a tea party? The one i was at was not a group of right wingers in fact there were as many independants and dems there as republicans. I think if you did a survey at one you would find out that most of the people there are just plain fed up with govt. ignorance of public will.

    November 22, 2009 at 8:02 p.m.

  • TERM LIMITS is the answer in the house at least. we need professional politicians in the senate. Our founding fathers set up a 2 house system to ensure the people of the house did not vote themselves every benefit they wanted without The educated and wise "senators" to keep this in check. The senate was to be a checks and balances on the house. With that said they need to be answerable to the people to keep their seat. all those lifetimers in government have forgot this one true fact WE THE PEOPLE not we the politicians run this country

    November 22, 2009 at 7:28 p.m.

  • You said a mouth full wayward wind. They want to push this crap on us but will not have to be part of it. They serve 2 yrs and get paid a retirement for the rest of their lives with the best health care our money can buy. They really have our best interests in mind. Make them take the same health care they want to give us is what i say.

    November 22, 2009 at 7:12 p.m.

  • Mike...I'd like to think you're right, but you have more faith in the government than I. Congress listens to those who contribute six figures to their re-election war chests. They don't listen to the Mikes, Waywards, Bubbleheads, Suzys or Hollys of the country. It'd be nice if they did, but they don't; at least in my experience they don't. They'd look out their office window overlooking the National Mall, see 100,000 people with protest signs and ask their aids how many of those people protesting are contributors. When they're told that very few contribute more than a hundred bucks each, the congressman will shrug and complain that the traffic jams the protesters caused will make him late for dinner. They just don't care about the ordinary citizens any more. Yeah, I'm a cynic and that's why I don't trust'em with the policies they're voting on in these times. I don't trust them with heath care because they won't participate. I don't trust them with Social Security reform because they don't participate. I don't trust them with economic stimulus packages because the only benefit contributors. The American government is far too corrupt to be rescued, I fear. Congress critters have forgotten the idea of public service -- serve in the Congress for a few years and return home and let fresh blood have a go. No, they have voted themselves too many perks for them to want to give them up and have become career congress critters and the country is suffering because of it.

    November 22, 2009 at 7:07 p.m.

  • I can see it now

    sgt to pvt, go see whats out there and report back.

    pvt to sgt, Sgt thats not in my job discription send the poor,underprivledged, minority to do it.

    November 22, 2009 at 6:59 p.m.

  • ROF LOL

    unions in the military!!! lol we would be like france a third rate nation with no backbone at all. One of the european countries tried that back in the eighty's could not get them to cut their hair, train like they should or even get them to show up when on duty!!! unions in the military thats too funny!!!

    November 22, 2009 at 6:54 p.m.

  • SSShhhhh Legion, don't give them (liberals)any more ideas!

    November 22, 2009 at 6:53 p.m.

  • Well said Holly.

    VBB, after thinking about it, a unionized military should fit right into the democratic party platform, you know form the bottom up.

    The Pilots union branch will strike... if they don't get to fly the latest and greatest fighter or bomber plane.

    The Navy branch will refuse to deploy on any ship that is over 10 years old.

    Not a single one of the Marine or Army infantry units will deploy unless they have the "solider of tomorrow" technology.

    Not one single military person that sets in a command center for the nuclear arsenal, will be there unless they get a X-box 360, 4 days off a week,a gourmet chef to cook, or gold plated bathroom fixtures.

    LOL

    November 22, 2009 at 6:44 p.m.

  • SUZY

    when we had a draft all the left wing eliteist's kids went to canada instead of doing their duty. so preach about the poor and underprivledged while your liberal buddies run to dodge the draft. We sure need more of your type in this country!!! want all the perks and none of the work to keep them.

    November 22, 2009 at 6:34 p.m.

  • suzy

    sure there are a lot of people who join for the bonuses. But lets be real here. The job description list defending our country as the main duty. They are joining the military not the boy scouts! They know the risks up front. I did when i joined. I did not do it for the money ($700.00 a month) when i joined. That included all the add ins. So where do you get off preaching they do it for the money. Did you ever serve? I bet not! so when you say thats its for the money think again. most of the people for what ever reason have no problem with being sent over seas its part of the job. those who do should not have joined in the first place. They weren't forced to sign the papers or take the oath. Like i said before every american is required to do 6 years of service its just not enforced. When you enlist then maybe you have the right to complain. OOPS people like me gave you that right and protected it with our lives. So next time you whine about it thank everyone who has served for that right, You did not earn it they did.

    November 22, 2009 at 6:26 p.m.

  • "Apparently, minorities, students, unemployed, immigrants, are being targeted because of their economic distress during this bad economy."

    The same thing was said about the draft, so in 1969 President Nixon change it to a lottery format based on birth dates, but NOOOOOO, some how that was still slanted against minorities and the poor, (oops economical disadvantaged.)

    November 22, 2009 at 6:11 p.m.

  • Good grief...

    Rewind to the 60's, the draft, Kent state,military industrial complex, cost, corruption...

    Same old McGovern/Democratic talking points. Some things never change. Suzy, yourself and Mike have brought up 3 out of the 4 lately, and you rag on independents and conservatives, accusing them of using Fox News / Rush Limbaugh talking points.

    IMO, you two, by yourselves, have drug the most outrageous late 60's democratic party talking points ever made out of past history, tried to polish them up, and present them as something new.

    November 22, 2009 at 6:06 p.m.

  • Wow...that Mary Murtha is a bit**....."hialrious" & "pathetic", she can suck it & find another country to call home if she can't find anything nice to say about the men & women who join our military. Also, she had more typos in that 1 article than the ViCad does on the whole front page!

    Actually the military is a good place for those trying to escape poverty, crime & ignorance. Whatever the reasons, I am grateful they volunteered.

    November 22, 2009 at 5:01 p.m.

  • There was a draft & people dodged anyway...college & marriage were also get out of war free cards or at least they were delayed.

    LOL legion...unionized military...toooooo funny!

    November 22, 2009 at 4:51 p.m.

  • What is worse about it? Let me count the ways. Apparently, minorities, students, unemployed, immigrants, are being targeted because of their economic distress during this bad economy. You know, those who don't make a difference to those higher up, so they could care less what they are going through, or how long, or often, their tours are, or even if they get killed or not. For those making the decisions, this war seems a world away.
    Fact: If there was a draft and no one was off limites, then you would see a whole different attitude about this war.

    November 22, 2009 at 4:22 p.m.

  • What is "worse" about it?

    That most join for the financial benefits?

    That is a decision each and every one of enlistees made, the old risk/reward thing.

    From your previous posts, I am fairly certain that you would like to see two different changes(#1., I can't disagree with.)

    1. Higher pay for every service member in the armed forces.

    2. To propose a constitutional amendment that allows enlisted personal to form a union, and negotiate a collective bargaining agreement that both find reasonable, if not to go on strike.

    Boy #2. Would really work great huh? President Obama," I request that X number of troops be sent to xyz country."

    Secretary of Defense," Sir that will require a new collective bargaining agreement with the Armed Forces Union, because of added duties required, before we can deploy X amount of troops to country xyz."


    November 22, 2009 at 3:31 p.m.

  • There's stories like these all over the net. Here's 2 as to why certain people enlist. It's worse than I thought.

    http://co.mcc.org/us/co/stories/milit...

    http://ezinearticles.com/?10-Extraord...

    November 22, 2009 at 2:54 p.m.

  • seems to me that Holly didn't even begin to know how to answer my question (or didn't want to), so she went on offense.

    I'll ask again, what percentages, Holly?

    November 22, 2009 at 10:10 a.m.

  • seems to me both mike and suzy are both dreamers and 1960's throwbacks. The freelove hippy movement they both preach here is what the government controlled by Pelosi stands for. This is not what main street stands for. as far as mike being a little left of center. LOL who's center not mine or most of america. They both preach the 20% or so left wingers agenda. 60% of americans are true moderates with 20% left wingers and 20 % right wingers. Lets hope neither extreme wins out in the end.

    November 22, 2009 at 9:27 a.m.

  • 5/26/1940 In 1940, as Hitler's armies marched across the face of Europe, President Roosevelt faced the formidable task of persuading a nation wedded to a policy of isolation and pacificism that events in Europe warranted American attention and, possibly, American aid.

    And now we want to isolate our self's, again, stick our heads in the sand and pretend it will never effect us like it did on 9/11?

    November 21, 2009 at 6:26 p.m.

  • I can't speak for Mike, but IMO if a draft was reinstated, the administration would think a little harder about jumping into war, and/or would be winding this one down sooner, rather than later. the public would demand it.

    November 21, 2009 at 6:26 p.m.

  • Besides Mikes points about the media which sound alot like Dave McNeelys op-ed piece in the paper today...

    Are you both advocating that if a draft in the US happened to be reinstated, that the US would never go to war again? That is unless it was a "just war"?

    Or perhaps that congress and the administration would think a little longer about going to war?

    Or that the majority of service men/ women only joined for the financial benefits?

    November 21, 2009 at 5:57 p.m.

  • Holly, what do you think the percentage is for people who join for strictly patriotic reasons? What do you think the percentage is for those who join for monetary gain?
    What do you think the percentage is for those "talked into it and were promised the moon and the stars" when they are in HS and then later regretted their decisions?

    I think the patriotic reasons are probably lagging the other 2, but I have no way of finding this out.

    I know people who enlisted for all the different reasons from the above reasons.

    November 21, 2009 at 5:24 p.m.

  • wayward,it's not really optimism it is based on todays,24/7 media coverage and showing an endless loop of the protesters and violence on the campuses...Don't under estimate the power of the media and the mentality of today..... I take you back to the 1970s, if the senate had 60 Democrats, do you think the old Dems would be begging for one, maybe two votes, just to get a bill on the floor?... Better yet do you think we would ever have given coverage to government death panels or FEMA concentration camps?

    The politicians of today are bought and paid for and they are scared of their own shadows.e.g. Senator Mary Landrieu will now let the health-care reform bill go the floor for debate because Harry Reid put in an extra $100 million for those states that have recently been devastated by a storm(Katrina) and Ben Nelson of Nebraska got the anti-trust provision stricken from the bill, Joe Lieberman will probably be given a waiver to be a wild catter, and heavens knows what Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas wants....Bring back the old Senators of principles that skipped the formalities of being principled and just called the pork for what it is," entitlements" or "bribes"..lol

    November 21, 2009 at 2:10 p.m.

  • Thanks, Mike..."I imagine polls, 300,000 people marching on Washington, and student demonstrations would come into play…. I recall Kent State."

    You know, I remember Kent State, too. I remember the thousands who protested and the massive demonstrations, the ones who burned their draft cards and the ones who went to Canada. I would have hoped that the history of Vietnam would have given the government pause -- that they would have learned that a traditional army has little hope of winning a guerilla war in which the population of the country either is activly against you or at best not supportive of the change you hope to bring. I would have hoped the history of Russia in Afghanistan would have given further pause to the government that a traditional army's chances of winning against religious fanatics in a god-forsaken hell-hole like Afghanistan approaches zero. It didn't happen. Our government decided that fighting in Afghanistan was a good thing to do. I don't share your optimism that the government would pay any more attention to protests today than it did in the sixties and seventies when the public lost all hope of any kind of honorable conclusion in Vietnam. In the end, it was a useless war with 60,000 dead for no good reason. Now, the death rate in Afghanistan is much lower than in Vietnam, but the hope of an honorable conclusion is just as dim.

    November 21, 2009 at 1:49 p.m.

  • suzy

    why do you ignore the fact that a good percentage of our youth still enlist in the services because of the call to duty and the patriotism they feel for this country. The same call to duty that people feel when they become police officers or fire-fighters. Its not for the money believe me who would be a cop for what they're paid. You sell true americans short for answering the call to duty!

    November 21, 2009 at 1:12 p.m.

  • I agree with Mike about the draft. People aren't as concerned with soldiers that "chose" to sign up. It was their choice.
    Although, most of the poeple that join the army now are people that don't have a job, or need the money or college credits. They are the ones that go for monetary gain of some sort. Lots of them want the large bonuses, so they enlist because they have no other way to support their families. Is that considered a poor man's army?
    Now, if young men from every walk of life were forced to go, then that would be taking people against their will to go die. Influential people's children would be drafted, and you would hear such an uproar, the government would be forced to end the war.

    November 21, 2009 at 12:15 p.m.

  • draft or not Every american is subject to military service thats a requirement of being a citizen of this great country. maybe we should be more like isreal in this fact and require everyone be trained to a basic level that way they at least would understand what it means to serve in the military and know what it means to be a member of the armed forces. Then maybe the politicians would think twice before jumping into all these wars

    November 21, 2009 at 11:39 a.m.

  • Waywardwind

    A draft would not have kept us from invading Afghanistan because it was the right thing to do, it was a CIA led invasion along with about 300 Special Forces with a mission to knock down the terrorist camps and capture Bin Laden… We had the support of the world, the resources, and we drove out the Taliban and al Qaeda with the help of Afghanistan’s own Northern alliance.. That was a no-brainer….Now, if we had a draft today, how many young people would support a president that sent them to an unpopular war?

    You ask why a draft would have kept us from invading Iraq….. When responsible people have to have complete buy-in for their decisions (such as their own children, grandchildren, constituent's children, and friends children participating) they tend to have a bipartisan view of the facts.. I imagine polls, 300,000 people marching on Washington, and student demonstrations would come into play…. I recall Kent State.

    I am not for a draft unless we are going to be involved in constant war… I'm going to repeat this for the umpteenth time, we only have one half of 1% ,that are directly involved, that includes the family and friends….. It is just my opinion, I understand the military does not want a draft and it is very unpopular…. I remember Charlie Rangel bringing up a bill to reinstate the draft, just to prove a point. I think it got two votes and Charlie was not one of them.

    It's like you always say, if the politicians were spending their own money, they would be more frugal.

    November 21, 2009 at 10:45 a.m.

  • Mike..."I really don't think we would've been in Iraq or Afghanistan if we would have had a draft, perhaps more senators would have looked at the data that was in direct conflict with the one that we used to invade Iraq…. They would've done their homework; Democrats and Republicans……No need for a rush to war; be deliberate and have an exit plan."

    I agree that there was no need for a rush to war and there should be an exit strategy. My question -- please note that it's a question, not an attack -- is why do you think a draft would have kept us from invading Iraq and Afghanistan? Why do you think Congress would have been more questioning if the military contained many draftees instead of all volunteers? I'm missing the logic here and would appreciate your enlightenment.

    November 20, 2009 at 7:49 p.m.

  • Victore
    I'm trying to stay away from topics such as this but I opened door as I mentioned Fox News..One more time.

    I could ask you why the right is so threatened by the mainstream media… Evidently you don't know that is cable news where Fox is king but network news like ABC, NBC, and CBS beat Fox day in and day out…Network news is free and is viewed by more people.

    You are very typical of someone who asks me a question and expect a filtered answer to your liking or else it is a left wing talking point...That's cool because I am not afraid to give my opinion,as I have said before ,I know the environment.

    I just watch the local news but I don't watch CNN, FOX, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, and CBS for news…I watch MSNBC for their political coverage, because it is the stable of their coverage. ..Fox gets their high ratings because conservatives like to have their ears tickled and they will not tolerate an opposing view, they all flock to one outlet…Fox News got its start as an alternative to the so-called mainstream media…. I don't have an issue with that. Fair and balance is just a slogan, people do not like the old boring news format anymore, they like it to be filtered geared to their point of view…

    The ratings for Fox News did not transcend into votes, so they did not influence… That's what counts, the ballot box.

    November 19, 2009 at 5:19 p.m.

  • Mike,

    I’m going ask you a question; why does the Left fell so threaten by Fox? You know from a televised point of view rest of the media has Fox out numbered 2-1. I just don’t understand where you get off on all of your rhetoric about Fox. Is it because of their high ratings or maybe it’s because their fair and balanced, they do take up both side of the issues. So how about an honest answer and please no left wing talking points.

    Have good evening, I’m going for beers at the CC.

    November 19, 2009 at 4:49 p.m.

  • just to let mike know before I get slammed for my view on the wars in the middle east. I did my time in the military (army) and was willing to go where ever they sent me to defend this country. I fully support our troops and wish President Obama would do the same. This delay on making up his mind is unexceptable. He is playing politics with our young men and women's lives. this is just plain wrong!!!!

    November 19, 2009 at 4:42 p.m.

  • as i have stated in this and other blogs about the war in afganistan we need to have troop levels high enough to surround the regions that our enemys are in and wipe them out. then get our troops back home the day we stopped taking ground when we fight wars (korea, viet nam and every where else since then) was the day we stopped winning wars. War is evil but when attacked like 9-11 we need to fight. The goal then should be to win and win quickly. civilians will always be in harms way but then again thats part of war. sure i don't want us to kill indescriminatly but the sooner its over the less civilians will die.

    November 19, 2009 at 4:23 p.m.

  • ex stop spying on americans yes, terrorists in this country no. the war on drugs has been futile and a waste of money. foreign aid should be based on need not politics. by that i mean our need not theirs. as far as pulling out of iraq and afganistan its to late for that now but if we are gonna have to be there then lets do it right and win quickly. Isreal can fend for its self with a little help from us as long as we control irans desire to get the bomb. we don't want isreal attacking iran that would cause more problems than it solves. we just need to pull our funding from the un for a year or two and it would fall back in line. Let china pick up the tab for the un for a while.

    November 19, 2009 at 4:07 p.m.

  • the only policy our government should have right now is to freeze spending. Cut waste and abuse and pork barrel spending (no more pet projects and earmarks) and institute a tax to pay off the debt (sale tax because its the only fair tax) until the debts paid off no more spending beyond our means period!!!!

    November 19, 2009 at 3:43 p.m.

  • Mike the interest on the national debt would pay for all the health care we need. eliminate that and we would all have free health care!!! The real problem in washington is both sides want to be right. neither are! Time to throw all the bumbs out and start over with true moderate americans in charge. We also need to adhear to the constitution on wars. If we want to fight one then declare war and fight to win period.

    November 19, 2009 at 3:29 p.m.

  • Rollingstone
    Before you start calling me a liar or mocking my source..I found it in a matter of seconds.

    According to information compiled by the U.S. Army for The Washington Independent about the deployment status of active-duty and National Guard Army brigades, as of December 2009, there will be about 50,600 active-duty soldiers, serving in 14 combat brigades, and as many as 24,000 National Guard soldiers available for deployment. All other soldiers and National Guardsmen will either be deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan already or ineligible to deploy while they rest from a previous deployment.

    http://washingtonindependent.com/6817...

    November 19, 2009 at 3:24 p.m.

  • darkvslight
    Good luck with that..:-)

    November 19, 2009 at 3:18 p.m.

  • Rollingstone
    That was my normal response; your doctorate in medicine has failed you once again.

    Spencer Ackermann told Rachel Maddow that he spoke to the Defense Department yesterday, and they gave him be 50.600 available forces number… He went on to say that this is a same number that was available to President Bush at the time of the” Surge.”… Remember thanks to Senator Jim Webb’s legislation allowed them to be at home for two years before they can be redeployed.

    November 19, 2009 at 3:17 p.m.

  • The only thing the "not so federal" Federal reserve banking cartel has been effective at is robbing all of us blind. The FED must be abolished

    November 19, 2009 at 3:13 p.m.

  • Geeezee Mikey, calm down - take a pill or whatever. You say we have only 50,600 active duty military personnel. What I have been able to obtain we have about 1.5 million active duty personnel. About 50% of these are army and marine. In addition there are about 850 thousand in the reserves and natioanl guard.

    So without getting hysterical where did you get your numbers???

    November 19, 2009 at 3:07 p.m.

  • That is why I was reluctant to get into the subject with you... You're trying to do my thinking for me…

    The Fed is accountable to Congress (the people) they are audited on a yearly basis but in order to be successful it must operate under a veil of secrecy…IMO.. Last I heard Congress does not print money, they approve of budgets, and monetary policies. Congress has operated in the red (except for three years of the Clinton/GOP years) for many, many, years and the debt is so far out of sight ,that he will not be paid in my life time…. I do not worry about things I cannot control; it keeps the blood pressure down.

    November 19, 2009 at 3:05 p.m.

  • Mike there are politicians who's children are in the military. Most of them are republicans. as far as a draft thats a joke because all the liberals will go to canada like viet nam. the majority of the housing crash is due to sub-prime loans pushed by barney frank in his give the poor houses bills he has pushed through congress. (the banks new would default thats why they sold them on the stock market) I do agree with you on the point that bush borrowed and spent but he was no consevative by any means. the only true way to get the economy back on track is to quit spending money and pay off the enormous debt. adding trillions to it will not help at all in fact it will make it worse. And before you call me a right wing nut job I am one of the independants you talk about. I don't like the far right anymore than the far left. Its time the government lives by the rule if you don't have it you can't spend it. I can't believe you would favor spending 1.3 - 12 trillion dollars (depending on which side you listen too) on health care that we don't have. as far as beck being a right winger go back to the bush years he was bashing him as well. Its high time fiscal responsibility was returned to the federal government. Pay off the debt baby pay off the debt baby should be the policy.

    November 19, 2009 at 3:01 p.m.

  • If you are so pro-Muslim and pro-Obama move to Saudi or egypt, people are sick of this trash that's coming from washington and the a real change is on it's way, & quit moaning about the scripture and it's supposed violent overtures, Where were you when the Muslim terrorist struck in Fort Hood, Why didn't you whine and cry about his violent act. Obama is a idiot and his defenders are even worse, just admit we are being led into intentional chaos by this communist ,anti-American, muslim idiot!

    November 19, 2009 at 2:56 p.m.

  • Rollingstone

    I suspected all along that you are just repeating the Glenn Beck, Andy Stern boogieman line.. I won’t give you that satisfaction… So predictable, when you are weak on the subject go back to what you are comfortable with… Sarcasm, sound bites and hate radio rhetoric.

    I did not say that I wanted to re institute the draft but I'm re-emphasizes the need to take into consideration the stress these troops and their families are going through. I'm also point out the fact that conservatives like to point out the cost of Health Care Reform legislation and how it is adding to the debt but they are silent when it comes to endless wars.

    I really don't think we would've been in Iraq or Afghanistan if we would have had a draft, perhaps more senators would have looked at the data that was in direct conflict with the one that we used to invade Iraq…. They would've done their homework; Democrats and Republicans……No need for a rush to war; be deliberate and have an exit plan.

    November 19, 2009 at 2:54 p.m.

  • So, you are ok with the fact that a group of people, not accountable to the people of this country, with absolutely no oversight, manufacture what we call money with a printing press,worthless paper at the time of printing, loan it to our government treasury, we work for it and give it value, give our labor(money) to our government through taxes, and they in turn pay it back to the FED with interest? and this is ok with you when congress has the power to print money with no interest?

    November 19, 2009 at 2:49 p.m.

  • Yes I do, it has been effective since 1913 in every industrial nation in the world has a central bank to control its monetary policy. Again we are not going to replace the Federal Reserve so it is a complete waste of time talking about it…. We can make improvements but it cannot be under the transparency of the loose lips Congress because it would inhibit the way they gather information. Foreign countries would be reluctant to give the Fed honest information it needs… If Congress could come up with some kind of gang of 10, like we do for our sensitive military data, then I would not oppose an extra layer of audits.

    I can hear the death panels and all the fear mongering if we to allow all 535 members to audit the Fed.

    If your question is, do I believe in the laissez-faire philosophy…. Absolutely, unequivocally, not.

    November 19, 2009 at 2:35 p.m.

  • Mike if you and Obama want to reinstitute the draft by all means be my guest. As far as being out of Afghanistan in a New York minute that will remain to be seen.

    Afghanistan is a very difficult place to maintain a large body of troops, but it looks like that is what we are going to try and do.

    And as far as taxes being raised, rest assured I have no doubt about that except the revenue won't be used for the war, it will be used for new entitlements - butter instead of guns.

    And oh yeah do you have something against Obama's BFF - Andy Stern?

    November 19, 2009 at 2:34 p.m.

  • Mike,
    Do you support the Federal Reserve Act? If so why?

    November 19, 2009 at 2:18 p.m.

  • Rollingstone

    As usual you didn't answer the questions, just some babble about Vietnam, Stern & Avery.

    These young men and women are going through tremendous pressure and serving two to five tours to the battlefield. If this war is that important, shouldn’t we all have buy-in? Shouldn't we have a way to pay for it? Those are the two questions. I believe that if the politician's sons daughters and grandchildren were subject to the draft, we would be out of Iraq and Afghanistan in a New York minute and every college campus would be demonstrating.

    It does not matter how you want to engage the enemy, General McCrystal has said he would use a counterinsurgency strategy of winning the hearts and minds, instead of indiscriminate bombing. A spokesman for the Defense Department and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has already said that we do not want to remain in Afghanistan, and our only mission is to keep Afghanistan from being a haven for terrorist camps. That will take building schools restoring the utilities, and training the police and military forces. Of course there will be limited engagements but we already know the enemy resides in Pakistan, our ally.

    November 19, 2009 at 2:11 p.m.

  • darkvslight
    It is quite easy to say that the free market would have sorted it out but by all accounts we would have been in deep depression with very high unemployment numbers if President Bush had not signed the $700 billion bailout. That is a bipartisan opinion of many economists. The only way to test that theory of yours was to let everything fail; we did not do that so you cannot prove or disprove your theory with any certainty.

    I do not want to have a discussion on global warming(climate change) the fallibility of the Fed because really at the end of the day, the Federal Reserve will still be here and we will continue to look for alternative fuels for our future needs.

    I am quite happy with the administration we have now and I have the patience to see this stimulus through (it might not work) and the voters will let them know it…… It took us more than 10 months to get into this financial situation and frankly I don't see any anyone out there that could do a better job… All administrations will make mistakes, when employing over 5,000 people some will have to be fired for being corrupt, and some policies will have to be canned due to the political atmosphere or just being bad policy.

    Thanks for your input.

    November 19, 2009 at 2:06 p.m.

  • This comment was removed by the user.

    November 19, 2009 at 1:48 p.m.

  • The free market did not socialise anything. Our government did. Let them fail and the free market will sort them out. The democrats and the republicans have been ruining this country for the last 100 years. The Republicans introduced legislation to repeal the Glass Steagal act and Bill Clinton signed it into law.
    As far as this fraudulent climate change carbon tax goes. There is no scientific consensus that man kind is causing climate change.
    Factually, all the fossil fuels that are in the ground right now will eventually be spewed into the atmosphere by volcanoes through the process of plate tectonics at some point. Burn it now or not, it will be burned later. Unless, we gather up all of the fossil fuels and start launching them into outer space it is unavoidable. That is a fact.
    The change Obama talked about while he was campaigning is not the change we are getting. Everything Obama campaigned on has turned out to be a lie or was misrepresented on the campaign trail. That is another fact.
    Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Another fact.
    The Federal Reserve banking Cartel is a fraud and has been robbing this population through the inflation tax since its inception. That is another fact. How much more power do you wish to bestow on the crooks running this government now? I love this Republic yet can't stand the Imperalism. Lets fix it... Vote the crooks out and get some people that aren't corrupt and have some common sense in office. I would rather have "drill baby drill" than "spend baby spend" in office any day.

    November 19, 2009 at 1:48 p.m.

  • "Don't you think it would be fiscally responsible to have a “war tax “or a draft, if we are to want to continue going to war? It does increase the deficit and the debt."

    The draft is a page from the Vietnam War playbook. It was the reason for much of the opposition to the war, just ask Andy Stern and Bill Avery.

    The Afghan War has many similarities to the Vietnam War - an administration dissatisfied with a corrupt government and a confusing and uncertain reason for fighting the war. But the thing I find most alarming is that we give the enemy the right to choose the battlefield and influence our strategy and tactics, just like Vietnam.

    All I see is just another war of attrition against an enemy who cares little about their own losses. We need to use our most effective weapon - precision bombing. It was developed just for this kind of war. I think we know where the enemy is holding up - bomb them, yes we will kill some innocents, but that doesn't seem to concern them when they set off their car bombs.

    Secondly we need allies that are willing to really help us - this is not just our fight. And please don't tell me this is Bush's fault I just had lunch.

    November 19, 2009 at 1:26 p.m.

  • Oh,I know the current free market likes to privatize their gains and socialize their losses and put the blame elsewhere...

    November 19, 2009 at 1:13 p.m.

  • Victore
    I know you think the far right wing is at the top because you are a member but facts are just facts...I already know the mentality of "if it ain't right-wing then it just liberal propaganda."...lol

    I know the BBC is probably in Obama's pocket but here are the results with a short enclosed paragraph.

    Senator John McCain maintained his lead among older voters and evangelicals, but his lead among men evaporated.

    The figures from the National Election exit poll, based on interviews with voters at polling stations around the country, show that Mr Obama succeeded in mobilizing his key supporters.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/u...

    November 19, 2009 at 1:10 p.m.

  • Mike, I know you will try to blame Wall Street for the financial crisis to the cows comes home but to ignore the government interference in the free market is just disingenuous

    November 19, 2009 at 1:01 p.m.

  • The voting bracket that voted for Obama was the 20 to 64 years...McCain/Palin got the 65+,in fact that is the only demographic they won...Obama also won the college educated..Look at the electoral map,after the last election the GOP became a southern regional party.

    November 19, 2009 at 12:48 p.m.

  • Mike,

    I understand you’re left of center, which is why you post your rhetoric against the right. The left wing Democratic Party has their on definition of free speech just like the right.

    I did make a statement; I read all of your left wing propaganda. But you continue to quote the left wing media, which is staged for the left so you left wingers will continue to watch their liberal agenda. I respect the fact you believe everything the Democratic Party has to say. The right is wrong the left is right.

    Sorry, I really didn’t want to get into anything with you, because you’re away to far left me.

    Why is it I can’t find anyone in our age bracket that voted for Obama? I have traveled a lot in the last few months. It must be this 21-29 year old generation X, that is totally brain dead.

    Later

    November 19, 2009 at 12:43 p.m.

  • Rollingstone
    I guess you know that some will be going on their fifth tour in Afghanistan or Iraq since the year 2002…. Don't you think it would be fiscally responsible to have a “war tax “or a draft, if we are to want to continue going to war? It does increase the deficit and the debt.

    Americans are split on whether or not the president should follow the recommendations of commanders in Afghanistan and send more troops to the country. Thirty-two percent want a troop increase, a five-point decrease from last month. Thirty-nine percent, meanwhile, was troops levels decreased. Another 20 percent want troop levels kept where they are.

    Thirty-six percent say adding troops will make the situation in Iraq better, while 22 percent say doing so will make things worse. Thirty-one percent say adding troops will have no impact.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/11/...

    November 19, 2009 at 12:40 p.m.

  • Rollingstone
    That's what turns people off on conservatives and conservatism…No accountability. They simply say well if the policies the president put in place did not work, then it was not conservative enough.. An ideology is not infallible.

    I know you will try to blame the government for the financial crisis to the cows comes home but to ignore the credit default swaps and the other schemes in the free market is just disingenuous.

    I am glad the president is being deliberate with his decision because we only have 50,600 active-duty troops, right now, sending those people back in without an exit plan is not leadership. We only have 24,000 National Guard available..General McCrystal is only responsible for the Afghanistan theater not the worldwide situation. Then again, only one half of 1% will do the actual fighting, so it relatively easy to just want to go to war without an alternative. We had eight years of stomach now it is time for intelligence and reasoning.

    November 19, 2009 at 12:28 p.m.

  • Finally, Mike, you have come up with a percentage upon which we can agree. The only problem is you have it backward -- you are probably RIGHT about 20% of the time. Your postings demonstrate an abysmal ignorance of both history and economics, compounded by a Liberal/Progressive/Socialist/Communist mindset that is unable to recognize any fact that does not agree with your distorted world view. I rarely post any comments to your diatribes because correcting your many falsehoods would require more time than I am willing to commit, knowing that commenting to a wall would probably be as productive.

    November 19, 2009 at 12:15 p.m.

  • This recession was not caused by conservative policies. Bush was not a fiscal conservative, he cut taxes but he did nothing to restrain spending.

    This recession was caused by the collapse of a huge housing bubble enabled by government policy. The result of easy money and a policy to make housing "affordable." The liberals in Congress deserve a large share of the blame.

    But they are continuing on the same track as if nothing has happen. The government has taken over the home mortgage business. In 2009, ninety nine percent of the mortgages were government backed. Many of the loans are subprime loans and many are at or near default.

    Now the Democrats are going to make healthcare "affordable" - no one should hold their breath.

    And finally I have a bad feeling about Obama running a war. He does not have the stomach for it. Delaying a decision or not making a decision is really a decision to hand over the initiative. War is about shooting, bombing and killing, it is about cruelty and it can't be refined. And if he can't handle that we should get out now and not later.

    November 19, 2009 at noon

  • itisi
    It should not be a secret that my politics are left center and I belong to the Democratic Party. My avatar is a donkey, so that should tell you I am not ashamed of that. Yes I am trying to persuade my viewpoint (talking point) doesn't everyone?

    I was not talking about your personal portfolio…. You said we should have given the money to the taxpayers as a stimulant… If you analyze financial data it would stand to reason that you will look at the savings rate of consumers; if they’re saving they're not spending. That same data would have would have told you that consumers started saving after the 2008 financial meltdown, so it wouldn't make any sense to target any stimulus package to people that would have hoarded it.

    I didn’t blame the GOP for borrowing and spending; it’s a matter of fact.

    The Fed is independent of the federal government (one who prints money) but if you're making a point of history making federal budgets, deficit and debts, then you would be correct… Of course you would not factor in the fact that the previous administration left a deficit and the worst recession since the Great Depression. I failed to mention that we now have two ongoing wars (now on budget) rising health care costs that were ignored, a crumbling infrastructure that was ignored, and just maybe we will tackle alternative fuels that was ignored…We still have those entitlements that need reform.

    Many people are squeamish when it comes to dealing with China but I'm not one of them because since they have about $1 trillion of our debt;it is in their best interest that we succeed.

    November 19, 2009 at 11:27 a.m.

  • Victore
    I will not give in to an argument over your right wing ideology either but your answers are in the blog itself, if you would just read rather than just make a statement.

    You posted “I will remind you we live in a democracy and entitled to free speech” in my second paragraph I posted " if the message was to extend to Psalm 109.9 of “let his children be fatherless; and his wife a widow” then it becomes a call from violence, although it is protected free speech.”… It is not uncommon for one to know the definition of free speech.

    It is my opinion that John Kennedy or Ronald Reagan reincarnated could not get the confidence of the American people at this time, since unemployment is at 10% with no indication it will get lower in the next two years. Jobs are being lost along with benefits, high insurance costs are getting higher, and so unless those problems get resolved in the private sector, a president can’t do much about the poll numbers. You may think you know someone or that an ideology could straighten out this financial mess overnight but I don’t have such illusions.

    You certainly are not an independent but those idependents were the fiscal republicans that are not compfortable with the high deficits and debt…They left the GOP... Those problems are not permanent and if Healthcare Reform pans out and the American people get portability and cannot be turned down for preexisting conditions, the independents will come back because they voted for this president in the last election so they aren't totally out of sync with him…. This continues to be a multicultural country and opinions vary, so don't let this snapshot fool you. Things have a way of changing.

    November 19, 2009 at 10:39 a.m.

  • Mike that is fine, I accept the fact you rally around the standard democratic talking points.

    As far as my financial knowledge, I have done pretty well with the market, I watch it every day.

    You blame the GOP for borrow and spending; the Democratic Party is making history with out of controlled spending… Your party says don’t worry; we can just print more if we need it… As far as China goes, we have played right into there hands.

    November 19, 2009 at 10:22 a.m.

  • I use Glenn Beck, Joe McCarthy as a metaphor that is interchangeable with Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Mark Levin, and others that use name-calling, hate, labels, and hyperbole to divide rather than have substantive debate.

    I believe there are always two sides to any argument but in this county I am left with very little choices. I have said many times in the past that I am probably wrong 20% of the time but my posts is just an attempt to show my opponent that there is another side...I have failed time and time agin. I joined this forum over four years ago in awe of how ideas and arguments were exchanged. I remember logging in just to learn something, afraid to post something because I didn't have the knowledge of those posters.. About two and half years ago, I had a lone mission of just correcting the myths, such as chain e-mails and undocumented talking points….. Old-timers will remember that we're not allowed to use a long cut-and-paste and we pretty much had to source our post or the forum police would embarrass us…Today, that would be a fruitless full time job with overtime…Certainly not worth my time.

    November 19, 2009 at 10:01 a.m.

  • Coolgranny
    I wouldn't call it research but I have read about carbon-capture and sequestration, but the economics are enormous. The technology has been around for decades, in areas like the Permian Basin in west Texas. The carbon dioxide, injected into the ground, helps to get at the oil that cannot be extracted by easier methods. I remember reading about a plant that pumps about 3 million Tons of CO2 into Ground. The CO2 can be sold for commercial products.

    I believe T. Boone Pickens has the right idea of putting 18 wheelers on LNG in the immediate future because we have an abundance of the fuel(well he does) and it does have a place at the table of ideas of alternative energy… It does have is transportability problems. I believe the world will go to electric cars because countries like Israel and Denmark are already making battery change out stations.. California working on a smart system that will allow electric cars to give back electricity, and they're working on interchangeable batteries.

    November 19, 2009 at 9:36 a.m.

  • Hmmmm, Andy Sterns, Mark Lloyd, Vallerie Jarret, Bill Avery, Cass Sunstein, Anita Dunn, Rev Wright, Van Jones - these people are not just liberals.

    And by the way Mike Joe McCarthy is not my hero. He accused people of being communists who weren't. I'm not accusing anyone of that, I don't have to, they freely admit, in fact they brag about it.

    November 19, 2009 at 9:18 a.m.

  • Itisi
    To worship: to love unquestioningly and uncritically or to excess; venerate as an idol… according to a new Quinnipiac poll 74% of Americans like this president but only 47% agree with his policies…. You fall into the 26% that do not like the president and you t think anyone that does falls into the category of worshiping.

    The crash of September 2008(that’s 2008) was not because of government spending; the world crisis was due to Wall Street's speculative schemes. The policies the previous administration implemented had to be seen through.

    You obviously do not keep up with financial data on a day to day basis because in hindsight if we would have given this stimulus money to the taxpayers, we would not have seen any of the results needed to revive the economy…. Prior to the meltdown Americans were saving at a rate lower than 1%, by February of 2009 that savings rate wrote rose to 7%..Another wards people would have hoarded the money.

    Did you complain when Bush and all the other presidents used Air Force One? In fact I did not see anyone complain when the previous administration conducted two wars (off budget) passed a prescription drug bill (not paid for) and cut taxes to the wealthy..A classis formula for failure.

    BTW we have $14 trillion economy …See how much defense spending and the entitlements come to and you will see that your ideal does not have much merit.

    One more thing; if China knew our government was going just cut spending without trying to revive the private sector (too big to fail) they would not have invested or loaned us any money.

    The GOP :borrow and spend.

    The Clinton admistration left the Bush Administration a surplus (I know all the talking points) but Obama inherited a deficit.

    November 19, 2009 at 9:17 a.m.

  • Hey Mike,
    I just wanted to make a few comments, and I will leave at that. I’m not going to get into any kind of argument over your ideology of the left wing democratic party.

    You have continued to criticize posters calling them Glenn Beck’s and Fox News supporters. I will remind you we live in a democracy and entitled to free speech. Maybe you believe that certain types of free speech should be suppressed with in the scope of your ideology. I don’t know the answer to that. But you can’t write a blog without slamming Fox News and all the programs within that media network.

    President Obama has made some miserable mistakes when he first took office and has continued some of those mistakes, by pandering to the nut jobs on the far left.

    If the President wants the confidence of the American people he should have put the government in-check first, instead of signing these enormous budgets, which would have given him a platform to get the economy going again.

    President Obama knew what he was in for when he took office and I’m basing this theory that his advisors or economist knew the economy was on a downward spiral, if they are as smart as you say. But the President put his agenda as a priority, which will cost the American taxpayer a lot of money during this falling economy. In my opinion that was very poor leadership on his part. He toke the American people for granted and thought he could get his agenda through this democratic controlled congress without any problems, but it has backfired on him, he may not get his healthcare or cap & trade at all. I think the President and his policies are so misaligned, that is one of the main reasons for the loss of confidence in the American people mainly the independent voters that are moving more to the center even to the right.

    Have a great day

    November 19, 2009 at 9:04 a.m.

  • Ex I have no problem with helping the needy and thats why i donate to our local charities. but having the government tax me and give it to people who will not work ticks me off.

    November 19, 2009 at 9 a.m.

  • EX I have never been a tax and spend liberal thats why i left and yes i am a D@#$ yankee because i will never go back to a tax and spend liberal state like NY or CA

    November 19, 2009 at 8:38 a.m.

  • another case in point my brother (still in ny) is moving out of that state as well his property taxes went up again this year to over 400 a month on a 140,000 house his taxes are as much as his mortgage. New yorks answer to everything is to raise taxes. Do we want that here as well.

    November 19, 2009 at 8:24 a.m.

  • You want jobs in this country then stop taxing the crap out of the companies that are still here. I left new york state 18 years ago because of the taxes. buffalo ny was at one time the steel and auto industries main area in that region until ny state (dem controlled at that time and still is) taxed them so much they left or went out of business. Its time they (democrates) quit taxing our industrial base into poverty so they can afford to build stuff here again. Handing control of crysler to the unions in the bail out is like giving the hen house to the fox!!!! SEIU has been to the white house so often they might as well move in!!!!! lower the tax rate on business and start building stuff in this country again is the way to get people back to work here. The dems cry about all the jobs going over seas well high taxes and high union wages caused that!!!!

    November 19, 2009 at 8:02 a.m.

  • I think you need to research coal fuel. Technology has turned it into a cleaner fuel. Natural gas is everywhere. LNG could become the new gasoline someday.

    November 19, 2009 at 7:49 a.m.

  • Ok Mike,

    This goofy President that you voted for and worship… When he took office he should have put a hiring freeze on the federal government along with all government budgets. Veto any spending bills from congress. Stimulus should have gone straight to the American public, not laden with pork and pet projects of the U.S. Congress. No bail-outs for the big three auto makers, only solid financial institutions (BANKS) that’s all. Then he should have parked that $6,000.00 an hour Boeing 747, instead of flying his butt around the world apologizing for America. But hell no this President has decided that he has a blank check book and it’s in the red… Must I go on, common sense that is what this radical left wing administration does not have… You can not borrow and spend your way out of this recession it’s plan and simple…

    November 18, 2009 at 10:23 p.m.

  • Always an interesting blog. I will once again remind everyone that there used to be a company called Skytop Brewster out across from the airport. I worked there until the "deregulation" president, Ronald Reagan, deregulated the oil industry and let everyone shut down the oil drilling in the US and get cheaper oil from the Saudis. It's a stretch to say environmentalist stopped the oil drilling here. Nuclear plants have to be federally funded because they're too expensive--I went to a meeting with the rep of the proposed nuclear plant and it all sounded great, but it's definitely very expensive for the taxpayor. I'm not sure about the $98 billion on energy parts. Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer is trying to stop allowing the windmills to be made in China, but they're financing the $1.5 billion project. I'm waiting for someone to scream "protectionist" at him, but I think Americans are tired of letting our jobs go to countries that don't let our products be sold in their countries. Capitalism without regulation has left us where we are today.

    November 18, 2009 at 8:34 p.m.

  • Poor Glenn Beck...the man is blamed for so much good and so much bad that has never come out of his mouth. But he is a brilliant man --people just don't like to be told their fly has been open all day and in church too.

    November 18, 2009 at 6:52 p.m.

  • Odd how when some one expresses an opposite view Beck gets the credit for it. My commentary is not from Beck.

    1. The 98 Billion dollar expense on energy parts --some of it is going to the new Texas wind farm. So our state and company contribute to what I consider criminal acts with my tax money.

    3. Not a talking point. FBI has released a report last week regarding the missing documents and computers from the Louisiana office. There are documented videos of Obama promising both ACORN and SEIU the moon and total protection and financial support of his regime. These are not Beck's talking points --these are the words of the horse himself.

    5. Again, when at a loss for words blame on Glenn Beck? These are my thoughts and words as an American and Texan. California can't even pay for the fuel they get from Texas --yet we are suppose to "give" it to them. The same state that does not want oil wells cramping their view. Texas regretably is part of the 50 states where many do not contribute their fair share but have their hand out or steal when you are not looking.

    A great example of squirrels running the nut house --the decision to try the gitmo men in NY. And the Attorney General is guaranteeing that they WILL be found guilty. If not, he won't let them out in the general populous. And then maybe he would consider backtracking for a military trial. Can everyone say HUH? We need brains not squirrels.

    November 18, 2009 at 6:50 p.m.

  • itisi
    Not to repeat a known economic factor but we all should all know that unemployment is a lagging indicator. That does not give any comfort to those that are under employed or unemployed.It is said that unemployment will still be at 10% in 2012 for various reasons..Have any ideas how to reduce them?

    We will be in a depression in 18 months? Are you quoting an economist or Glenn Beck?

    It is well known that Republican and Democrat economist thought that we needed a stimulus package,the target and the amount was only thing different.

    November 18, 2009 at 4:55 p.m.

  • blue_marble
    1. If in fact they spent $98 billion outside the United States, then that was wrong.
    2. As I told you before, the high unemployment numbers, and if the Health Care Reform bill is seen to be too costly and too much of a government controlled legislation the conservative Democrats will lose seats but conservatives are for the escalation of troops to Afghanistan… The Liberal Democrats are in safe seats.

    3. I believe this is just undocumented talking points…
    4. You must've forgotten about the secret energy meetings Cheney held…Czars have always been part of administrations… For the first time in history they (Obama Administration) released the White House visitors log.. After domestic spying, signing statements, Scooter Libby, torture policies, and the Patriot Act, you have the audacity to say this is a secretive regime..lol
    5. Just another of Glenn Beck right-wing talking points.

    As I said before, the Sarah Palin/Tea Party wing of the Republican Party that holds these views will not influence the moderate Independent voter because they don't represent any more than about 20% of the electorate.

    Texas is part of the 50 states,they all contribute.

    November 18, 2009 at 4:46 p.m.

  • LOL, the President and his advisors along with some of he’s best economist. They haven’t got it right yet…

    In 18 months we will be in a depression… There is no sign of the unemployment coming down…

    November 18, 2009 at 4:31 p.m.

  • They blame the 2006 congressional winners but they didn't take office until mid-January of 2007... They did not have complete control until Jan. 20,2009.

    I just heard that Sarah Palin was teasingly suggesting a Palin/Beck ticket... I can only wish.

    November 18, 2009 at 4:28 p.m.

  • I agree there has been a great tossed salad made here. I too am tired of the ongoing bemoaning and tirade against conservatives and now a little fearmongering today.

    I would like to ask why this brand new regime allowed money from the incentives for power be spent on parts and equipment from companies OUTSIDE the United States? What is it--to the tune of $98 Billion. The pigs at the trough did not even keep the money inside our borders.

    2. The reason the obamanation is not speaking about making a war decision is that he won't make one until the medical bill passes. He does not want to cause any democrats to loose seats.

    3. Why has the SEIU who Obama swore would be in his regime for years to come --destroyed and hid records in Louisiana --seems they have learned the same practices as Chicago.

    4. In this past year, this regime has done more behind closed doors, illegal agreements, creation of czars that are not under our scrutiny, and worse the nancy gang --all of the pork that is being promised for votes --how could we be proud of this type of America? How can you use fear saying we could loose it? We have spent our grand children's grand childrens lives and further on all this greed.

    5. And still explain to me why the obamination is personal friends with those who wrote and still believe in the destruction of democracy and our current type of economy? Why does he still hang out with people who believe in bombing and killing Americans if they disagree with them? And now he is showing favortism for the man who shot and killed fourteen souls in Fort Hood. Why? Why is he showing favortism for Muslim protection?

    There has been a lot happen this year. A lot of it is an ungodly smear on who and what America is suppose to be. I just don't understand. This is not what I was taught as a child about honor, ethics, truth, and justice. I don't think it thrives very well in our congress or whitehouse.

    Why do we even debate that we need fuels? They are necessary. I am tired of other states sucking fuel out of Texas and not doing anything for themselves--greedy little pigs. It is also tiresome to keep hearing what people do not want --give it up, quit being selfish --we need to build, and do what ever we need to do not to be dependent on other countries. As my grandmother would say quit being cantankerous.

    November 18, 2009 at 4:27 p.m.

  • This comment was removed by the user.

    November 18, 2009 at 4:25 p.m.

  • Itisi
    First you make a definite statement saying " I know you seem to think we’re all stupid, but we’re not.” I don't know who you are a spokesman for, are you representing the Victoria Advocate Forum or conservatives in general? I assume I am a normal blogger that type their thoughts without any assumption about reader's intelligence or lack thereof. I don't have the training, motive, or ego to evaluate one's intelligence. In some cases it doesn't take any special tools to know when one does not have any knowledge about the subject they are writing about.

    Second, the president and his advisers, backed by most economists, passed a large stimulus package to keep this economy from going over the cliff… It is not certain whether it was the Bush administration initial bail out of the banks or where there it was some of the moves the Obama administration made that revived the economy for now.

    He bought the election? Lol… Can you elaborate?

    You tell me to stop blaming conservatives for everything but they do a lot of chest thumping and blaming others for their mistakes. Victoria County is Glenn Beck- Rush Limbaugh country; I am not under any illusions that my words will have any effect.

    November 18, 2009 at 4:18 p.m.

  • The sad part is that all of you that are blaming Nancy, the congress since 2006, and all things liberal, think that if you get those people out of office, it is going to magically fix itself. Nope, we will go back to (or remain at) what we had at the end of Bush's terms.

    No one fixed what is ailing this country. No one is allowing anyone to even try for fear that they will lose the next elections. Wall Street, the too-big-to-fail institutions, healthcare, big oil, unfair business practices, disparity between classes. It's not fixed, so it will not change. It will just get worse until there are 2 classes left...slaves and slave owners. We are returning to the confederacy in a way.
    All that has happened since the Reagan years (and maybe before) was a push to strip money and property from the lower and middle classes. Heck, Bush II even wanted to allow his buddies to take control of SS, by privatizing it and putting it into the market. Can you just picture what would have been lost if that would have happened? It boggles my mind to even think that someone that was elected President twice would be that stupid.
    No one wants government to have anykind of control over our lives. I do not want corporate america to own me. I trust the govermnent a whole lote more than I trust corporate america.

    November 18, 2009 at 4:12 p.m.

  • You have certainly said a mouth full here. You type at your keyboard and blame Fox along with all other conservative arms. You speak of fear, if there is anyone to blame it is the U.S. Congress. Based on the summary of your writings, I think you can safely say, maybe the American people are getting a little tired of big government intrusions to our every day lives.

    You have blame Bush for the erosion of the economy, which is not entirely correct. The U.S. Congress has played a large part in the demise of this economy, with a large number being Democrats from the Clinton years.

    Then we have a new President that has a vision but not one ding blue print to go with it. He bought this election, he wanted the job and he has it. You can not change the American culture as we know it over night.

    This economy is oil based and has been since the early 1900’s… We must have oil even to go green, every product you buy is oil based…

    I know you seem to think we’re all stupid, but we’re not…

    This President went into office passed one of the largest budgets in the history of this country. He and congress has been on a spending spree that has brought this country to its knees. The government can not continue to spend on this current path. You can’t rob Peter to pay Paul.

    Mike, stop blaming the conservatives for everything, if you’re going to preach about it get it right…

    November 18, 2009 at 3:46 p.m.

  • I am not a big fan of the George Bush administration but I think history will treat him kind for his role in the initial bailout of the banks. The ex-president recently apologized for that move but I continue to think it was the right move that kept us out of a deep depression.

    The cash for clunkers was actually a cash cow and a stimulant for a short period but in the long run it didn't have a big impact.

    Numbers 3-7 might have made right wing fundamentalist a little angry but they are not a large group of the electorate that will influence the independents or the next election.

    At this point I don't think John Kennedy or Ronald Reagan reincarnated would be very popular with these high unemployment numbers. It is what it is and no whining is necessary. I think the fact that corrective measures have not been incorporated yet, such as remedy is for "too big to fail” and the large stimulus bill did not provide the jobs that were promised….

    "It’s the economy stupid"
    James Carville

    November 18, 2009 at 2:57 p.m.

  • Well, I wouldn't think it had anything to do with...
    1. The Bank Bailout scams of giving our money to the failure makers (Bank CEO's)
    2. The auto industry bailout (cash for clunkers) only to find out that those that bought a car would have to pay 3,500 extra tax.
    3. The socialization of healthcare...
    4. Gay Rights agenda...
    5. The multiple tax cheats in the administration...
    6. Foreign policy of apologizing for every event the US has been forced into since our birth...
    7. The muslim apology party for allowing the highjackers to die on 9/11...

    get real...Obama's slip and the dem's slip would have nothing to do with any of this...it just the FoxNews crew and the tea bagging rightwinger terrorist...that's all

    November 18, 2009 at 2:33 p.m.

  • Mike where do you live? I'm from texas and every time they have tried to build a new refinery here its been stopped by lawsuits. same goes for nuclear power plants here in texas. If they would have started building more plants in the 70's we would not need to burn coal and oil to produce electricty. The new low yield nuclear plants do not produce the amount of wastes that the old ones did. The navy has been using this technology safely for decades. Plus these reactors are so much smaller that they could be built much faster than the old ones not the 10 years you claim. Clean coal technology is much cleaner than the old coal plants. I do agree with you on this issue though something needs to be done to get away from oil as the main source of powering our economic future but renewables just are not there yet. The almost trillion doller stimulas package should have been spent to solve this problem not the way it was spent. All this aside reducing the national debt would be the best way to stimulate the economy and spending trillions more is not the answer. The health care plan is way to big and is trying to fix the problem without taking the time to do it in a way that truely solves all the problems. Tort reform,waste and fraud, insurance reform, and costs that outpace inflation many time over. We only have one chance at getting it right so lets all work together and put together a bill that truely fixes this mess.

    November 18, 2009 at 2:23 p.m.

  • holly1
    This is my last rebuttal because I promised myself after election I would not engage in these mindless arguments.

    You really need to get off the talking points such as taking three months to make up his mind on the general’s recommendation..That is just right-wing babble… Anyone who has kept with the Iraq war knows it took Bush administration losing the 2006 election before he replaced Rumsfeld and his ” stay the course. “Policy… The civilian authorities have the final say on war and war should be deliberated, especially since only one half of 1% of this country's population will actually do the fighting.

    You might want backbone for a qualification but I want intelligence..We had eight years of gut feeling, that's how we attacked a country that had nothing to do with 9/11.

    You have a good day and I will not respond to any more of your posts because it is evident to me that you are clueless on domestic and foreign affairs… You're welcome to post I will not delete.

    November 18, 2009 at 2:14 p.m.

  • The only sane voice i've heard lately is Glenn Beck he is the only one out there saying we need to stop spending money like water and start paying off our huge national debt. The interest alone is killing the economy. The current government is spending money at a rate that will double the debt in 2 years. And blaming the last president for all this spending. wake up President Obama and Nancy Pelosi are in charge now not the republicans so how can it still be their fault. They have controlled congress since 2006 not the republicans. And oh yeah lets not forget the law Barney Frank push through congress that lead to the housing crash.

    November 18, 2009 at 2:02 p.m.

  • holly1
    Nuclear power plants take about 10 years to build, have a slow return on investment, have not figured out a way to dispose their waste, so the good people of Nevada have told them to go elsewhere, but their biggest hindrance: Wall Street does not want to invest in them because they are expensive and it takes too long for Wall Street to recoup their money. Financing? Do you want the government to finance a free market enterprise, so they can privatize the gains and socialize the losses?

    Refineries (at peak demand) have always operated at 95% capacity but the companies don't really want to build oil refineries because they're happy with status quo, higher prices. Oil refineries are expensive, dangerous, and it's much cheaper to use Middle East oil now, since our military will guard the shipping lanes and refineries in a roundabout way.

    Hampered the repairing of the infrastructure? Lol… The gasoline tax supplies the money for the repairs for the bridge that collapsed in Minnesota and other places, under the Bush administration. Enabling and being a blind loyalist does not help the Republican Party but many prominent Republicans have come forward and said they needed this time out, to regroup and mend their ways.

    “Raising power costs by as much as 100%”, Where to get that from? WorldNetDaily…lol

    Cap-and-Trade legislation is pretty much dead this year and the next.

    November 18, 2009 at 2:01 p.m.

  • our fearless leader is bowing to every world leader and kissing rings. He has taken 3 months to make up his mind on the recommendations of the general he put in place. Now he says it will be another month before he makes his mind up. I say what mind! All it proves is how little he knows about foreign affairs and How unprepaired he is to be the leader of the free world. When is he gonna stop campaigning for re-election in 2012 and start leading. all he has done is make wonderful speeches and nothing else. Like him or not at least G.W.Bush had a backbone.

    November 18, 2009 at 1:52 p.m.

  • well I see the liberal spin is in full force here. Lets get a few facts straight here. the liberal eco-nutjobs have stopped us from building nuclear power plants since the 70's. they wont let us drill for oil anywhere in the coastal waters or alaska. they have protested building new refineries so we haven't been able to build one in 30 yrs. they have hampered us building any major infrastucture ie highways, power transmission lines, port facilities, airports and now they want to put cap and trade into effect that will sure help the economy out by raising power costs by as much as 100% depending on which figures you use. yep that sure helps the USA out alot. Oh and lets not forget all the global warming propaganda that they spew forth. to top it all off almost a trillion dollars spent to stimulate the economy thats had no effect at all and the 3 to 12 trillion dollar obama care plan. yes we have a great future ahead under their watch.

    November 18, 2009 at 1:37 p.m.

  • President Obama Did not have to retain the Fed chairman.

    OAK BLUFFS, Mass. -- Praising him as the man who shepherded the United States past the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, President Obama on Tuesday announced plans to keep Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke in his job for another term.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/...

    November 18, 2009 at 12:56 p.m.

  • Allow me to reinstate… I do not want coal and oil to be our major source of energy….The electric grid is over a hundred years old and it will not sustain our needs for much longer; in its current state.

    The president surrounds himself with economic advisers that dictate the direction the country is going in, and then appoint or retain a Treasury Secretary and a Fed Chairman to tweak the money flow. They control the interest rates, enforce legislation needed to police the financial markets, so the president has a pretty large role but in a global economy he/she has very little impact on how things eventually pan out. The tax policies, domestic and foreign policies that the president and his administration favor have a lot to do with our economy…. I think legislation that the president signs or vetoes cannot be minimized…. A tax cut targeted to the top 1% or 2% (trickle-down) that does not work can have a huge impact on our economy or one that is heavily invested in entitlements. The way a president handles these domestic situations cannot be minimized...IMO

    November 18, 2009 at 12:43 p.m.

  • And you know Mike I'm all for that, but, you know that it's not going to happen that way. There are just to many things and people that are dependent on it. But alot of the oil companies have to be permited to drill in certain areas and thats where the goverment steps in. It would creat jobs, lower our dependancy on foreign oil and lower the cost overall.

    November 18, 2009 at 12:17 p.m.

  • JR74
    I want to get off fossil fuels,period...Administrations do not drill;oil companies do.

    These oil fields do not produce right away and not all refineries are at full capacity when there's a demand.

    Money would much be better spent on nuclear or other alternative fuels, but petroleum will always be around since we have other uses for it.

    November 18, 2009 at 11:55 a.m.

  • But in alot better shape than we are in with Nancy and her congress. She's alot of the problem. And as far as oil drilling goes....Read the last blog I posted. There is enough oil under 3 states to keep us going easily till 2041.....3 states...and that's not to mention what was found under the Rockies. But the current administration won't drill....why? At least Bush 2.0 tried to open it up, not refuse to and stay dependant on foreign oil. Why pay $107 a barrell for foreign oil when I can be drilled in the U.S. and only cost $16 a barrell.

    http://www.victoriaadvocate.com/weblo...

    November 18, 2009 at 11:46 a.m.