• It was a sad day when a mans word and a hand shake stopped being all that was needed to conduct business. We did not need 2,000 page bills until that happened.

    July 22, 2010 at 9:50 p.m.

  • born2be

    Maybe instead of writing 2,000 page bills to cover all the bases we need a massive reform in the legal system and major tort reform.

    We have become a country of sue happy people with out much personal responceability, who file law suits for spilling hot coffee on ourselves. Coffee is supposed to be hot DUH

    July 22, 2010 at 9:40 p.m.

  • Cap and trade???

    This is a bad way to handle a big problem. We do need a greener energy policy but a tax on carbon is just a goofy way to do it. I would think a better way to drag the US into a greener country would be to reward those who cut emmisions with a tax break ( read as allowed to write off all expenses incured to switch over to a greener way of business). It strikes me as odd why we are not using more nuclear reactors like what are in navy ships. Carriers produce enough power to completely handle the needs of 6,000 people. If this was used only for electricty and not for propulsion, water making, or other military specific power usage that number would rise considerably. This would cut construction costs and provide better over all grid support. A modern naval reactor only needs re-fueling once every 25 years, are much more efficient than large reactors and produce way lower amounts of spent fuel rods and could be upgraded or modified easier to keep up with demand.

    Taxing carbon in the current economic mess we are in , I fear, would cost jobs we can't afford to lose right now. This would also raise the price of just about everything. These increases would place a lot of every-day americans in a bind. So many are living check to check now.

    Granted americans as a whole are spoiled, whiny, and selfish and unwilling to change our ways except in token ways. This must also change. Just a tiny change in our wasteful ways would help much more than a cap and trade bill. There is no-one here that can say they really make an effort to change the amount of power we use.

    Case in point:
    nobody gets up to change the channel anymore. Everything with a remote control or a clock use power 24/7/365. Just outlawing remotes and un-needed clocks would save more power than we think.

    July 22, 2010 at 9:32 p.m.

  • The thing is 2000 pages long because of the way legal documents have to be worded, to cover all bases.
    If you have read the fine print on loan applications, titles to property, and other legal documents, you know what I mean.

    July 22, 2010 at 9:05 p.m.

  • holly1, I agree about term limits. Some politicians have been there too long and are taking advantage of the situation. This is true of both parties.

    We liked it when we heard politicians promise to clean up in congress, but it never happened to the extent we hoped. There is so much waste.

    I have a copy of the Constitution that I can carry in my pocket. A bill does not have to be 2000 pages long. They do that so no one reads it and they sneak things in that we don't know about. Then most don't ever read it. I would not put my name on something I had not read.

    Those are some changes I would make.

    July 22, 2010 at 8:41 p.m.

  • Mike
    I was replying to writeins post.

    did I not say BOTH parties are to blame for the economic mess we are in?? And yes we do spend WAY to much on ENTITLEMENTS. If this country is to get it's house in order MOST if not ALL programs need to be reviewed for effectiveness of the program for the money spent. If they are not then they need to go or be changed so they do work.

    The federal govt has a track record of wasting money. Maybe some of the things it runs should be placed under state control and funded the same as now.

    There all always to many strings attached on govt funds. What works well in one state may be a complete failure in others. The reason we have all these 2,000 page bills now is that the fed govt is trying to micro manage everything. Both parties are unwilling to sit down and really fix anything. They both say it's our way or no way.

    With this in mind it's high time to throw all the bums out and start over with all branches having TERM LIMITS so we no longer have career politicians.

    July 22, 2010 at 7:54 p.m.

  • I just read that it was the upper 5%, and you are right about extending the Bush tax cuts for those people too, at least for 2 years.

    July 22, 2010 at 7:32 p.m.

  • Mike, I told you I am more moderate originally. :)

    born, they said the upper group is about 30% of the spending, so they need to keep it. Not sure if they mean the upper 1-2% tho.

    If they would just work together with the good of the people in mind, I would feel alot better. And maybe they are. Cap and trade would hurt the middle class. They need to hold off or trim it down to some reasonable goals.

    July 22, 2010 at 7:14 p.m.

  • Born...Yeah, I do separate the multi-generational welfare bums from those who were either laid off from their jobs or because of health reasons cannot work. In 1986 when t-bone pickens destroyed Gulf Oil, I was on unemployment for a while till I got a job. But, each week, I had to provide evidence that I had been making an effort to find work; I couldn't just sit around making babies.

    July 22, 2010 at 7:03 p.m.

  • Cap n' Trade is DOA or so they say, but I heard the same thing about healthcare "reform" before they passed it.

    July 22, 2010 at 6:20 p.m.

  • yep, I heard they were talking about extending the tax cuts for the middle class and not extending the tax cuts for the upper 1-2%.

    July 22, 2010 at 6:17 p.m.

  • Regarding Republicans and their goals... someone is talking, they are considering extending the Bush cuts because if they don't it may be bad for the economy. There are several democrats in on this discussion. Also, one democrat has pledged not to support cap and trade at this time.

    July 22, 2010 at 6:08 p.m.

  • I'm just talking about Federal law , not myths, hearsay evidence, or anything else.
    That's the way it reads on the government web site. What happens with the money once it reaches the state's; I have no idea.

    July 22, 2010 at 5:59 p.m.

  • Mike,

    Federal money finds it's way to states for these programs, so basically, state welfare includes federal money.

    July 22, 2010 at 5:55 p.m.

  • jbj
    Come on now, you are for smaller government and you are calling for more bureaucrats...:-)

    I understood your good intentions, I concur.

    Bill Clinton the GOP Congress came up with Welfare Reform which meant that you could be on welfare for two years and then you were out. It probably needs to be looked at again.

    BTW don't confuse Federal welfare which is only for American citizens with state welfare programs.

    July 22, 2010 at 5:49 p.m.

  • This comment was removed by the user.

    July 22, 2010 at 5:46 p.m.

  • Citizens who need help should be helped. Some older people are in that group. Money that helps these people is well spent.

    A fraud department is in order, for sure. Money filtering through congress doesn't always come out well. And congress has a poor record of policing itself.

    July 22, 2010 at 5:41 p.m.

  • theWWW,

    I agree with you. Sending money overseas to prop up other countries before helping Americans is just wrong. Humanitarian aid is one thing, but what is happening now is overkill and more times than not, is aiding American companies overseas and not the people it is supposed to help. And then there are all of those crooked governments that keep the money for themselves and the help never makes it to the people that need it anyway.

    Paying for more that 2 kids for anyone on public aid is wrong. Paying for kids of parents here illegally is wrong. Not setting up a work program for those on public aid that are capable of work is wrong.
    But there are many, many Americans who are down and out through no fault of their own and they have tried everything to support themselves, but either their health or their jobs fell out from under them. THOSE are the people I am talking about.
    If one area of the government needs to grow, it is a fraud department of somekind. It would pay for itself.

    July 22, 2010 at 3:35 p.m.

  • Born...I agree that the country used to be big on taking care of those of us less fortunate but I have to disagree about the reason. Over the years I have become less and less willing to give and more and more resentlful of welfare when I see generation after generation on the dole; when I see teenagers having kids and EXPECTING that I (through my taxes) will help raise them because she is living in poverty. There are millions of people in this country illegally and the government uses my tax dollars will help educate their kids and provide them with health care. Yeah, I deeply resent that. I have come to believe that the money we send to foreign countries could be much better spent here at home -- or even better, NOT SPENT at all. I'm not nearly as generous as I was 20 or 30 years ago.

    July 22, 2010 at 3:17 p.m.

  • I agree with Mike about the "S" word. jbj, maybe it is "your" idea of socialism, but it is so far removed from what socialism really is, that it is just sad to hear it bandied around in such a manner.
    America is big on Social Issues and that is what makes it one of a kind. Until lately, it took care of it's own, but the ones degrading the idea of helping out our most needy because they greedily want more and more for themselves, want to turn it into something I won't be proud of.

    July 22, 2010 at 2:45 p.m.

  • jbj
    You certainly have not offended me because I am the equivalent of a 64 year old armadillo . Things just roll off my back.

    Pilot and Big J have a history; I don't interfere.

    I'm just saying if you want to have a legitimate discussion fine; when you bring in the talk radio rhetoric(socialism etc) then... I'm gone.... Understand.

    July 22, 2010 at 1:16 p.m.

  • Mike, if I have offended anyone other than having a different opinion, I appologize. But some of my comments were removed by someone clearing the entire blog. I have only been contacted once, and that was by you because you said I was off topic.

    I am aware of Beck's history. You are probably wasting your time to read my comments because you have a very different perspective. But I do research, and quite a bit.

    July 22, 2010 at 1:03 p.m.

  • jbj

    I went over your comment history since you joined on July 2, 2010 you have been deleted numerous times for" this comment was removed by site staff for violation of user agreement." That is just in 22 days. I wouldn't get on my high horse if I were you.

    You've had this" holier than thou" attitude since day one when you gave this analysis"I have noticed that liberals often trash those who disagree. People who have valid points do not have to do this because their own ideas are meaningful. In coming to the defense of Glenn Beck.

    You said "Conservatives can find much of what Beck discusses to be valid points of concern and can agree that Beck is an educated man who worries about the future of our country as a republic."

    Beck never went to college in fact"When his mother died, Beck moved to Bellingham, where he attended high school. After graduation, he worked at radio stations in Provo, Utah, Washington D.C. and New Haven, Connecticut. Along the way, Beck struggled with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder and substance abuse, and he went through recovery in the mid 1990s

    My point, you don't do any research and you are a complete waste of my time.... I can get your point of view by tuning in AM 1340.

    July 22, 2010 at 11:59 a.m.

  • This comment was removed by the user.

    July 22, 2010 at 11:47 a.m.

  • Thanks for putting up the chart, rollinstone. Clinton did well, and Bush2, until 2006. That is interesting.

    July 22, 2010 at 7:43 a.m.

  • I am not here to threaten, push anyone, or make anyone angry. If a person puts a political blog up they usually want discussion. Maybe not so much here. If a person contributes to the discussion, they should give their thoughts and accept the thoughts of others. Everyone is not going to agree. If it makes a person so angry to hear other people's thoughts, maybe it is not the type of discussion it should be. Pilot has a point.

    Writein has asked me to explain my feelings at times and I have done so as politely as I can. I had one post removed for answering a question, or I guess sometimes it is more like answering a challenge. I don't do so with anger or threats. If someone asks why I feel the way I do, I will explain.

    Yes, I have more conservative views than some. That makes some people angry. Hatefulness and threats will not change my mind. I have read links that have been put up because I will always consider what others think. Research will enrich me but when I read a biased item, I consider the bias. That goes for any thing I watch on tv or read.

    Writein, you don't have to trust me. I don't fix your food or take care of your children. So you don't have to trust me. We probably don't live next door to each other. You don't even have to like me. I will explain why I feel like I do when you ask, as long as I am allowed to. But you probably won't make me think the same things you do.

    July 22, 2010 at 7:25 a.m.

  • I still don't know what he said. But I agree, if he made fun of the President's children, and he even admitted he did, he was wrong. No matter why, no matter where. He made a mistake. It is wrong on late night shows, it is wrong in the media, it is wrong in cartoons, it is wrong anywhere to make fun of children. Children are gifts.

    July 22, 2010 at 7:09 a.m.

  • JBJ.

    Let me also add a question. How can you plead people to get together and have unity from people like me, but yet accuse the President of being a racist ? To me THIS isn't about disagreements OVER POLICY, it is ABOUT YOUR FALSE RED MEAT US VS THEM TALK. I can't get along with that nor I can trust you.

    July 22, 2010 at 6:16 a.m.

  • JBJ.

    Read this.

    You conservatives are pushing it with me.

    July 21, 2010 at 10:35 p.m.

  • Like I say, writein, I don't watch Beck as much as you do. I have no idea what he said about the Obama girls.

    July 21, 2010 at 10:01 p.m.

  • JBJ.

    You talk about how Sarah Palin’s children being attack, but you NEVER, NEVER mention about Glenn Beck attacking the Obama children a month ago. Why won’t you bring that up?

    You also said, “writein, the senate vote for the Iraq war was 77-23. 29 of the 77 were democrats.”

    Really? You think? Tell me something I don’t know. The Iraq War is why Barack Obama, not Hillary Clinton, is President. It is one of the major reasons, I jumped on the Obama bandwagon.

    July 21, 2010 at 9:42 p.m.

  • Growth of government from Carter to Obama. Federal Spending as a percent of GDP. This data is incomplete because it does not include the explosive growth in state government due to federal mandates. Obama is in a league of his own, both in spending and deficits.

    What is intersting is the level of spending by the Clinton administration. If he could have controlled his libido he would go down as a great president. I give him high marks for the way he handled the Kosovo War - he received a lot of criticism for it at the time.

    1980 - 20.9% - Carter
    1981 - 21.5% - Reagan
    1982 - 22.7% - Reagan
    1983 - 22.6% - Reagan
    1984 - 21.5% - Reagan
    1985 - 22.3% - Reagan
    1986 - 22.1% - Reagan
    1987 - 21.1% - Reagan
    1988 - 20.8% - Reagan
    1989 - 20.8% - Bush-1
    1990 - 21.5% - Bush-1
    1991 - 22.0% - Bush-1
    1992 - 21.7% - Bush-1
    1993 - 21.1% - Clinton
    1994 - 20.6% - Clinton
    1995 - 20.4% - Clinton
    1996 - 19.9% - Clinton
    1997 - 19.2% - Clinton
    1998 - 18.8% - Clinton
    1999 - 18.3% - Clinton
    2000 - 18.2% - Clinton
    2001 - 18.3% - Bush - 2
    2002 - 19.2% - Bush - 2
    2003 - 19.6% - Bush - 2
    2004 - 19.5% - Bush - 2
    2005 - 19.8% - Bush - 2
    2006 - 20.7% - Bush - 2
    2007 - 19.9% - Bush - 2
    2008 - 20.7% - Bush - 2
    2009 - 24.7% - Obama *
    2010 - 25.2% - Obama *

    * From Obama's 10 year budget all other data from the Tax Foundation.

    July 21, 2010 at 8:16 p.m.

  • This comment was removed by the user.

    July 21, 2010 at 7:57 p.m.

  • Mike, when an article starts with "Republicans are entitled to their own....." it is usually going to be from a Democratic perspective. This one quotes out of context.

    I noticed that another person posted that jbj would probably ignore the link, and that you didn't think I would understand your answer to the capitalization question. You had shown some irritation that I assumed how you might react or feel earlier in my post. That is the reason for my vague statement that you did not understand. I should have made it more clear.

    If I am obsessed with tax cuts, you are obsessed with tax hikes. To each his own.

    July 21, 2010 at 6:42 p.m.

  • jbj
    I'm getting a little old and I don't understand vague statements about how someone would think or act..... I just think for myself and I'm pretty sure everyone else does, so I really don't know what you are talking about. If you wanna give a personal analysis of what you think; that's how it will be taken... Your personal opinion.

    I didn't know Dick Cheney and people that worked for the Bush administration were democrats. How is that a democratic slant? Did you even read it?

    We don't have high tax rates(it's barely paying the bills),they are lower than the 1990s when we had an economic boom. That is a perfect example of what I have been saying , you have an obsession with tax cuts.... A one track mind.

    For the fourth time, corporate profits are up and the Fortune 500 companies have a $1.8 trillion CASH surplus. I know you believe in " supply side-trickle down economics'" but that is not what is needed right now..IMO

    Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke said "Bernanke said that while he expects moderate economic growth and low inflation, it would take some time before lost jobs would be regained. He did not specify what further steps the Fed might take. Read more on Bernanke's testimony.” today.Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke reiterated Wednesday his belief that Congress should continue to prop up the sputtering economy, casting aside concerns that the federal budget deficit should trump the economy's need for additional stimulus.

    My point, the Federal Reserve, Congress, the treasury and the administration are all working on the economy. You may not like their solutions.

    July 21, 2010 at 5:40 p.m.

  • Mike, I can remember getting some criticism because I claimed to know how some of you would think or act. This is where I am not supposed to say anything. So I won't.

    The link to the democratic slant on tax cut results is helpful but a graph on tax rate cuts and resulting revenue is more so.

    High tax rates will kill jobs. There is a balance there.

    July 21, 2010 at 5:13 p.m.

  • Excellent KyleC,I wasted a couple hours trying to scale down that graphic from an economics' book.

    July 21, 2010 at 2:43 p.m.

  • Interesting image on Fed deficit over the years from Carter to Bush II - I don't see any reason to believe Republicans can manage the economy any better given recent history and this is why they cannot simply rely on fear and ignorance to sweep them into the House

    July 21, 2010 at 2:30 p.m.

  • born2bme

    That's why I wish I had the skills of KyleC.... I've been trying to scale down a chart showing the deficits going straight up after a republican president takes office. You're right, it just makes sense you cut taxes and raise defense spending..Duh!

    Vice-President Dick Cheney famously told former Treasury Secretary Paul H. O'Neill, that "deficits don't matter." What's interesting and alarming, however, is that different Republican factions believe deficits don't matter for opposite and incompatible reasons.

    Supply-siders believe deficits don't matter because tax cuts so boost investment and productivity that the economy grows its way out of debt. The opposite, "starve the beast" faction, epitomized by tax tactician Grover Norquist, hope tax cuts will indeed create deep deficits that will then force spending cuts. But both things can't be true.

    John is right, the GOP has many sensible people but they don't toe the party line, so they don't get the microphone.i.e.

    1) The Council of Economic Advisers' Report to the President, 2003: "Although the economy grows in response to tax reductions (because of higher consumption in the short run and improved incentives in the long run), it is unlikely to grow so much that lost tax revenue is completely recovered by the higher level of economic activity."

    2) The chair of CEA from 2003-2005, Greg Mankiw: "Some supply-siders like to claim that the distortionary effect of taxes is so large that increasing tax rates reduces tax revenue. Like most economists, I don't find that conclusion credible for most tax hikes, and I doubt Mr. Paulson does either."

    3) He's right! Hank Paulson, Bush's last Treasury Secretary, doesn't: "As a general rule, I don't believe that tax cuts pay for themselves."

    It's just as well,jbj, would just ignore it and go on to the next talking point without acknowledging the facts....Hey,Glenn Beck U disagrees with all that..:-)

    July 21, 2010 at 2:19 p.m.

  • Ah but Defense is sacrosanct isn't it? You can't touch that with a 10ft pole without fear of leaving the country wide open to attack or so some would have you believe. It's well known that the US Defense budget is larger than the sum total of all the nations in the world. Some would rather spend our money and lives fighting wars in the Middle East and continuing to project cold war era power than take care of those who need it the most at home.

    When fear rules over reason expect the citizenry to suffer unnecessarily.

    July 21, 2010 at 2:10 p.m.

  • Mike you are so right. I've been doing some research lately and discovered that the republicans have grown the government more than democrats, even though they run on the platform of smaller government and tax cuts. They know that is what Americans want to hear, even though it is far from the truth.
    The only difference is that republicans grow the government in the defense are, and the democrats grow the government in social issues. Defense is so much more expensive and doesn't really help America as much as it helps countries and peoples overseas. We need help HERE.

    July 21, 2010 at 2 p.m.

  • jbj
    I knew you wouldn't get it.

    I am a a capitalist(I am invested in a market) but I don't believe in an unfettered free market...i.e. BP,Enron,Wall Street crisis.

    Since we have the Federal reserve, we cannot have a completely free market but I'm pretty sure the people want government oversight. I can't imagine not having the FDIC, EPA, FDA, and the Clean Air and Water act just to name a few.

    No one wants a lot of bureaucracy but every president has grown government.

    July 21, 2010 at 1:49 p.m.

  • Mike, is that a NO?

    July 21, 2010 at 1:47 p.m.

  • I head once that capitalism cannot work worldwide and I don't remember why exactly.

    July 21, 2010 at 1:39 p.m.

  • Your question is too vague.... Perhaps you're asking if I am a disciple of Laissez-faire.

    July 21, 2010 at 1:38 p.m.

  • Not to mention what he is doing overseas to improve our image and what he accomplished in China.
    Give him time. He still has over 2 years to go. Go look up Clintons popularity when he first started. It wasn't good, but he fought back and got elected again and really pulled America up, and quit concentrating exclusively on the gloom and doom of FOX news. Start doing the research yourself and get the numbers.

    July 21, 2010 at 1:38 p.m.

  • Let's go back to one basic question. Do you believe capitalization works? Or can work?

    July 21, 2010 at 1:35 p.m.

  • .

    You continue to overlook the facts; the healthcare bill has been passed and it doesn't generate the anger it once did. I showed you the poll. The republicans were never going work with Obama because they saw healthcare being his Waterloo. Republicans have never never been interested in healthcare reform, history proves that. That's a fantasy of yours.

    Clinton & Obama = apples to oranges...... In in his last term, Clinton had no choice but to compromise because he had a GOP controlled Congress.

    The stimulus package was too small(for the recession we were in) but because of the obstruction of the Republican Party and the uneasiness of the American public, this was all they could possibly get. They should have never used 1/3 funds to pay for tax cuts just to get three republican votes. They would have been much better off putting most of it into light rail.

    You and the rest of your cohorts may not like it but this president is very successful, according to presidential history. His administration passed Health Care reform where nine others failed, he passed the first major financial reform bill after the depression, he passed " equal pay for equal work" and now if Congress can pass an energy bill, it will be quite an accomplishment....Reagan had lower numbers than Obama under similar unemployment numbers;I have no reason to think Obama will not survive,even thou he has two wars and much more on his plate.

    btw the stimulus bill is still on line.... There are business tax credits included.

    July 21, 2010 at 1:29 p.m.

  • jbj,

    President Obama could only sign what was brought to him. Republicans made it impossible to come out of negotiations with a good bill. Democrats had to bribe some of them for their votes, or it would not have passed at all. Now if it was me, I wouldn't have given in to their bribes, but it seems that this is the way politics works, on both sides.
    So, in the end, a watered-down bill emerged, but President Obama had no choice but to sign it to help those that needed it the most. They never went into this with the idea that it wasn't going to be refined in the future. There will be changes made, but people will have access to insurance if they need it, or need help. They cannot be discriminated against anymore. Those provisions will probably stay, and that was the aim all along.

    July 21, 2010 at 1:21 p.m.

  • jbj

    Let's start with the equalizer

    1. The 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for the wealthy....... was not paid for.
    2. The $7 trillion Medicare Part D prescription drug bill...... Was not paid for.
    3. Two wars were carried off budget..................... Was not paid for.
    Were you angry in the years 2000-2008?

    Giving the record above makes your republicans "will cut spending, cut taxes and let business grow." One of those" Don't as I do, do as I say do."....

    Your party strategy is wrong...... If they had their druthers, the democrats would pass an energy bill that would steer us to green and clean energy before another country beats us to it.

    The republicans do not know another strategy other than to cut taxes. I watched every one of their 2008 presidential debates and I listen to all their candidates, and that's what I come away with. Nothing else. Both parties will have to borrow because the revenues coming in only pay for the entitlements. Look at Florida's Marcos Rubio game plan, it's all about restoring the Bush tax cuts.

    The financial reform bill the President signed today was popular with the American public and so was extending unemployment benefits. The republicans opposed both bills and I think the voters will see that. In fact this afternoon I see where the democrats have taken the lead in the generic candidate poll....There I go again.

    July 21, 2010 at 1:08 p.m.

  • Clinton did a magnificent job. Not that I agreed with everything he did, but he managed well. He wanted to be re elected and knew how to compromise.

    Democrats are in pretty good with big business, too.

    Obama didn't inherit anything that Congress did not help create. But if he had stuck to a health care package that put some regulation on insurance companies and got everyone covered who needed it, and stopped there, he would have gotten support and had not only the Republicans working with him but also the American people. His stimulus package would have been a boost to jobs if he had geared it to private sector growth.

    If Obama had stuck to what he campaigned to be he would probably have been a very popular president and would have done some long lasting good for our country.

    July 21, 2010 at 1:04 p.m.

  • jbj,

    In the first place, the Republicans are the party of borrow and spend. The Democrats have been the party of tax and spend. Neither one has ever been about balancing the things, although Clinton came closer than most.
    You make your choice. Higher taxes to balance things and quit borrowing, or let the borrowing and spending continue.
    President Obama inherited something so massive that he has no choice except to borrow, or let America as we know it, cease to exist. He has to deal with the issues that brought us to this point before he can ever fix the rest. It will not happen in 2 years, it will not happen in 4 years, lets just hope it happens in our lifetime.
    The people who elected him understood that tough decisions were coming and that they too, would have to suffer before it ever got better.
    Republicans on the other hand, loved it like it was, so they saw no point in trying to fix things. They consistantly side with big business over anything else. Fox News is the biggest jokes of all. They lead people astray with their edited footage of events. That amounts to a lie meant to deceive the American public. I've seen it over and over again. People are so gullible it isn't even funny. They hear only what they choose to hear and their minds delete the rest. Until that stops happening, things will not get better for anyone.

    July 21, 2010 at 12:44 p.m.

  • I never understood about borrowing and spending to improve an economy. Maybe it would work in good times.

    Big government and higher taxes kill jobs in the private sector. Jobs make money and taxes. In good times it works well.

    A stimulus plan that addresses jobs and small businesses would grow the economy in times of economic stress, but spending the money wisely would determine how much help would result.

    Most business owners want to grow their businesses. Right now we are seeing businesses sheltering in place. Not much is growing. People are holding onto the money they have. Not as much investing is happening. We feel it in the economy and the government feels it, too, in lost revenues and unemployment.

    Add that to the insult we suffered with the housing market collapse due probably to corruption and mismanagement.

    How can a party, either party, offer a way out of the recession? One party thinks borrowing and spending will do the job. The other thinks that the market will recover by letting businesses recover with time. Somewhere in between is the answer, if there is one.

    What do Republicans offer? Cut spending, cut taxes, and let businesses grow. Money going into the economy from the private sector would be much more efficientlly used than taxpayer money filtering through Congress.

    Add to that a well planned and well spent stimulus plan that streamlined growth in the private sector and the economy might be jump started.

    We have government bonds which used to be popular. If we could offer a "grow America' type of bond that would pay a little more than a cd and use this instead of borrowing from another country, we might have our economy back sooner.

    July 21, 2010 at 12:21 p.m.

  • born2bme

    After all these years on a forum , I know when I'm 360°from a poster.

    It just seems a complete waste of time, his and mine.

    I really don't mind a person having a different opinion, in fact in most cases, it leads to a better discussion. Like you, I don't really like all these battles over labels, like I bow at the altar of liberalism. I think it's the conservatives that like to embrace labels.... Many of my left of center friends don't know the meaning of liberalism or progressive.... They know what they like and don't like...:-)

    July 21, 2010 at 11:30 a.m.

  • John
    I guess you can make anything of the blog that you want to but I was emphasizing the fact that I have never seen a political party look so bad on the Sunday morning talk shows. I explained that most of the time both parties put out their spin without any trouble all. It was not an indictment for the whole year. Rich Lowry and others have admitted that it was a poor performance by the republicans. I also said they will get another chance and that they will probably change their strategy or it's going to be another, hello democrats, you won again.

    There's certainly more questions and answers out there but I just posted some for jbj.

    This is an American economic crisis, not a democrat ,republican ,conservative, liberal or libertarian crisis. If the republicans win the house, then they get to chair the committee meetings and we will follow their agenda. That's how the process works; it starts at the ballot box.

    July 21, 2010 at 11:17 a.m.

  • Here is the reality I am trying to get across.

    We have about a $14 trillion economy and right now,the tax revenues will only pay for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.... We are forced to borrow the rest or make drastic cuts and raise taxes. You say the democrats made the wrong moves; you might be right and the republicans might get their chance to correct them.

    Senator John Cornyn said the republicans will wait until President Obama's, December 1,2010 deficit/debt commission, which they voted against, to come up with a bipartisan solution before they develop their strategy. Is that fair to your party? I know the anti -Obama crowd does a really care about a strategy, just as long it's not a democratic strategy.

    What is the truth certain solution for jobs, jobs, jobs?

    1. Smaller government: what a agencies will you get rid of and how much revenue will that bring in?
    2. Less taxes: I guess you know tax cuts add to the deficit... OK ,you want them anyway, what programs would you eliminate to pay for them? How much extra revenues will your cuts generate?
    3. What if the bipartisan Congressional Budget Office comes back and says your ideas would increase the deficit and the debt by two trillion dollars or so?Then what?
    Loaded questions?No, if your party regains the house, they will have to govern.

    So you just can't run a government with slogans because economics 'is about numbers.

    July 21, 2010 at 11:04 a.m.

  • "Have a nice day" does sound familiar. With that said, I see your point Mike. jbj's remarks are so far out there that it has to be a way to get everyone's attention onto himself. he seems to be someone that needs a lot of attention.

    July 21, 2010 at 11:01 a.m.

  • You are correct Mike. Both, that it does appear like something the GOP might have had in mind and that I was referring too you. The GOP, is not all bad and President Obama bashing; some actually have a brain and tend to use it.

    July 21, 2010 at 10:53 a.m.

  • jbj
    Sorry my mistake, I did not mean to demean.

    I see you're still resorting to talking points instead of strategy, new ideas, or meaningful legislation.... It's about a 2010 platform not slogans and sound bites that sound good.

    July 21, 2010 at 10:41 a.m.

  • "It is based on the Constitution, to support capitalism, less government intervention, and lower taxes"

    Some of these ideals didn't quite work out as planned under the previous Republican administration did they?

    So what's the back up "groove"?

    July 21, 2010 at 10:36 a.m.

  • The Republicans do not need a groove, however, they do have one. It is based on the Constitution, to support capitalism, less government intervention, and lower taxes.

    Why would you call me lbj? Do you think I mirror Lyndon Johnson or are you of the generation that would remember him?

    July 21, 2010 at 10:32 a.m.

  • @jbj

    "Here is something on topic. The Republicans do not need a groove. The Democrats are committing political suicide."

    Running on a negative message is the worst way to ingratiate yourself to the public. Republicans will soon find themselves painted with the same anti-incumbent brush if they cannot come up with sensible positive ideas for this country.

    If the Democrats are committing political suicide, as you say, it would be a shame to see Republicans following like lemmings shortly afterwards.

    July 21, 2010 at 9:29 a.m.

  • lbj said "The Republicans do not need a groove."

    Your argument is with Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell.

    With the 2010 campaign heating up, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., is laying out his party's strategy, proclaiming that the GOP has got its "groove back" and will reverse "the damage Democrats have done


    July 21, 2010 at 9:27 a.m.

  • born2bme

    I'm sorry but it is my opinion that posters like Holly1 and jbj are not interested in facts or a reasonable discussion. i.e. To bolster his case, that republicans do no wrong even in the case of the Iraq fiasco... jbj failed to mention that only 82 house democrats voted for the war out of a possible 208.... They like to make the democrats complicit in their failures but the decision rested with the commander in chief. I learned a long time ago, you can't penetrate the mind of a right wing ideologue...i.e. Specially someone like lbj,that says he was a moderate but Obama turned him into a a conservative..What? That's like me saying about 15 years ago, I ate three doughnuts and became a type II diabetic.... Ideology is a mindset.

    Holly1 it just a roaming infomercial, delivering the same message on every site, topic doesn't matter.

    July 21, 2010 at 9:21 a.m.

  • Mike, everything I have typed was in answer to someone who commented on what I posted. You do not want anyone to disagree with you.

    Here is something on topic. The Republicans do not need a groove. The Democrats are committing political suicide.

    Have a nice day.

    July 21, 2010 at 9:21 a.m.

  • lbj

    Writein has a blog where you can post all your nonsense..... I have warned you repeatedly to stay on topic and have suggested that you write your own blog. I'm deleting your last post because this blog is not about wing nut Debra Medina or is it a place for your republican infomercial. You're not the only one but after receiving a couple E mails from posters telling me that they will not post anymore because of all of nonsense, I have decided to take a different course. About six months ago, a longtime poster made a similar statement online I know I can find a lot better things to do than have the Sean Hannity face offs every time I put up a blog.... I wrote a blog about my Medicare letter and received some political responses about Obama Care. I see the old posters are leaving and I certainly don't want to be think, I was a part of it. We have a few new bloggers that will hopefully increased viewership and take the forum in a different direction.

    I don't take the hour or so to write a blog just so it can be a magnet for all the right wing nonsense from hate radio. You don’t make any sense at all.

    I don't have to worry about you thinking that I don't want anyone disagree with me because if you would just take the time to do it comment history check, you would notice that several have disagreed with me several times. That comes with the territory. I might not have told you this before but after the 2008 election I decided to quit participating in the back and forth ad Hominem attacks. I have fallen off the wagon several times but I don't really want to go in that direction anymore. There's a difference between debating Keynesian economics'/ political strategy, and battling the day to day left/right nonsense.

    July 21, 2010 at 9:05 a.m.

  • jbj,

    You have to know all of those things that you listed are not new to politics, or this administration.

    Mike, I'll let you give jbj specifics. you are so much better at that than I am.

    July 21, 2010 at 8:20 a.m.

  • jbj jbj

    This comment was removed by the user.

    July 21, 2010 at 7:34 a.m.

  • writein, the senate vote for the Iraq war was 77-23. 29 of the 77 were democrats.

    I opposed this war, btw.

    July 21, 2010 at 7:27 a.m.

  • yes, borntob, I think much of what is happening today is new. Let me list a few of the things that I worry about the most:

    Media bias which not only opposes, but slams anyone who wants to tell something that may make this administration look bad. Cruel and threatening attacks by the media on political opponents and their families.

    Passage of legislation that is strongly opposed by a majority of Americans, with no respect for the American people.

    Americans who turn against each other and hate each other because of a difference in political opinion.

    A media which ignores blatant racism and allegations of voter fraud selectively.

    An attempt to radicalize radio and tv which attempt to get expose the part of the story the mainstream media wishes to withhold from the American voters.

    A President who says he is going to pass legislation which will "necessarily cause energy bills to sky rocket", and he is elected. (this was a campaign promise, but most people did not and still do not see this as a problem as he moves toward passing cap and trade)

    American citizens being branded as racists if they oppose the policies of the President.

    And yes, dude, I am old enough to have seen some huge changes.

    July 21, 2010 at 7:01 a.m.

  • writein
    my last post placed blame equally on both parties not just one party. pol. correctness is seen from the side you happen to be on so what is correct to one may not be correct to the oppisite point of view. At the state and federal level no one party or person is completely responceable for anything. Although lately the dems own all the bills that have been passed as the republicans voted NO almost to a person. I am an Independant and have voted for both parties if I felt that person was the best one for the job. I am no one's puppet and have never voted party line just to do so. I try to stay up to date with the issues and vote for what I think is best for me and the country as a whole. Granted my views are right of center but this is due to my being self employed and find it hard to support all the social freebies lauded on the lazy or on the poor just because they are poor. I find it repulsive that just because I work I have to support those who won't and make more than I do sitting at home watching tv and making babies so they can get more of my hard earned money. And see people like my grandparents living on S.S which they paid into their whole lives and have less money than those who never put a single dime into the system.

    It also seems the one's living off everyone else are the first in line to get more and feel they are entitled to it. There is something really wrong with the system when it rewards laziness by taking from those who are not. I also feel if I have to drug test to get jobs then thy should have to test to get their checks and that we need to return to past systems where you can only buy listed items and not have much extra for spending money. If you want more spending money get a real job like the rest of us working stiffs.

    July 21, 2010 at 4:16 a.m.

  • Holly1.

    Politically correct?? HUH? what is politcal correctness. It seems to me whenever some complains about politcal correctness, usually want to protect their own bias, ingorance, and the old time status quo.

    July 21, 2010 at 3:49 a.m.

  • write in
    I suppose you liked ann richards? morrison is not on my list of favorites either. drop out rates are high because we have bad teachers. they are more worried about test scores than traditional education. thats what happens when you try to be politically correct instead of teaching. Rick perry is not totally to blame for the economic position we are in. Some of this rests on the shoulders of bush and now obama and federal policies like unfunded mandates and increased deficits. Over all texas is in better shape than most states but run away govt spending by both parties has strained our local economy. Tx dot, what can we say about them they do what they please. The truth of the matter is that no one person or party is to blame for the mess we are in now. Both sides seem to have lost touch with reality and basically ignore the will of the people. Govt spending at all levels has become excessive and continues to be out of control. New schools alone will never solve drop out rates. We need a return to class placement by ability and performance instead of grand and lofty ideals of equality and teaching everyone at the same level. Not every student needs a college level education or has the smarts for advanced classes. These students would be better served by trade or skill based instruction to ready them for finding jobs after school is completed. The biggest issue with education is teachers need to stop teaching ideals and political brainwashing and return to being neutral and just teach.

    July 21, 2010 at 3:28 a.m.

  • correction: study not STUIED.

    July 21, 2010 at 2:38 a.m.

  • Holy1.

    Here’s a question for you…….What about Rick Perry???? What about State Rep Morrison???? I do not hear you talk about water issues and HIGH DROP OUT RATES in this area. I don’t hear you talk about TX DOT, the Youth Commission, and the gross loss of government funds under Perry???? Why won’t you talk about home first?

    July 21, 2010 at 2:05 a.m.

  • JBJ.

    Stop pulling my leg. You D(a)mn well know Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, and Joe Pags are the power behind conservative politics. Let’s take Debra Medina’s run for governor for example. I donated money to her campaign after your boys Beck and Pags blast her and try to trip her up. She is the one of few Republicans I had some feelings towards. They blasted her because they want the nazi neo-con like Rick Perry to run in 2012. If they can influence an election, then they can influence a nation.

    Now you are talking about concern for the nation. Here is a question for you. WHERE WERE YOU in March 2003? ????? No, you were sitting watching FOX News waving the American flag, while someone was being order to fight, kill, and die over A LIE!!!!!!!!!!!!! READ A HISTORY BOOK instead listening to these bigots on the radio station.

    You need to take some advice from born2bme and STUIED UP ON SOME HISTORY!!!!!!!!!!!

    July 21, 2010 at 2 a.m.

  • Ok Mike if you say so but I don't see where any jobs were SAVED but I do see where a lot of new GOVT jobs have been created. 40 to 70 just in all the CZARS Obama has hired, 15,000 new IRS agents to enforce Obamacare, Where are all those SHOVEL ready JOBS?? Or are you counting all the highway jobs here in victoria to FIX the traffic flow problems nobody saw when they picked the sites for the new schools and all the jobs saved in govt programs. Manufacturing jobs are still not rebounding, construction jobs are still nowhere to be found. Banks are still failing and Victoria mall is becoming a ghost town with all the stores closing shop. So again WHERE are all these jobs being saved or created?? There is no truth to the figure of 3.6 million jobs saved or created unless you count teachers and govt jobs. Just more fuzzy math and unsupported claims thats all.

    July 21, 2010 at 1:27 a.m.

  • Isn't it funny that with both the stimulus bill and the Obamacare bill most of the money gets spent just before the 2012 election and all the new taxes go into effect just after the 2012 election?? And also with the new financial reform bill the biggest cause of the current economy (fannie and freddie) were never even mentioned.
    This LIBERAL govt, congress and the president, are playing shell games with the TARP money and stimulus money. Neither of these bills were ment to be used on unemployment. You LIBERALS slam the republicans for opposing the newest extention of unemployment money. All they (republicans) wanted is for your party (dems) to cut something else to pay for it not just borrow more money to pay for it. When will the massive deficit spending end??? 1 trillion this year already and more red ink is in the works. HOW will the liberials pay back all this debt??? MASSIVE TAX INCREASES THATS HOW!!!! BUT WAIT THAT WILL BE BUSH'S FAULT. It's high time they claim owership of all this crap and quit blaming the republicans for it, as none or very few republicans voted yes on any of these LIBERAL programs.

    Here's an idea maybe all those on entitlement programs should get no more than those on social security ( another entitlement program) and NO ILLEGALS get 1 RED DIME unless it's a free ride back out of the country. When will all you liberals wake up and see that all this spending has done NOTHING to get us out of this recession. Most of the stimulus money has yet to be spent 2 years into it. (most gets spent just before the elections) how convienent if your a dem. The only BS I see is all the crap being passed now.

    July 21, 2010 at 1:06 a.m.

  • jbj,

    Are you serious? You think all of the things happening now are new? Dude, you really need to study up on history. How old are you anyway?

    July 21, 2010 at 12:47 a.m.

  • Hannity is not ruling our country and probably never will be. So his friends will not influence the laws that are passed.

    I am not here to fight with anyone. I watch Fox because they have all the news, not just what the white house wants you to get.

    I am pretty curious about the change Obama brought, other than his policies. I have never seen people so infuriated by differing opinions as I have seen in this presidency. I seldom heard the word "racist" until this presidency, and I was called a racist any time I expressed my disagreement with policies. This became the battle cry. I have never seen the media hide information or fail to report news, never even heard of a radio station or tv channel being threatened to be shut down for offering a differing opinion.

    So when I express concern for our country it is because some things are happening that I have not seen before.

    We have a Congress and President who have passed legislation unpopular with the majority of Americans on party lines using whatever means available. Now they are tackling cap and trade by Aug. 6 and the American people expressing opposition are villianized. This has never happened before.

    You may not be concerned by this, but I am and the Democrats I used to know would be.

    July 21, 2010 at 12:34 a.m.

  • JBJ.

    I believe in knowing my enemy. If you are ok with Hannity cutting ties with Hal Turner, then shouldn’t you be ok with Obama cutting ties with Wright? Come on now.

    July 20, 2010 at 11:45 p.m.

  • Seems like you know more about the Fox people than I do. Hannity cut ties with Turner some time ago, but that is the extent of my expertise on that.

    July 20, 2010 at 11:13 p.m.

  • Let me add on here. Maybe you should look at Sean Hannity and his friendship with New Jeresy Neo-Nazi leader Hal Turner???????

    July 20, 2010 at 10:45 p.m.

  • Why I am hung up on Glenn Beck? Because that man is the devil. I bet my bottom dollar he creating and encouraging the next Oswards and Wikes booths of the world. Heck take at look at his show on Monday.

    July 20, 2010 at 10:36 p.m.

  • You seem to be the one who is hung up on Glenn Beck, writein.

    How does reparations have anything to do with race? I think he meant there are pay offs in it the health care bill, but then I really didn't watch that day.

    I am definitely a part of the problem. (to you) To be apart from it I would have to live in another country.

    And I told you if we talked long enough we could find some ways we are alike... I am pro life and traditional marriage too. This is what I mean when I say that people are not just left or right.

    July 20, 2010 at 10:25 p.m.

  • JBJ.

    Here you go again. I am “pro-life“, pro-tradition marriage among other things. This shows what you know. Glenn Beck made that coded raical comment “reparations” to stir fears about Barack Obama. People like you are eating it up. That makes you apart of the problem.

    July 20, 2010 at 9:54 p.m.

  • Writein, I guess I had gotten the impression that you are less moderate and more liberal than you may be.

    You also asked about reparations in the health care bill. Yes, I think there are plenty of them, and also in the stimulus bill. But both parties do that and it needs to be done less. The health care bill would be a better bill if it was limited to health and care, the stimulus to what the American public thought they would be paying for.

    The health care bill would also be a better bill if congress had to be on it.

    That is my opinion.

    July 20, 2010 at 9:22 p.m.

  • JBJ.

    You asked, “Does someone having a different opinion actually make you that angry?” BS makeS me angry. Taking words from Glenn Beck as gospel makes me angry. CALLING THE PRESIDENT A RACIST LIKE YOU HAVE DONE MAKES ME ANGRY. You keep on asking same ole same ole question , where are the moderate democrats . WELL HELLO JBJ. I’M RIGHT HERE. LOOK AT THE PICTURE next to my name. What does it say???????


    July 20, 2010 at 9:12 p.m.

  • Writein, you have a right to your opinion and I have a right to mine.

    Considering Wilson, I think Obama or at least his backers are as radical as Wilson, at least in their goals. That is my take on it.

    Do you have a problem with the term "socialist"? Maybe there is a better term for the change he was talking about. But he did mean more government control and more taxes and he said as much in his campaign.

    I don't control Glenn Beck and don't even watch him that much. I
    didn't see the program on Jan 19, I guess.

    I am not a fan of Michael Moore but I would not want to wish him any harm. He is a liberal, and we have very different views. If Glenn Beck wants to kill him, he is out of line.

    Martin L. King's niece was on tv a few days ago, not sure what show, tho. I don't know much about him, but he said some things I certainly agree with. I didn't follow him politically.

    I agree violence is not the answer.

    I don't like the health care bill. We could have done much more for the people sooner and with fewer pages to read or not to. I do have a problem with Congressmen voting on something they did not read. I don't think it is good for us and I think we will regret it if is ever funded. I think it needs serious revision.

    July 20, 2010 at 9:09 p.m.

  • Mike, I am not insulting the men. Few people are pure left or right and it is no crime to be in the middle. Those men are more conservative than many, but are not the most conservative of the party. We need more moderates in both parties. They make the compromises, they are peacemakers. When I first came on this site, I asked where the moderate Democrats are. I still would like to know. The middle people are what we need.

    I was not conservative to start with. I was moderate. I became conservative when our country started sliding left and it was a sharp left. But I don't want everyone to be conservative. I want a balance.

    I admit if I liked a person and some called him or her a racist, I would be angry. But I would consider the facts and decide. Everyone has a right to an opinion. And a right to express it.

    Other than that, what have I said that is so infuriating? That I think people need to be taxed less? Sarah Palin and her family underwent some brutal criticism? Congress has not made wise decisions on how to spend our money? I don't think borrow and spend works?

    Does someone having a different opinion actually make you that angry?

    July 20, 2010 at 8:57 p.m.

  • JBJ.


    Glenn Beck on Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
    “I think this is probably a more likely scenario that the president is under fire and we know that a radicalized socialist is a label that is going to be attached to this president and so we want to show you that a radicalized socialist is Martin Luther King and it’s okay.” January 19, 2009

    “How many times do I have to say peaceful? As Martin Luther King did, was Martin Luther King” November 25, 2009

    Glenn Beck on Slavery
    “Do you know who wanted slaves to be counted as a full person? … Slave owners. … The reason why they wanted that is because of the balance of power. “The South could control the numbers in Congress. Their representation would go through the roof. … That’s why, in the Constitution, African-Americans were deemed three-fifths people, because the Founders wanted to end slavery and they knew if the South could count slaves as full individuals you would never get the control to be able to abolish it.” Dec 2009

    "The health care bill is reparations. It's the beginning of reparations." July 22 2009

    Glenn Beck on Violence.
    “ "I'm thinking about killing Michael Moore, and I'm wondering if I could kill him myself, or if I would need to hire somebody to do it. ... No, I think I could. I think he could be looking me in the eye, you know, and I could just be choking the life out. Is this wrong?” May 17, 2005.

    "Violence is not the answer." March 18, 2010.

    July 20, 2010 at 6:21 p.m.

  • MIKE


    July 20, 2010 at 6:13 p.m.

  • lbj
    Before I leave for the night let me leave with you with these few words.(IMO)

    If John McCain, Scott Brown, GW Bush, Lindsey Graham, Mike Castle are moderate republicans just because they compromise; that makes you are right wing ideologue. They call themselves conservatives; I kinda believe a person when they tell me that.

    Who are you, to judge? Who gave you that authority?

    Again, I choose NOT to engage in topics about racism in this forum; especially with those I do not really know....

    July 20, 2010 at 6:10 p.m.

  • Mike it was not on a loop, and Beck felt that she had been fired unfairly. It appears the NAACP made available a part of a tape damaging to the director of the USDA and Fox played it last night. The white house picked up on it and fired her on the spot. The rest of the context did not support her racism, in fact it was the opposite. The tape was from March but the story was 24 years ago. Beck just did not feel it was right to fire her without knowing the whole story.

    I am just relating what happened, from what I can tell.

    July 20, 2010 at 6:09 p.m.

  • Mike.

    Glenn Beck needs to be challenged, Sean Hannity needs to be challenged. Rev. Wright is not the President. Barack H Obama is. I am so pissed off, that "writein" maybe an action, rather than a VICAD handle name.

    July 20, 2010 at 6:08 p.m.

  • Writein

    Initially, I was talking about the public in general needs to cool off about that recent story because all the facts haven't come out yet. Glenn Beck and Fox News will run an endless loop because that's what their viewers like.

    Now that I think about it, some posters don't really care if they'd get kicked off the forum, if they can take you down with them.
    I know you're young and your mama didn't raise you to be a sissy but choose your battles.

    I've had my say..... Suppers ready; see you tomorrow same time same place.

    July 20, 2010 at 6 p.m.

  • Mike, Rev. Wright is the first hint about racism in the wh. If Obama would speak up when issues arise, he might put forth a different image.

    Everyone has varying views on issues, sometimes being more moderate than at other times. Five more or less moderate Republicans: John McCain, Scott Brown, GW Bush, Lindsey Graham, Mike Castle. That does not mean I would not vote for them, just they are more likely to side with a more leftist approach. Oh if you want to let Bush off the hook, substitute any of those who voted for the financial reform.

    I am not here to irritate, writein, if you start a blog do you want to see only one side? Yes, there are those out there who disagree with you, and if there were not, it would be a sad situation.

    July 20, 2010 at 5:54 p.m.

  • Mike.

    Cool off? cool off. That is what they wanted from people like me. to cool off and shut up. That is what they wanted. JBJ calls my President a racist for what happen in the DOJ, but he won't talk about Sean Hannity's friendship with Neo Nazi leader Hal Turner or Glenn Beck's racist comment he made last year.

    July 20, 2010 at 5:49 p.m.

  • Wtitein

    I know you don't need my advice but lbj and is not worth getting upset over... He is an obvious disciple of Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and Rush limbaugh... What he knows about politics you can put on back of a postage stamp and still have plenty of room. Like others ,he is purposefully going on our blogs just to irritate.

    lbj is trying to push that Andrew Breitbart story about an incident that happened 24 years ago.In 1986, at the time of the incident, Sherrod worked for the Federation of Southern Cooperative/Land Assistance Fund, a job she held until she was appointed to the USDA last year.

    Sherrod identified the white farmer as Roger Spooner. CNN today interviewed his wife, Eloise Spooner, who said Sherrod had helped her and her husband save their farm.

    "She's a good friend ... she helped save her farm," Spooner said, adding that Sherrod did all she could to help them. "They have not treated her right."


    I think it's time to cool off and let this story play out because Andrew Breitbart doesn't have the best reputation for the truth.

    They're usually two sides to a story

    July 20, 2010 at 5:42 p.m.

  • Mike you said, "Let's keep this straight up on the facts, and those items that are controversial, back them up with some links or are some sort of proof." Duh, does that include cut n' paste, Mike does it, huh?

    July 20, 2010 at 5:29 p.m.

  • JBJ.

    You and your cohorts on here calling the President racist and radical. Don't feed me cr@p and expect me to call it sugar. Here is one of your lies. “He is the most radical and racist president we have ever had”. THAT IS A LIE. There is only one, ONLY ONE BLACK GUY IN THE CABINET” Don’t lie to me. You love to use the race card because you, YES YOU have nothing, Yes nothing to go on. More Radical? I guess you forgot about Woodrow Wilson. " I think you are one.

    July 20, 2010 at 5:17 p.m.

  • born2bme

    I've got break my addiction to polls..:-) ... I'm beginning to find them more of nuisance than a reliable gauge.

    I'm not that enthusiastic about voting in November but I will, just to vote for governor and county judge. I probably will skip the rest.

    July 20, 2010 at 5:03 p.m.

  • Mike, you just stated why polls are not an accurate thing. Polls are conducted over the phone, most of the time. With caller ID, many people do not answer a number that they do not know, and I'm one of them. People who work a lot are not home to answer the phones, people who cannot afford phones, and there are people out there like that, cannot be contacted.
    Many, many of the people that will vote Democrat are not included in the polls, it's as simple as that.
    Unfortunately, many of those people do not go to the polls and vote either because of various reasons due to hardships.

    July 20, 2010 at 4:53 p.m.

  • jbj

    I missed one of your most laughable post... You say the Republican Party has been taken over by Name me five.... The Republican Party has taken over by the far right and people like former Senator Trent Lott, Bob Bennett and others have confirmed that. The Tea Party are republicans, that's their old fallback, even though they might have been discouraged by the Bush administration.

    Smaller government, less taxes, and less spending is just a slogan unless you put some real numbers behind them . Empty rhetoric.

    July 20, 2010 at 4:51 p.m.

  • lbj

    If you have been following elections for anytime at all; you would know the enthusiasm number is usually with those out of power..... For the umpteenth time, not many people, other than the elderly, vote in off-season elections. As the pundits keep saying, the unemployed, the minorities, the college students, and the poor will not vote. The registered and likely voters are the numbers one has to watch..... It's no doubt that the angry will join the elderly in the upcoming midterm election.

    Then again, the pollsters do not call those with cell phones.... Cell phone usage is on an up-rise and many have abandoned their home phone.

    July 20, 2010 at 4:33 p.m.

  • lbj

    This past Sunday CNN's Reliable Sources had a segment about this small incident.Abigail Thernstrom, who's a conservative member of the Civil Rights Commission, writes in the National Review magazine that this is small potatoes involving a lunatic fringe group. That would seem to argue that it doesn't deserve much media attention. Besides The Justice Department, by the way, reduced the charges to an injunction against the man with the billy club who has to stay away from Philadelphia polling places for a couple of years.... Move on.

    You know when you go into all that Glenn Beck,Sean Hannity,Rush rhetoric such as Obama media etc., You lose all credibility.... If you want to think Obama is a racist that is your opinion but I prefer you not do it on this blog, it will be welcomed on another blog. I don't mind the truth or a different opinion but I don't wanna be part of a platform that attracts all the craziness and conspiracy theorist.

    Let's keep this straight up on the facts, and those items that are controversial, back them up with some links or are some sort of proof. I'm well aware that I might be wrong from time to time; I do not have a big ego; I have apologized when I was wrong.

    July 20, 2010 at 4:25 p.m.

  • mike, did you see the one about enthusiasm on the same site? 28% dems, 51% repub. Someone must be hearing a message.

    July 20, 2010 at 4:20 p.m.

  • Gansoblanco

    I just saw were the Gallup Poll had the democrats up by six points 49-43 among registered voters ..... Just maybe(fingers crossed) all this indecision by the republicans, may be taking its toll.

    I don't know for sure but I think the independents want a plan.

    July 20, 2010 at 4 p.m.

  • Generally one would think that an anti Obama agenda approach would be weak, but in this case, the anger of the people is intense and overcomes other causes.

    I think part of the problem with the polling is that there is a split in the party because of the tea party effort, which is not a political party but is being polled as one. People do not want the Republican party of old. They want smaller government and less spending, lower taxes, and the Republican party has been taken over by moderates. Most Republicans want a more conservative leader.

    Hopefully, the tea parties will, in the end, support the Republican party and if the Republicans run conservatives, they will. Time will tell.

    July 20, 2010 at 3:59 p.m.

  • Mike you are obviously not informed about the new black panther incident. Our DOJ has made policy there will be no prosecutions of black racists if the victim is white. No one went to jail, it was overturned after the man was convicted. The "small incident" did not make the news, but the big news was avoided by the Obama media... that the DOJ will not prosecute blacks. That is not small no matter where it occurs.

    I know tax and spend and borrow and spend is a problem with both parties, and I have not supported this in the past.

    Obama has something against white people, comes from a church that does not like whites, and does not speak out when his appointees embrace racist policies. Draw your own conclusions.

    I don't ask anyone to feel sympathy for Sarah Palin. She does not need it or want it. But what the media did to her family is out of order. She made a mint off of it and will probably go far in politics because of it, or inspite of it.

    July 20, 2010 at 3:38 p.m.

  • Mike-
    To return to your original point. The falling approval numbers of Obama and the Dems has not been matched by a surge in GOP support. Why is that?

    Here's the best explanation I've found (from the same ABC poll):

    "Lack of confidence in the Republicans, plus their stubbornly low allegiance numbers since the
    Bush presidency went bad, indicate that they’re not benefiting from affirmative support for their
    own plans, but rather from dissatisfaction with Obama and the Democratic-led Congress.
    That’s a weaker hand to play, and it’s one reason that high-level enthusiasm among intended
    Republican voters is essentially no better than it is among intended Democratic voters. Thirty
    percent of those who plan to vote for a Republican candidate say they’re “very enthusiastic” about it, but so are 28 percent of those who plan to support a Democrat. Compare those to “very
    enthusiastic” support among Obama’s voters in 2008 – 68 percent.

    The way it seems to be shaping up the Dems will stand on the sidelines saying, "You don't want what you had before do you?".

    While on the field the Tea Partyers will implode the GOP.

    July 20, 2010 at 3:29 p.m.

  • John
    I don't know who you were addressing in your first two paragraphs but I will attempt to answer your proposal,as if you meant me....The blog is about politics,meet the Press etc

    It looks like you put some thought into it but a reads like the first budget the GOP put out. You know, the one without any actual numbers and before it is run through the bipartisan Congressional Budget Office. I'm not saying it's not a viable option but unless it meets the scrutiny of accountants and economist, it amounts to a proposal, nothing else.

    I'm sure every since the Washington Post story broke out ,we're gonna do something about all the intelligence agencies and their ~ 850,000 employees with secret clearances.

    btw, both parties agree that so Security Security can be fixed in hours but Medicare is the big monster. You didn't mention Medicare.

    July 20, 2010 at 2:33 p.m.

  • This is how I see it, putting aside politics; because it should be obvious by now, that I pretty much ignore idiot commentary or persons that have an unhealthy hang up on grammar. If the reason, you refuse to hear common sense, is because of a grammatical error, your an idiot.

    Regardless, from or how a message is presented to you, it’s contents have value if they speak truth. The wise seek truth, the fools seek structure; fore truth is a force of existence and structure is man’s presumption of existence, which invariable is proven false. If you are a true intellectual, you will understand the meaning of my statement.

    That being said, let me offer what I see as true, at least, until my perspective is proven false.

    1. Social Security, for those whose incomes are above the poverty level, should be cut; allowing for essential expenses(if they do not have other secured revenue sources) and as much as 10% above. This should be implemented immediately.

    2. Foreign military bases, not essential for continued activities in Southeast Asia, should be decommissioned(closed).

    3. Federal, State, and Local Governments should outsource their bureaucracies. Two “government task online auction sites” should be created. One for “essential operations”, and the other for “human services“. essential operations, should be allocated to profit oriented businesses; while human services to non-profit entities. Of course, religious entities should not be allowed to participate.

    4. With the exception, of non-profit entities participating in government human services, nonprofit tax exempt status should be revoked.

    5. Immediately, taxes should be applied to all imports; equitable to the potential tax revenue lost, from outsourced occupations used in foreign products and services. If foreign companies want to do the same, then they will have to raise occupational salaries, as to not appear to engage in trade war. This benefits us as well, because it raises the cost of doing business outside the United States. Every country that participates wins. Multinationals and their cohorts will not; because it favors governments.

    This is just for starters.

    The underlying theme, is that representatives, should be focused on eliminated the money drain; then use the additional tax revenue to fund real “job growth projects“ like electric rail along interstate commerce routes. To reduce the cost of transporting goods and services between states.

    There is your money to get the economy going and where you should spend it, to create jobs, that will not be outsourced and are essential to our economic future as energy prices rise.

    July 20, 2010 at 1:56 p.m.

  • Tax cuts for the rich, tax cuts for the rich!!!!! Please have some humanity just raise their taxes and be done with it and then please shut up. The Democrats have had dictatorial power for 18 months - what are they waiting for, just do it.

    FDR did it during the Depression, it worked wonders so why not do it again. Doing it will confirm once and for all that taxing the rich is either good or bad for economy and for the poor and unemployed.

    It will be a big social experiment with the whole population as guinea pigs - wait, that's what's going on now with those big 3,000 page bills being passed, whatever.

    July 20, 2010 at 1:40 p.m.

  • born2bme

    I believe the millionaires would love the Flat Tax because then they wouldn't have to pay their accountants and trust lawyers.

    I do believe a flat tax would penalize the poor because they don't pay any taxes now(at the end of the year) and they receive the EITC..... The flat tax would only apply to the Federal income tax because the states would keep their sales tax.
    Barack Obama tried to reduce the itemized deduction amounts on those making more than $250,000 by just 3% to help pay for Health Care Reform and the lobbyist went crazy.

    July 20, 2010 at 1:28 p.m.

  • jbj
    The borrow and spend title can be given to both parties.... That is where we are today. According to the words of John Cornyn, it seems like the republicans will wait until after the December 1 report from Obama's deficit cutting commission before they lay out a plan.

    It the same old republican “supply side trickledown economics" in which former president George HW Bush correctly called " vow doo economics."... You have to have a different plan other than “tax cuts."..... The voters did not buy that line in 2006 or 2008.

    The new Black Panther party issue is not one for the president to address. This story was sensationalized by Fox news to gin up their viewers. They were angry because the mainstream media did not pick up on the story. I can't imagine CNN, ABC, NBC, and CBS worrying about Fox, when they present what they think is important. Voter intimidation is wrong and everyone deplores it. This incident took place in the black neighborhood and it involved two people calling themselves the new Black Panther Party. Fox’s, Megan Kelly, thought this was a Pulitzer prize event, so much so, she criticized Bob Schieffer of CBS News we're not asking Atty. general Holder about the small incident. Fox News has had various programs featuring the president of the new Black Panther Party, giving him more attention and publicity than he deserves. I think he has been on over 51 times. The offender went to jail and but his partner did not, and I believe that neighborhood voted for Obama anyway..... If we had a voter intimidation case in Victoria of that small magnitude, do you think the major networks would pick it up? Fox was just doing what they always do, sensationalize an event dealing with race for publicity and bring up stuff to try to embarrass the administration.

    Just because the president did not address this issue, you want to call him a racist and yet you want sympathy for Sarah Palin?

    July 20, 2010 at 1:15 p.m.

  • This Country doesn't have the resources for a tax cut as long as we owe so much, or as long as the war is going on, or as long as the unemployment rate is so high, or as long as on and on and on. Bush's tax cuts are exactly what started to sink this economy, especially since he started a war at the same time. Did his tax cuts make the economy any better for the Average American? That would be a very funny statement if it wasn't so sadly true.

    Is it time for a flat tax where everyone pay the same %? How about take away all of the decuctions, so that it doesn't make it unfair?
    That way the ones making millions will naturally pay more, and those making pennies will pay the exact same percentage.
    Would it work? You tell me.

    July 20, 2010 at 12:16 p.m.

  • Mike you are the one who doesn't get it. Your team has tried the borrow and spend approach and it is not working.

    If Obama is not a racist, he needs to address the new black panther issue.

    It takes more than intelligence to run this country, we are seeing.

    July 20, 2010 at 12:06 p.m.

  • Pleeezzzz, Mike not the "ignore option" OMG what next!

    July 20, 2010 at 12:04 p.m.

  • Rollingstone
    Once again, you want to piggyback off my blog, to give your daily gloom and doom report. The blog was about Sunday's Meet the Press, not about some obscure hedge fund report.

    The Victoria blogosphere needs a few more bloggers to fill the void left by a daily anti-Obama,anti-liberal,anti-democrat poster. It is just my opinion, but I think you would do fine in that capacity. You would not have to worry about me pestering you because I would just ignore you as I do now...:-)

    Btw..I have not read one word from your cut & pastes....Boring.....zzzzzzz

    One more thing..Why can't you speak in the singular...Why must it always be we and us?You are the official spokesman for ????

    Have a good one

    July 20, 2010 at 11:43 a.m.

  • This comment was removed by the user.

    July 20, 2010 at 11:36 a.m.

  • Duh! thanks Mike fer dat. Duh here is another cut n' paste, I hope you ken explain it to me, I mean us. It sounds lek to us dum Sh!ts dat dings ain't as good as u say deh are, but I kant tell cus we are so stupid.

    "My post from last week, “Confirming A Sense Of Gloom” attracted some lively comment, not least from Lakshman Achuthan, managing director of the Economic Cycle Research Institute.

    I cited the ECRI’s Weekly Leading Index as something to watch for signs of an impending downturn.

    Achuthan took issue with my argument, that although the ECRI has been good at flagging recessions, it has offered up some false positives. I take his point. My error was to use “ECRI” as shorthand for the Weekly Leading Index it produces and which has lately been widely cited as warning of an impending downturn. What’s more, I fess up to using a simplistic interpretation of the WLI, with which Achuthan also took issue.

    In mitigation, however, I did offer up the caveat that it would have to show “a significant drop below zero” to signal recession, rather than just to dip into negative territory.

    Still, I don’t feel I’ve grossly misused the data. My feeling is that the more an index lends itself to eyeball analysis, the more useful it is to investors. For instance, economists have long used the negative Treasury bond yield curve as a warning sign of impending inflation. It doesn’t work perfectly, but it’s pretty good.

    Indeed, economists Albert Edwards and David Rosenberg also seem to use relatively simple interpretations of the WLI to support their arguments that the U.S. economy’s recovery is starting to crumble.

    I’m sure, as Achuthan points out, the ECRI has a flawless record of recession forecasting based on its subjective analysis of a “pronounced, pervasive and persistent” drop in its leading indices. I shall be watching closely for any pronouncements it makes. But I’ll also be using simple eyeball analysis of the ECRI’s WLI, together with any number of other indicators (including Dow Jones’ own Economic Sentiment Indicator, which I help to produce), to develop for myself a picture of what’s likely to be happening to the U.S. economy.

    By the way, the Dow Jones ESI suggests the U.S. economy has plateaued during the past six months at broadly the level that marks the border between recession and recovery. This suggests that once the effects of the inventory rebuild are taken out, the underlying trend for the U.S. economy is rather muted. And that it’s very vulnerable to another downturn."

    July 20, 2010 at 11:32 a.m.

  • I did not mention "US" I specifically mentioned Rollingstone...The only one who submitted a word for word cut & paste.

    July 20, 2010 at 11:20 a.m.

  • RE: Retraction

    Pundits may have led me astray again because I thought Elizabeth Warren was approved to be the head of the newly created "Consumer Financial Protection Bureau" but apparently she is not,as of yet.

    According to the bill's language, the Treasury Secretary has sole authority to build the new agency before it's ultimately transferred to the Federal Reserve. That includes anointing a person to head the effort on his behalf, and under his authority. The interim head would serve until the President's nominee is confirmed by the Senate.That person could be Elizabeth Warren.

    I do know of an ongoing feud between her and the treasury secretary because she is currently the bailout watch dog.
    I did not want be called a liar, again.

    July 20, 2010 at 11:18 a.m.

  • Duh! Mike please help me understand dis cut n' paste and dees graphs deh are so confusing to us dumb Sh!ts dat read your blogs.

    July 20, 2010 at 11:08 a.m.

  • jbj

    The day John McCain nominated her to be his vice president, someone put up a blog where several bloggers discussed several aspects of her campaign. Most of us decided to go to the issue of intelligence and knowledge of domestic and foreign affairs. Others went to dwell on personal issues.

    I'm not a fan a reality TV nor do I Care about Palin's personal life, her tweets, her Face Book page or her opinions but Hillary Clinton faced the same scrutiny and hate but she over came it by continuing to go out day after day giving intelligent answers to complex questions. Sarah Palin uses the media to her advantage by not taking serious questions but still getting her partisan message out with Face Book etc... Old adage applies " can't stand the heat... get out of the kitchen."

    You may want down to earth candidates but I want above and beyond because the presidency does not call for mediocracy .

    Btw... I don't think you can take a " holier than thou stance" when you call the president of the United States,a, I don't really want to spend the rest of my day discussing poor little Sarah Palin.....

    July 20, 2010 at 10:38 a.m.

  • 95% of those making less $250,000 got a tax cut.....More tax cuts when revenues only pay for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid .
    We borrow the rest...Do you want us to go on borrow for another tax cut? ....You have and a one track mind, once we get the job market going again, we might have the revenues for another tax cut.

    July 20, 2010 at 10:33 a.m.

  • Mike, I am not for a tax cut for the rich. I am for a tax cut for everyone. Many do not pay any taxes. Who pays their share? The ones you consider rich pay the most.

    Why should those who pay the most not get the benefit of a tax cut?

    July 20, 2010 at 10:14 a.m.

  • Mike, Sarah Palin and her children underwent a slaughter by the media and everyone else who wanted to get in on the act. I was horrified at the American people who were in on this. Like a pack of dogs attacking a downed animal. If even a fraction of this hate had been aimed at Obama or his family, or Biden and his, it would have been all over. This was not opposition to a politician.

    We had an American woman who thought a nation full of normal people would appreciate her down to earth take on things and many did, but we also found some serious haters out there. It is one thing to hate a politician and attack their policies, but those who thought they had a shoe in for the leftist agenda found some opposition in this woman and what she represented and had to make it stop even at the cost of lowering their self respect to try to hurt someone's children.

    Now, like her or hate her, you have to admit the attack was uncalled for.

    July 20, 2010 at 10:05 a.m.

  • lol...Thanks Hictoria,that was a good icebreaker.

    Have a good one

    July 20, 2010 at 9:49 a.m.

  • On the serious front,these economic issues should worry all Americans not just democrats and republicans.

    Housing has dropped again but permits have gone up a little bit, so it all comes back to jobs, jobs, jobs.

    I'm so glad Elizabeth Warren will head up the Consumer Protection Agency because she will clean house on behalf of American consumers.... She warns that we're going into a commercial real estate crisis. We have a lot of empty buildings out there and right now we're going through a " Pretend and Extend" scheme... Both parties pretend the property is valued more than what it's worth and the bankers will extend the loan... This will coming to head,pretty soon and you won't be able to blame the fed,minorities, and the poor for that.

    July 20, 2010 at 9:46 a.m.

  • This article on the Baltic Dry Index drop states : "What we are seeing is an over supply of shipping space rather than a dramatically slowing global economy" as the reason for the drop and concludes: "So all is not as it first seems. Bulk cargo rates are falling more because of vessel supply than a sharp decline in trade while container traffic rates are rising more because of a shortage of containers than a booming finished goods market. Not surprisingly the recovery continues to be a rocky road even if so far it appears to be heading more or less in the right direction."

    I am not an economist but there are plenty of mixed interpretations of economic data out there...

    July 20, 2010 at 9:46 a.m.

  • And in other news... I thought you would like this one Mike. (due to you being a dem) Enjoy!

    July 20, 2010 at 9:42 a.m.

  • If only rollingstone understood all the cut and pastes.

    In your own words summarize what all that you can't because you cut and pasted word for word.

    July 20, 2010 at 9:35 a.m.

  • Lol....Read all about it,from the " Daily Dloom and Doom Report" one headge fund report will send the democrats heading for the hills.... That's so funny.

    All economic policies and economist all depend and on one forcast and the whole world will blame the

    July 20, 2010 at 9:31 a.m.

  • So it's a good sign that the ECRI drops - my bad. But what about this?

    This morning the Baltic Dry Index, a measure of freight rates for international shipping, was at 1700. It hasn't been at this level since April 2009, only four months after its Credit Crisis low and only one month after the stock market was at its bottom.

    Bloomberg News noted a week ago that the index had dropped continuously for the longest period in nine years. Yes, the current drop in the preceding seven weeks (from a high of 4209 in late May) has been bigger than anything seen during the Credit Crisis. The last drop of this magnitude was in August 2001 in the middle of that year's recession. Lack of shipping activity from China, the engine for global economic activity, was cited as the main cause for the falling index. Charter rates for all types of ships tracked in the index are falling.

    Prices for dry bulk shipping, which doesn't include energy commodities, tend to be very sensitive to economic activity. A sharp drop in rates indicates a significant drop in global trade. Based on historical charts it looks like the Baltic Index can lead, be coincident or lag movements in economic data and the stock market. The index seems to be most closely correlated with prices of industrial commodities and the industrial sector of the global economy. While this is not the largest component of the U.S. economy (the service sector is four times larger), it is the key sector in developing economies. It was manufacturing though that had the biggest rebound in the U.S. since last year. The service sector has remained lackluster.

    The stock market will likely be following the Baltic Index down, although perhaps not with such a precipitous decline. The Index has dropped almost 60% since late May. With the exception of the small cap Russell 2000, none of the major stock indices have had even a 20% drop - at least not yet.

    July 20, 2010 at 9:28 a.m.

  • Lakshman Achuthan managing director of ECRI "blasted" the WSJ for "misleading reporting" over the Index:

    "While we certainly appreciate the attention given to our Weekly Leading Index, I’d like to clarify a few points raised in the article. First, according to the Economist magazine, “the ECRI” has not ever given false alarms on a recession forecast.

    The purported false alarms from “the ECRI” mentioned in this article come from a mistaken and simplistic view that negative growth in ECRI’s Weekly Leading Index (WLI) is tantamount to a recession forecast. In fact, since 1983, cyclical downturns have taken WLI growth under the zero line a dozen times, but recessions have followed on only three of those occasions – times when ECRI actually made a recession forecast.

    Since ECRI itself has never used WLI growth going negative as a recession signal, it is important that such “false alarms” are attributed not to ECRI or even to the WLI, but to what is a mistaken interpretation of the WLI"

    July 20, 2010 at 9:21 a.m.

  • jbj

    Now, you're the spokesman for the liberals when you said" most liberals would like to see her take a hike",meaning Palin.
    Really, a person who quit her position in half term, has high negatives, and doesn't know a thing. She would be great comic relief but if she ran in 2012 and won the nomination; it would be the greatest landslide victory, ever for the democrats.

    You said" if the republicans get back in,I feel many will work on jobs." That's a vague statement without any specifics unless you think more tax cuts to the rich, automatically means more jobs.
    Talk show ran rhetoric(socialism) will drive independents away from the GOP. The independents are fiscal conservatives that haven't no interest in social conservatives issues. This is according to independent pollsters like Charlie Cook.

    If a politician cannot stand attacks by their opponents; they need to get into quilting, basket weaving, or something less strenuous. Besides the GOP could give lessons on how to slam your opponent ala Karl Rove & Lee Atwater.... A history book or two is in order.

    While I agree both parties take lobbyist money from big businesses; I sincerely think the GOP works harder for theirs. It with Joe Barton that apologize to BP, it was none other than minority house leader John Boehner that went over to tell the bankers " "Don't let those little punk staffers take advantage of you," Boehner said. "Stand up for yourselves." meaning against congress. Wall Street said they will cut off funds to the democrats, after they saw all that financial reform was going to get passed.

    Talk show rhetoric is just that, it is not a good substitute for facts.

    July 20, 2010 at 9:17 a.m.

  • The Democrats will be running for their lives from this:

    The ECRI Leading Economic Index just dropped to a fresh reading of 120.6 (flat from a previously revised 121.5 as the Columbia profs scramble to create at least a neutral inflection point): this is now a -9.8 drop, and based on empirical evidence presented previously by David Rosenberg, and also confirming all the macro economic data seen in the past two months, virtually assures that the US economy is now fully in a double dip recession scenario.

    "It is one thing to slip to or fractionally below the zero line, but a -3.5% reading has only sent off two head-fakes in the past, while accurately foreshadowing seven recessions — with a three month lag. Keep your eye on the -10 threshold, for at that level, the economy has gone into recession … only 100% of the time (42 years of data)." We are there.

    July 20, 2010 at 9:13 a.m.

  • Jimidollar

    I agree, the GOP will run against Obama but this off-season election will also be about local politics. The democrats will ask their opponents, why they would vote against extending unemployment benefits but 100% of them want to extend the Bush tax cuts to the wealthy.

    It might be a play on words but Congressman Pete Sessions was a member of that panel, the dems will try to use his words to tie him to the previous administration.

    "We need to go back to the exact same agenda that is empowering the free enterprise system rather than diminishing it," said NRCC chairman Pete Sessions on "Meet the Press" Sunday morning.

    The transcript is at the bottom of the page.

    July 20, 2010 at 8:51 a.m.

  • If you think the Democrats have done nothing, you are the one delusional. We are walking down a path toward socialism and the majority do not want to go there.

    If you think where we are headed now will take care of the poor you are buying into some Socialistic bs that does not work and will never work. In societies where the government controls more it corrupts more. History proves this. The rich get richer, the poor, poorer. Check out history. Oh wait, you said the Republicans won't take care of average Americans... well if we keep going this direction, average Americans will be poor Americans who actually need help.

    Democrats are into big business more than they want you to know. Who do you think the health care and financial bill help?? Certainly not the average American. Do you think the stimulus bill actually created jobs?

    The government is not an efficient spender. The less they control the better the average American will do.

    July 20, 2010 at 8:10 a.m.

  • jbj,

    You are delusional if you think that the Republicans are going to do anything except take care of the upper class and big business. History shows that they do not care about average Americans and the struggles that they face every day. Their answer is that people are lazy if they don't have a job, or need a little public assistance.
    What makes you think that they can do any better? Things will always get mired down in Congress.
    Democrats thought they had it made this time since they had the 60 votes and look what's happened. There is no magic going to happen if the Republicans take control, unless you count them taking care of the ones that need it the least.
    History doesn't lie and does repeat itself..

    July 20, 2010 at 7:51 a.m.

  • I didn't watch Sunday, but I can say this. If Republicans do get back in, and I feel like many will, they will work on JOBS. They will get more money back into the hands of the voters and out of the hands of the government, which has not been efficient in getting things moving. They will stop the Socialistic move, and that is really the focus of the majority of Americans. They will repeal or at least revise health care.

    The platform of the Republicans may not be as strong as we would like to see it, but that of the Democrats is pretty weak, with their record. They focus on slamming opponents rather than offering real solutions and they have no record to stand on.

    Say what you want about Palin, most liberals would like her to take a hike.

    July 20, 2010 at 7:08 a.m.

  • GOP missed their groove because they sold their souls to the devil(Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Mark Williams, and Joe Paggs).

    July 20, 2010 at 5:07 a.m.

  • I watched Meet the Press. The Democrat plan for November will be to blame Bush. The Republican plan is to blame Obama. Pretty simple.

    I thought Cornyn(whom I greatly dislike) missed an opportunity to make a statement. He was repeatedly asked what the Republicans would differently this time around as opposed to the Bush years. He never answered.

    July 19, 2010 at 5:52 p.m.

  • Holein1
    For the past two Sundays I have been surprised by Chris Wallace, last week, he held senator John Kyl's feet to the fire, when he asked why it's okay to increase the deficit to give tax cuts to the rich but it's not okay to increase the deficit to extend jobless benefits to the unemployed.

    I don't know in what context that house member said"we'll do what the President tells us to do." but there is that separation of powers and like her or hate her, Nancy Pelosi reminds the administration of that separation.

    I always thought that senator John Cornyn could spin with the best of them but Sunday he looked like he was rope-a-doping, just waiting for the show to end. Pete Sessions reminded me of a windup toy, wind him up and he spits out the talking points....... It looks like the democrats were testing their talking points for November and if it goes like it did yesterday, is gonna be a repeat of George W Bush vs. George W Bush.....The dems will remind voters of the Bush years and people like Pete Sessions will say "The Bush years were not so bad.".....

    I'm pretty sure the republicans will change their strategy; if not they will give new life to the vulnerable democrats.

    The democrats need to own the bills they passed.

    July 19, 2010 at 4:24 p.m.

  • I totally agree that it was a weak showing this past weekend. I had to change the channel Sunday morning, because I was going to puke if I had to listen to anymore of the same 'ole same 'ole from both sides.

    It's too bad when real folks get involved in politics they either get shoved out or turned in to pod people.

    The regurgitation of the political rhetoric is really getting old. The blame game is really getting old. I'm tired of no one stepping up and claiming ownership of mistakes.

    I read somewhere recently, that one House member said "we'll do what the President tells us to do." That made me pause. Since when does our Congress work for the President and not the People? I know, it's been going on for years, but that doesn't make it right. Both sides make me sick.

    And would the GOP tell Palin to take a hike and STFU!!! It's enough to make me become politically apathetic.

    July 19, 2010 at 3:48 p.m.