I think the demonstrations across the nation exemplify the mood of the nation. It quickly was seen as a left wing movement because they marched on Wall Street. When a protester was asked if he wanted the president or some Democrats to give voice to that protest" he said absolutely not because they like the Republicans, are part of the problem." I enjoyed reading the article written by Jennifer Janak because she said “We’re failing as a nation. We need to take note of what is going on." She also indicated that she would like to get a group together to discuss the issues and their wants and demands. After the September 2008 financial meltdown, we bailed out Wall Street and paid for their bonuses but not one Wall Street CEO has paid a price for squandering taxpayer's retirement funds. Yes, I think the bailout was necessary, and they did pay us back with interest but that's all they did. They are continuing the same policies that got them in trouble in the first place, and they have enough well paid lobbyists on the payroll, which will make it hard to rein them in. They certainly won’t self-correct. As a poster correctly stated, deregulation and lack of oversight have been a problem for years. The SEC is just a farm system for future Goldman Sachs hedge fund managers. A lot of our treasury secretaries have come from Goldman Sachs. SEC employees learn the ropes on the taxpayers' dime and use that expertise to gain a lucrative contract from the people they used to oversee.

I don't blame the protesters for not wanting Washington's politicians to be part of their protest because it's obvious both parties are in full campaign mode. Yesterday, the president was in full mode campaign in Mesquite, Texas urging that crowd to call their representatives to pass his job bill. He even called out Majority House Leader, Eric Cantor because he had said the jobs bill was dead- on arrival. That's been a common theme for about 10 years now and will continue to be as long as one lonely senator can hold up any piece of legislation by filibustering. We could help remove the gridlock by going back to the simple 51 vote majority rule. This morning I heard a good example of why Congress has a 14% approval. This morning Chuck Todd, host of MSNBC's "The Daily Rundown" asked Senator John Thune(R-NE) about a poll showing that only 35% of Americans trusted President Obama with the economy but the same poll showed only 20% trusted the GOP. The senator responded by saying that it was because the president didn't have leadership qualities. Huh? Republican leaders of both houses cannot control their ranks, and he expects the president to show the way. The only way that the president can do that, is by meeting their demands and sticking it to his own party. There is hope because yesterday,"Rep. Frank Wolf (R., Va.) lashed out at anti tax advocate Grover Norquist, charging that he abuses his position as a sponsor of a no-new-taxes pledge."

We're not without solutions because economists and leaders of both parties have said that Bowles-Simpson in a solid bipartisan plan. The president could have endorsed it, since he endorsed the idea of the committee but for some reason, he did not take all the recommendations.

I don't see why we just can't break down the talking points. I would say, "Of course we don't want to tax the job creators while unemployment is high" but I would attach a caveat. The job creator would have to prove on his 1040/1120S/1120 or1065 return that he employs 100 people or more. He would pay the tax and then receive the credit for 100% of the extra tax after submitting his employer ID number for verification. I would be willing to give the credit on a graduated scale; like a 90% credit if you employed 90 people. If we could agree on that I would just tackle the “job killing regulations." I can sympathize with that because I remember all the unproductive rules and regulations our company placed on us. I think it would be too expensive to require all deep offshore drilling rigs to have two relief wells on standby, but they could at least update their response plans. It may also be too expensive to make all refineries install carbon emission sequestration systems, but we could provide incentives for them to do that. I think Dodd-Frank is too complex to put it in the " job killing" category because the financial industry seems to be doing fine, but if some arcane regulation is preventing them from lending; by all means make it public,so we can discuss it.

This morning, Harold Ford Jr. said the president should not have said that Americans were soft. He went on to say that our troops in Afghanistan, Iraq and the Middle East have demonstrated that is not so. Yes, our troops have demonstrated a high degree of sacrifice, determination, and bravery, but they represent less than 1/2 of 1% of Americans. Can you imagine the laughter, a representative or a president would get if he suggested that we come up with a Marshall Plan to fix our many problems? That was the 1947 plan that asked taxpayers to pay ~$12 billion to pay for reducing the hunger, homelessness, and political unrest for 270 million people scattered across 16 countries in Western Europe. Yes, Europe is a financial mess today and the fall of Greece might damage our economy even more, but it was a financial success for about 60 years. We mustn't lose sight of the need to need to invest in education, innovation, and infrastructure, while we're reducing our deficit and debt. Right now we mustn't let the distractions keep us from focusing on jobs and the economy.

You may not like President Obama and the democrats, that is your prerogative but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to revive this economy and do our best to reemploy a majority of the 14 million. A President Romney should not have to dig us out of a hole first, before trying his solution to make this country a world leader in education, health care, innovation, and job creation again.