Forgot your password?
Type your email address below and click the sign up button to create an account.
Why isHarry Reid the only individual holding up the progress of the United States Congress? No fabercation or lies, just the dang truth...
Surprise ,surprise .Romney wins FlordiaM. Romney 47.4% 550,680N. Gingrich 31.3% 363,110R. Santorum 13.0% 150,678R. Paul 6.9% 79,980R. Perry 0.4% 5,122J. Huntsman 0.4% 4,975M. Bachmann 0.3% 3,047H. Cain 0.2% 2,507G. Johnson
A little housekeeping,the other day I said a CBS poll showed that a 91% approval for Obama's SOTU speech in addition all three primetime MSNBC shows – The Ed Show, The Rachel Maddow Show, The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell and several democratic operatives quoted that WRONG number the 91% was last year's approval..I know Rachel Maddow made a retraction last night..Posting incorrect material (no matter how small) is humbling..Sorry,I did not mean to deceive but I know others will see it differently.
On another matter the president DID NOT say he was going to raise the capital gains rate (he can't,that's up to the GOP controlled House and Ways Committee and Congress) he was pushing an Alternative Minimum Tax(AMT) and which would ensure that those making a $1,000,000 would pay a minimum of 30%..With the use of a complex formula those making over $1,000,000 would get certain tax preferences eliminated so they don't get taxed less than 30%. The thing to look at is the EFFECTIVE TAX RATE. Which is the amount of tax paid divided by taxable income.
LOL! A person can claim or make believe whatever they want. Rising above it is the tough part. It's easy and I know you can do it.Again, I won't get into this here.
By "WE" did you mean all aliases?
Thanks for making Stephen Pappas' point from the liberal side of things.
You know who you are and we appreciate the honesty.
A great debate tonight, Romney & Gingrich both made money off Fannie and Freddie Mac and they now blame them for the crisis...lol
Thanks but we know the study will be demonized by targets of the research...lol
But I've believed all along that "Nonetheless, there is reason to believe that strict right-wing ideology might appeal to those who have trouble grasping the complexity of the world.
"Socially conservative ideologies tend to offer structure and order," Hodson said, explaining why these beliefs might draw those with low intelligence. "Unfortunately, many of these features can also contribute to prejudice."
And the first sentence explains the research.
"There's no gentle way to put it: People who give in to racism and prejudice may simply be dumb, according to a new study that is bound to stir public controversy."
The excerpts were taken from the links that were provide.
They know who they are..:-)
There are warning signs for congress, at an all time low of 13%,especially for Republicans,according to the latest NBC/Wall Street Journal poll
More people say the GOP has brought the wrong kind of change (31 percent) in Congress than the right kind (12 percent). That represents a drop for the GOP from a year ago, right after when they took control of the House as a result of the sweeping 2010 elections. In January 2011, 25 percent thought Republicans would bring the right kind of change versus 20 percent who thought they would bring the wrong kind.Those attitudes are also far worse than right after when Democrats took control of the House in 2006 (42%/15%) and Republicans regained a majority in 1994 (37%/11%).
LOL, OK, I'm not saying this pertains to everyone, but it does explain a lot
The SOTU speech takes about two months to write because it gets input from all departments in the Federal government and sometimes changes are made an hour before the president makes the speech to reflect what is current...It's usually just the premise for a presidential road trip where the president explains his proposals.
Coming off the SOTU speech which had a 91% approval according to CBS News, the president gave some details of his energy plan in Las Vegas, just a little while ago. I was very pleased at the approach because it's what I've been saying all along(I'm sure got it from somewhere), he's got to explain his proposals, he doesn't have to use a whiteboard like Ross Perot but he has to be the educator in chief or his opponents will tell their version ..... Again, I've been saying that the American people will not move to natural gas or hybrids on their own... The president said that we had about 100 years of natural gas we need to extract BUT we need to know what chemicals they are using and we must take all the precautions to do it safely.... He also said we need to build refueling stations. He wants to start with the Federal government because they have the most vehicles in their motor pool. The United States Navy will start using more solar power and most of the government vehicles will be converted to natural gas. ... He encouraged cities and states to do the same...NYC's Mayor Bloomberg wanted to impose a city law requiring city cab companies to replace their gas-guzzling Ford Crown Victoria sedans with more efficient livery vehicles but the Supreme Court struck it down... Perhaps, the mayor can try another approach, such as incentives.
Take control of the message.
I had the same feeling becuase at the end he made sure to sprinkle in enough red meat to satisfy the base...As for that statement "continue to mislead Americans that we should change nothing" in reference to Social Security could be applied to Wall Street which his party does not want to regulate...Jamie Dimon just told CNBC that's it's not the regulations per say;it 's the ambiguity..Spell it out and they will comply and it obviously won't hurt them one bit.
Mike-Mitch Daniels G.O.P. response to the President's SOTU speech got my attention:
"Decades ago, for instance, we could afford to send millionaires pension checks and pay medical bills for even the wealthiest among us. Now, we can't, so the dollars we have should be devoted to those who need them most.
"The mortal enemies of Social Security and Medicare are those who, in contempt of the plain arithmetic, continue to mislead Americans that we should change nothing. Listening to them much longer will mean that these proud programs implode, and take the American economy with them. It will mean that coming generations are denied the jobs they need in their youth and the protection they deserve in their later years."
Still scratching my head about that comment....never saw it coming.
Again with the sorry but That's Jeff Flake instead of what I typed Jeff Blake and I can't blame it on the keyboard layout because the "B" and the "F" aren't that close together.... Four corrections on one blog posting has to be a record...:-).
Yes,newcowboy Jeff is a gentleman .
Jeff Blake - is above being a republican or democrat - he is a gentleman that respected his collegue and supported his collegue. Good for HIM!
Sorry I meant tweets instead of tweaks but it might have been taken as a tweak...:-)
You've always been a proponent of bipartisanship, so I thought I would share this story with you.
Jeff Blake is a conservative republican representative from Arizona but last night he showed what bipartisan is all about. He sat next to Gabriel Giffords last night and helped her up every time she wanted to applaud something the president said... He received many tweaks from his colleagues questioning whether he was for those programs but it didn't faze him because he said that every one should know where he stands.... Just because you have a colleague with a different opinion doesn't mean that they are your mortal enemy forever.... We all remember the cordial friendship between speaker Tip O'Neill and President Reagan and the friendship between conservative Orin Hatch and the Liberal Lion,Ted Kennedy.
DaleThat is an idea that the president has been pushing since his 2008 presidential campaign but has been unable to offer the republicans enough meat to make it happen.I keep wondering when Harry Reid will submit a bill like that.
Our legislators had the right idea several years ago when they came out with the Alternative Minimum Tax(AMT) but like always, they didn't make adjustments, so the tax that was supposed to hit the upper income started falling on the middle class.... The president is proposing a 30% AMT for the top 2% to make sure people like Romney pay their fair share but it'll never make it past the House of Representatives.
Sunday, I heard speaker Boehner tell Chris Wallace that an infrastructure bill is ready to go with bipartisan support... He forgot to say that the bipartisan support is eight democrats. Repairing infrastructure is supported by republicans and democrats but the bill has to be clean bill without the usual poison pills or sweeteners in it.
BTW He took a chapter from Ron Paul by saying let's take 50% of the savings of getting completely out of Iraq and put it on the debt and use the other 50% for some of the needed programs...At least that's what I thought I've been hearing Ron Paul say at the debates.
The president disappoint most of the republicans because he barely mentioned the $15 trillion debt.
But what about Warren buffet? This fabercation of Obama saying Buffet pays less in taxes than one of his employees. If that employee has a yearly income of $34,500-83,600 it is taxed at 25%. Now Mr. buffet makes a billion dollar investment and has a profit of one billion, then he would be taxed on CG of 15%, which = 150,000,000million in taxes... The fabercation or lie that President Obama seeks to present to the American people is just that. Mr. Buffet's tax rate is different than his employee, but for the president to say Buffet pays less in taxes is a dang lie, and the president knows it.
I have to hand a congrat to one of Mr Obama's suggestions. EVERY, corporation must pay taxes. If the corp moves it's production facilities overseas, then pay more. If it produces here, pay less. To which the R-"leaders" frowned and thought not over my dead body. Mike, if a corp is an American company, with a desire to sell to Americans, and enjoy American privileges, why not pay the tax or pay extra for the luxury of producing overseas? I would really like to see some of our well healed CEOs move to Peking.
Thank you for the synopsis.
I didn't exactly see it that way because if it's a bipartisan piece of legislation, a presidential veto means he has an agenda different from his own party... I can see where the Keystone XL project might fall into that category right now because the president doesn't want to boxed in but he will eventually allow the project to go forward when the states, the State Dept., and a pipeline reroute is acceptable to all those concerned.
You're exactly right; the president can't get any real money to spend unless Congress authorizes it.
They are some things they can get done without Congress like getting the Atty. General to call in those banks that were involved in the predatory lending to come up with a workable solution for their investors and consumers who were duped in the housing crisis. It's better than taking them to court where nothing will get done.
I don't know where the president was going with this but when I saw the CBS “60 Minutes" segment about the legal insider trading that was done by individual members of Congress; I actually thought Congress would do something on their own. Now that the president has put the spotlight on this scheme; will they act?
It is my opinion last night's SOTU speech is a preview of how the president will campaign this summer. He will use a Truman populist style to run against a do nothing Congress. The two GOP front runners have been playing right into his hands. For example: Newt Gingrich was complaining about Mitt Romney not showing his tax returns. The tax return showed Mitt paying a ~13.6% effective tax rate, leaving room for Mitt room to say Newt, under your plan I pay zero taxes.....Thing is, Mitt Romney was a successful businessman and he was rightly compensated for it. He makes $57,000 a day and he does not spend one day working, it’s all interest, dividends and other income that allows him to pay a maximum rate of 15%. Not his fault but consider a struggling young family(under 59 1/2 years old) taking money out of their BEFORE tax 401K...They would automatically pay the 10% penalty and let's say the $10,000 they had to pull out , $10,000 would be taxed @ ordinary rates of the taxpayers. ..This is just one example.
I agree - some of his speech was good - other parts was kind of like - do what I say are else. What I was thinking while he was speaking was the the democrats and republicans in congress must find that middle ground and write and pass legislation - TOGETHER - that will make a difference. Then it is up to President Obama to sign it. My fear is that even if there is bipartisan agreement and legislation passed - Mr. Obama may veto if it isn't exactly what he wants.No matter what he said last night - the people sitting in the room are the ones that can make it happen. I am getting more and more frustrated with those listening last night.
Tonight's SOTU speech was mostly about unity but he also stressed that he will use executive authority if Congress becomes an obstacle. ...Politically,he made an optimistic speech leaving his opponents a challange to do something besides critize..IMO
Gov. Daniels made a pretty good rebuttal but as usual everyone will come away with their own interpretation.
Regular CNN as well, but español could be fun
You can bet yourr a$$ on Obama laundry list. But i would say to you and the rest of the dang Dems, where in the hell is the budget, you libs/dems have had over 700 days to produce one, while the dem/clowns were in control... How about an answer, other blame the republicans, or is that over the top???
I hear you,Newcowboy but SNL will have to get creative because this one was a yawner...:-)
I will wait and watch the replay on SNL - as you say - it is more entertaining.
Thanks ,you are correct "CNN en Español" January 26,2012.
Ummm there is another Cnn debate Thursday, so not over yet. http://www.2012presidentialelectionne...