Hello:

We are NOT going to have a Supreme Court that will overturn Roe v. Wade. We are NOT going to repeal health reform. We are NOT going amend the Constitution to prevent gays from marrying. We are NOT going to give tax cuts to millionaires and billionaires. We are NOT going to eliminate the Department of Energy OR the Environmental Protection Agency. We are NOT vetoing the Dream Act. We are NOT going to throw 12 million people out of the country. We are NOT going to end Medicare.

Ain't this a great country, or what?

excon

He won with only 52% of the vote.. and even that is in question due to numerous irregularities... such as 59 precincts in Philly that had ZERO Romeny votes... over 100 in Ohio... and also in Illinois and Fl... there is also reports of numerous precincts that had more votes cast than they had elligible adults... and one where the result is alredy being contested whenre the votes counted do not come close to the number of people logged in that voted.

THis election was stolen through massivve vote fraud... which is WHY the Democrats have fought agaist Photo ID being required to vote.. something that is REQUIRED everywhere else in the world. To prevent dead people and Illegals from voting in elections like happened so obviously this time.

Romney getting ZERO votes in so many precincts in so many swing states is a statistical IMPOSSIBILITY.

Not even Saddam Hussain got 100% of the vote... or Fidel Castro.. And we all know HUGO CHavez still didn't even with the wholesale fraud that happened there.

Yes but...

We (USA) will be broke...

We will have millions addicted to free handouts, free phones, free everything instead of taking pride in their own achievements.

We will have doctors who averaged C's in medical school because any sensible doctor is going to leave medicine.

We will be more like the other socialist countries of the world who have tried to make socialism work and never have made it work? Remember when France lectured Obama on the economy. How embarrassing for us.

We will have a President who bows to other leaders.

We will have a nuclear Iran.

Honestly, God help the United States of America.

The Joy of Democracy. Some bemoan the results of each election, some say we are on a ever-widening track of a nation of people who truly care about each other in all our variety, and some don't care. I'm in the middle group. How much has really changed in 250 years?
Mainly, the argument 'I (am, am not) my brother's keeper' will always be here.

You aren't going to end Medicare, you're just going to bleed it to death via Obamacare.

Hello again, Steve:

I couldn't agree more.. So, we should move forthwith to single payer. Think of the BILLIONS we'd save. What? Romney is WRONG about how much the Israeli's save? If we did HALF that, we could fund Medicare FOREVER, and we'll have some left over for an air craft carrier or two.

Other than being ideologically opposed to it, what do you think about the MONEY we'll save?? Isn't the future of your country WORTH it?

excon

Do I hear the bleating of sheep on their way to the shearing shed

If we did away with Welfare.. Medicaid and food stamps.. think of all the money we would save.

do I hear the bleating of sheep on their way to the shearing shed

I think that's the Democrats molesting the sheep in the shearing shed. And the sheep aren't too happy about it.

I think thats the Democrats molesting the sheep in the shearing shed. And the sheep aren't too happy about it.

No that's the republicans, they don't want to be dipped

I couldn't agree more..

That was a quick 180 from "We are NOT going to end Medicare."

No it's just business as usual and someone is going to have to get used to it. There will be must posturing, much chest beating, and many will say we did our best, but it was a bridge too far

no that's the republicans, they don't want to be dipped

Republicans sit in boardrooms and Corporate Executive offices... they don't mingle with the working man... didn't you get the memo?

No, I'm not getting all my memos these days, must be that damned spam filter.

Look I know about Boardrooms and Corporate Executive offices , spent a good part of my life there, that didn't stop me from having common sense and speaking to the workers. If these guys were religious like they say they are, they would work to see the ordinary people get their share

The Republicans got done bigtime, they backed the wrong horse, it happens and if they don't get their head out of you know where, it will happen more frequently. I don't necessarily like to see conservative forces get done but you can be too far to the right, too much sold on this rugged individialist crap

No, I'm not getting all my memos these days, must be that damned spam filter.

Look I know about Boardrooms and Corporate Executive offices , spent a good part of my life there, that didn't stop me from having common sense and speaking to the workers. If these guys were religious like they say they are, they would work to see the ordinary people get their share

The Republicans got done bigtime, they backed the wrong horse, it happens and if they don't get their head out of you know where, it will happen more frequently. I don't necessarily like to see conservative forces get done but you can be too far to the right, too much sold on this rugged individialist crap
Obama only got 52% of the popular vote... thats no mandate. and it's a very slim win... and there are LOTS of indications of massive vote fraud across the country. Because people didn't have to prove most places they were legally eligible to actually vote.

Obama only got 52% of the popular vote.....thats no mandate., and its a very slim win...and there are LOTS of indications of massive vote fraud across the country. Because people didn't have to prove most places they were legally eligible to actually vote.


Rather than complain about it on just about every post in this forum why don't you do something about getting a Federal electoral system that works?

Tut

It is clear from his presser yesterday that the Prez is over-reading his win as some sort of massive mandate . GW Bush got smacked down in 2005 when he claimed he had 'political currency to spend'. The result was a stalled agenda even with a majority in both houses ,and a mid-term thumping . I predict the same in 2014 .

You just don't get it, this is not good government. It doesn't matter what margin you win by, if you win, you win. There is some sort of falacy that the electorate could elect a President and not give him control of the house. Your electoral college should actually be your two houses voting together and before you say it, I understand what the outcome might have been, you are the victims of a eighteenth century time warp

There is some sort of falacy that the electorate could elect a President and not give him control of the house.

The founders gave us divided government for a reason . They were fearful that the central government would grow into the powerful leviathan it has become. If the electorate wanted to give the power to act without the checks they would've voted in a Democrat Congress too.

Go on living in fear Tom

go on living in fear TomIt is their raison d'être.

And yours is to troll

Hello again,

Romney, ungracious in defeat, slinks away. He didn't lose. The takers did him in. Sounds like OUR snivelers...

The good news is, that we'll NEVER hear from him again.

excon

no it's just business as usual and someone is going to have to get used to it. There will be must posturing, much chest beating, and many will say we did our best, but it was a bridge too far

Yes, complete inconsistency from American liberals is business as usual. From crowing "We are NOT going to end Medicare " to saying they ARE going to end Medicare 5 posts later is even quicker than usual.

Hello again, Steve:

Get a grip. I thought you UNDERSTOOD what I said.. IF I said Medicare, I meant Obamacare. The point I was making is that Obamacare IS unwieldy and needs reform. I suggested single payer. We'd save a bunch...

Carry on.

excon

Hello again, Steve:

Get a grip. I thought you UNDERSTOOD what I said.. IF I said Medicare, I meant Obamacare. The point I was making is that Obamacare IS unweildly and needs reform. I suggested single payer. We'd save a bunch...

Carry on.

excon

I have a grip, freedom is the best thing about this country. I'd like to keep it.

Hello again, Steve:


freedom is the best thing about this country. I'd like to keep itHey, I'm into freedom too. But NOT unfettered capitalism.. That'll bankrupt us. So, if it's a choice between curbing freedom for SOME, and bankrupting us, I'll take door number #1.

Look. It would be FINE with me if the health care industry FIXED its own problems. That should ALWAYS be the first alternative... But, if they DON'T, the nation should. What? We should be held hostage to them?? Not in MY world.

Excon

Why is this a big election win? Becaue you guy just can't holler b1tch and moan any more. You have to help govern now and move us forward. So stop whining about cheating, voter fraud, or the zombies are coming, and get to work!

Your way or the highway has been rejected, your agenda rejected, and you will be rejected again if go back to the plan that wa rejected before!

Twinkie any one?

To OweBama compromise is doing it his way... or not at all.

The funny thing is that he blames Bush rates and yet he will keep 98% of the Bush rates in place.

I don't know why you don't get a different plan rather than referencing Bush all the time, let the Bush rates expire and set a new set of permanent rates, the top rate just a little lower than the old rate and the middle rates restructured. Then the argument goes away and you can move on. You should also build sunset clauses into programs so it it doesn't get done it expires. What was it you said in the GFC, shovel ready, if it isn't shovel ready, stop shilly shallying, don't approve it, don't even consider it until it is

let the Bush rates expire
You mean institute the Obama tax increases.

You should also build sunset clauses into programs so it it doesn't get done it expires
Absolutely . Let Congress debate renewal of any program. It would keep them busy and they wouldn't have time for more mischief.

You don't get it Tom, to get out of your delimma there must be higher taxes, but they don't need to be as high as they have been historically, after all your economy has expanded since then. What is wrong over there is there is too much talk and not enough action, that is why you take away the opportunity for debate, you have the debate once, you set the agenda and the time limit and either you get on with it or you don't. The Bush era tax cuts are an example, They should have made a change and left the issue beyond debate. If someone wants change then they debate that on its own merits, that is democracy.

You see Tom I live in a place where we do something and it is done. If we want change either it gets done or it doesn't, but there is certainty. The system isn't perfect and we make mistakes but we get on with it. The government of the day either has the numbers or it doesn't. We have lived with the situation you have for a long time, but it hasn't stopped progress because there is an ability to compromise. Tax is dealt with as part of a budget, if the budget isn't passed, the government falls and is replaced

Half the population did not want him to be president and with good reason. Our emperor is all hyperbole.. our emperor has no clothes. He is so over his head, he doesn't know what to do.

We now have a national policy, during war and the worst economic disaster since the great depression, in which our highest priorities are to support abortion and sodomy. People can do what they want privately and I won 't interfere, but honestly - those are not my top priorities for the country.

When the out of touch democrats get done with their last verse of Kumbaya, they are going to wonder where their formerly decent health care benefits and jobs went, what happened to Isreal, why we still have Guantanamo, why we are still in Afghanistan without an end game or strategy, why the President still hasn't answered for Benghazi and why our federal, state and local governments are all bankrupt. Let's put giant Obama pictures in every town square, fawn over how lovely his wife and daughters are, talk about the great wonder of the freedoms he is removing from beneath our feet on a daily basis, and in four years... we can still blame it on Bush, who by then will have been retired for 8 years.

I think you need to move on, half the population didn't want change, they didn't want Romney and they outnumbered those who thought otherwise or at least were concerned enough to vote

You ask a lot of good questions, why are you still in Afghanistan, why are any of us in Afghanistan, ego, treaties, obligations. Israel can look after itself, Benghazi was snaffu, get over it and yes, your nation is bankrupt because of Bush era policies, and is likely to remain so. Bush's legacy is disaster, and until his supporters accept that you will not move on.

There is no doubt your nation has been on the slippery slope for a long time, Obama is not going to change that because it is outside his ability to rapidly reverse disaster. All any government can do is set up and support an environment where business has confidence and will invest in the future.That point has not yet arrived. Zero interest rates do not give capital confidence, it will go where it can get a return

I think you need to move on, half the population didn't want change, they didn't want Romney and they outnumbered those who thought otherwise or at least were concerned enough to vote

You ask a lot of good questions, why are you still in Afghanistan, why are any of us in Afghanistan, ego, treaties, obligations. Israel can look after itself, Benghazi was snaffu, get over it and yes, your nation is bankrupt because of Bush era policies, and is likely to remain so. Bush's legacy is disaster, and until his supporters accept that you will not move on.

There is no doubt your nation has been on the slippery slope for a long time, Obama is not going to change that because it is outside his ability to rapidly reverse disaster. All any government can do is set up and support an environment where business has confidence and will invest in the future.That point has not yet arrived. Zero interest rates do not give capital confidence, it will go where it can get a return

You tell us to move on and in the same positng cling to that nonsense that all our difficulties result from Bush policies .

The Bush era tax cuts are an example, They should have made a change and left the issue beyond debate.
Agreed ;they should've been made permanent a long time ago. The expiration was part of the process of compromise that the Dems claim doesn't happen. The marginal rates are not as significant as the fact that our tax code sucks and is beyond belief cumbersome. The only fix that makes sense is not punitive tinkering on the margins to satisfy the campaign promises of a demagogue . The fix is extending them until a bipartisan tax code overhaul can be negotiated .

So change it, you have the numbers in the house, change it. You know you can't, no matter how hard you try because the guy who put it in place couldn't do the Job. Time to move on, time for a different play. You have to get to the point of finding what is acceptable to both sides, a little trim here, a little trim there. These are different days, just as the twenty-first century is different to the eighteenth. No one in this century would set up a nation the way yours is set up, we are more enlightened, in fact more educated. It is time to realise you have more to lose than you have to gain by playing games

so change it, you have the numbers in the house, change it. You know you can't, no matter how hard you try because the guy who put it in place couldn't do the Job. Time to move on, time for a different play. You have to get to the point of finding what is acceptable to both sides, a little trim here, a little trim there. These are different days, just as the twenty-first century is different to the eighteenth. No one in this century would set up a nation the way yours is set up, we are more enlightened, in fact more educated. It is time to realise you have more to lose than you have to gain by playing games

Woodward's book explains that Speaker Bonehead and Obama had a deal ;and at the 11th hr. The President threw in a monkey wrench by adding "additional revenues " on the table so he could report to his base that he screwed the rich .
Then Woodward goes on to document that this so called ' fiscal cliff ' we are approaching that includes 'sequestration' was again engineered out of the White House.
Yes we should've had a budget. The House of Reps have done their job ,passing budget after budget that then stalls on the Harry Reid shelf . Meanwhile time after time ;the Senate voted down the President's budget proposals. Had they passed even one of them then a Conference Committee could've been created for the House and the Senate to hash out a deal.
The stall was the fault of the Dems who used it to create a campaign position that the rich should be screwed . It is classic Alinsky . Isolate and 'demonize ' an 'enemy' . It worked . The President was reelected ;Reid's majority was retained . Does that mean that the people voted for change or status quo ? With the House Republicans retaining a large majority in the House I maintain that the people still want a strong check on Dem excesses. They saw what havoc the Dems can do with complete control of the Federal Government in 2009/10 .

Oh yeah they voted for health reform.Who did that cause chaos for, the insurance companies? Vested interests, you pay too much attention to them, just as you pay too much attention to your rich capitalists. You think bailing the country out of depression is havoc, cry havoc, let loose the dogs of war, that is something Obama didn't do

Bailing out the country ? No ,they bailed out the very 'capitalists ' you complain about instead of letting them suffer the consequences of their decisions.

Well perhaps they thought the little people like you would suffer more

There's a problem with undermining and continuing this hate for all the rich guys in board rooms. They hire people. They do the deals that build our trade in the world environment. They make the big-ticket donations to the charities that protect the most vulnerable among us. They take the big risks that move our economy in progressive ways. They get rich doing it - fine with me if while getting rich they also drag many people from poverty into the middle class, and some from the middle class to elite levels of financial wealth.

Getting rid of rich people is flat out a stupid policy ideal, though it's Obama's core strategy. He is trying to take one of the world's wealthiest nations and move us into the third world. Apparently it's more "fair" if we're all poor.

While you are right in some of what you say there is a need for such people to pay taxes and not hide their earnings in tax shelters

Paying more taxes at the top doesn't make rich guys poor. We are only talking about 4% increase on 2% of the population.

It also addresses uncertainty, which most businesses and wall street said they needed. Its lunacy the rich should pay less than the working poor. We all agree the middle class tax cuts should continue, so do what we all agree on and keep negotiating the rest.

Apparently it's more "fair" if we're all poor.
That's exactly his thinking . He even said so when confronted with the evidence that lowering the rates increases revenues. He said he would do it anyway over the issue of what he perceives as 'fair' .

We are only talking about 4% increase on 2% of the population. isolate and demonize . The Democrat Alinsky party .

And name calling changes the facts of the debate HOW? Do you really think rich guy deserve more protection under the law than everyone else?

Do you really think poor people are going be better off by taxing the rich?

What a spirious argument, poor people will only be better off when the society takes a real interest in addressing the issues that make them poor, some of those things are inequality and exploitation. Do you think the poor will be better off by increasing taxes on them? The rich have always objected to being taxed, but the rich are not made worse off by taxing them since no one takes 100%. What you are objecting to is a 4% increase in tax. Here's an idea, make it equal and everyone pay more. No, you don't like that idea either, but the rich couldn't bleat then. Your country is bankrupt and you don't want to pay more tax to help overcome the problem, you would rather future generations solve the problem for you because you are too dumb arse to do it. You want the poor to bear the burden so the rich can become richer

Here's an idea, make it equal and everyone pay more. No, you don't like that idea either,

Ummm you didn't wait for my response... of course to make the tax system equal everyone should pay the same flat rate.But you guys aren't concerned about equal... you are concerned about your perception of fairness.

Tom you think I should wait around for your opinion, we have heard your opinion before, but that idea is ridiculous because to collect enough money the rate has to be rediculously high and have a catastrophic effect on the poor. Those who benefit most (the rich) should pay the most. Taxes go to provide the inferstructure that enables the rich to make money, therefore they should pay. Would you be infavour of a fifty percent tax rate for everyone irrespective of means. What a disincentive to be employed for a poor person, in fact it is inflationary because the level of wages would have to be very high to make such a system work..

You want a flat rate tax, abandon income tax and tax consumption, tax spending and tax money transactions. Take the tax right off the top, so there can be no deductions

Do you really think poor people are going be better off by taxing the rich?

Yes, becaue they will be no WORSE off for sure!!


ummm you didn't wait for my response ....of course to make the tax system equal everyone should pay the same flat rate.But you guys aren't concerned about equal ...you are concerned about your perception of fairness.

For one, it NOT fair for the rich to pay less than anyone in the lower brackets, and for two a flat consumption tax isn't fair on those states that have a state tax, and those that pay payroll taxes, and detroys the buying power of all the middle and lower tax classes, and to be honet my idea of fair is a lot more fairer than the one you have presented.

I mean don't we build roads and bridges to help the rich guy make money? Don't we give them tax breaks to build their store in our cities? Don't we as a people deserve more than low wage for all that help to the "job creators" who have not created jobs?

That not my idea of fair!

Just saying.

We wouldn't be having this conversation if they had done their job, and NOT blown the money on cigars and cognac, and being GREEDY!

Job creators my A$$!

but that idea is ridiculous because to collect enough money the rate has to be rediculously high and have a catastrophic effect on the poor.
But you think raising rates a couple points on the rich is going to make a difference ? You're joking right ?
Nothing will matter if spending isn't checked . You're whole tax ruse is about your perception of fairness and has nothing to do with fiscal sanity .


Take the tax right off the top, so there can be no deductions Well that part is sane at least.

Sane, insane Tom what is not sane is doing the same things and exxpecting things to change. Yes you have to cut the cloth, it you are paying benefits you can no longer afford then you have to make adjustments. Don't you think this is realised, the difficulty is do do it whilst impacting as little as possible on the most vulnerable. What you do is set thresholds so those who have their own resources don't get on they bandwagon.But you also look to those who have benefited to contribute. You have a situation where the wealth of your nation is owned by very few and the intention is to target those people to contribute more.

80% of your people have only 5% of the wealth and yet you think taxing these people more will solve your problems, bunkum! 80% of your people earn less than 40% of the income.

BO wants to tax the top 2% more, I think he has it wrong, he left a digit out

The fact is you are under taxed relative to the public inferstructure you are trying to maintain. You want aircraft carriers and to project your military power, then pay tax, you want bridges and highways then pay tax

LOL, If a .05% tax increase on the top 2% can fund a million jobs to fix roads and bridges, imagine what 4% can do! Revenue + smart spending cuts = jobs and paying the debt.

Your way with just spending cuts = poverty increasing and even less revenue. The same plan that has Europeans in a worse down turn than before. Why would we do that?

Tal he doesn't get it he has swallowed the B/S believing it will be all right on the night. Fact is it won't. There is one way to fix the debt, massive inflation, devaluing the currency until it is worthless or at least the same value as the Chinese wan, that might even bring some of those jobs back but goodbye Walmart, We will buy equipment from you using US dollars, might even pick up an aircraft carrier or two

The same plan that has Europeans in a worse down turn than before. Why would we do that?

The Europeans did not cut enough .Their cuts were marginal... AND... they raised taxes in an economic downturn . That's STUPID !

You are the ones who doesn't get it. In France,the "austerity" consisted almost entirely on raising taxes. There was a 3 percent surtax on the rich , an increase of one percentage point in the top marginal tax rate ,and an end to the automatic index of tax brackets . There was also a 5 percent increase in corporate income taxes on businesses... AND an increase in the capital gains tax,AND a closing of many corporate tax breaks. Then they screwed the middle income with an increase in the VAT; and excise taxes on tobacco and alcohol.

It doesn't surprise me at all that their economic plan failed and they are headed back into recession.

Yes, becaue they will be no WORSE off for sure!!

Ah, so you admit it's just for show.


LOL, If a .05% tax increase on the top 2% can fund a million jobs to fix roads and bridges, imagine what 4% can do! Revenue + smart spending cuts = jobs and paying the debt.

And we've seen how efficient government is at "creating" jobs. The CBO estimated last year that every job "saved or created" cost the taxpayers $228,055 per job. At that rate, to create a million jobs would cost $228 billion. His tax the rich scheme will only raise $824 billion - over ten years. Do some of that math you guys keep talking about, we can do a lot better with a quarter million dollars to create jobs than he can. .

Hello again, Steve:


Ah, so you admit it's just for show.Sure. Nobody ever said it was going to cure our financial ills. But, just like the 47% paying NO taxes pisses you off, the 2% paying VERY LITTLE taxes pisses ME off. You DO understand, that, don't you?

Let me ask you the same question. You don't think, do you, that taxing the POOR is anything but show, do you?? Do you REALLY think that's going to help?? Oh, it'll make you FEEL better... So, why can't I feel better too?? We WON the election after all...

Excon

Hello again, Steve:

Sure. Nobody ever said it was going to cure our financial ills. But, just like the 47% paying NO taxes pisses you off, the 2% paying VERY LITTLE taxes pisses ME off. You DO understand, that, don't you??

Let me ask you the same question. You don't think, do you, that taxing the POOR is anything but show, do you??? Do you REALLY think that's gonna help??? Oh, it'll make you FEEL better... So, why can't I feel better too??? We WON the election after all...

excon

You wanted to win so you could feel better? That's no surprise, I've been saying for years that liberals weren't about solutions, they just want to feel good about themselves. Me, I like solutions.

P.S. I don't talk about taxing the poor, we can't afford to expand the welfare class intentionally. That's more of that math you keep talking about.

Hello again, tom:

Nahhh, I wanted to win so that my country could go FORWARD instead of backwards... And, THAT makes me feel good.

But, I see that, even though Alan West was cheated out of his rightful spot, and even though he, like smoothy, can't CATCH a single cheater, he KNOWS they're there.

Seeing him slink off into the sunset NEVER to be heard from again, except on FOX perhaps, makes me feel good too.

excon

OweBama has done nothing BUT go backwards... in fact in 4 short years he has regressed this country to the Jimmy Carter Era and worse.

Hello again, tom:

Nahhh, I wanted to win so that my country could go FORWARD instead of backwards... And, THAT makes me feel good.

But, I see that, even though Alan West was cheated out of his rightful spot, and even though he, like smoothy, can't CATCH a single cheater, he KNOWS they're there.

Seeing him slink off into the sunset NEVER to be heard from again, except on FOX perhaps, makes me feel good too.

excon

I'm not tom.

Hello again, Steve:


I'm not tom

Then never mind.

Excon

OweBama has done nothing BUT go backwards.....in fact in 4 short years he has regressed this country to the Jimmy Carter Era and worse.

Don't give him all the credit, he had help

don't give him all the credit, he had help

Yep, a do-nothing Senate.

And a do nothing Congress, but I wasn't referring to that. The problems didn't just stem from Obama's actions, every President back to Carter made his contribution

Yep, a do-nothing Senate.

The House is a do nothing body, because of the right, the Senate is obstructed by the right.

That's why the right is responsible for doing nothing that's reasonable.

Around, and around, and around we go, and where we will come out, nobody knows, is this the Congress perchance?

Conservatives are people too! I know that, but can't help push back and be stubborn to their thinking. Government is a reflection of the people being governed so expecting perfection is a crazy notion from the outset.

That's why we go round, and round and up down, back and forth.

I seem to remember an old rhyme.

The grand old Duke of York,
He had ten thousand men,
He marched them up to the top of the hill and he marched them back again.
And when they were up, they were up,
And when they were down, they were down,
And when they were only half-way up,
They were neither up nor down.
Obviously nothing got done on that occasion but this tale may have a parallel to Gen Petraeus.
The Duke of York left his command after a scandal involving a woman