Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

Barack Obama’s Phony Mandate

December 7, 2012 by  

Barack Obama’s Phony Mandate
PHOTOS.COM

Let me see if I have this right. Earlier this year, while campaigning for re-election, Barack Obama said he wanted to raise taxes $800 billion on everyone making more than $250,000 a year. Republicans were virtually unanimous in shouting, “No way!”

Then what happened when the Spender in Chief wins the White House for another four years? He promptly doubled down. Now, he says he wants $1.6 trillion in new taxes over the next 10 years. And our “don’t call my bluff” President made it abundantly clear that he’ll play hardball to get it.

When he appeared on “Meet the Press” on Sunday, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who is serving as Obama’s messenger boy to Capitol Hill, declared flatly: “There’s no path to an agreement that does not involve Republicans acknowledging that rates have to go up on the wealthiest Americans.”

In other words, it’s our way or the highway. So what did the Republicans do? Rather than sticking to their earlier promise, the leadership countered by agreeing to give Obama the $800 billion he originally asked for. Way to fight for principle, guys.

Of course, $1.6 trillion in new tax revenue isn’t all that the Democrats are after. Obama also wants $50 billion in new stimulus spending and another $30 billion to extend unemployment benefits. Plus, he wants the death tax to go back up to 45 percent on estates and family farms worth $3.5 million and more.

And it doesn’t end there. Geithner, a tax cheater, also says that it’s time to abolish the ceiling on the Federal debt. No more coming back to Congress, hat in hand, to increase the limit on how much money our bankrupt Federal government can borrow. No, if Team Obama gets its way, there will be no limits on how much deeper this country will go in debt. Isn’t that a lovely situation to contemplate?

What about cutting some spending? “We’ll talk about that sometime down the road” is the best Team Obama will offer. No wonder Charles Krauthammer said that the Democrats’ proposal is “not just a bad deal, this is really an insulting deal.” In fact, he added, “Robert E. Lee was offered easier terms at Appomattox and he lost the Civil War.”

What happens if House Republicans dig in their heels and just say no? Well, inaction might give the Democrats an even bigger victory. It would mean that the Bush tax cuts (which Obama extended in 2010) would expire on Jan. 1. Those increases, plus all the new taxes and fees that are part of Obamacare, will mean that our taxes will go up even more.

A lot of observers are convinced that Obama and his advisers will be only too happy to see the U.S. plunge over the much-hyped fiscal cliff. Either way, they get the tax increases they want. Plus, under the latter scenario, they get to blame the Republicans for not being willing to compromise. It’s a heads-I-win, tails-you-lose proposition, with the big spenders in Washington coming out ahead either way.

By the way, did you see what one top Obama supporter is doing to avoid paying a bunch of those new taxes? Jim Sinegal, the co-founder, director and former CEO of Costco, was so smitten by the job Obama is doing that he agreed to give a prime-time address at this year’s Democratic convention. So you’d think he’d be hunky-dory with the Obama tax increases, wouldn’t you?

Not on your life. This past week, Costco announced that it would pay a special dividend this month to all of its shareholders. It is doing it in December — and even borrowing the $3 billion it will cost — so shareholders won’t have to pay the higher tax on dividend income next year.

Since Sinegal owns 2 million shares of Costco stock, that’s $14 million he’ll get in this special dividend. At the current tax rate of 15 percent on dividends, he’ll have to fork over a little more than $2 million of it to Uncle Sam. But had Costco waited until January to pay the dividend, Sinegal’s tax rate would be 43.4 percent, or more than $6 million.

In other words, the former Costco CEO gets to pocket an extra $4 million that otherwise would have gone to the Internal Revenue Service. Merry Christmas!

So much for the “shared sacrifices” by Obama’s wealthiest supporters. Now, please allow me to puncture a few more holes in the Democrats’ balloon. Let’s turn to the myth that Obama got a huge mandate in the November elections.

Nonsense! Obama won 51 percent of the votes for President on Nov. 6. But only 60 percent of eligible voters even bothered to cast a ballot this year. Winning support from 30 percent of eligible voters is hardly an overwhelming mandate.

Plus, exit polls of the people who voted revealed that a majority of them didn’t want taxes increased on people earning $250,000 or more. Obama’s claim that the voters this year sent “a very clear message” that they favored higher taxes is a bunch of baloney.

Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows that the problem in Washington isn’t too little revenue; it’s too much spending! If the Federal budget were reduced to what it was four years ago when Obama first took office, we wouldn’t need a nickel of new taxes to balance the budget.

In fact, if we held the line on spending and simply stopped increasing it every year, pretty soon Uncle Sam would enjoy surpluses once again. We could even start reducing the national debt, rather than see it go up more than $1 trillion a year.

Of course, there’s about as much chance of seeing this happen of a snowball surviving a trip through Hades. While it’s not what we wanted or worked for, I’m afraid it is now a virtual certainty we will see higher taxes and fewer new jobs and more new bureaucrats, regulators, tax collectors and other Federal busybodies next year.

And after that, it could get even worse.

Until next time, keep some powder dry.

–Chip Wood

Chip Wood

is the geopolitical editor of PersonalLiberty.com. He is the founder of Soundview Publications, in Atlanta, where he was also the host of an award-winning radio talk show for many years. He was the publisher of several bestselling books, including Crisis Investing by Doug Casey, None Dare Call It Conspiracy by Gary Allen and Larry Abraham and The War on Gold by Anthony Sutton. Chip is well known on the investment conference circuit where he has served as Master of Ceremonies for FreedomFest, The New Orleans Investment Conference, Sovereign Society, and The Atlanta Investment Conference.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Barack Obama’s Phony Mandate”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • Mike in MI

    Is there ANY way, could anything allow it to be possibly possible that somewhere, someway, someone in this vast, over-educated, brain euthanized, nervous system anesthetized, mnemonically challenged populace could ever put together the concepts from the Koran that a Muslim can say ANYTHING, ANYTHING at all he wants to say, sign or agree to today to someone who is not a follower of Mohammed and tomorrow totally recant, deny it, disavow and say, “It never happened”? He will suffer no consequence from allah. In fact, if his perfidy brings injury to an “unbeliever” which serves to advance allah’s agenda in any way that muslim will be praised, honored and eternally rewarded? So it is written.
    What might be the effects if someone of such beliefs and intents might rise to the level of the national leader over a people for whom he has contempt? What might he not say or do that he espouses today, but rescinds at bedtime? Anything?
    What such a person gives, promises or moves today can not be depended upon to show up with any new dawn, unless you are FULLY, provably under his tent.

    • FreedomFighter

      Now Obama and the progressives will bleed all the economic life from America and Americans…

      Your taxes are going up: local, state, national

      Your energy prices will skyrocket as Obama and the Agenda 21 sustainalbes kill off Coal generated electricity, as they sell the coal to China

      Your vast natural resources of oil will be kept from you – you will continue to buy your oil from the middle east – as your gulf oil, North Alaskan oil and coastal oil reserves are pumped out by other countries.

      All your cars will contain black boxes like airplanes and the authorities will be able to remotely monitor and punish you for any infraction, send you a VAT vehical activity TAX f
      for road use…all the while continueing the gas TAX — and you thought cameras were bad at stop lights?

      You will be monitored 24/7 by drone air assets and all visible illegal activity punished, fined or taxed

      Obama care will be the biggest TAX on the American people in the history of the nation, kill off jobs and further impoverish the middle class — here comes the 29 hour work week – no benies.

      The death tax will be used to steal family business and farms — bye bye family held.

      Obama will continue the crony capitolism — exp GE

      With no debt ceiling from congress Obama and the progressives will use that power to kill off all further resistance to there taking over America.

      it goes on an on…

      Laus Deo
      Semper Fi

      • Warrior

        Ya know what’s really “unfair”? Those “rich” get to pay the same taxes on fuel, electricity, phones, vehicle stickers, cigarettes. alchohol, tolls, cars, groceries, water, garbage collection, and almost everything you can name. These people should be “branded” and made to pay MORE for everything! Forward! Come to think of it, weren’t some “people” branded some years back? I don’t remember right now who they were but it will come to me.

        • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

          First they came for the rich, and I did not speak out because I was not rich,
          Then they confiscated the property owners,
          Then they took away our right to bear arms, but I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t armed.

      • eddie47d

        One thing for sure Freedom Fighter aka; Jack Benny “your killing me” ! How can the Affordable Health Care plan be any worse on the Middle Class if private insurance still runs the show? They have raised rates over 100% or more in the last couple of decades so have you enjoyed those increases? Did you enjoy those private companies denying you insurance and “killing you off”? Since there is currently more drilling than under the previous administration and it is predicted we will have more production than anywhere in the Middle East by 2020 then that puts you back to story telling. All the tax increases coming up next year have been on the table for some time and that can keeps getting kicked down the road. Time for Congress to poop or get off the pot and stop with this phony shock. If you can’t make tough decisions then feel free to retire!

      • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

        Freedom Fighter Once they get 100 % Government Employment then they will come for the rich, and I did not speak out because I was not rich,
        Then they confiscated the property owners,
        Then they took away our right to bear arms, but I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t armed.

        UNEMPLOYMENT RATE PLUNGES TO 3.8% — FOR GOV’T WORKERS
        http://cnsnews.com/news/article/unemployment-plunges-38-government-workers-government-adds-35000-jobs-november-544000

      • http://Yahoo.com Bill

        Warrior – why are you so jealous. In this country, anyone having the desire to “Make it” with hard work and education – CAN. Why don’t you try it. If you already have “Made it” write a personal check to the IRS.

      • TIME

        Dear Bill,

        Perhaps you should work on your “Comprhension” skills, then perhaps you may be able to understand what W posted.. :-)

        Peace and Love,

      • JUKEBOX

        Obama is a duplicitous hypocrite, who talks about caring for the middle class, then runs around the country grinning and waving at the poor fools who support him, while picking their pockets. I don’t believe Donald Trump or Warren Buffett would spend $40 million on a twenty day vacation, but Obama is getting ready to do exactly that on the taxpayer’s dime. While the economy is in a death spiral, Obama is happy as a pig in a mud wallow.

      • Kinetic1

        Tony,
        Isn’t it funny that the Right had no problem ignoring the massive and historical job losses in the public sector when those numbers negatively impacted the overall unemployment numbers, but now they are THE news when all those teachers, police, office workers, etc. are able to return to work? You see, unlike factory workers who have lost their jobs due to a reduction in sales, Teachers and such are still needed no matter how weak the economy. In fact, many public sector workers are even more necessary when the economy is weak.

        Your patently biased “news” source failed to present any context for their claims. They failed to note that this is not a substantial increase in Public sector jobs, but simply a return to pre-recession numbers. They failed to not that, during the first 10 months of the Bush administration Private sector jobs dropped by almost 4% while Government jobs grew by 3%! In fact, even as the Private sector struggled to recover over the next 35 months (returning within 1%) the Public sector continued to rise another point. Even Reagan, that stalwart Conservative saw a return of over 100,000 government employees at a time when general unemployment was over 10% for over 9 months! Compare that to the Obama administration where, after bottoming out in month 10 the Private sector job numbers began a steady increase while Public employment continued to decline for months.
        http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/06/01/493849/obama-bush-jobs-record/

        Now, what was that about the evil Obama and his Public sector jobs?

        • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

          Kinetic1 the state and Federal Governments cannot be sustainably the number 1 Employer and those BRICS continue to take Obama dollars for the vital parts supplies we are Dependent on them for today .

      • http://pweiters9.wordpress.com pweiters9

        12/8/12, As bad as things are right now, bam won’t have enough time to implement all these subversions because the economy will collapse long before. If commerce is stymied any further, you will have chaos in the streets.

      • Peter Sagi

        Hey Chip, guess what? If you are paying income tax, you are doing it to yourself. The income tax is an excise tax on government granted privilege. Mainly, that comes down to use of a socialist slavestate number. Use that number, totally voluntary by law, and you have voluntarily done it to yourself, so stop complaining. That includes Obamacare. No SSN, no Obamacare, no FICA, no Medicare tax, no payroll tax, no federal income tax, no state income tax, no local income tax. Stop whining and tell the truth about socialistic insecurity and the socialist slavestate number. It really is that simple.

        Pete

      • Diana

        I simply do not understand the envy of the rich. It does not make any sense to me. The rich became rich because they worked for it, positioned themselves properly with education, focus, goals, etc. Anymore, it seems that those who have made poor decisions in life are unwilling to suffer the consequences of those decisions, and simply want those who have been successful to pay for it. This is the freakin’ land of opportunity. Nobody has more opportunity than every single solitary American walking the face of this earth regardless of where you come from, where you are in life, and where you’re headed. You have a choice to make something of yourself, or not. It’s up to you, not those who already have. I admire the rich and thank them for creating jobs that keep you and I employed. The puppets who have supported Obama, and you are puppets, are simply unwilling to take advantage of the opportunities this great country has to offer you, and will never accomplish anything more than you currently have because why? That is the Democrat’s plan – to keep you dependant on the government so that they stay in power. Have you ever asked yourself how Obama has improved your personal life over the past four years? How has he improved poverty in this countryover the past four years? The answer is he hasn’t – with over 50% of Americans receiving entitlements and ads running in Mexico telling Mexicans (Mexicans!*$%#!!) how to apply for food stamps, the poor will always be poor and this great country will never be the same. It’s time to wake up America!

      • DaveH

        Peter says — “Mainly, that comes down to use of a socialist slavestate number. Use that number, totally voluntary by law, and you have voluntarily done it to yourself, so stop complaining”.
        From the SSA website:
        http://www.ssa.gov/history/InternetMyths.html

      • DaveH

        Diana says — “The rich became rich because they worked for it, positioned themselves properly with education, focus, goals, etc.”.
        Well Diana, if we had Free Markets I would agree completely with you. But we don’t. Many of the rich got that way by Political methods rather than pleasing their consumers. Those who got that way strictly by pleasing consumers indeed deserve to be admired.
        Please pick up a copy of this book, Diana, and learn what’ really going on in this country:
        http://www.amazon.com/The-Big-Ripoff-Business-Government/dp/0471789070/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1354981413&sr=8-1&keywords=the+big+ripoff

      • Deerinwater

        “The president could come down to $1.2 trillion,” he said. “I don’t think he’ll go any lower if he did.”
        Other Democrats say there is plenty of room to negotiate.
        In the Senate, Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) has talked about a deal that raises $1 trillion in revenue.
        “There is a lot of middle ground between $1.6 trillion and $800 billion,” said Rep. Linda Sanchez, a California Democrat who will take a seat on the Ways and Means Committee next year.
        Another incoming Ways and Means Democrat — Pennsylvania’s Allyson Schwartz — said, “Nothing is set in stone.”

        Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2012/12/democrats-see-middle-ground-for-revenue-target-85017.html#ixzz2EuNdOnFC

      • http://www.facebook.com/benjamin.fox.98892 Benjamin Fox

        Hitler-in-chief, obozo and his nazi clan will steal your guns, your property, your children and cheer their god allah satan but, the real God will help us when we turn to HIM:

    • AZ-Ike

      Mike in MI,
      Rec’d this email a day or so ago. Thought you might appreciate it.

      CHURCHILL ON ISLAM

      Unbelievable, but the speech below was written in 1899! (check Wikipedia – The River War)

      I am sending the attached short speech from Winston Churchill, delivered by him in 1899 when he was a young soldier and journalist. It probably sets out the current views of many, but expressed in the wonderful Churchillian turn of phrase and use of the English language, of which he was a master. Sir Winston Churchill was, without doubt, one of the greatest men of the late 19th and 20th centuries.

      He was a brave young soldier, a brilliant journalist, an extraordinary politician and statesman, a great war leader and Prime Minister, to whom the Western world must be forever in his debt. He was a prophet in his own time. He died on 24 January 1965, at the grand old age of 90 and, after a lifetime of service to his country, and was accorded a State funeral.

      HERE IS THE SPEECH:

      “How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries, improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.

      A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement, the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

      Individual Muslims may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it.

      No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step, and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.”

      Sir Winston Churchill;
      (Source: The River War, first edition, Vol. II, pages 248-50 London )

      Churchill saw it coming……………
      And now you now know why our Muslim president returned the bust of Winston Churchill to the British. In a fit of Muslin pique, Obama displayed his true colors.

      If God favors the USA, He will remove the scales from our eyes and give us the insight into the hateful world of would be dictators.

      • Mike in MI

        Wow, Thanks AZ-Ike -
        What a Great insight, too, about why he was motivated to return Churchill’s bust to the British.
        Maybe, too, when someone is as hollowed out and void of virtue as Obama, having that reminder of someone so virtuous and who epitomized character like Churchill would irritate to no end someone so low on the scale of evolution as the Obugger. Barry would probably say something about England and its colonization. Hell, I sometimes wonder what it is that colonizes Barry.

      • Sam

        Churchill’s introspection is noteable but falls short of the ageless experience with Islam felt by all Hindu’s who have enjoyed a “see saw” history. The Brits, of course, are linked forever to India and may understand this relationship. The West, however, like the Hindus, shall never be destroyed by Islam even though the West has only entered the fray a very very short time ago. The so called alignment of Obama to Islam is superflous at best as is his connection to the debt crisis as Obama wasn’t even born when all this began.

    • http://www.facebook.com/benjamin.fox.98892 Benjamin Fox

      Seems obozo has read Marx, since he is using his book to become a dictator of this nation.

      • Gordon

        If you study it out you might discover that Marx got his ideas from islam.

      • http://gravatar.com/bychoosing WTS/JAY

        Marx got his ideas from Hegel, not Islam!

    • Sam Adams

      Are you all residents of DC or federal employees? Yes,, or No?? Tax doesn,t effect you. It only effects Taxpayers who are dc residents and Privileged federal workers. ” Congress has exclusive legislature Authority in America[NOT TO EXCEED TEN 10 SQ MILES]“.. Signing a W2 allows them to tax you, YOU volunteered, so unvolunteer. Obama care is a tax, it doesn,t effect you, its voluntary. Tax increase doesn,t effect you. If you want the court case rulling I will give it to you. Ask me.

    • http://tlgeer.wordpress.com tlgeer

      “What might be the effects if someone of such beliefs and intents might rise to the level of the national leader over a people for whom he has contempt? What might he not say or do that he espouses today, but rescinds at bedtime? Anything?
      What such a person gives, promises or moves today can not be depended upon to show up with any new dawn, unless you are FULLY, provably under his tent.”

      We don’t have anyone like that so what’s your point?

      • Mike in MI

        Guess you were out of country during the last two presidential campaigns, eh? Like five years now? Nervous system anesthesia? Or, euthanasia? Or, just Anastasia?

    • http://None R S’Chevalier

      Actually, I no longer believe a single damn thing will be done regarding the Kenyon Obama. The Congress and the Senate are all wearing pampers, and 60+ percent of the population wants a free ride. It will take a revolution to return the Republic to greatness, and I seriously doubt such will happen. We have far too many illegals residing in the U.S., the very same illegals that provided Obama four more years. So best get ready for the big kill, which Obama and his liberals will use to destroy what little remains of a once proud and noble republic. Its gone now forever. Actually the present reminds me very much of Nazi Germany, and but in but a short time we will have our very own cremation ovens. I’m in my eighties, and have in the past warn people about what the liberals were doing to the Republic, No longer shall I do so, because the populace is getting that which the desored most, “government control over them and a free ride to the end of the road.

      • Marty S.

        Well said. I am half your age and have seen things change in this country dreadfully fast and in the wrong direction. My hope is that this country gets a serious spanking into reality and pretty darned quick.

    • nickkin

      Let’s wait and keep the powder dry for this raghead president…..he can’t wait to go see allah with the 70 virgins(?), and with mooshell as his wife, why not? He will be bending down on the prayer rug soon and with that target the powder can be spent, literally.

      • http://tlgeer.wordpress.com tlgeer

        What you are suggesting, murder, is illegal. Stop it.

        • Frank Kahn

          NO, tlgeer, according to you and the other liberals murder is only illegal if you say it is. Murder of babies inside a mother is okay. Murder by drones is okay. It is only murder if you dont have a good liberal reason for it. However, advocating killing the President is a Federal crime so we wont say what needs to be done will we. When you speak out against the murder of unborn babies, then you can complain about other killings. When you stop thinking it is a matter of opinion that it is murder, and you are no longer insane enough to think that GOD gives a woman the RIGHT to kill by abortion, then we will talk.

          Are you a Christian? Do you believe in God? Do you follow the word of God?

          If you answer all three questions with yes, then you believe that abortion is murder.

    • http://google David

      This miserable make of a man has us by the throats. We only required another 3 million conservative votes. There were 6 million voters on sofas that were on their butts that did not care. We are in a national disaster, and there are more executive orders coming our way. Globally, we are a sitting duck. Our culture continues in peril.

    • JohnR

      In a word: Huh?

  • Harold Olsen

    I’m willing to be he will be saying that he has a mandate to run for a 3rd term.

    • http://n/a AmFer

      Good luck with that -

      • therealhawkman

        Want to bet he gives it a try and that there are many of his followers (voters) out there who would be willing to give up all their freedoms to accommodate his rabid quest for power? It’s been done before in other countries. Just look no further than Egypt right now. Consolidation of power through a new constitution granting unlimited power. Just as Obama is proposing with his attempt to acquire absolute spending without Congressional oversight.
        It begins people, because the people allow it.

    • eddie47d

      Are your pants still on fire Harold ? Dream on!

      • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

        Obama will never be able to run a 3rd term , its a Hurdle that the International markets will repudiate fiercely !!!!

      • Mike in MI

        Tony –
        MARKETS? What “markets”? Businesses and finance transactions rely on TRUST, ACCOUNTABILITY, ABILITY, FAITHFULNESS and RESPONSIBILITY. When individuals, companies, legislative bodies or countries negotiate and come to agreements, whether verbal, contractual or whatever it is absolutely imperative that reliable results will follow on all sides in the agreement. Business, markets and culture in the WEST are built on the Biblical basis that you shall not lie and your words need to be founded on your ability and desire to produce in accord with the negotiated agreement. Without that the market will dissolve and collapse.
        If you negotiate with a muslim you can not be certain of a reliable result UNLESS you too are a muslim. (Ever wonder why the Mideast has remained a wasteland since the 8th and 9th centuries?)
        A few short years ago Dow Chemical Company had just such an experience with a Persian Gulf company. They had contracts that made it appear certain things would be done so as to benefit both sides. Upon that expectation Dow made agreements to acquire an East coast U.S. chemical company.
        Then the Persian Gulf outfit just decided to dishonor their word to Dow. Religiously motivated? Who knows? They don’t have to give a reason… good or bad. They just did it.
        To their credit, Dow did some scrambling and honorably upheld their other agreements.
        Some will say, “That’s just business for ya.” Right, business with muslims. MARKET? They dissolved that one quick – without even a twinge of conscience (gotta have one first).

        But, where do we, as U.S. citizens, stand when careful observation of events in Washington seems to indicate our Congressmen are letting themselves be manipulated by people who seem to share the same ethics as that Persian Gulf outfit? They should take the “Republic” out of “Republican”. Then, change it to “Reprobate-icans”.
        Could sufficient amounts of lies and dishonesty in Washington dissolve government? Or, has that already been done because one side decided not to honor the agreement under which we measure our citizenry – the Constitution?

      • walter agard

        It’s new to me. Do presidents run for a third term?

      • Gordon

        Run for a third term?

        Don’t you mean stay on forever like your lazy drunk brother-n-law?

      • http://tlgeer.wordpress.com tlgeer

        Walter,

        “Do presidents run for a third term?”

        No, they don’t. A President has not been able to serve more than 2 terms since the last term of FDR.

        • Deerinwater

          Actually, as I understand it, ~ today under certain circumstance a President can serve more then two, 4 years terms, but he cannot serve three whole terms.

          But this talk is foolish nonsense. ~ don’t allow yourself to be sucked in and waste time with what fills the minds of Obama haters. They will not quit this activity irregardless of what is true or false. ~ They enjoy , relish in their fear phobia. A produce of small minds and nothing more.

          He’s different! He’s black! He’s a Muslim! He’s got a demonic plan! He hate America , the land that gave him a chance to aspire beyond his raising! There’s something badly wrong with this whole thing! He’s suppose to be eating watermelon and picking cotton! He should be “shucking and jiv’en, and sAnging “Old Man River”. I wonder if he can make a shoeshine rag sing and pop to a rhythm? I love to hear someone do that! ~ I spent my whole life growing up around people with this kind of thinking ~ you people are not fooling anyone with your racist phobias.

          • Motov

            I Believe it is 10 years max,…ie if a president dies in office, or is removed after say 2 years the VP becomes the president with the option of running for office for 2 more terms,
            If the VP serves more than 2 years as president he can only run for one term.

    • SGT YORK

      I think your right,in fact it will be a fourth term. His plan is “They all wanted me to run the American People have mandated me to be President for as long as necessar to vastly improve life. All A Great Lesson In Pure BS

      • Doc Sarvis

        NOBODY is even thinking about another term for our President. Two’s the limit and everyone knows it.

      • Flashy

        Doc…two consecutive. there, in theory, could be a two term presidency, one term out of office, then another two terms etc…

      • therealhawkman

        @ DOC:
        The constitution was not amended until after FDR held sway a President for four (4) terms. Don’t think his rabid supporters in Congress would not go along with his agenda if he were to attempt it?

      • Rick

        Doc don’t forget Obama’s pet Blommberg altered New York City’s charter to allow him to run for a thrid and now fourth term. what makes you think this popus arrogant jerk won’t try? I wishthe Congresswould grow a pair and put this clown in his place. pass a fair and reasonable budget. And if Obama doesn’t sign it then his shoud beimpeached and tried for treason. Congress would do it’s job and let Obama decide if he wants to face the people if he vetoes it.

      • TML

        Flashy says, “…two consecutive. there, in theory, could be a two term presidency, one term out of office, then another two terms etc…”

        22nd Amendment – “No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice…”

        Nothing that implies “consecutive” there, and nothing in the history from which it was adopted that implies consecutive, so that would be a very weak theory.

        • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

          It could happen in this scenario if there were a national security crisis as great as a economic collapse due to a rejection of the Dollar as the free market trade currency that it is today by the BRICS that supply us our vital needs in a fashion that if this supply is Lost would not be able to be replaced fast enough in a domestically produced manner so this would require rationing of existing supply and that could only be accomplished by dictatorial measures !!!!!

      • Chris

        Sorry Flashy, you don’t get more than two terms, consecutive or otherwise. Here is the 22nd amendment. The max anyone can serve would be just under 10 years. Less than two years as VP finishing out someone else’s term and then elected twice. Johnson finished 19 months of Kennedy’s term and ran in 64. He could have run again in 68. Ford, on the other hand, finished Nixon’s term of more than 2 years could only run in 1976 if he had won and not again in 1980.

        Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

      • Gordon

        Doc, where have you been?

        It’s either zero or hillary.

      • Old Henry

        TML, why would the 22nd Amendment stop Little Barry from running for a third, fourth, or fifth term? It’s just part of that silly founding document known as our Constitution, which by the way also requires that the cheif excutive be a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.

        If Little Barry wants to run again in 2016 I am sure he will do so, and not a finger will be lifted to stop him. The Republicans will all be cowering in a corner picking their noses and scratching their a$$e$.

        • Deerinwater

          Why waste so many words , time and energy talking and fretting about things that will never happen?

          8 years as President ages a man 15 years, they are not Kings you know. They work and worry and fret over things we know little about. ~ This comprehension of what any President does and is put though as the leader of the free world is baffling After 8 years, most of them are tired, exhausted and ready to let it go.

          The only two Presidents in modern history that had an active political life after leaving office was Slick Willie and Jimmy Carter as both found a calling to address national and global humanitarian issue.

        • Jeff

          Old Dog:

          Does your granddaughter know you’re typing nonsense on her computer again? I will bet you a billion dollars Obama will not run for re-election in 2016.

          • http://pweiters9.wordpress.com pweiters9

            12/9/12, BO’s been talking to Clinton too long. Clinton once said “I like being prez, if we could change the 22nd Amen., I’d be prez for life.” God help us; during the next 4 years we don’t know what’s coming down the pike. BO & his handlers could conceivably make a bid for this. After all, he circumvents Congress every chance he gets.

          • Jeff

            Even if the 22nd amendment were repealed, it would apply to future presidents only. Reagan could likely have won a 3rd term, senile as we was by then.

      • TML

        Old Henry

        Well, there’s no pseudo-legislation which can be used to justify doing so, like there is for other usurpation of the Constitution, and the majority would never support such legislation. There have been constant attempts to over-turn the 22nd Amendment since its ratification by the prescribed number of States, and none of them even make it through their respective committees.

        It’s unrealistic to think it would happen and pessimistic views as you present could be met with equal speculation to the contrary.

      • TML

        Old Henry says, “NATURAL BORN CITIZEN”

        Well, oppose the idea that a natural born citizen requires two parents who are citizens if the child is born on American soil. But considering the theory that Frank Marshall Davis being Obama’s real father is much more compelling, it renders the natural born citizen argument null even for those who advocate opposition to my position on the subject..

      • Mike in MI

        Well, gee you guys, get real. -
        If Obama decides he wants a third and fourth or just one endless third term all he has to do is change the name Potomac to Rubicon, stage one of his mob scenes in the Old Dominion or better yet – and more symbolically – at Mt. Vernon. Give a “Promises, Promises” speech that subdues the fires in the hearts of a bunch of palms up Occupiers and they’ll carry him over the Rubicon on their shoulders. Then, once they reach the Washington Monument they’ll bow down before the Obelisk, declare him god-king and present him with his mace and toga.

        Problems solved. et tu, …..Bluto?

      • DaveH

        More childishness from the Liberal Progressive, Jeff.
        Jeff says — “I will bet you a billion dollars Obama will not run for re-election in 2016″.
        Like you have a billion, Jeff.
        Even if you did, you are a Liberal Progressive, so why would anybody expect you to keep your word?

      • Old Henry

        TML, Little Barry would not need any pseudo-legislation. If he wants to run again he will simply decree that he has some sort of a mandate to do so. I’m guessing Congress will still be split, or quite possibly in Democrat hands completely – again. If that would be the case there would absolutely be no one trying to stop him. Soetoro is a narcissist of the first degree and will do whatever is fest for him. Thanks to G.W., the Republican Congress and an essentially worthless judiciary the Constitution has finally become irrelevant – at least as far as they are concerned.
        I hope I am wrong, but with four more years of a criminal fraud being allowed to conduct an illegal occupation of our WH it is quite probable – especially if his handlers wish him to remain.

        You can oppose the idea of a Natural Born Citizen definition till the cows come home, but that is how it is, and was, defined. The “Law of Nations” so defines it (which our Founders read and studied) and the U.S. Supreme Court defined it as such in Minor v Happerset – 1875.

      • TML

        Old Henry says “I hope I am wrong”

        Well, I hope you are too.

        Old Henry says “You can oppose the idea of a Natural Born Citizen definition till the cows come home, but that is how it is, and was, defined. The “Law of Nations” so defines it (which our Founders read and studied) and the U.S. Supreme Court defined it as such in Minor v Happerset – 1875.

        I have. The Law of Nations, your own source, states…. “I say, that, in order to be of the country [natural born], it is necessary that a person be born of a father [singular] who is a citizen”. Unless you take a sexist approach that excludes the citizenry of the mother as being equally valid by itself, then must concede.

        The Supreme Court ruling concerned voting rights for women, and only ruled on the particular case to determine her citizenship… this was not a ruling which settled the issue of a “natural born citizen” and fails to specifically specify “two” citizen parents if that were the intent of the words.

        If then we consider, United States Code – 8 USC § 1401

        “The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at BIRTH:

        (a)a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof; [no specification of number of parents]

        (c)a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents BOTH of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person;

        (d)a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents ONE of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the birth of such person, and THE OTHER of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States;” (emphasis mine)

        With the available information, I claim, only one parent (mother or father) must be a citizen and the child must be born on American soil, to be considered natural born. In addition, I hold that TWO parents who are citizens, if the child is born outside the United States (in agreement with the above US Code) in order for the child to be considered natural born.

    • elba schmitt

      Harold, God saved us from this self-emposed Moslem dictator. Thanks to all those ignorant idiots that voted for him, who believe that government should take care of them, this President will do anything to control the population, and to change the Constitution to allow him to run again. America open your eyes and don’t let this man take charge of our lifes, which he certainly is doing. Unless people become involve and take action to reclaim our rghts/country, we wil become another Middle Eastern country. He is egotistical/arrrogant, and has lied to us over and over, but many Americans have blinders on. We need responsible leaders, both Democrats & Republicans…and vote him out. e schmitt

      • Rick

        better yet try him for treason along with some of his minons, for treason and hang the whole bunch of traitors. Reform the election funding to block the special interest groups and to make it about the people not the big money people, special interest, and rich.

      • Lyndia

        I totally agree with you!! Can anyone name a promise that he made to the American Citizens that he has kept?? I know that he has claimed the increase in jobs although we all know that that increase will be short lived since the “breadline” that those who have ran out of unemployment benefits will be going up even more very soon and those temporary seasonal jobs will soon over as well!! This president has made a mockery out of our country and the rest of the world is still in shock at the ignorance of the people in this country who have been foolish enough to give him another 4 years!! What happens when the wealthy businesses who don’t take their businesses overseas, have to cut employees back and/or lay them off in order to make the higher tax payments??
        Obama is actually going to put this country into further debt with this crazy scheme of his and will also put it into greater danger by cutting our military….which will also add all of the military personal caught in that cut into our already over the top unemployment lines!!

        Have any of you studied the rise of Hitler?? I have…we lost many of our family during Hitler’s reign of terror. Those who managed to escape told us from a very young age how Hitler managed to grow from a nobody into Germany’s ultimate ruthless power!! I believe Obama is capable of the same thing since he relies on the gullible youth, and went after the churches and those who worshipped within them!!

        • Jeff

          If you believe it, then I guess it must be true. Do you also believe Obama was born in Kenya (or on Mars)? Right wingers believe lots of crazy things – the earth is 9,000 years old, people lived with dinosaurs, and Jesus will save us from the effects of global warming. The belief doesn’t make any of them true. And Obama is nothing like Hitler no matter what you choose to BELIEVE. I thought W was the worst president in U.S. history, but never for one day did I think he was Hitler. You people are NUTS.

      • Gordon

        Jeff….. ah, never mind.

      • eddie47d

        Maybe that includes you Gordon?

      • Old Henry

        Rick!

        I’ll buy ya a beer! We could run the gallows 24 / 7 for months and still not get the job finished.

      • Old Henry

        Lyndia:

        Yes he has kept promises.

        Fundamentally transform the greatest nation in the history of the world and trillion dollar deficits for as far as the eye can see.

        I told people back in the Spring and Summer of 2008 that Soetoro was a half-black Hitler.

        • Lyndia

          So far Obama has been working hard on eliminating our 2nd amendment with the aid of Hillary and also removing GOD from our Constitution as well. You would think that people in this country would question WHY we aren’t allowed to have nativity scenes, and other things that allow people to celebrate Christmas but other religions are free to display symbols of their religious holidays without into trouble; Why crosses must be removed from government property that have been there for ages!??I just read an article regarding a senior citizens home that was told they had to remove their Christmas Tree because it might upset some of the population/visitors there…that is totally ridiculous and carrying things way too far as far as I’m concerned!!
          If Obama is messing with our Constitution to remove our rights…it is not beyond him to try to increase his tenure as president.
          Just look at what a nobody by the name of Hitler accomplished in Germany during his reign of terror!! He managed to be the Pied Piper leading the youth of Germany to do his dirty work and take down the churches & punish/kill those who continued to worship..
          I actually believe that Obama wasvwell groomed from childhood for this job…an actor with human telepromoters telling him what to say & do….without them, he would be just like he was during the first debate; a bumbling ****!!

      • Flashy

        “So far Obama has been working hard on eliminating our 2nd amendment with the aid of Hillary and also removing GOD from our Constitution as well.” <— Lydia

        Ummm..is this part of the theory since he has not done anything about gun control, that is proof positive he has a secret plan to take them away in toto ? Or is this related somehow in the UN Small Arms Treaty negotiations that have been ongoing since 2006 ? If the first, since someone has done nothing concerning gun control …it is quite a stretch to say that proves a plan to have a secret plan to take everything. Almost to the point of paranoid lunacy requiring therapy. As to the UN Small Arms Treaty paranoia….read this …http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/untreaty.asp

        Second…the reference to God. I assume you are referring to a christian god. Try this…read BOTH the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Find any reference to "god" ? I'd be surprised as neither has that word in any of the writing. The Dec of Ind refers to a "Creator"…whatever meaning any particular person has for that…which means everything and yet means nothing. Your "Creator" is different meaning than mine, or Eddie's, or Bob Livingston's…such is not a reference to a christian deity. The Constitution of the United States has NO reference to any deity. None. Zero. Not even a hint. Never has.

        The question is…why do you insist there is such a reference when clearly there is not.

        " You would think that people in this country would question WHY we aren’t allowed to have nativity scenes, and other things that allow people to celebrate Christmas but other religions are free to display symbols of their religious holidays without into trouble"

        Ummmm..last i heard (as of a few seconds ago), you may have such a scene. they are common throughout the United States, in all neighborhoods, and protected as they are on private property. Except for insistence by the American Taliban that christian symbols MUST be allowed to be displayed on public property…i know of no other religion where the adherents insist on such use of public property.

        Careful though what you wish for. If you insist on christian nativity scenes be allowed to be set up on public property…so as to be 100% neutral as far as religion…ALL religions will therefore be free to use public property for promoting their religions. Hare Krishnas, catholics, Wicca, Protestant sects (Methodist, Baptist,) Statanists, Snake Worshippers etc. For if the State allows one, it must allow all or it gives sanction to one religion being correct above all others….a situation which the American Taliban would welcome I am sure, and erases the difference between the US and the Middle East countries led by such groups as the Muslim brotherhood, Hamas, Hezbollah etc …

        Jeesh…THINK AND BE INFORMED fer chrissakes …

        • Frank Kahn

          Two points, Flashy:

          1. It is nonproductive to counter a right wing biased site with a left wing biased site, both are suspect as to true facts. They both might tend to use only select portions of the document, leaving out items that go against their biased ideas.

          If there is a link to the actual content of the current proposed UN Arms Trade Treaty, that would help us to personally assess the wording in its full context.

          2. It is true that CREATOR does not specify GOD.

          Saying that your CREATOR is different than ours is not a valid point, since you nor any other person mentioned in your post was alive to participate in the creation of the two mentioned documents.

          Using the word CREATOR (and we have no evidence of Muslim, Buddhists, Wiccans or any other religious following), implies God. The fact that the rules in the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, follow Christian values will support a Christian saying they are Gods values. By inference, you can say that going against any rules in those documents goes against God. If you insist on strict adherence to the term CREATOR, then it goes against the CREATOR. In that instance, it is still going against God to Christians. So, you saying that your CREATOR is not GOD is invalid in this argument. It would be more valid and acceptable if you simply stated that you object to the juxtaposition of the two words.

          Next, you make an absurd claim about allowing other religions equal opportunity.

          “ALL religions will therefore be free to use public property for promoting their religions. Hare Krishnas, catholics, Wicca, Protestant sects (Methodist, Baptist,) Statanists, Snake Worshippers etc”

          While there are some differences in the methodologies and some divergence of beliefs between Christian churches, they are all still Christian, and you left out a few like the Jehovas Witnesses and Seven day Adventists, even the LDS (Mormons). To list Catholic, Protestant, Methodist and Baptist as separate religions is wrong. All of them would use the same Nativity Scene in their Christmas displays.

          In Idaho just such a controversy did happen, and it was resolved in the same manner as you suggested. All faiths were allowed the same opportunity. The result, however, was somewhat disappointing. Even though all were welcome, there was only one such taker. It was decided to remove the other groups display, not because it was opposed to God, but because it promoted racial hatred and conflict.

      • DaveH

        Flashman says — “Jeesh…THINK AND BE INFORMED fer chrissakes”.
        The first condition for that to occur would be for the readers to know that you have no credibility, Flashman.
        Here are some facts about Obama and guns — you know, facts; something you won’t get from Falsy:
        http://gunowners.org/op03242009.htm

      • Marty S.

        You are correct and now that he is a lame duck don’t be surprised by any antic or decree he puts forth to achieve his goal #1 which is to destroy the U.S. and that includes demand ing subsequent terms as dictator-in-chief. The American poopulace did a real number this time. Also to Jeff on Dec 8 12:28 AM you said “I bet you a billion dollars blah blah… ” please make that payable in gold or silver because by the time Obama and his half wit minions are done with your billion dollars it will not be worth the strips of green paper it is printed on so good luck with that one.

      • Flashy

        “In Idaho just such a controversy did happen, and it was resolved in the same manner as you suggested. All faiths were allowed the same opportunity. The result, however, was somewhat disappointing. Even though all were welcome, there was only one such taker. It was decided to remove the other groups display, not because it was opposed to God, but because it promoted racial hatred and conflict.” <— Frank kahn

        Frank, I won't get into a theological debate on the word "Creator" as it is not productive to the main point we are discussing. And, as i stated needed to occur to allow religious displays..and as you state has occurred … makes the point. Now…what if there was a prime spot…and more than one religious group wanted to use it?

        BTW…the first time this may have been as it may not have been anticipated or expected, has such a policy continued? I'd love to know what part of Idaho has attempted to resolve the issue as you cite. The time/place/manner guidelines would be very interesting to read

        • Frank Kahn

          I will do some research and try to find out if any followup policies were enacted. I will also try to get internet links to the stories surrounding it if they are available.

          In the question of a prime spot, please be more specific. If it was a large enough spot then scaled versions of different faiths iconic symbols would be possible.

    • Kinetic1

      HO,
      Ohhh, a chance to make some easy money! How much are you willing to put up?

    • Chester

      Harold, explain to us exactly HOW Obama, or any other president under our current constitution will ever be allowed to run for a third full term. Seems it is rather clearly stated that NO president shall serve more than ten years total. and only eight if he or she did not inherit the position as vice president at or beyond the halfway point of the previous administration. In other words, no one can RUN for president AFTER his or her second full term, or first if he or she was elevated to the presidency less than two years into the term as vice president.

      • Old Henry

        Chester, what does our Constitution have to do with it?

      • Mike in MI

        Chester – WHAT Constitution? If Oburger and Hairy Reed and Nasty P. are under no behest to pass a budget for the last four years, without a peep from Boner’s homeless representatives, there’s really nothing on paper they have to do or not do just because it’s in that worthless old thing, Hell, O uses that thing for personal hygiene.
        He seems to have the same motto as Alfred E. Newman, “What? Me worry?”
        Speaking of whom, did you ever notice how much resemblance there is on a full on facial shot for those two?

      • Marty S.

        In Obama’s world rules are made to be broken plain and simple.

    • Marty S.

      Oh Hillary would just love that now wouldn’t she? Imagine the look on her face when it becomes a reality. She would probably chew right through her cheeks on that one.

    • nickkin

      Why not, Roosevelt did it with a rough ride.

  • Steve

    Chip
    It is time to replace Boehner . A campaign to action is needed by guys like you. Ryan would be a great replacement

    • Dan

      Are we actually going to take up an offensive. For the purpose of defending the ultra rich against a sustainable Taxation. ??? REALLY

      • Texas Ride

        Dan, there is no such thing as raising the taxes only on the rich! Everyone pays a penalty. Even the 50% of the population that doesn’t pay taxes will be hurt by paying higher prices for everything….

        But, in fact, to be “Fair,” the tax bill should be shared by ALL. What is fair about half of the population paying taxes and the other half not paying! I agree taxation should be “Fair.” Everyone should pay their “Fair share.” That means EVERYONE that works for money and those that get their money for free! Everyone needs to pay! If one person in this country must pay, everyone must pay. All are to be treated equal under the Law..

      • Mike in MI

        T.R. -
        The Constitution has something in it to that effect, didn’t it? But, the Hoary Trinity – Nasty p., Hairy Reed and The Zero – didn’t believe in that sort of thing. So they unrhote that silly old stuff.

    • Doc Sarvis

      It is Ryan’s economic ideas that the electorate rejected in the election. Way to maintain irrelevancy GOP.

      • Old Henry

        No Doc, why Romney lost:

        Romney said, “When I’m elected, I will put Americans back to work.”

        And 51% of Americans said, [expletive deleted] that!”

        • Deerinwater

          I guess people just don’t want to clean Mitt Romney commode or wear a paper hat and work three jobs.

    • http://newstips@personalliberty.com dee

      I agree that Boenher should be replaced he is a nice man but we need someone stronger to let Obama know that he can’t walk all over the American people, I would like to know between Geitner & Obama they sound like they don’t know what they are talking about, God help us all, & Romney was right about the 47%, the Liberals told so many lie were fact checked & proved that told lie after lie, how did they get away with this

    • susan banta

      I support our President and I don’t understand how those of you who believe in the right wing policies don’t understand that the country at large has just indicated that they don’t agree with your point of view. I am also very concerned that there doesn’t seem to be an understanding that while politics are about conviction, governing is about compromise…that is the only way a democracy will survive. In fact, forcing policy to land somewhere in the middle, is what keeps us a true democratic country. As soon as you refuse to allow the majority to speak and influence the direction we go, then we are in trouble. Please don’t talk about the Muslim stuff or Obama wants to ruin this country…that is silly, fear-mongering talk and does nothing to work toward a reasonable solution. We have valid differences of opinion about what will work best to bring our economy back. For me a crazy policy would be to cut government spending through cutting spending on the ‘social safety net (s.s., medicaid, medicare), then…to ‘increase revenues” bu cutting tax credits for, say, charible spending..yikes, so much for the poor folks and needy. This looks to me to be the sort of thing the republicans want. We are 2%er’s and I can tell you, we don’t want our taxes to go up, but, you know, it is fair, and even more fair for those on the high side of the 1%…I see some of them up close and personal: they can do with one less house, one less boat, horse, or whatever without harming their life styles. Please don’t continue to try to force an extreme perspective. Compromise should be the word of the moment.

      • Warrior

        Calif, NY, IL. Unfunded liabilities and broken promises. Hmmm, the “rich” need to make up for this. They’re probably the “ones” that caused this condition. Sound thinking there my friend.

      • Steve E

        susan, you are a perfect example of a kool aid drinker. You are a taker. Why should anyone give their money to anyone else? That’s stealing.

      • Nadzieja Batki

        What a dope you are. O tells you and us that he will raise taxes and take the country over the proverbial cliff to change the makeup of the economy and you blame the “right wing”, the Republicans and everyone else. Why are you not blaming the man O who is planning the mess. You are afraid of O so you need an easier target to blame.

      • eddie47d

        Thanks for a wee bit of common sense Susan and you are not a “taker” if you are working or retired. The 1% are not the producers like they use to be and increasingly are the takers.

      • mike

        To much koolaid

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Susan,

        Well said. Don’t let the non-thinkers succeed in their attempts to silence you and/or drive you from the site. Thinking people will understand your message and applaud you. The “dopes” will not and will attack you for being smarter and more compassionate than they are.

        Ignore them all and keep speaking to truth. PLD needs more “truth”

      • http://gravatar.com/cbgard Carlucci

        “susan banta” – Pull your head out of your rectal database.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        eddie47d,

        You and I agree on nearly everything but I DO fault you for being perhaps too “polite” and “conciliatory” on a site that is populated by so many “junk yard dogs”. I have tried to do some of that myself, and neither of us has gotten very far with that approach. Certain of the denizens on this site barely respond to .50 cal bullets of truth driven between their eyes, never mind politeness and subtlety.

        Susan said more than a “wee” bit and the the 1% have never really been the “used to be” producers. They have ALWAYS been way bigger takers, and that’s going back 120 years to the Gilded Age. And “increasingly”? Look at the latest figures showing the incomes of the bottom 80% dropping by nearly 2%, the incomes of the top 20% going up by nearly 2%, and the INCOMES OF THE TOP 1% GOING UP BY NEARLY 6%. That’s “going up” for real, and the takers of the 1% are taking at an accelerating rate.

        Tell it like it is, eddie, the other side is the one that fears the truth like vampires fear Holy Water and sunlight. Give them a shower in the Holy Water of Truth and throw open all the curtains of blind adherance to ideology. Watch them scream and smoke.

      • TIME

        Dear Susan,

        OMG ~ Your post is so far beyond the ability of one who has eyes to see with, or ear’s to hear with, let alone any nano trace of gray matter to dicipher worthless rhetoric with, that your post presents a clear case of utter insanity ~~ and thats being very kind.

        Yes you are welcome to present your opinion, but when your opinion is based on
        “UTTER INSANITY” its value becomes worthless ~ as in a far lesser value than watching a turd swirl down the toilet.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Susan—–Carlucci arrives to prove my point—–ignore her stupidity. I don’t recall you commenting before on this site, but, as a general rule, the biggest namecallers have the least to say, Carlucci proves that point too.

      • http://yahoo bob peters

        People like you the Ignorants are the cause of this countrys problems..Get your head out of your ars Pendejo…

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Well, Susan, TIME now appears to further illustrate my point. Time appears to be more literate than the others who have attacked you but don’t be fooled. TIME is just as deluded as they are—-TIME just uses bigger words and what he thinks is fancier language to prove it. His thinking is just as faulty, and his feigned “literacy” just serves to trap him with his own words.

        Opinions should be based on rational analysis of facts. You did that, TIME does not. He actually gives a far better illustration of “UTTER INSANITY” than he realizes. I would not go so far as to accuse him of the overblown “utter insanity” that he so casually drops on you, but I will point out to all that if anyone sounds “insane” here, it is most definitely TIME, who drops choice tidbits like these on us:.

        “beyond the ability of one who has eyes to see with, or ear’s(sic) to hear with”
        “let alone any nano trace of gray matter to dicipher(sic) worthless rhetoric with”
        “your post presents a clear case of utter insanity “~~ and thats being very kind”.
        “your opinion is based on “UTTER INSANITY”
        “watching a turd swirl down the toilet”.

        (really classy, that last one, and it calls for a DaveH style reply, as in “You’re the turd, Time, and they’re coming to flush you! Ha Ha Ha)

        On second thought, I take some of it back—-maybe TIME’s not quite up to “insane” but he IS a bit sick.

      • JUKEBOX

        Susan, you must realize that a lot of people live in reality, which is called fly over country, and which voted in the red. These are the people who are suffering under this duplicitous hypocrite, not the ones on the east & west coast.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        And yet ANOTHER one arrives to prove my point.

        I won’t suggest that bob peters clean up his spelling and grammar so that we can better understand what he is trying to communicate. His message is so primitive that we “get it” in spite of his misspelling of “arse” and his deficiencies in the use of commas and apostrophes.

        I do think it is quite clever of him to juxtapose “arse” and “pendejo” the way he did. An Anglo epithet and a Latino epithet side by side. Brilliant abuse of the language.

        I will be leaving the thread for a while, Susan. You seem like a smart lady so I’ll leave you to deal with “them” on your own. It’s really easy—just ignore them—some will then go away, and those who don’t will continue to shoot themselves in the foot so you can laugh at them.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        I really must go and live a real life for a while, but JUKEBOX says something that needs to be clarified—-let me reword what he said—-I’m sure he will disapprove but I have a very big bottle of the Holy Water of Truth and can always get more to throw on folks like him. The TRUTH sounds more like this:

        “Susan, you must realize that a lot of people that post on PLD live in UNreality, which is called fly over country, and which voted mostly in the red, except for a few pockets of reality. These are the misguided and misled people who have been saved from the hypocrisy of the right by the election of O’Bama, and they should thank the ones on the east & west coast for saving them”.

      • Texas Ride

        Susan, when you figure out this country is a Republic, not a democracy…get back to us.

        Anyone with an IQ over 20 should be able to see the truth of what is happening.. unless you are a pig at the trough! And the pigs should not have the privilege of voting how other people’s money is spent! They don’t contribute.

        • http://momathomeblog.wordpress.com leemckee1

          When are we going to quit attacking/insulting each other and band together? That is the only way this country is going to be improved.

          One private note to Texas Ride — it’s really sad when a person’s only way to feel better about themselves is to insult another! What does that say about their IQ?

      • http://gravatar.com/cbgard Carlucci

        Right Brain Thinker (which is a contradiction in terms, as their brain seems to lack any thinking power at all on either side) is obviously yet another paid govt. shill.

      • Bob Jeffrey

        Excellent comment. I wish that most of the commentators on this site could hear and understand you. It would be a far better country..

      • DaveH

        Lizard Brain Thinker says — “(really classy, that last one, and it calls for a DaveH style reply, as in “You’re the turd, Time, and they’re coming to flush you! Ha Ha Ha)”.

        No, LBT, only a Liberal Progressive like yourself, who has no factual or logical comments to make, would stoop to such adolescent comments.

        For those who want to understand the mindset of the Liberal Progressive:
        http://www.instantbrainstorm.com/lizard_brain.html

      • Nadzieja Batki

        R B T, you are such a poor little victim being picked upon by the PLD, boohoohoo. Why the bloody hell did you come to this site?

        • http://momathomeblog.wordpress.com leemckee1

          Did I miss read the name of this site? Isn’t it called Personal Liberties? Doesn’t that include freedom of speech?

          I see a lot of comments about how we have to watch out because Obama is attempting to become a dictator. But how is that different from those of you on here who are trying to tell others to basically shut up just because you don’t agree with their views?

          I am new to this site, and I don’t agree with everyone’s opinion but I do believe they have a right to it.

          Personally, I have never been impressed with any political candidate. When I vote, I just try to choose the least “evil” choice. I also don’t believe anything any of them say, my opinion is stop talking and start showing.

          We all have a right to speak our minds, that is granted in the constitution of the United States of America. If you don’t agree with someone, you have the right to do so but in a manner that acknowledges and respects their rights as well.

      • DaveH

        If I belonged to a group of people like, say, the Liberal Progressives, and somebody like RBT was making our group look bad, I’d be all over the guy. Yet, I haven’t yet seen any Liberal Progressives attack those like RBT. Why is that? Is it because people like RBT are indeed representative of the behavior we can expect from the typical Liberal Progressive?

      • moonbeam

        Susan, I believe you are on the wrong site. Go to the light and make a left.

        So, how much do you get on your free check, food stamps and free medical care? Must be nice. And you can even afford internet access. WOW! Do you have a free phone too? If so, I helped pay for that. See, I get charged extra for mine so that YOU can have a FREE one.

        Oh, and you may need to look up what democracy is. In case you’re not aware, we are a Constitutional Republic. Democracy is mob rule. You didn’t get the memo?

      • TIME

        Dear rbt,

        Wow ~ again with the wizzard level ability to display discourse with the same value content as a bag of Sea Monkeys.
        So just how much are they paying you over at: gov.con blogger these days?
        If you go by the per word level, then perhaps we can hear about your lawn ~ afterall, { I for one } really do love a beautiful lawn.

        There is nothing like a smooth green flow with tree’s, shrubs and manicured line’s that blend into the beauty of nature own palatte. Afterall YAH did a beautiful job with all his creations ~ as well he gave many of us the ability to enjoy this splendid beauty, afterall we are one of GOD’S creations TOO.

        BTW, in case you missed the point of a “real” >Right Brain Thinker< ~ that being the Creative side of the "control grid" – within the carbon unit that is within all of the Human condition.
        Perhaps you may learn more on the crosslinking of how the base electric grid works within a {TRUE RBT.} On that note ~ Perhaps you may wish to find a name more suited to lower level vibration you're in before you try and leap to a higher plane.

        Thats ok, as there's still TIME for even you to learn something on the positive level of the human control grid and move your vibrational level up the scale, but thats only if you can handle the "REAL TRUTH." {Thus far you're failing.}

        Many of us who have been GIFTED with the "Ambidextrous" level platform are confused by the lacking gray matter within the below average spark producer ~ such as yourself.
        But again as I noted the very positive thing is there is still "TIME" for even you to grow some folds within your gray matter and allow the true power of GOD'S Higher Vibrations in.

        BUT – it's something one must apply themself to do daily to grow these folds, so as to be able to lock and load intel of: worth & value ~ thus be able to discern ~ Value ~ Truth's ~ and Creative ability ~ as well as, continuity of all of them within a cicular flow.

        I do wish you much success in working toward a goal that allows you to grow beyond your current minimal limitation's.

        Peace & Love, Merry Christmas & Happy Chanukah ~ Shalom

      • JeffH

        Ah yes, the brilliance of the progressive mind or more fitting would be the lack of a mind…”period”(emphasis)…

        The progress sought in Progressivism was to be an ongoing process through which society at large would evolve benefit under the guise of “the state,” administered by specialists, scientists, and the expertise of elitst intellectuals. They also agreed that only government so populated with and administered by elitists could be up to the job. Such a government, they argued, has the resources and the expertise could accomplish such an organizational task.

        And this leads us to the rub.

        Progressivism advocates—then and now—a total break from the principles of freedom articulated in our founding documents, particularly the Declaration of Independence. It seeks to either get around or dismantle limitations on government power, the very constitutional limitations established in the Constitution for the protection of individual freedom.

        For this reason, the progressives desire for something old in world history, not something new.

        Remember President Coolidge?:

        “No advance, no progress can be made beyond these propositions. If anyone wishes to deny their truth or their soundness, the only direction in which he can proceed historically is not forward, but backward toward the time when there was no equality, no rights of the individual, no rule of the people.”

        The progressive positive view of rights and “freedom” casts society into three classes: those using freedom to exploit others, those being exploited, and the ruling classes in government and the “intelligentsia” who set about to right the wrongs. In setting about to liberate one class, the ruling class exercises power over the other both remaining classes. The oppressors have their liberty curtailed and property confiscated, in whatever degree, in the interests of the greater public good, for welfare’s sake.
        http://freedomlessons.net/freedom-101/progressives-and-tug-o-war/

      • Nadzieja Batki

        leemckee1, how did you come to be on this site? I thought you are saying that PLD does not want people to talk so they block their freedom to speak, yet here you are making your comment.
        Try being sneaky and manipulative on some other Leftist site, you have banished your own credibility.

      • Frank Kahn

        Susan, we are not a democracy. I can tell by your long winded post that you are either a left wing person or you have some weird sense of RIGHT.

        You use the word COMPROMISE in the same way that Obama and the democrats use it. I would suggest you try a dictionary for the correct definition. COMPROMISE never has been and never will be DO AS I SAY. IF (and that if is a very big if since it will never happen) Obama and his demagoguery want COMPROMISE then they need to make significant concessions. And, by concessions, I mean SPENDING CUTS.

        Your use of the word FAIR in taxation is laughable. You speak of, RAISING TAXES on the top 2% as a FAIR solution to the deficit problem. You FAIL to address the PROBLEM of obscene SPENDING. I will give you credit for a thought, if it was a valid solution, that YOU can give every single dime you have (including all real assets) to the government. I applaud the notion of everyone in the top 2% (including all corporations) giving the same. Okay, now we have balanced the budget for 2013, but we done spent everything they had on one year. What will we do for 2014? Oh, and by the way, even if you believe the lie that they dont CREATE jobs, there will be millions of newly unemployed workers that had jobs at the facilities that were shut down to sell. And, just curious here, who has the money to buy all their assets?

        Now, you might call that RIGHT WING RANTING, but it is no worse than the LEFT WING RANTING that you support with the STUPID idea that MORE TAXES will solve the DEFICIT problem without MASSIVE SPENDING CUTS.

        Now, back to my first statement. We are a Republic, there is a major difference in the two forms of government. The difference makes another of your statements INVALID.

        In a DEMOCRACY the MAJORITY has the POWER to rule the PEOPLE.
        In a REPUBLIC the PEOPLE rule the GOVERNMENT.

        In a DEMOCRACY, if the MAJORITY says you should not own something, they can take it from you by force of the WILL OF THE MAJORITY.

        In a REPUBLIC, you are sovereign and have the RIGHT to OWN it and NOBODY can take that RIGHT away from you.

        In a DEMOCRACY, it is the GOVERNMENT (MAJORITY RULE) that controls EVERYTHING.
        In a REPUBLIC, it is the RIGHTS OF THE PEOPLE, that controls everything.

        So, your statement about the MAJORITY DECIDING something holds no special significance in a REPUBLIC.

      • David Silva

        We have been screwed twice thanks to you and all of the all the Curious George supporters

      • TML

        susan banta says, “…governing is about compromise…that is the only way a democracy will survive. In fact, forcing policy to land somewhere in the middle, is what keeps us a true democratic country. As soon as you refuse to allow the majority to speak and influence the direction we go, then we are in trouble.”

        First of all, this is a Republic, not a democracy or democratic country.

        Second, no matter how many people believe something, that doesn’t necessarily make it true or right.

        Third, “forcing” compromise, is just force.

        susan banta says,”For me a crazy policy would be to cut government spending through cutting spending on the ‘social safety net (s.s., medicaid, medicare), then…to ‘increase revenues” bu cutting tax credits for, say, charible spending..yikes, so much for the poor folks and needy.”

        Spending reduction is an obvious requirement to balancing a budget, considering spending clearly continues to increase throughout the decades. It would be a better compromise to concentrate efforts on reducing spending rather than revenue increases in the form of taxation to match that problem. I think the elimination of government agencies which contribute to the increase over recent years, such as TSA and others, would be a good start in reducing the size of government, and thus spending. We should also consider (contrary to common sense) cutting revenue (taxation) which hinders business development, and invite capital back from company’s, and jobs, which have gone overseas. This in turn should reduce the the number of “poor and needy”, allowing for cuts in spending (which should also translate to tax cuts to those who pay in) to those programs, by virtue of a good economy and fiscal stability.

      • TML

        eddie47d says, “The 1% are not the producers like they use to be and increasingly are the takers.”

        I think that’s due directly to the private central bank and it’s ability to print fiat currency. It acts as a wealth redistribution system through inflation that effects the end user (the so-called 99%) most.

        That’s what Jefferson warned when he said, “If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered…I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies… The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.”

        I don’t think greater taxes on this so-called 1% is the correct remedy to our economic woes, and implies a mere sense of envy to take from those genuinely industrious – effectively punishing them for success.

      • eddie47d

        Great quote TML. Those bankers are working for Lucifer and he doesn’t reside in hell but in the ivory towers of Wall Street.

      • Lyndia

        It seems to me that Obama promised the people that he would work with Congress to accomplish a compromise for the mess our country is in…The Republicans have countered Obama’s “offer” with their own and asked that he consider it. Obama wants it all HIS way and has made NO offer to compromise. The Republicans are willing to extend the Bush Tax Cuts for the middle & lower incomes and work out the rest after the first of the year. I believe the Republicans are basically against abolishing the ceiling debt level, which would be against the constitution to begin with and would give Obama a no limit to continue his huge spending habits with the taxpayers left with the burden of paying for it all! With the election over with, Obama has suddenly changed his mind about working with Congress and decided it will be what he wants OR ELSE!!
        I don’t care whether you are republicans, democrats, or whatever….people better start listening to what is going on and quit bowing down to this “wonderful leader” that is doing his best to destroy this country as we have known it to be for over the past 200+ years!!

      • Old Henry

        susan, you must either be a burnt out acid-head from the 60s, or a fairly recent grajiate of the public indoctrination centers.

        You really should do some critical thinking and take a good look at what is going on.

        Only 60% of registered voters did so in November. The foreign naional Kenyan got 51% of that or just a tich over 30%.

        Oh, and yes, he is a Muslim. Pay attention to what he does, his statements. For instance you have probably not noticed that Little Barry never travels to the ME with Moochelle. Why? I don’t think Little Barry ever travels on the same plane as Bo the dirty dog. Why?

        He cancles the National Day of Prayer, but celebrates Ramadan.

        susan, turn off PMSNBC and the tinkle boy.

        Also, Social Security is NO an entitlement. It is OUR money stolen at virtual gun point over 30, 40, 50 years.

        And, the “safety net” has been turned into a hammock.

      • Old Henry

        susan, here is an explanatin of the difference between our style of government and democracy.

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4r0VUybeXY

      • vicki

        susan banta writes:
        “governing is about compromise…that is the only way a democracy will survive. In fact, forcing policy to land somewhere in the middle, is what keeps us a true democratic country.”

        Fortunately (for you) we are not a democracy. We are a Constitutionally LIMITED Republic. The difference is rather important to all that YOU hold dear.
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4r0VUybeXY

        susan banta: “As soon as you refuse to allow the majority to speak and influence the direction we go, then we are in trouble.”

        The whole purpose of the 1st amendment is to allow the majority to speak. AND to allow the minorities to speak even if the majority would rather they be silent. If we lived in a democracy do you really think that the majority would allow you or I to speak out as we are able to on sites like these? We might actually change some minds and if the change is not want the majority approves of they would not let us.

      • Vicki

        Eddie47d writes:
        “The 1% are not the producers like they use to be and increasingly are the takers.”

        At least you noticed they did actually produce wealth. Which they shared thru hiring and or spending some of it on that 2nd house susan seems to think they don’t need.

        Now the only thing they take is their OWN money to spend on things. Silly them to think they can spend their money better then you (thru your agent, the government) can.

      • Vicki

        Frank Kahn writes (to susan banta):
        ” I will give you credit for a thought, if it was a valid solution, that YOU can give every single dime you have (including all real assets) to the government. I applaud the notion of everyone in the top 2% (including all corporations) giving the same. Okay, now we have balanced the budget for 2013, but we done spent everything they had on one year. What will we do for 2014?’”

        Here is a very detailed but short video outlining the problem of “eating the rich” as some liberals have famously said.
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=661pi6K-8WQ

        • Frank Kahn

          Interesting video, a year earlier than my scenario but the same message. Thanks for sharing.

      • Mike in MI

        Dear susan banta – Welcome to PLD where you can be exposed to more facts and truths in a few hours than most any other site you will find, courtesy of and thanks to Mr. Bob Livingston.
        You ask that we not speak about President Obama’s religious affiliation. You have evidently not taken the time to read his biography, autobiography or documentaries and investigative accounts about him by various journalists, lawyers, academics and students of the Koran and the culture it engenders. He is not who or what he seems which is why all his records are sealed – so you can’t find out, ’cause he can’t afford for you to comprehend what he intends. It would become too obvious what he is doing were the facts to leak out.
        But, I can not convince you here. So, I encourage you to read some expert analyses of the Koran (Qu’ran) by non-muslim translators, commentators and historians (be sure to get the unabridged versions). Find out why muslims so fanatically hate Jews and Christians. Why do muslims want them ALL annihilated? Who or what is the god of the moon – the symbol on their flag?
        Delve deeply to find out with whom Obama has surrounded himself in his administration.

        Oh, hell, never mind. You’re a 2%er. So, you’re much too busy for this kind of studying. Besides, they’ll come knocking at your door to pop the big question before too many years. But, don’t lose your head over it. Instead, be afraid this country gets turned into a muslim nation. Because when it does, you’ll become a hunk of chattel, or someone’s concubine. Sharia Law requires female subjugation.
        But…you might like it. It’s a sort of modified S&M.

      • Smilee

        Texas Ride says:
        December 7, 2012 at 10:42 am

        We are both, they basically mean the same thing and are interchanged all the time. The definitions below. Your description only shows that Susan is ten times more intelligent than you, your not even worthy to kiss her feet.

        REPUBLIC
        b (1) : a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law
        (2) : a political unit (as a nation) having such a form of government

        DEMOCRACY
        a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority
        b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections

      • Vicki

        Smilee says:
        “We are both, they basically mean the same thing and are interchanged all the time. The definitions below. Your description only shows that Susan is ten times more intelligent than you, your not even worthy to kiss her feet.”

        Your ad hominem attack is particularly funny cause you are in error. We are not a (banana) Republic nor a (peoples democratic) republic nor even a republic by the definition you gave.

        We are a Constitutionally LIMITED Republic. Understanding the difference is critical to seeing the genius of the founding fathers.

        This video will help should you choose to become enlightened.
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4r0VUybeXY

        • Smilee

          Vicki commented on Barack Obama’s Phony Mandate.

          Smilee says:
          “We are both, they basically mean the same thing and are interchanged all the time. The definitions below. Your description only shows that Susan is ten times more intelligent than you, your not even worthy to kiss her feet

          ”I HAVE NO DISAGREEMENT WITH SUSAN SO I DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOUR POINT IS HERE. IT IS SUCH A STUPID STATEMENT

          Your ad hominem attack is particularly funny cause you are in error. We are not a (banana) Republic nor a (peoples democratic) republic nor even a republic by the definition you gave.

          DID NOT SAY ANY OF THIS SO AGAIN WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?? SPIN SPIN SPIN

          We are a Constitutionally LIMITED Republic. Understanding the difference is critical to seeing the genius of the founding fathers.

          YES AND A Constitutionally LIMITED DEMOCRACY

          This video will help should you choose to become enlighten.

          I HAVE SEEN PIECE OF FAR RIGHT PROPAGANDA BEFORE BUT IT DOES NOT CHANGE THE REAL REALITY AND I GUESS YOU DO NOT BELIEVE THE WEBSTERS DICTIONARY IS TELLING THE TRUTH, EITHER WHICH CERTAINLY BRINGS INTO QUESTION YOUR INTELLIGENCE.

      • TML

        Smilee says, “We are both, they basically mean the same thing and are interchanged all the time.”

        There is a significant difference in a Republic and a Democracy and they are not truly interchangeable. A Constitutional Republic has some similarities to democracy in that it uses democratic processes to elect representatives and pass new laws, etc., but this is a far cry from being any kind of democracy. The critical difference lies in the fact that a Constitutional Republic has a Constitution that limits the powers of the government and creates checks on its power and balances power between the different branches. There is a reason why the word democracy never even appears in neither the Declaration of Independence nor in the Constitution, as the ‘founders’ feared democracy as much as they feared a monarchy. That is why the will of the majority (mob rule), by virtue of the Republic, cannot vote away the rights of a minority.

        • Smilee

          TML commented on Barack Obama’s Phony Mandate.

          Smilee says, “We are both, they basically mean the same thing and are interchanged all the time.”

          There is a significant difference in a Republic and a Democracy and they are not truly interchangeable. A Constitutional Republic has some similarities to democracy in that it uses democratic processes to elect representatives and pass new laws, etc., but this is a far cry from being any kind of democracy. The critical difference lies in the fact that a Constitutional Republic has a Constitution that limits the powers of the government and creates checks on its power and balances power between the different branches. There is a reason why the word democracy never even appears in neither the Declaration of Independence nor in the Constitution, as the ‘founders’ feared democracy as much as they feared a monarchy. That is why the will of the majority (mob rule), by virtue of the Republic, cannot vote away the rights of i

          MY RESPONSE:

          You ignore the Webster dictionary definitions and have inserted your own which is your first mistake. A Constitutional limited Democracy and a Constitutional limited Republic do mean the same thing and the bottom line in our case is that the Constitution is the Supreme Law in both and because of that either term is true and are both commonly used to describe our type of government and as used are totally correct. . You are arguing that a democracy does not have Constitutional limits but what you fail to recognize its that it can as it does in our case. You say because the word does not appear in the Constitution that supports your joke when in fact the constitution covers many things that are not specifically mentioned in the Constitution, like healthcare which was recently ruled constitutional but no where does that word appear in it and this is true in many other cases as well

          • Frank Kahn

            Actually, it is not health care, it is health care insurance, which pays for the health care. This is what is meant by making health care affordable. The supreme court did not uphold its constitutionality as health care, it upheld it as a tax. While congress has the power to assess taxes, it is not clear in the constitution that it has the power to assess taxes for the purpose of health care. In fact, the sited article states that, the power to levy taxes is for the purpose of certain criteria, which includes defense of our sovereignty as a people and a nation, and to pay credits to foreign nations for purchase by our nation.

            I also read the two definitions of DEMOCRACY and REPUBLIC, and found them to be similar. I did see something that you appear to have decided to ignore when it shows a difference in the two.

            Definition of DEMOCRACY
            1
            a : government by the people; ESPECIALLY : RULE OF THE MAJORITY
            b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections

            Definition of REPUBLIC
            1
            a (1) : a government having a chief of state who is not a monarch and who in modern times is usually a president (2) : a political unit (as a nation) having such a form of government
            b (1) : a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law (2) : a political unit (as a nation) having such a form of government

            Now, I see evidence that there is a difference between your websters definition and mine, which was cut and pasted directly from their web site.

            I put one phrase of definition 1 a. in all capitals to emphasize that it is missing in the definition of REPUBLIC. It is that phrase that greatly distinguishes the two, and why we are not a DEMOCRACY.

            IF you read 1 b. for DEMOCRACY and 1 b. for REPUBLIC, you will see a subtle difference in the wording.

            Note that the supreme power is vested in the people directly in a DEMOCRACY (which has MAJORITY RULE), and the supreme power is vested in a BODY of the citizens in a REPUBLIC (REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PEOPLE).

            Now, for some, it might be hard to see the difference in results but, if you understand the principle of the Electoral College in presidential elections, it becomes apparent how this can change the outcomes of things. It is possible to have the MAJORITY of voters elect candidate A, and have the Electorate elect candidate B. This is because the MAJORITY is not the final decider in the REPUBLIC.

            So although they have some similarities, calling them the same is wrong. We are a Constitutional Republic, not a Democracy. To say that we are a Democracy because it is the same thing as a Republic is wrong. Personally, I cannot see how it is possible to read those two definitions and not see a major difference.

          • Smilee

            The tax is for health care insurance that buys health care which provides health care albeit not by the government which congress could of done too and both or either would be constructional. Your point is irrelevant to the debate as it is nothing more than splitting hairs over nothing really. I explained is a post I think it was to JeffH and I stand by that explanation and will not address it again here you are splitting hairs there to and the fact is common usage is both are used interchangeable.

          • Frank Kahn

            First of all, Smilee, the word is constitutional not constructional.

            I read all your slanderous posts to everyone that does not believe your story. You fail to support any view available to reasonable people.

            I was not splitting hairs when I pointed out your ERRORS. You are WRONG to say that a DEMOCRACY and a REPUBLIC are the same type of government. You were also wrong in calling it health care instead of health care insurance.

            THESE ARE FACTS, AND AS YOU TELL DAVE, THE FACT THAT YOU DONT LIKE THEM DOES NOT CHANGE THE FACTS.

            Also, your stupidity in claiming that general welfare is a catchall phrase for total government control is insane.

            You might also benefit from a course in legal issues. Just because something is lawful does not make it legal. If congress passes a LAW and it is unconstitutional, it is ILLEGAL (NOT LEGAL). To be a blind, ignorant slave of the state, like you are, is not a good thing. Laws need to be challenged, not just blindly accepted and adhered to.

            And, yes, the Supreme Court can be wrong.

          • Smilee

            MY WORDS

            The only thing you are good at is filling these pages UP with garbage, does not say much for your knowledge and intelligence either.

            YOUR WORDS

            Also, your stupidity in claiming that general welfare is a catchall phrase for total government control is insane.

            MY WORDS

            PAY ATTENTION YOU IDIOT i NEVER SAID THAT WHAT I SAID WAS THE COURT SAID THAT AND THEY HAVE THE POWER TO DO SO NEITHER YOU OR I DO, YOU CAN OFFER YOUR OPINION AND BELIEVE THE COURT IS WRONG BUT NEVER THE LESS THAT IS THE REASON THE COURT USED TO DECLARE OBAMACARE CONSTITUTIONAL THEY ARE THE ONES THAT SAID IT IS INCLUDED IN THE GENERAL WELFARE AND IT HAS BEEN FOUND THAT BEFORE AND YOU CAN CALL WHAT THE COURT SAID INSANE BUT THAT DOES NOT CHANGE THE FACT THAT THE COURTS OPINION COUNTS YOURS IS NOTHING BUT PURE GARBAGE AND NEEDS TO BE DISCARDED AS SUCH.THE REST YOU WRITE IS NOT WORTHY OF A RESPONSE FROM INTELLIGENT PEOPLE SO I WILL IGNORE IT

          • Frank Kahn

            You are a pathetic simpering fool. You did imply that you believe and agree that the morons in the government can control everything in our lives by the use of general welfare.

            It is not a legal interpretation of the term to say that FORCING CITIZENS TO BUY UNNECESSARY HEALTH INSURANCE, is a form of protecting the general welfare.

            The same stupid statement could be said of your inane and stupid remarks. For the general welfare of the sane members of the nation you must be made illegal and silenced to prevent your ranting to upset us normal people

            And, you worthless piece of feces, I am more intelligent and better leaned than you will ever hope to be. You have never one time put forth an original thought that was supportable by logic or evidence.

            The Supreme court is not GOD, it does not set the LAW OF THE LAND.

            The AHCA is not a tax, and if it was it would be ILLEGAL on the basis of its origins. Since it is not a tax, it is unconstitutional because the senate has no power over intrastate commerce.

            I could cut you to ribbons in every aspect of this subject (assuming that you had even 1/10 the mental ability to comprehend anything about it). Come on PH, give it your best shot, try to make a statement of fact, an original thought not spewed by the LIBERAL pathos running the country into oblivion.

            Or, maybe, you and Deer can cuddle together and pat each other on the back and say “see I agree with you so it doesnt matter what the truth is.”

            Like I told you both before, Obama is WRONG, everything he says and does is WRONG. Everything you morons think is WRONG. You cant argue, you only play like your word is best, you cant see the tree for the forest.

            The problem with you and understanding the constitution is that, the people who wrote the constitution had brains, they knew something outside your LIBERAL insanity. You want to put meanings where there are none so that the government can rule you so you dont have to think for yourself. That is just fine and good for you, you need their help. WE intelligent people neither need nor want their pathetic meddling in things they know nothing about and cant manage properly.

          • Smilee

            Frank Kahn commented on Barack Obama’s Phony Mandate.

            in response to Smilee:

            MY WORDS The only thing you are good at is filling these pages UP with garbage, does not say much for your knowledge and intelligence either. YOUR WORDS Also, your stupidity in claiming that general welfare is a catchall phrase for total government control is insane.

            MY WORDS, PAY ATTENTION YOU IDIOT i NEVER SAID THAT, YOU PUT THOSE WORDS IN MY MOUTH AND THEY ARE ACTUALLY YOUR WORDS

            You are a pathetic simpering fool. You did imply that you believe and agree that the morons in the government can control everything in our lives by the use of general welfare.

            I NEVER SAID ANYTHING LIKE THAT YOU ARE AGAIN PUTTING YOUR WORDS IN MY MOUTH SO THEY ARE YOUR STUPID WORDS AND YOUR SPIN

            It is not a legal interpretation of the term to say that FORCING CITIZENS TO BUY UNNECESSARY HEALTH INSURANCE, is a form of protecting the general welfare.

            IT IS NOT PROTECTING THE GENERAL WELFARE IT IS PROMOTING THE GENERAL WELFARE, I GUESS YOU HAVE TROUBLE READING THE CONSTITUTION RIGHT TOO IF YOU EVEN HAVE READ IT AND THE COURTS INTERPRETATION OF IT IS LEGAL AND IF YOU DO NOT LIKE THAT JUST TUFF

            The same stupid statement could be said of your inane and stupid remarks. For the general welfare of the sane members of the nation you must be made illegal and silenced to prevent your ranting to upset us normal people

            MORE STUPID RANTING FROM A STUPID AND IGNORANT PERSON SO TYPICAL OF YOU

            And, you worthless piece of feces, I am more intelligent and better leaned than you will ever hope to be. You have never one time put forth an original thought that was supportable by logic or evidence.

            YOUR TALKING ABOUT YOURSELF HERE, AS I TOLD THE TRUTH AND ALL YOU DID WAS SHOW YOUR LACK OF CHARACTER AND LIED YOU’RE A$$ OFF AS USUAL

            The Supreme court is not GOD, it does not set the LAW OF THE LAND.

            NOT GOD BUT IT IS CHARGED TO INTERPRET THE LAWS OF THE LAND, SMART PEOPLE KNOW THIS IS ACTUALLY TRUE AND it ONLY SHOWS YOU CANNOT RECOGNIZE THE TRUTH

            The AHCA is not a tax, and if it was it would be ILLEGAL on the basis of its origins. Since it is not a tax, it is unconstitutional because the senate has no power over intrastate commerce.

            YOU IDIOT, THE TAX WAS NOT INTERSTATE COMMERCE THE TAX ACTUALLY enacted was to promote the general welfare, this what the court ruled and said in the opinion

            I could cut you to ribbons in every aspect of this subject (assuming that you had even 1/10 the mental ability to comprehend anything about it). Come on PH, give it your best shot, try to make a statement of fact, an original thought not spewed by the LIBERAL pathos running the country into oblivion.

            BOY ARE YOU PISSED AND YOU COULD NOT BE MORE WRONG, MY STATEMENTS WERE FACT SUPPORTED BY THE COURT YOURS ARE A$$ BACKWARDS AND SUPPORTED BY ABSOLUTELY NO ONE MAKING IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR YOU TO CUT ANYONE TO RIBBONS IN ANY ASPECT OR SUBJECT YOUR JUST FAR TO LACKING IN ANY KNOWLEDGE TO ACCOMPLISH ANYTHING NEAR THAT

            Or, maybe, you and Deer can cuddle together and pat each other on the back and say “see I agree with you so it doesnt matter what the truth is.”

            AnOTHER IDIOTIC AND SILLY STATEMENT FROM FRANKIE

            Like I told you both before, Obama is WRONG, everything he says and does is WRONG. Everything you morons think is WRONG. You cant argue, you only play like your word is best, you cant see the tree for the forest.

            IN YOUR OPINION AND THAT HOLDS NO WEIGHT WHAT SO EVER IT IS JUST MORE STUPID RANTING ON YOUR PART

            The problem with you and understanding the constitution is that, the people who wrote the constitution had brains, they knew something outside your LIBERAL insanity. You want to put meanings where there are none so that the government can rule you so you dont have to think for yourself. That is just fine and good for you, you need their help. WE intelligent people neither need nor want their pathetic meddling in things they know nothing about and cant manage properly.

            ARTICLE 1, SECTION 8, WAS WRITTEN IN THE ORIGINAL CONSTITUTION BY THOSE YOU SAY HAD BRAINS AND NOT BY WHAT YOU TERM LIBERAL INSANITY UNLESS YOU MEAN THE PEOPLE WHO WROTE THE CONSTITUTION AND YOU CANNOT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS. YOU DEMEAN THE MEANING OF THE WORD INTELLIGENT AS YOU ARE SO TOTALLY LACKING IN IT THIS WAS THE WILL OF THE ORIGINAL FOUNDERS AND YOU ARE SO STUPID TO WANT PEOPLE TO BELIEVE IT IS THE CURRENT DAY LIBERALS DOING THAT WHEN THIS CLAUSE HAS BEEN THERE SINCE DAY ONE. THEY DID NOT MANDATE THAT CONGRESS PROVIDE FOR THE GENERAL WELFARE BUT THEY GAVE THEM THE POWER TO DO SO IF THEY FELT IT WAS NEEDED AND I’M SURE THEY UNDERSTOOD THAT OR THEY WOULD NOT PUT THAT POWER IN THE CONSTITUTION BUT THEY DID AND I AGREE (SURPRISE, SURPRISE) THEY HAD BRAINS AND I’M SURPRISED YOU THINK THAT AS YOU ARE SO LACKING IN THAT DEPARTMENT YOURSELF. NOW WHEN JUSTICES ON THE SUPREME COURT AFFIRM THEIR INTENT IN EXISTING LAW AND YOU DO NOT LIKE IT YOU SAY THAT ITS MEANS SOMETHING VERY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT IT SAYS AND MEANS THE COURT UNDERSTANDS THAT AND US WHOM ARE INTELLIGENT ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT, SORRY FRANKIE BUT YOU CERTAINLY DO NOT UNDERSTAND THAT TRUTH. YOU NEED TO SHINE SOME LIGHT ON THIS BEFORE YOU GET IT RIGHT WHICH I AM BEGINNING TO WONDER IF THAT IS EVEN POSSIBLE IN YOUR CASE.

          • http://tlgeer.wordpress.com tlgeer

            “Also, your stupidity in claiming that general welfare is a catchall phrase for total government control is insane.”

            Where, exactly, did Smilee state this?

            “You might also benefit from a course in legal issues. Just because something is lawful does not make it legal. ”

            Actually, that is the definition of legal.

            “If congress passes a LAW and it is unconstitutional, it is ILLEGAL (NOT LEGAL).”

            Only if the US Supreme Court finds that it is illegal. And they only get to make that decision if the law is contested.

            “To be a blind, ignorant slave of the state, like you are, is not a good thing. Laws need to be challenged, not just blindly accepted and adhered to.

            And, yes, the Supreme Court can be wrong.”

            If the US Supreme Court decides that a contested law is legal then it is legal. Period. That is not just my interpretation. It is the foundation of all the law books that I have read over the last 30 years. Can you cite any other legal definition?

          • Jeff

            According to Dave, the Von Mises Institute is the final authority. The Scalito Supremes may be infallible because they’re final, but the folks who write Dave’s talking points are infallible because Dave says so.

          • Frank Kahn

            Jumping on the band wagon little woman?

            Actually Smilee implied that general welfare is an acceptable premise for passing a constitutionally illegal bill. By inference you can say that if that is true then everything can conceivably be considered valid for congress because it, in some way, affects the general welfare of the citizens. I also researched his ignorant claim that promoting the general welfare was the reason given in the Supreme Courts ruling on the AHCA. I read the entire document (which took a very long time due to its length), and found that this was not mentioned by the Justices even one time. The act was found to be constitutional on two points, 1. The PENALTY is a tax and therefor part of congress’s authority 2. Through some twisted logic, people who refuse to get insurance (intrastate commerce) substantially affect interstate commerce, which is under congressional regulation.

            Lawful is nowhere in the definition of legal. There is however a reference to the word law. I am sure that many have a problem with the distinction since it is in the details of the wording.

            Law is a set of rules put down to assist in maintaining a civilized society.
            Lawfull is in accordance with the RULES of law.
            Legal is in accordance with the INTENT (spirit) of the law.

            If congress passed a law saying that all male citizens who dont perform a period of military service must be castrated at age 25 to prevent future occurrences of non conformism, then castrating them would be lawful. However, reasonable people would say that sterilizing a man would not ensure that everyone would conform, so, since the intent of the law is invalid the act of following the law would be illegal.

            I agree that I am reaching here for an example but it is easier to see the consequences of thinking that everything that is lawful is also legal.

            You are both correct and incorrect in your assertion that the Supreme Court is who decides if a LAW is LEGAL. Our government is divided into 3 main branches, with a fourth branch that is very important (THE PEOPLE). The Legislative branch writes a law, the Executive branch signs it into law, the Judicial branch determines the CONSTITUTIONALITY of the law. Then WE THE PEOPLE decide if it is LEGAL. It is, in fact, the jury that has the final say in this matter, you cant punish someone for breaking the LAW if the JURY finds it to be ILLEGAL.

            There are many rules that use the color of law for creating crimes. These rules are not true law and so even if you called it lawful it would still be illegal.

          • Smilee

            Frank Kahn commented on Barack Obama’s Phony Mandate.

            Actually Smilee implied that general welfare is an acceptable premise for passing a constitutionally illegal bill.

            I DID NOT IMPLY ANYTHING, I STATED THIS IS WHAT JUDGE ROBERTS IN HIS MAJORITY OPINION ON OBAMACARE SAID AND HE SAID THAT THE PENALTY WAS A TAX AND THAT CONGRESS HAD THE POWER T0 LAY THAT AS A TAX TO PROVIDE FOR THE GENERAL WELFARE (OBAMACARE) AND HE QUOTED ARTICLE I, SECTION 8, CLAUSE WHICH READS AS FOLLOWS” The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; THE FACT THAT THE COURT RULED THAT IT IS CONSTITUTIONAL FOR THIS REASON IT MAKES IT LEGAL AND HERE IS A CUT AND PASTE IN PART FROM THE ACTUAL OPINION SHOWING THAT ART. 1 SECTION 8* CLAUSE ONE IS THE REASON IT IS CONSTITUTIONAL. YOU CLAIMED YOU READ AND RESEARCHED IT WHICH PROVES YOU DID NOT OR YOU ARE INCAPABLE OF UNDERSTANDING IT HERE IS THE PORTION OF THE OPINION i STATED AND IT READS AS FOLLOWS: “concluded in Part III–B that the individual mandate must be construed as imposing a tax on those who do not have health insurance, if such a construction is reasonable.The most straightforward reading of the individual mandate is that it commands individuals to purchase insurance. But, for the reasons explained, the Commerce Clause does not give Congress that power.It is therefore necessary to turn to the Government’s alternative argument: that the mandate may be upheld as within Congress’s power to “lay and collect Taxes.” Art. I, §8, cl. 1. In pressing its taxing power argument, the Government asks the Court to view the mandate as imposing a tax on those who do not buy that product. Be-cause “every reasonable construction must be resorted to, in order to save a statute from unconstitutionality,” NOTE HEREIN ROBERTS CITES Article I, Section 8, Clause one and that is the one I pasted above saying exactly what I said it was and you injected your own and wrong and twisted interpretation of it

            By inference you can say that if that is true then everything can conceivably be considered valid for congress because it, in some way, affects the general welfare of the citizens. I also researched his ignorant claim that promoting the general welfare was the reason given in the Supreme Courts ruling on the AHCA.

            i INFERRED NOTHING ONLY STATED WHAT THE COURT SAID. SEE ABOVE WHICH PROVES YOU DID NOT OR YOU ARE NOT CAPABLE OF UNDERSTANDING IT AND NOTHING YOU WRITE IN THIS POST IS ANYWHERE NEAR THE TRUTH

            I read the entire document (which took a very long time due to its length), and found that this was not mentioned by the Justices even one time. The act was found to be constitutional on two points, 1. The PENALTY is a tax and therefor part of congress’s authority 2. Through some twisted logic, people who refuse to get insurance (intrastate commerce) substantially affect interstate commerce, which is under congressional regulation.
            Lawful is nowhere in the definition of legal. There is however a reference to the word law. I am sure that many have a problem with the distinction since it is in the details of the wording.

            MORE GARBAGE FROM FRANKIE

            Law is a set of rules put down to assist in maintaining a civilized society.
            Lawfull is in accordance with the RULES of law.
            Legal is in accordance with the INTENT (spirit) of the law.

            MORE GARBAGE FROM FRANKIE

            If congress passed a law saying that all male citizens who dont perform a period of military service must be castrated at age 25 to prevent future occurrences of non conformism, then castrating them would be lawful. However, reasonable people would say that sterilizing a man would not ensure that everyone would conform, so, since the intent of the law is invalid the act of following the law would be illegal.

            MORE GARBAGE FROM FRANKIE

            I agree that I am reaching here for an example but it is easier to see the consequences of thinking that everything that is lawful is also legal.
            You are both correct and incorrect in your assertion that the Supreme Court is who decides if a LAW is LEGAL. Our government is divided into 3 main branches, with a fourth branch that is very important (THE PEOPLE). The Legislative branch writes a law, the Executive branch signs it into law, the Judicial branch determines the CONSTITUTIONALITY of the law. Then WE THE PEOPLE decide if it is LEGAL.

            WRONG UNLESS THEY CAN CONVINCE THEIR REPRESENTATIVE TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION

            It is, in fact, the jury that has the final say in this matter, you cant punish someone for breaking the LAW if the JURY finds it to be ILLEGAL.

            MORE GARBAGE, IF THE LAW IS CONSTITUTIONAL OR EVEN LEGAL THEY DETERMINED IF THE FACTS ARE PRESENT TO DETERMINE IN THE CASE THEY ARE DETERMINING IF THERE GUILT OR INNOCENCE BASED ON THE LAW GIVEN THEM BY THE JUDGE. IT IS HARD TO COMPREHEND JUST HOW TERRIBLY IGNORANT YOU ARE AND i DO NOT BELIEVE YOU READ THE ACTUAL MAJORITY OPINION BY JUDGE ROBERTS AND I THINK YOU MADE THAT UP THINKING I HAD NOT AND YOU COULD BLUFF THE PEOPLE ON HERE, YOUR NOT SMART ENOUGH TO DO THAT SO CAN THE BS

            There are many rules that use the color of law for creating crimes. These rules are not true law and so even if you called it lawful it would still be illegal. MORE GARBAGE FROM FRANKIE

          • Frank Kahn

            Smilee, good to see you have not grown any in your lack of ignorance. I stated a FACT which your post confirms. I will paste part of your post here to indicate that it is YOU who is ADDING something to the wording of the decision.

            “HE QUOTED ARTICLE I, SECTION 8, CLAUSE WHICH READS AS FOLLOWS” The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; THE FACT THAT THE COURT RULED THAT IT IS CONSTITUTIONAL FOR THIS REASON IT MAKES IT LEGAL AND HERE IS A CUT AND PASTE IN PART FROM THE ACTUAL OPINION SHOWING THAT ART. 1 SECTION 8* CLAUSE ONE IS THE REASON IT IS CONSTITUTIONAL. YOU CLAIMED YOU READ AND RESEARCHED IT WHICH PROVES YOU DID NOT OR YOU ARE INCAPABLE OF UNDERSTANDING IT HERE IS THE PORTION OF THE OPINION i STATED AND IT READS AS FOLLOWS: “concluded in Part III–B that the individual mandate must be construed as imposing a tax on those who do not have health insurance, if such a construction is reasonable.The most straightforward reading of the individual mandate is that it commands individuals to purchase insurance. But, for the reasons explained, the Commerce Clause does not give Congress that power.

            ********************************************************************************
            It is therefore necessary to turn to the Government’s alternative argument: that the mandate may be upheld as within Congress’s power to “lay and collect Taxes.” Art. I, §8, cl. 1.
            *********************************************************************************

            In pressing its taxing power argument, the Government asks the Court to view the mandate as imposing a tax on those who do not buy that product. Be-cause “every reasonable construction must be resorted to, in order to save a statute from unconstitutionality,” NOTE HEREIN ROBERTS CITES Article I, Section 8, Clause one and that is the one I pasted above saying exactly what I said it was and you injected your own and wrong and twisted interpretation of it”

            I have separated the portion of the quote with asterisks to indicate to YOU what IS and IS NOT said.

            Again, I say, the words GENERAL WELFARE are not used in the wording of the decision. I am neither lying nor twisting the truth here. If you want to equivocate and say that the section referenced used those terms, that is true, but the Justices did not use them. And by your logic, you might say they did it for the common defense of the citizens, since that is the other reason given for taxes.

            As to the rest of your ignorant reply. Saying something is GARBAGE, is neither accurate nor does it give any reasonable attempt at disproving anything. Calling me Frankie, when you know that is not my name is just childish.

            Everything in my post is accurate and factual, with reference to the difference between lawful and legal. If you doubt me, then I direct you to use the link provided, which takes you to an explanation from a law dictionary.

            The citizens never HAVE TO GET THEIR REPRESENTATIVES TO ENACT AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION to strike down the legality of a law. That sir, is in fact GARBAGE. Jury nullification is a valid way of stopping an illegal law from being enforced. In most states constitutions the juror is tasked with not only weighing the evidence but also the LAW.

            Now, if you want to try and twist my words, and thereby achieve a desired result, go ahead. It does in no way strengthen your arguments.

            The decision to determine the constitutionality of the act were 1. It was said (incorrectly) that the PENALTY is a TAX. 2. It said that the refusal to participate in INTRASTATE commerce by purchasing HEALTH INSURANCE significantly impacts the INTERSTATE commerce of the overall cost of HEALTH INSURANCE.

            The opinion of the SECOND Justice writing in the decision was somewhat differing in his view on the commerce issue. But even he did not mention GENERAL WELFARE in his portion of the document.

          • Smilee

            Frankie, try hard to follow it correctly:

            “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States ”””

            He referenced this article section and clause which includes general welfare in it and Obamacare certainly is not Defense so he did not mean that even though he did not use the word he by his reference included it

            Your simple minded jerk, to not say general welfare is not included once again shows you do not understand it. THE THE WHOLE CLAUSE IS INCLUDED BY REFERENCE THE WORD IS NOT NECESSARY BECAUSE BY REFERENCE IT IS INCLUDED IN THE OPINION and Roberts did include the whole clause, YOUR SIMPLE MIND JUST CANNOT GET IT. The rest of your post is just garbage and I will not wallow in your garbage.

          • Frank Kahn

            Smilee, you should not use derogatory words which you dont understand. Simple minded would more closely describe your narrow minded approach to this discussion. If you can follow simple sentence structure, you will notice that I said that the words “GENERAL WELFARE” were not used IN the document written by the Supreme Court Justices. Those words were not used, and no matter what insipid moronic crying you want to do will not make them appear.

            SINCE YOU INSIST ON ACTING LIKE A 2 YEAR OLD BABY, MAYBE YOU CAN GIVE US YOUR REAL NAME SO WE CAN MAKE FUN OF IT AS WELL.

            CALLING INTELLIGENT FACT BASED COMMENTS GARBAGE IS IGNORANT. IF YOU THINK YOU CAN PRODUCE ANY FACTUAL EVIDENCE THAT DISPROVES MY STATEMENTS, I ENCOURAGE YOU TO GIVE THEM. SIMPLY SAYING THEY ARE GARBAGE (BECAUSE YOU ARE INCAPABLE OF UNDERSTANDING THE TRUTH) ONLY ENHANCES YOUR DISPLAY OF IGNORANCE AND LACK OF THE MENTAL CAPACITY TO DISCUSS ANYTHING WITH MATURITY.

            MY INFORMATION IS BACKED BY MULTIPLE LAYERS OF EXPERT ANALYSIS. MY ASSERTIONS ARE TAKEN FROM SEVERAL PRESTIGIOUS LAW DICTIONARIES. YOUR REBUTTAL COMES FROM A SMALL UNDERDEVELOPED MIND.

            AND, ARE YOU NOT THE PERSON WHO THINKS THAT DEMOCRACY AND REPUBLIC IS THE SAME THING? DID YOU READ MY POST SHOWING YOU HOW WRONG YOU WERE? DID YOU FIND ANY INTELLIGENT RESPONSE TO IT? CAN YOU DISPUTE IT WITH SOMETHING OTHER THAN NAME CALLING AND 2 YEAR OLD WHINING?

            THESE TWO DISCUSSIONS ARE INEXORABLY LINKED BECAUSE IN A REPUBLIC THE CITIZENS ARE SOVEREIGNS AND HAVE ALL THE POWER TO DECIDE THE TRUTH AND LEGALITY OF ALL LAWS.

            I BELIEVE IT IS YOUR RIGHT TO DECIDE THAT YOU LIVE IN A DEMOCRACY AND GIVE ALL YOUR RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS AWAY TO THE MAJORITY (MOB) RULE.

            WHEN YOU ARE CHARGED WITH A CRIME, YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO A JURY, JUST ACCEPT YOUR PUNISHMENT LIKE A GOOD DEMOCRACY PEON. YOU WANT TO BE JUDGED IN A LAW SYSTEM, FINE LET THE LAWS RULE YOU.

            I, ON THE OTHER HAND, WANT TO BE JUDGED IN A JUSTICE SYSTEM WHERE MY RIGHTS ARE PRESERVED.

            TRY TO FATHOM THIS, RULE OF LAW IS SIMPLY THAT, RULE BY LAWS. A TRUE LEGAL SYSTEM IS GOVERNED BY JUSTICE NOT LAW.

          • Smilee

            Frankie

            You make no sense what so ever, confused, ignorant, childish, stupid are some that comes to mind I when read your bull, it is pure garbage, All your BS will not change the fact Obamacare is the law of the land for the reasons Roberts stated in his majority opinion and which I cited and cut and pasted and yet you want us to believe you can contradict Roberts, wanting us to believe you are right and he is wrong, his words have power yours are pure BS and Obamacare will remain because of them and your words will have absolutely no effect of any kind, garbage should be thrown out so your words are as they are meaningless

          • Frank Kahn

            More childish crying and name calling? You never learn, you even keep trying to shift the focus of my post to something that you THINK you can defend. I said those two words were not in the written decision of the Supreme Court, and they were not there. You cant deny that I am right so you call me names. Wont work, does not change the facts.

            As to the difference between lawful and legal, you again fail to put forth any facts or citations to dispute my facts, once more you do childish name calling.

            I am not trying to CHANGE anything, I am simply stating facts that you could find for yourself if you were actually interested in doing it.

          • Smilee

            Frank Kahn commented on Barack Obama’s Phony Mandate.
            in response to Smilee:

            More childish crying and name calling?

            THIS IS WHAT I SAID confused, ignorant, childish, stupid are some that comes to mind when I read your bull, it is pure garbage THAT WAS WHAT CAME TO MY MIND WHEN READING YOUR POST I DID NOT CALL YOU THESE NAMES, I SAID THEY WERE THE THOUGHTS THAT CAME TO MY MIND, SO AGAIN YOU READ INTO MY WORDS WHAT IS NOT THERE

            You never learn, you even keep trying to shift the focus of my post to something that you THINK you can defend. I said those two words were not in the written decision of the Supreme Court, and they were not there. You cant deny that I am right so you call me names. Wont work, does not change the facts.

            I SAID THE WORDS WERE NOT IN HIS OPINION SO WHATS YOUR BEEF, CANNOT YOU READ WHAT SAID, WHAT I said was it was included by reference in his opinion and Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 does include the words “general welfare” and as Roberts included this as reference as why he said taxing for that reason (general welfare) was constitutional therefore it is included in his opinion without actually writing these two words. NOW YOU ACCUSED ME OF CALLING YOU NAMES SO HERE I WILL, YOU ARE IGNORANT (NOT REALLY NAME CALLING BUT AN OPINION AS TO WHAT KNOWLEDGE YOU HAVE) STUPID ( NOW THAT IS NAME CALLING) AND AN IDIOT (AGAIN NAME CALLING AND YOU DESERVE IT AS YOU ARE)

            As to the difference between lawful and legal, you again fail to put forth any facts or citations to dispute my facts, once more you do childish name calling.

            IF IT IS LEGAL IT IS LAWFUL AND IF IT IS LAWFUL IT IS LEGAL, ASK ANY LAWYER STUPID AND YOU CAN FIND OUT FOR YOURSELF.

            I am not trying to CHANGE anything, I am simply stating facts that you could find for yourself if you were actually interested in doing it.

            IF YOU HAD STATED FACTS I COULD FIND THEM BUT AS THEY DO NOT EXIST IT IS NOT POSSIBLE. YOU ARE SUCH A SAD CASE I DO REALLY FEEL SORRY FOR YOU BEING SO OUT OF TOUCH WITH REALITY. YOU HAVE SERIOUS PROBLEMS, FRANKIE.

          • Frank Kahn

            since you are to stupid to do anything for yourself, I am copying one of my references for the lawful versus legal argument.

            “It is crucial to define the difference between legal and lawful. The generic Constitution references genuine law. The present civil authorities and their courts use the word legal. Is there a difference in the meanings? The following is quoted from A Dictionary of Law 1893:

            Lawful. In accordance with the law of the land; according to the law; permitted, sanctioned, or justified by law. “Lawful” properly implies a thing conformable to or enjoined by law; “Legal”, a thing in the form or after the manner of law or binding by law. A writ or warrant issuing from any court, under color of law, is a “legal” process however defective. See legal. [Bold emphasis added]

            Legal. Latin legalis. Pertaining to the understanding, the exposition, the administration, the science and the practice of law: as, the legal profession, legal advice; legal blanks, newspaper. Implied or imputed in law. Opposed to actual

            “Legal” looks more to the letter [form/appearance], and “Lawful” to the spirit [substance/content], of the law. “Legal” is more appropriate for conformity to positive rules of law; “Lawful” for accord with ethical principle. “Legal” imports rather that the forms [appearances] of law are observed, that the proceeding is correct in method, that rules prescribed have been obeyed; “Lawful” that the right is actful in substance, that moral quality is secured. “Legal” is the antithesis of equitable, and the equivalent of constructive. 2 Abbott’s Law Dic. 24. [Bold emphasis added]

            Legal matters administrate, conform to, and follow rules. They are equitable in nature and are implied (presumed) rather than actual (express). A legal process can be defective in law. This accords with the previous discussions of legal fictions and color of law. To be legal, a matter does not follow the law. Instead, it conforms to and follows the rules or form of law. This may help you to understand why the Federal and State Rules of Civil and Criminal Procedure are cited in every court petition so as to conform to legal requirements of the specific juristic persons named, e.g., “STATE OF GEORGIA” or the “U.S. FEDERAL GOVERNMENT” that rule the courts.

            Lawful matters are ethically enjoined in the law of the land—the law of the people—and are actual in nature, not implied. This is why whatever true law was upheld by the organic Constitution has no bearing or authority in the present day legal courts. It is impossible for anyone in “authority” today to access, or even take cognizance of, true law since “authority” is the “law of necessity,” 12 USC 95.

            Therefore, it would appear that the meaning of the word “legal” is “color of law,” a term which Black’s Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, defines as:

            Color of law. The appearance or semblance, without the substance, of legal right. Misuse of power, possessed by virtue of state law and made possible only because wrongdoer is clothed with authority of state, is action taken under “color of law.” Black’s Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, page 241. ”

            reference link

            http://www.famguardian.org/Subjects/LawAndGovt/LegalEthics/LegalVLawful.htm

            and on the subject of the wording of the ruling, once again you twist the purpose of the argument. You claimed that obamacare was found to be constitutional because of the clause “promote the general welfare”. I said that the words general welfare were not in the decision. You said I was wrong, and accused me of lying about reading it. I re-asserted that those two words were not in the document. You said they were there by inference. I said that that did not matter, they were not in the words of the justices. The fact is that I am correct and all you can do is keep resorting to name calling. The words that most appropriately describe you are not allowed to be used here so I will only say that you are willfully ignorant and probably functionally illiterate.

          • Smilee

            Frankie; You are even more ignorant and stupid than I previously thought, You know nothing of law and legal and the Constitution and court rulings and opinions and if you talk it over with a lawyer he will tell you you are wrong. It might help if you came into the 21st century too and quit living in the 18th & 19th centuries as this is the 21st century now and Roberts is the Chief Justice and his opinion is the correct one and is legal not yours. Why do I feel that your far to arrogant and egotistical and not man enough to acknowledge that you are wrong which you are which a lawyer can tell you if you wish to know the truth. I never once said that Roberts used the words “general welfare ” himself and he does not have to use those words when he references that part of the constitution as his reason for his ruling because it contains those words in that part of the constitution thus he included them by reference without writing them but I never said he wrote them himself so quit lying and saying I said them when i did not.

          • Jeff

            Now, now, Frank. Remember your blood pressure. Now, tell me, is Edna the kind of political ally you seek?

            edna.bowden@yahoo.com commented on Barack Obama’s Phony Mandate.

            in response to Lyndia:

            Terry, I don’t know where you are from but I don’t think you will want to see the farm programs gone unless you are independently wealthy or you are on a welfare program! If the farm programs are taken away, the majority of the farmers will be forced out and farm products will be sky-high [...]

            Impeach Obama before he totally destroys our great country. He is not a US citizen so why do we allow him to continue as The President? What is the matter America???

          • Frank Kahn

            Why did you post a link to send edna an email?

          • Frank Kahn

            sorry left out a link to an excerpt from a legal dictionary

            http://www.famguardian.org/Subjects/LawAndGovt/LegalEthics/LegalVLawful.htm

      • Marty S.

        This used to be a republic but now the U.N. …uhmm I mean U.S. citizenry has turned into a hippocracy um I mean a democracy mob-rule state and soon to be monarchy with BHO as king.

      • TML

        Smilee says, “You ignore the Webster dictionary definitions and have inserted your own which is your first mistake.”

        Wasn’t ignoring the definition. I was simply pointing out the difference. I think Frank Kahn did a decent job of taking the definition itself and showed the significant difference. Although, once he did that effectively you merely ignored it by saying he is “splitting hairs”. There’s a reason for two different words, and if they were truly interchangeable then, well, we’d only need one word, eh? That’s what you do when you paint of the difference.

        Smilee says, “A Constitutional limited Democracy and a Constitutional limited Republic do mean the same thing and the bottom line in our case is that the Constitution is the Supreme Law in both and because of that either term is true and are both commonly used to describe our type of government and as used are totally correct.”

        No, they do not mean the same thing, and it is not the existence or use of a Constitution that makes the difference.

        Smilee says, “You are arguing that a democracy does not have Constitutional limits but what you fail to recognize its that it can as it does in our case.”

        I never argued that a democracy doesn’t have a constitution. You should entertain the difference between the Athenian Democracy and the Roman Republic. They are not rightfully interchangeable my friend; the difference may appear subtle to some, but it is a significant difference.

        Smilee says, “You say because the word does not appear in the Constitution that supports your joke when in fact the constitution covers many things that are not specifically mentioned in the Constitution, like healthcare which was recently ruled constitutional but no where does that word appear in it and this is true in many other cases as well”

        Healthcare isn’t a political structure, and while I can argue against the idea of healthcare being constitutional, the point remains, that there is a difference between a democracy and a republic, and that the United States is a Republic, not a democracy.

        When asked by a woman what type of government the American people were going to participate in, Benjamin Franklin said “A republic, madam, if you can keep it.”

        “Republics decline into democracies and democracies degenerate into despotisms.” – Aristole

        • Smilee

          Common Usage on our type of government is that republic and democracy refer to the same thing in our country so anyway you argue it, it in the context of our actual usageyou are spitting hairs and the dictionary reflects our common usages. I have no dispute with your quote of Franklin if he in deed said it and I know he is commonly credited with saying it but not sure there is any real proof he did but either way it is irrelevant to this. You get overly technical on this and are very loose on most of your positions showing wide discrepancies in your approach to issues. You would rather think of yourself as being right even when you are not right and that appears to be a problem with you as to ascertaining what the real truth is.

      • TML

        The entire point is; the common context of such interchangable usage, or that they mean the same thing, is incorrect. I’m aware that the truth is people commonly use them that way, but doing so doesn’t make it correct. It’s not rocket science, Smilee

      • Smilee

        TML

        Your entitled to your opinion and despite all your words I still thing you are wrong on this but glad to see you agree that it is common usage.

      • TML

        More of a fact than opinion.
        Common interchangeable usage of Republic and Democracy only proves that there are many uneducated people who don’t know the difference.

        • Smilee

          Yes, You have made it very clear your uneducated

        • Deerinwater

          susan banta; ~ Some people quite simply believe they are much, much brighter than most people. I refer to it as the “Cinderella Syndrome” . It a fabricated illusion that is reinforced and justified in countless of ways.

          Cinderella was convinced that she was ugly and unworthy by people inside her environment, she had no reference point to the understanding of or notions of beauty, For surely she could never appear as attractive as her sisters.

          People that have never been exposed to intelligence are much the same. ~ We are all victims in one way or another by our perception of “ourselves” and how we fit into the world.

          It all starts with “Self – Image” ~ how one views themselves. This starts early with a mothers heart beat and voice. ~ We realized early that we are not alone. There are others. From that point the boundaries of “self” is a learning process of great discovery. Mommy is good! I like mommy, Mommy love me, I must be good too! I want to please mommy and from there is grows.

          These early forming months are very important and some fair better then others for a host of reason. ~ But once the image of self starts to emerge any going back and making corrections is impossible. The die is cast. Most will go to their grave with the self image they formed as infants. It’s a self fulfilling prophecy of sorts.

          People that do not feel in control will tell you they are smart to hide their deepest fears, ~ they will proclaim and boost to just how smart they are. ~ They refuse to accept the limited control they have over others much less themselves.

          If they truly believed themselves bright ~ they would not be bringing it up. The question would not even be in their thoughts if they were completely certain.

          make sense?

      • Walter & Renee Agard

        Warrior, are you a rich man. if you are then case closed, but if you are not then why are you hurting yourself for them ?

    • DaveH

      Don’t hold your breath, Steve, for the Republicans to offer anything meaningful unless it means allowing their Crony Capitalists to further benefit at the expense of the people. The only difference between the majority of Republican Leaders and the Democrat Leaders is that the Republicans “say” they want Small Government while the Democrat Leaders are more honest about their intentions.

      • independent thinker

        DaveH the Republicans do want smaller government. They only want government to grow at a 2% rate compared to the democrats wanting government to grow at a 10% rate so the Republicans want smaller government than the democrats they just neglect to tell us that it is a matter of how rapid the government will grow not if it will grow.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Hold your hats, folks, and mark this date on your calendars, because something really unique has occurred today!

        RIGHT BRAIN THINKER AGREES WITH WHAT DaveH SAYS HERE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

        ALMOST EVERY WORD OF IT !!!!!!!!!!!!

        I take small issue with Dave only on “….. Democrat Leaders are more honest about their intentions”. Dave is presuming a bit when he talks about their “intentions”—he really has no way of knowing what their intentions are, and they really haven’t said they “want to grow government”, so there’s no reason to give them “honesty points” for something they really haven’t done. Other than that small thing, Dave is 99% spot on.

        Independent thinker chips in with a good thought also, although he probably should have stated that his 2% and 10% figures are “for illustrative purposes only”. I don’t think either party has specified such figures. GROVER has said he wants to “shrink the government down to a size where he can drown it in a bathtub”, and virtually all Republicans have signed THE PLEDGE by which Grover hopes to do that, so, by extension, we can say that the Republicans want NO growth at all.

      • Vicki

        That’s not smaller government. That’s smaller INCREASE in already big government.

  • Warrior

    Here’s my advice to young people, get a gubmint job. Seems to be working out fine for all those early retirees. My scrool teacher neighbors are sure enjoying their 50′s retirement. The poor non-public sector schlub down the street with 2 kids just lost their home. Well, when your “property taxes” are the same cost as your mortgage what do you think will happen?

    Sure hope some greedy “rich” person gets that house or maybe some retired “gubmint” worker.

  • Don the britton

    What is wrong with the Bush tax cuts? Obama thinks that Obama tax cuts would sound a lot better and if can get higher taxes for the rich it will be even better. How will he accomplish this? By going over the cliff he thinks that is a win win.

    • walter agard

      Are you a rich person, if you are, you can afford to pay your fair share, and you wont even feel itA poor person cannot afford a tax hike.Maybe you are defending the rich because you are rich.I am defending the poor.

      • TML

        walter agard says, “Are you a rich person, if you are, you can afford to pay your fair share, and you wont even feel itA poor person cannot afford a tax hike.Maybe you are defending the rich because you are rich.I am defending the poor.”

        The Robin Hood philosophy isn’t an effective one. I think a fair share would be an equal rate across the board, not a higher rate for the “rich”, which equates to punishment for success achieved by those who are genuinely industrious. Your position is, in fact, unfair and immoral because its based on envy thinking someone else has acquired to much, can therefore spare to others, and thus elects to take it by force.

      • Vicki

        Besides if we had an equal rate (say 1%) the rich WOULD pay more than the poor cause 1% of the poor is much less than 1% of the rich.

        Or in math terms
        1% of $10,000 would be $100 and 1% of 1,000,000 would be $10,000

        So someone earning 10k a year would pay 1% of the amount a rich person would pay.

        That should be “fair” to both the poor and rich don’t you think?

        What about the money the government needs? They can do what they do now and borrow the rest or perhaps the government should consider SPENDING CUTS!.

      • http://www.boblivingstonletter.com/ Bob Livingston

        Dear walter agard,

        You write: “Are you a rich person, if you are, you can afford to pay your fair share, and you wont even feel it.” What gives you the moral authority to decide what is a “fair share” and determine what a person might “feel”?

        Best wishes,
        Bob

        • Lyndia

          What do you consider a “fair share” that the wealthy should be paying? Is it 50% of his/her gross income/net income, or shoud they just give it all away to those who live off the country?? Why not just give it all to the government and see where it will waste it on more of the stupid spending over the past 4 years??
          Most people who have an abundance of wealth have businesses that employ many people; they pay FICA, employee benefits, etc for their employees plus the taxes on their net income & most contribute several 100s of thousands into the US treasury every year for their company and then they pay taxes on top of that for their personal income!! These businessmen will simply start laying off people and very likely move their businesses back over seas so they will employ people for less until people in this country wake up to the fact that what they are demanding is cutting employment, cutting benefits, & destroying this country!!
          I have listened to these sites with the majority of those posting wanting the wealthy to pay more taxes because they have more money and they are just too greedy to help get this country out of debt. It sounds to me that the “greedy” are those who want someone else to pay the debt!!
          It wasn’t the everyday people in this country that put it so far in debt…it was the leadership of this country (President & Congress) who did the spending, kept handing out money that they did not have to spend bailing big companies out, inviting over a million illegals into this country that benefit from government benefits that should be going to those legal citizens who need it!! It’s spending government money on lavish parties and tripping around the world to hobknob with the bigwigs; adding on something over 5 trillion on to what Bush ended with when he had promised to cut Bush’s debt in half or wouldn’t run for re-election….and people seem to forget all of the broken promises “O” made to get elected the first time because they seem foolish enough to trust him again this time to keep his promises and once again what kind of liar they are following…this time around they will really regret their belief in this “savior of theirs”!!

          • Jeff

            All the problems you discuss, perceive, and imagine are occurring during a period of historically low taxation, particularly for the wealthy. A large portion of the deficit results from the Bush tax cuts – a far larger portion than from any of Obama’s policies. This chart clearly shows why our deficit is where it is:

            http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/05/obama-romney-deficit-debt-chart.php

            I understand you dislike Obama. You have your own reasons for that, and I’m not going to accuse you of bad motives though many here have expressed them. But facts are facts and fantasy is fantasy. For you to blame all our fiscal problems on Obama is in the realm of fantasy.

  • GEORGEOUS GEORGE

    I DON’T THINK A 3RD TERM IS OUT OF THE QUESTION. HE IS DESTROYING THE CONSTITUTION NOW AND HAS FOUR YEARS TO SEE IT FURTHER DESTROYED

    MAY GOD SAVE AND BLESS AMERICA!

    • Doc Sarvis

      And I am still waiting for that October Surprise many on this site were talking about. HA!

      • Karolyn

        Yeah, hmmmmmm…No martial law – no cancelled elections? What happened? I also remember certain well-versed individuals saying that the behind-the-scenes directors were throwing Obama under the bus in favor of Romney. And then there was the Romney landslide predicted by legendary (HA!) prognosticator Root!

      • Vicki

        The October surprise was the stuffing of the ballot boxes. :) Or Benghazi but that was bungled. http://www.wnd.com/2012/11/the-big-list-of-vote-fraud-reports/

        • Deerinwater

          Oh give it a rest ~ Between Romney being looked upon by many American as what is destroying the American Way, of success by perseverance and hard work and the Tea Party pushing GOP candidates to the extreme far right ~ the GOP got their head handed to them in November. GOP party leadership scoffed the only true conservative that made a bid for the office. What would you expect?

          Do you really believe that Senator Dement just woke up one morning and decided to leave the Senate and head up a CEO slot with a private firm because he felt he’s be more useful to right-wing politics in such position ~ all on his own do ya????

          That might well be what we are hearing but what Senator Dement has been invited to do is, take a long walk off a short pier by GOP leadership.

          All these GOP “posturing” is all fine and good I suppose, I would never expect them to bow to the left or concede on a single talking point but it is the GOP that has places themselves in such an awkward position by pandering to the likes of Norquest and Jim Dement’s and Dick Armey Tea Party.

          The language that has been used has soured the American people. You need to get your “Language” right! This systematic process of demonizing of public workers to get at Unions , they have shot themselves in the foot.

          There is just too many Americans that work for government, they are white, they are black, brown, yellow. and so dark that they are blue!

          If the plan is to privatize everything, ~ fine! But you must sell a history of stability in private markets to entice people to consider it, and you can’t done that with the current track record. Private investors the likes of Mitt Romney have left just too many survivors in their wake in their race to the top. Survivors that remember just exactly how it happen and live to tell about it.

          And as for a stable track records for conservatism, the current GOP doesn’t have one.

      • DaveH

        Lots of broad generalizations, Deer, but almost no specifics.
        Can you give us some examples, for instance, of what Romney has done that is immoral or illegal?

        • Deerinwater

          No David I cannot, ~ I make only the claim that enough Americans feel this way toward Mitt Romney, ~ I will use their rejection of him as support. The suspicion is there and Mitt Romney helped put it there with all the many things that was said and done by him personally.

          Can you proved that the suspicion invalid or not the overriding reason for his rejection?

        • Deerinwater

          David, forgive me , I don’t mean to be brief with you question but I’ve much to do this morning.

          Of course there are specifics regarding Mitt Romney that I could being forward to be discussed. I simply don’t have the time to dive into it at moment and will leave you with enough of Mitt Romney success follow as pattern of behavior the American people have learned to deplore, A pattern that walks a fine line between criminal and immoral. While for obvious reason both the criminal and the immoral go to great lengths to hide their behavior, while the pattern is not so easily hidden.

          It’s not required that I prove anything, Mitt Romney solicited the American people vote claim that he should be found deserving by virtue of his pasted business success yet failed to offer adequate disclosure of his business affairs and the part that he actually played. ~

          Any unflattering news that was uncovered, Mitt might have headed the board but he really wasn’t in town or in charge or in town would be Mitt Romney claim. ~ And there were many unflattering events that surrounded Mitt Romney business ventures , it was not all sunshine and roses for thousand of people and not just a few but whole communities, small towns.

          Have a great day.

          • Jeff

            The thing about Romney is when did he ever stand up to authority or do something he felt was morally right even though it might cost him money? He knew how to make money and if it came at the expense of 1,000 factory workers or a town’s survival, those were factors that simply did not enter the equation. If Bain could make $100 million closing a factory, the workers who lost their jobs, their pensions, and their healthcare were no more a consideration than the variety of cheese comprising the Moon.

            Romney never stood up to the Government during Viet Nam, never stood up to the Mormon Church on race, and never stood up to the most vicious voices in the Republican Party. It was ultimately his “get along to go along” manner and his “money is the only thing” attitude that doomed his candidacy.

      • Vicki

        Deerinwater writes:
        “If the plan is to privatize everything, ~ fine! But you must sell a history of stability in private markets to entice people to consider it, and you can’t done that with the current track record.”

        If people want the kind of stability offered by excessive government control they should move to a country that already provides it. Cuba. USSR (deceased) etc.

        • Jeff

          Yes, Vicki, that is always the choice: your way (no regulation of the economy) or North Korea. Do you realize how insane that is?

      • Deerinwater

        If you want to invest your life saving in the stock market Vicky, tell me what is stopping you Vicky?

        But why would you insist that I should?

        Who is it that will bail you out ~ if your markets fail you and you lose all your money?

        Privatization is not bad thing, but Corporate America is not people with responsibility, the nature and purpose of Corporate is to skirt personal responsibility.

        I like to do business with a man that I can met between his back door and his car of I see the need too.

      • vicki

        Deerinwater says:
        “If you want to invest your life saving in the stock market Vicky, tell me what is stopping you Vicky?

        But why would you insist that I should?”

        Where. And be precise have I ever insisted that you invest in the stock market?

        Deerinwater: “Who is it that will bail you out ~ if your markets fail you and you lose all your money?”

        Apparently Obama and TARPn though I didn’t ask him too.

        Deerinwater: “Privatization is not bad thing, but Corporate America is not people with responsibility, the nature and purpose of Corporate is to skirt personal responsibility.”

        And the purpose of government appears to be “spend other peoples money taken at gunpoint.” You still are not required to buy from a Corporation. Well you weren’t until Obamacare.

        Deerinwater: “I like to do business with a man that I can met between his back door and his car of I see the need too.”

        Only thing stopping you is that bigger and bigger government the Democrats and Liberals keep growing. So join a group who’s mission is to get government out of your life for a change.

        • Deerinwater

          Vicki say; ” And the purpose of government appears to be “spend other peoples money taken at gunpoint.”

          I say ; Not at gun point Vicki, ~ just extortion . No need to embellish, it’s bad enough without the need. And too, it’s actually the governments money (or is it?)

          So what is you options, what do you propose Vicki, along the lines of feasibility and practical application, something that has a history of at some point being done before? No government at all? A Government with no money to spend or penalties to offer will receive little in the way of cooperation by the governed.

          It’s seems rather clear at this point that the governed only response to the carrot or the stick that I’m aware of, if I be wrong, I am listening and looking forward to hearing something new!

          Vicki say; “You still are not required to buy from a Corporation. Well you and I were not until Obamacare.”

          I say; I suppose the word “required” means differ things to you and I. I’m suppose that I am not required to breathe, but I certainly like too.

          They say that operating an automobile is a privilege and not a “right” while any existence to today world would be made most difficult without buying from Shell or Mobil.

      • vicki

        Jeff writes:
        “Yes, Vicki, that is always the choice: your way (no regulation of the economy) or North Korea.”

        Since economy is self regulating it is not possible for it to be “no regulation”.

        Argument to ridicule deleted.

      • DaveH

        Jeff says — “Do you realize how insane that is?”.
        Not insane at all to learn from other peoples’ mistakes.
        But, we do realize how childish you are, Jeff.

      • DaveH

        Deer says — “Not at gun point Vicki, ~ just extortion . No need to embellish”.
        Embellish? Try this experiment, Deer — refuse to pay. See if they show up at your door unarmed.

      • Vicki

        Deerinwater writes:
        “I suppose the word “required” means differ things to you and I”

        Unfortunate. Makes it hard to communicate complex ideas if you do not agree on the meaning of words. But then again that is part of the plan. Disrupt communication by changing meanings.

        Now for amusement we were talking about being forced at gunpoint to either buy health insurance or pay a fee to the government. That matches the dictionary definition of required.

        re·quire
        verb ri-ˈkwī(-ə)r
        re·quiredre·quir·ing
        Definition of REQUIRE
        transitive verb
        1a : to claim or ask for by right and authority
        b archaic : request

        2a : to call for as suitable or appropriate
        b : to demand as necessary or essential : have a compelling need for
        3: to impose a compulsion or command on : compel
        4chiefly British : to feel or be obliged —used with a following infinitive

        So Obamacare requires that you buy insurance from and approved Crony or pay a fine/fee/tax/ whatever.

        Definition 3 matches as you would find the IRS on your door step with guns should you dare to refuse this 1b definition.

      • Vicki

        Deerinwater writesL
        “They say that operating an automobile is a privilege and not a “right”….”

        The mysterious “they” say a lot of things that are not true. Taking my private property from my place to that of another is most certainly a right. The fact that I do that by having said property carry me changes the right not in the slightest.

        I do find it amusing that the “king” demands that I have “his” permission to travel with my private property on the “kings” highway.

        Reminds me of the quote from “the patriot”:

        “Would you tell me please, Mr. Howard… why should I trade one tyrant 3,000 miles away for 3,000 tyrants one mile away?”
        http://www.hark.com/clips/tqqkkllkfk-3000-tyrants-one-mile-away

      • Vicki

        Deerinwater writes:
        “It’s seems rather clear at this point that the governed only response to the carrot or the stick that I’m aware of, if I be wrong, I am listening and looking forward to hearing something new! ”

        That is because you are thinking of the governed as chattel not sovereign.

        Read the Declaration of Independence. Pay close attention to this part:
        “That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

        I can trick anyone into consenting when I have a big enough carrot and or stick but are they REALLY consenting or are they choosing the least objectionable path.

        Kinda like a mugger who says “your money or your wife”. When he takes one you will have consented but is it REALLY the kind of consent spoken of or is it coerced.

        (Yes I really meant to use wife for the humor value :) )

        • Deerinwater

          Vicki says’,

          “That is because you are thinking of the governed as chattel not sovereign.
          Read the Declaration of Independence.”

          chat·tel (chtl)
          n.
          1. Law An article of movable personal property.
          2. A slave.
          [Middle English chatel, movable property, from Old French, from Medieval Latin capitle; see cattle.]

          I don’t think of Government as “property” movable, personal or otherwise , Vicki ? ~ please explain.

          Pay close attention to this part:

          “That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

          An obvious observation and as it was intended to be ~ what am I suppose to be looking for Vicki? Help me out here, ~ what are you attempting to convey to us?

          “I can trick anyone into consenting when I have a big enough carrot and or stick but are they REALLY consenting or are they choosing the least objectionable path.”

          Agreed, while this applies to any government, where it a “trick” or a “fact” , the governed is being offered options, comply or willful noncompliance.

          Kinda like a mugger who says “your money or your wife”. When he takes one you will have consented but is it REALLY the kind of consent spoken of or is it coerced.
          (Yes I really meant to use wife for the humor value :) )

          ~ hmm ? ~ life, wife again, ~ still options where rightfully so or a ruse.

          I had asked you Vicki, ~ if you don’t accept our current form of government ( with all it’s flaws and failings) what form of government would please you?

          The only argument that you and I seem to have is about what you “think” that I believe Vicki.

      • Deerinwater

        DaveH says:
        -
        Deer says — “Not at gun point Vicki, ~ just extortion . No need to embellish”.
        Embellish? Try this experiment, Deer — refuse to pay. See if they show up at your door unarmed.”

        I say; David, ~ forget me, ~ with all respects, ~ I have suggest many times , I have been a pirate and lived the life of a pirate. ~ “Willful noncompliance” is one of the things I do best. I am not an easily intimidated person. I’ve done battle with the IRS on many occasions. ~ and what I know is too expensive to just give away. ~ and besides, ~ If I did give information away, ~ people like yourself would naturally assume it to be worthless. Just let me rest your mind about “Guns” for they are not required. ~ But you sure better put your “thinking cap” on.

        I’m noted for pushing boundary lines, ~ Unless you are some kind of underworld figure, an Al Capone or something David, they don’t come after you with guns ~ They come after you with an attorney and legal writs.

    • eddie47d

      Sore loser “Georgeous” is regurgitating the same loony hype we heard 4 years ago. No wonder they are stuck in quicksand.

    • Lyndia

      AMEN TO THAT!!!

      • Jeff

        All you guys demonstrate with this nonsensical talk is your own inability to distinguish fantasy from reality. Obama is not destroying the Constitution, and he will not run for a 3rd term. He will not cancel all future elections, and he will not one day grow a moustache to become either Hitler or Stalin. If you continue to believe such nonsense, you need to be wary not of black helicopters but of guys in white armed with butterfly nets.

      • DaveH

        You have a Crystal Ball, Jeff?
        Is that what you’re referring to when you make your childish comments to me?

      • Vicki

        Jeff says:
        “All you guys demonstrate with this nonsensical talk is your own inability to distinguish fantasy from reality.”

        All you (jeff) demonstrate with this argument to ridicule and ad hominem is that you have no counter point.

  • Louis Lemieux

    A month after the 2012 Nov. election, President Barack Obama has his highest approval ratings since the killing of Osama bin Laden, according to an Associated Press-GfK poll, and more Americans say the nation is heading in the right direction now than at any time since the start of his first term. Obama’s approval rating stands at 57 percent, the highest since May 2011.

    • http://n/a AmFer

      You can fool a lot of people by skewing a lot of numbers – but then again, we have an over-abundance of fools in America. We shall see how these fools react when it comes time for them to ‘collect’ on their votes for him – it’s happening now.

      • Steve E

        In a good way, the fiscal cliff will wake up some people when they feel the pain.

    • Dan

      These approval rateings are coming from the single, as in “ONE” issue the ultra rich tax defence. That we as conservatives have been sold on. We need to turn this anchor loose. It is takeing the whole party down.

      • Motov

        As the LIAR in chief sounds off his mighty mouth, all his hot air will eventually pop his balloon of deceit, and into the abyss he goes taking a willful nation with him.

        • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

          Motov when Obama cannot get anyone in the Foreign Supply chain to take Obama dollars anymore thats when his Power will cease !! and that day is coming . Of course that is the Plan so the final nail in the coffin of capitalism can be shot into the lid and seal that old failed Economic out dated policy into the history book of the last century , you know because this is the 21 century and everyone needs to be rich now not just those Pesky 1 % like the democrats and Obama are saying , right ????

    • http://newstips@personalliberty.com dee

      how did he get such a high rating after the economy & also his foreign policies, he has to be one of the worst presidents of our time,when you have the media on your side then their is a big problem, I thought the media was suppose to keep us honest what happened

      • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

        dee………. Obamas power will cease when he cannot get the foreign parts suppliers to take his Obama dollars anymore , and that is coming . This will Squeeze Our Supply Abundance and cause us GREAT Inflation on what Little dwindling supply we can get as these New World Bankers are not willing to take as many Obama dollars as Obama keeps Spending more and More raising the debt higher and higher . Get ready to see Oppression and Lose your belly fat people because those RICH people Obama wants to take money from are going to go become Full Time BRICS , OH they already are … LOL LOL We all Live in a Yellow Submarine Ha A yellow Submarine , HA a Yellow Submarine ….. http://thediplomat.com/indian-decade/2012/11/27/brics-the-worlds-new-banker/

      • DaveH

        They’d best be careful, Tony. It won’t be long after establishing a new currency that the US will be labeling them as “terrorist” nations.

        • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

          DaveH what will Obama and the Liberal Ruling party do to these BRICS suppliers if they tell Obama his Obama Dollars are worthless and THESE BRICS suppliers supply us with ALL Our MILITARY Repair Parts ?????

      • DaveH

        Our Government spends 5 times as much money on Defense than the next biggest military spender (China). You think, Tony, that our Government couldn’t wreck havoc on those countries with just the equipment that we already have stored up?
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

        • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

          BUT DaveH if the Plan is to Crash the dollar and Cause the destabilization of the Supply it buys from the BRICS the Great Communicator -in-Chief will come before the people and say ” See I told you so this Old tired system has Failed you People and we must come together under Me and Beg the BRICS for supply to at least get by till we can find our way FORWARD again , so give me your GUNS your Weak and Unhealthy , your Unstable and defenseless dependent on someone elses labor , we will place you in a CCC Camp of your choice but this is the Only way we can Get Supply from the BRICS that we are DEPENDENT ON Today ” !!!

    • S.C.Murf

      You’ll believe anything, killed bin Laden, right. Keep sucking it up and when those of us that do work (to pay for yours) lose our jobs, what are you going to do for food then, print your own food stamps?

      up the hill
      airborne

      • Flashy

        Nope SC…we’ll toss yer butt into a FEMA camp for failing to work to pay for us, have you work as slave labor for free (which is what the programs espoused by extremist TPers propose) and take everything ya got.

    • walter agard

      Yes you are right. He go after Bin ladin and got him without destroying the economy. Bin Ladin did us and the world something, not Sadam Hussain,although he was a wicked man.

  • http://YAHOO Thomas Green

    Obama is the greatest threat to the U.S. Constitution and the U.S.A. since the Civil War and you know he would have been fighting for the Confederacy. He is a muslim, marxist liar and should be deported back to his native Kenya.

    • eddie47d

      We’ll have to call the fire department on Thomas too ! His pants are also on fire or more appropriately….. a Conservative liar!.

    • Doc Sarvis

      Congratulations, you have hit on most of the tin foil hat issues that alienates the Conservatives from the GREATER American public.

      • DaveH

        I think you’re talking about NeoConservatives, Doc. I doubt you have any idea about what constitutes a True Conservative.

    • Jeff

      And where should we send you? Where exactly IS Moronistan? Interesting that you think Obama would have fought for the Confederacy since most of the right wingers on this blog seem to be in favor of secession all over again. Some of them even in states carried by Obama. You racist, red-bating idiots never learn anything. You think it’s still 1950. Well, the bloggers here notwithstanding, the country has grown up a bit. It’s not enough for you guys to simply scream the “N” word or scream “commie” anymore. We’ve heard it all before. “Raising taxes will destroy the economy” except that it doesn’t! You guys said the same thing when Clinton raised taxes and were WRONG. Then, W used the “mandate” from his selection to lower taxes. WRONG AGAIN. You guys are consistent. You always want lower taxes, you always complain about the deficit when a Democrat is president, and you’re always WRONG!

      • FreedomFighter

        Taxes = Theft when used as a instrument of social justice…Thief, commi, socialist all the same.

        Laus Deo
        Semper Fi

      • DaveH

        Jeff says — “Interesting that you think Obama would have fought for the Confederacy since most of the right wingers on this blog seem to be in favor of secession all over again”.
        Even a stopped clock is correct twice a day. No doubt that Obama would have been against the Southern States Secession.

      • Shelia

        Amen to that Jeff, I agree

      • DaveH

        As usual, the Liberal Progressive Jeff uses copious amounts of childish manipulation in his comment.
        And Jeff, the real issue isn’t Taxes, as much as you Green-Eyed trough-feeders would like the American People to think that way. Like Magicians the Liberal Progressives are distracting the people with one hand while they do their dirty work with the other hand.
        The Real issue is the Spending. It doesn’t matter if they tax the money from people now, or they tax our children later, or they tax us the hidden way by creating more dollars so our existing Savings and Fixed Incomes lose their buying power. What matters is that they are Spending us into Oblivion. And Jeff doesn’t care because he is obviously a Government employee who is participating in fleecing the rest of us. As long as Jeff benefits, he could care less about the rest of you.
        For those who aren’t aware of the Federal Reserve’s role in the Fleecing, look at this Money Supply chart:
        http://mises.org/content/nofed/chart.aspx

        The money supply has Tripled since 1998 (a 200% increase and growing fast). Yet the BLS Inflation Calculator says the Price Inflation has only increased 50% since 1998. Has our productivity increased dramatically since 1998 to offset that 200% increase? Not likely. So the bottom line is that there is a Lot of money sitting on the sidelines just waiting to come into the Marketplace and cause the dollar cost of our goods and services to skyrocket.

      • DaveH

        Of course, some of that increase in the CPI has already occurred and is just not being properly accounted for by the Government for a good reason — They don’t want to have to increase their COLA payouts.
        See here for a more realistic estimation of the current Price Inflation:
        http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/inflation-charts

    • cheryl

      I agree with you 100%.

    • http://www.boblivingstonletter.com/ Bob Livingston

      Dear Thomas Green,

      You write: “…and you know he would have been fighting for the Confederacy.” You must have received your degree from a public school.

      Best wishes,
      Bob

      • http://gravatar.com/cbgard Carlucci

        LOL – !! I was thinking along the same lines regarding Thomas Green’s post. My guess is that he went to public school just to eat his lunch.

      • TIME

        Dear Bob,

        You mean the “THE PUBLIC INDOCTRINATION” system?

        Of what produces a fine grade of high level IQ’s ~ as in the average high school grad as of 2010 has a ( 85 – 90 ) IQ, { But Good news { the above average } is higher at ( 105 – 110 )

        Average 4 year higher education produces a really specail level IQ’s its really high up on the scale at ( 105 – 110 )

        So what could possibly go wrong with such INCREDIBLE genius? ;-)

        Peace and Love Merry Christmas

        • http://www.boblivingstonletter.com/ Bob Livingston

          Dear TIME,

          You write: “You mean the ‘THE PUBLIC INDOCTRINATION’ system?” Yes, or as I usually term it: the public non-education system.

          Best wishes and Merry Christmas to you,
          Bob

      • Deerinwater

        Well Mr. Green’s posting was absurd but so is attacking the public school systems. ~

        That some of today’s public school systems are found “lacking” is indicative of the area and the students that these systems have to work with but not an indictment on all public school systems.

        Why this desire to throw the baby out with the bath water and make such flaming statement?

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Bob takes advantage of a somewhat confused and conservative Thomas G and states “You must have received your degree from a public school”. Bob later responds to another, “You mean the ‘THE PUBLIC INDOCTRINATION’ system?” Yes, or as I usually term it: the public non-education system.

        Although it sounds like just another “let them eat cake” comment from an elitist who probably sent his children to private schools, perhaps Bob went to public schools himself and is therefore well-educated (or well-indoctrinated) enough that he can explain some things to us.

        First, isn’t the primary meaning of the word indoctrinate “to teach or instruct”?, and aren’t you twisting that meaning just a bit to suit your purposes?

        Secondly, and more importantly, haven’t most people in this country gone to public schools?. And, even though liberals outnumber conservatives in this country, can we agree that roughly equal proportions of liberals and conservatives have therefore been “indoctrinated” by the public schools? Yes to both?

        Then what I would ask Bob to explain is how a conservative can attack the public schools when that’s where he was taught the lessons that led him to be a conservative? Why does he attack the public schools that apparently made him the man he is today? Seems a bit contradictory to me.

        Carlucci says: NOTHING OF IMPORTANCE

        And TIME, from whom Bob got the clever “PUBLIC INDOCTRINATION SYSTEM” idea, gives us a completely incomprehensible aggregation of “data” and commentary that comes from nowhere but his delusions.

        TIME says, “Of what produces a fine grade of high level IQ’s ~ as in the average high school grad as of 2010 has a ( 85 – 90 ) IQ, { But Good news { the above average } is higher at ( 105 – 110 ). Average 4 year higher education produces a really specail(SIC) level IQ’s its really high up on the scale at ( 105 – 110 )”
        WHAT does that mean? And TIME has made these numbers up. Even if we COULD figure out what point he is trying to make here, he obviously has no understanding of IQ scores, intervals, and standard deviations, never mind the meaning of the very simple term “average”.

        “….the average high school grad as of 2010 has a ( 85 – 90 ) IQ” That is so wrong that it rates 3 “Lord love a ducks”.

        TIME finishes with the incomprehensible question, “So what could possibly go wrong with such INCREDIBLE genius? ;-)”, and even smiles at himself at the end like the village idiot. State whatever question you have asked there in understandable terms, TIME, and I for one will try to help you.

        My first suggestion would be to go back to whatever level of school you were in when you “lost your way” and sign up for some remedial instruction in basic reading, writing, and arithmetic. Public or private school matters not—you need help—just go.

      • DaveH

        Why any Public Schools at all, Deer? They could just as easily (and much more cheaply) fund parents’ choices of their childrens’ private schools. There is no need for Government to be involved in parents’ educational choices at all.
        Why do they want to be involved? Read this:
        http://mises.org/journals/jls/7_1/7_1_3.pdf

      • Deerinwater

        Hmm? Public schooling could be seen as cost effective I suppose. ~ I pay about 600 per year to the ISD, of course I haven’t had a child in school in many years. ~ So what you propose has merits on many levels.

        The link you bring forward fails to address cost. or at least I didn’t see it.

        Good news ! I bought a new keyboard, one with the letters legible on the keys. ~

        maybe it’s omprove my spelling.

      • DaveH

        I use Google Chrome which has a built-in spell checker, Deer. You can get it free. I’ll post the link in next comment.
        As to public school being cheaper, read this:
        http://www.mackinac.org/1118

      • DaveH
    • walter agard

      You are talking share trash.Why are do you want a person to go to a country he dont belong ? he was born here and he has full right as an american. How would you like for the Native Americans Telling you that You are just a racist and prejudicial .

    • Neil Swan

      Green it’s easy to see you are stupid by your
      stupid lyeing comments.

      Neil

  • Dan

    I consider myself as a Conservative, But I do not understand how that the conservative party ever accepted the stupidity of tax breaks for the ultra rich. This single issue has destroyed the Conservative’s chances to assert their voices into the True Constitutional issues. The thought that the rich will just go stick their head in the sand and let someone else step up to their plate is absolute nonsense. This is the single issue that has truly destroyed the Republican party in the eyes of the 98% Population. If you are going fishing you best throw the hook in where there is FISH. The middle and low income have no more to give. And this stupidity that they don’t pay taxes now. ???? What a joke every item we purchase is “TAXED” that is the true Amassed taxation. The only way to touch the Trillions of “horded” dollars of the ultra rich is to Tax their Incoming sources.

    • Warrior

      Dan – the “real issue” is not about taxes. It is nothing more than “control”.

      • walter agard

        Haw can you say something like that. OBAMA tries to ask first before he does things BUSH dont care if you agree with you or not. He goes about doing things and he tells you plainly he is going to do it

    • Doc Sarvis

      Thank you for being Conservative AND actually applying logic.

      • DaveH

        He’s neither Conservative nor Logical, Doc.
        There is nothing logical about taking money from productive people and giving it to unproductive people. It is purely emotional and Greedy.

      • eddie47d

        The 1% have cornered the market on greed and I don’t think they are investing in pork belly’s.

      • DaveH
      • Walter & Renee Agard

        That’s right DOC, and it’s a fact.

    • Jeff

      You may consider yourself a conservative but by saying something sensible you may have just excommunicated yourself.

    • Motov

      Neo-cons long took over the GOP along time ago. True conservatives believe in less government, one that the Constitution mandates. The GOP got hijacked by puppets, their masters hide behind those puppets, the same people who “own” the Democrats, Both parties talk about good times,…but those good times they refer to are for their masters, not us.
      Democrats and Republican do not care about the USA, if they did, Why are we in such deep crap? Both parties talk about “going in the right direction” Being up side down with our wheels spinning is all they ever manage to do. Both sides “hate” deficits. Why are we so deep in debt, we cannot even pay off the intrest, let alone the principle?
      Their masters want it all, All the power, all the wealth, They seek total supremacy over everyone, and have been deceiving people for years. Nothing will get better, because we are too stupid to think outside the box these evil people built around us.

      • Steve E

        That’s why I’m Libertarian. We would not be in this situation if Constiturionalist Libertarians ran this country. There is not enough smart people to elect them in office.

      • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

        I agree this trying to appease the Independent Voter is where everything has gone wrong . Its time People get on one side or the other and let the chips fall where they may .

        • Motov

          I’m not trying to appease anyone, just do not vote for the candidates with all the money in the world to spend on their campaigns. Chances are they are owned by the very fat cats, Instead vote for the guy who doen’t have the $$$$ to spend, I bet HE knows first hand about budgeting, Knows what it is like to be powerless against a faceless monster called the federal government,…. BUT PEOPLE are too stupid to figure that out and continue to vote for “The lessor of 2 evils” And then the never ceasing arguments of which party is better at screwing up this country.

      • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

        its like trying to have a football game when there is only one team on the field and these Liberals would like to be the only team on the field

      • DaveH

        Motov says — “The GOP got hijacked by puppets”.
        The Republican Party as imagined by the average Republican is an illusion. They have been the Party of Big Government since they were formed in the mid-1850s on a Mercantilist and Big Central Government Platform.

      • Steve E

        On the national level, I believe the Republican party is dead. They will never get it together.

      • Smilee

        Motov says:
        December 7, 2012 at 8:18 am

        Neo-cons long took over the GOP along time ago. True conservatives believe in less government, one that the Constitution mandates.

        I BELIEVE YOU ARE MOSTLY RIGHT WHEN YOU SAY THE GOP WAS TAKEN OVER BY THE NEO-CONS AND IT WAS SHORTLY THERE AFTER I LEFT IT. AND MOST ON HERE ARE NOT CONSERVATIVES THEY ARE MOSTLY RADICALS. YOU ARE WRONG THOUGH WHEN YOU SAY THE CONSTITUTION MANDATES LESS GOVERNMENT IF WHAT YOU MEAN IS SMALL AS IT IS COMPLETELY SILENT ON THE ISSUE OF SIZE OF GOVERNMENT, IT DOES SAY WHAT THE POWERS OF CONGRESS ARE BUT PUTS NO LIMITS ON THE SIZE OF THOSE POWERS. MANY ON HERE SAY OBAMACARE IS BIG GOVERNMENT BUT NONE THE LESS IT WAS FOUND CONSTRUCTIONAL AND ROBERTS CITES THE POWER OF CONGRESS TO TAX FOR THE GENERAL WELFARE IN DOING SO. SIZE IS NOT DEFINED IN ANY TERMS NOR IS DEFENSE BUT MOST ON HERE THINK A LARGE DEFENSE IS OK AND IN THE CONSTITUTION THE SIZE OF BOTH IS NOT LIMITED SO WHAT MATTERS IS THAT CONGRESS HAS THE POWER TO DO IT AND HAS IN MANY CASES, I UNDERSTAND YOUR DESIRE FOR SMALLER GOVERNMENT BUT TO SAY IT IS CONSTRUCTIONAL IF WE DO NOT IS INCORRECT.

        Why are we so deep in debt,

        ITS BECAUSE CONGRESS DECIDED TO SPEND MONEY ON MANY ITEMS WITHOUT PAYING FOR WHAT THEY SPENT IT ON AND THEN DO NOT EVEN APPROVE BORROWING FOR IT IF THEY PASS A LAW TO DO SOMETHING AND THEY DO NOT PAY FOR IT AND THEN THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH IS SUPPOSED TO ADMINISTER WHAT CONGRESS WANTS WITHOUT GIVING HIM THE MONEY. LIKE CUTTING THE MONEY TO PROTECT OUR EMBASSIES AND THEN BITCH WHEN HE CANNOT. CONGRESS CAN ALWAYS PUT THE PRESIDENT BETWEEN A ROCK AND A HARD PLACE AND HAS BEEN DOING SO FOR YEARS AS I’M SURE WE ALL AGREE THE PRESIDENT HAS NO MONEY TO SPEND UNLESS CONGRESS GIVES IT TO HIM AND ALSO WHAT HE IS ALLOWED TO SPEND IT ON. IS CONTROLLED BY THEM.

      • Walter & Renee Agard

        That’s right steve, they will never get it together because they cant stand it far a black man to be PRESIDENT in this great country–AMERICA, that is why they are trying to find all negatives on him.

        • Frank Kahn

          More drivel from the racist section?

          There are some here that are obviously racist, that however does not extend to everyone that considers Obama to be a bad leader. He certainly is no better than Bush (either one) and he would have a hard time convincing the majority of intelligent people in the world that he is a great leader. He is a great actor, no more and no less. He is an appeaser, someone who panders to everyone in foreign relations so nobody is angry but in doing so gets nothing real done himself. He is divisive both politically and racially. He fosters class hatred as well as racial. He is disrespectful of religions.

          Everyone that takes his side seems to be able to either ignore his failings or insist that everyone that is against him is making everything up.

          Yelling racism is a cop out, a way to avoid talking about the issues.

    • TML

      Dan – If the “rich” are paying the same rate as everyone else, then tax cuts for the rich are just as unfair as tax increases on the rich. Greed and envy motivates both respectively.

      Dan says, “The only way to touch the Trillions of “horded” dollars of the ultra rich is to Tax their Incoming sources.”

      Yep, stealing it would be the only way to take what’s rightfully theirs, and taxing them more than everyone else, for no other reason that they are ‘considered’ rich, is a punishment for the success of the genuinely industrious.

  • http://davidsfloors.com Granpa David

    Obama is trying to destroy the economy via Cloward-Piven and if Republicans “obstruct” the tax hike on millionaires and billionaires, Republicans will get the blame for the bad economy. Rope-a-dope . vote present. One lady said that will put Republican fingerprints on the coming bad economy. Rush Limbaugh and others are now agreeing with me.

    • Dan

      Rush Limbaugh, is one of the ultra rich. Will he Quit makeing his Millions if they raise his taxes. Will any of the others. ??? DUHHHHHHHHHHHHHH ” I think “NOT”

      • http://sunshine49356.wordpress.com Sunshine49

        Did you conveniently forget that the “rich” are paying the majority of taxes already? Would it make YOU happy if they paid ALL the taxes?

        The IRS states on their web site that over 70% of all taxes they take in are going back out on “social” programs (Redistribution of wealth). The highest part of the taxes that working people pay is going to social security taxes which pay for social security, Medicare, welfare and Medicaid.

        Now, for your information, 33% of this country’s population is on assistance such as welfare. This includes people who are NOT American. They do not contribute one thin dime to the taxes that are collected. They only receive OTHER PEOPLE’S taxes for their support while NOT contributing to the well-being of the country! This is the 33% that re-elected Obama — the “redistribution of wealth” President.

        Another way that people collect other people’s taxes is through the child tax credit. This tax credit pays thousands of dollars to people who did NOT pay in the taxes in the first place. This is not the same as the child deduction that people receive when they have children. From what I’ve read, this tax credit payment far exceeds what the person was paid for any job they had or taxes they paid. The “rich” don’t get this tax credit!

        Now — IF YOU want to be FAIR, then EVERYBODY should have to pay in an equal amount of taxes according to their income, with NO special credits such as the child tax credit that gives people money they DIDN’T earn! Also, assistance to NON-Americans should cease. This a country of equal opportunity — NOT a socialist welfare state in spite of what Obama thinks we should be!

    • eddie47d

      Granpa; The “rope a dopes” are the ones having a pity party for the super wealthy who have screwed us every which way but loose. The wealthy have manipulated every facet of America and its time to make them pay for this continual con game!You can say the same thing about Washington if you’d like but no more pretending about these shakedowns from the wealthy either. Putting your faith in Rush Limbaugh is like investing in used toilet paper.

    • DaveH

      Obviously, Obama is playing an obstructionist role here. Where is the Democrat “compromise” when it comes to cutting spending?

      • momo

        Cutting spending is already off the table.

      • Flashy

        Pres. Obama has sent up a detailed budget proposal. It is the same one he offered up in the Spring, with the additional requirements of extending unemployment one last time through mid 2013 and taking away to debt ceiling vote from Congress this year.

        The spending cuts are spelled out, detailed and certain. The GOP has not detailed ANY of their proposed spending cuts…not one. They want a blank check for cut whatever they decide later on after the vote.

        Next question ?

        • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

          Rand Pauls Idea is a good one ” IF ” there is a trigger in the works like the one they put in this Fiscal Cliff one where if they cannot come to any agreement on Cuts in Government spending and a Pro Growth Incentive Plan that Inspires the Prvite sector business sector to find areas of growth in key areas that show Inflation supply shortages in the future supply -side markets , then the tax rates restore back to the Levels that Simpson Bowles .

          http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/12/06/sen_rand_paul_we_should_let_dems_raise_taxes_and_then_let_them_own_it.html

      • DaveH

        Flashman says — “Next question ?”.
        What does that have to do with my comment?
        And do you have any references, Flashman?
        You know you have no credibility on this board. I wouldn’t take your word for anything unless you said you were a board Troll.

      • DaveH

        Flashman says — “The spending cuts are spelled out, detailed and certain”.
        Then you should have no trouble, Flashman, providing us a link so we can investigate your claim.
        I’ll even take one from Huffington Post.

      • momo

        Flashy says: “The spending cuts are spelled out, detailed and certain.”

        Right, flashman. get ready for 1991 redux.

      • JeffH

        Falsy, this one’s for you…Reid shoots down Obama/Geit​hner tax increase deal.

        Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., blocked a vote on President Obama’s proposal, articulated last week by Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, saying that “there is no Geithner proposal.”

        “There is no Geithner proposal,” Reid said. “This is all made up.” Reid’s comment might come as a surprise to Geithner and the reporters who interviewed him over the weekend.

        “We laid out a very detailed, carefully designed set of spending, savings and tax changes that help put us on a path offiscal responsibility,” Geithner told Fox News’ Chris Wallace on Sunday.

        If the President’s proposal was made in good faith, Democrats should be eager to vote for it…right?

        Earlier this year, the Senate voted down Obama’s budget proposal by a vote of 99-0.

        0-414 vote: House clobbers budget proposal based on Obama’s 2013 plan.

        Kinda tough when “O” can’t get either of the Big Government parties to back his “plan”.

      • Jeff

        OK, Dave, tell us what you’d like to cut and explain in English (not Austrian) why those cuts won’t send the economy back into recession. Never mind the people who might be hurt by the cuts as I know that doesn’t enter your calculation.

      • DaveH

        The first place to start would be anything that the Federal Government doesn’t have a Constitutional Power to address, such as the Department of Education.
        But since Government doesn’t do anything as efficiently as the Private Sector, we could cut just about anything they do and be better off. Government jobs would be replaced by Private Sector jobs whose services were actually in demand by the consumers, instead of the current situation where some people demand something and Force the rest of us to pay for it.
        And you needn’t worry about your job, Jeff, because as glacially slow as Government moves, you would have plenty of time to seek a Real job satisfying Real customers.

      • Smilee

        DaveH says:
        December 8, 2012 at 4:57 pm

        The first place to start would be anything that the Federal Government doesn’t have a Constitutional Power to address, such as the Department of Education.

        It is constitutional and I defy you to point out where you think it is not

        But since Government doesn’t do anything as efficiently as the Private Sector,

        That’s not true either, Medicare efficiently is about 8% in overhead costs and private insurance plans have been mostly 25-40% in overhead costs but under Obamacare they will be required to keep it down to 15% in group plans and 20% in individual plans or refund the overcharge and Medicare has always had to cover pre existing conditions and now under Obamacare all will have to while before they did not and being the private sector has to make a profit for their stockholders simple math says you cannot be as efficient as the public can be. And my experience is the service from Medicare is superior to when I had private plans. These are all verifiable facts Davy and out there for your viewing if you are interested in the truth.

      • DaveH

        Time to wake up, Sleepee.
        From the Constitution. The List of Enumerated Powers of the Federal Government:
        “Section. 8.The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
        To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;
        To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes;
        To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
        To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
        To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
        To establish Post Offices and post Roads;
        To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
        To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
        To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;
        To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
        To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
        To provide and maintain a Navy;
        To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
        To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
        To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
        To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards and other needful Buildings;—And
        To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof”.
        https://www.cato.org/constitution/article1_en.html

        Do you see anything in there, Sleepee, about the Power to control Education?

        • Smilee

          Yes, power to lay and collect taxes to provide for the general welfare, education contributes to the general welfare of the nation therefore it is constitutional just like Obamacare, the part of the Constitution Roberts cited in his decision to uphold Obamacare saying it is providing for the general welfare and education would come under the same heading. I know you do not like but you not liking it does not change this reality and you being in denial on it will not either.

      • DaveH

        Sleepee says — “And my experience is the service from Medicare is superior to when I had private plans. These are all verifiable facts Davy and out there for your viewing if you are interested in the truth.”.
        Your experience? Your anecdotal personal evidence should convince us?
        Verifiable facts? Well then, you should have no trouble giving us a referential link to back up your conjecture, Sleepee.
        Meanwhile those who want to learn something can read this:
        http://mises.org/daily/2285

        • Smilee

          DaveH commented on Barack Obama’s Phony Mandate.
          in response to DaveH:

          Sleepee says — “And my experience is the service from Medicare is superior to when I had private plans. These are all verifiable facts Davy and out there for your viewing if you are interested in the truth.”.

          Your experience? Your anecdotal personal evidence should convince us?
          Verifiable facts? Well then, you should have no trouble giving us a referential link to back up your conjecture, Sleepee. Meanwhile those who want to learn something can read this: http://mises.org/daily/2285

          Your reference makes no comparison between private health care insurance plans and Medicare concerning coverage’s and service to the patient. so it is meaningless and irrelevant to this as about ninety percent of your references always are.

          My experiences are what most experience and it is generally believed by the public and I have had a lot of experience with that especially the private plans in my place of employment before I retired and considered by them as very knowledgeable and I know for fact I am right on that and it is verifiable to anyone who want to spend the time and effort to find out. There are a lot of private plans so it could be some what time consuming. Why don’t you try and prove me wrong rather than sit back and demand others do it for you like a little child. Prove me wrong davy but you always deny the truth if it differs from what you want the truth to be and I also suspect you are to lazy to but I welcome it on your part to prove me wrong as I know you can not.

      • DaveH

        And before you bother me with your usual nonsense about the “General Welfare” clause, Sleepee, I will give the readers a link to Federalist #41 in which the Father of the US Constitution — James Madison — argues against any such interpretation:
        http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa41.htm

        • Smilee

          DaveH says:
          December 9, 2012 at 1:23 pm

          The Constitution is the supreme law of the land the federalist papers were the sales pitch to sell the ratification of the constitution to the states but are not law and do not trump the law, nor is the opinion of the authors trump the law. I thought you understood the difference but guess your more ignorant that I thought and this verifies you do not understand the constitution

        • http://tlgeer.wordpress.com tlgeer

          “I will give the readers a link to Federalist #41 in which the Father of the US Constitution — James Madison — argues against any such interpretation:”

          The Federalist Papers are not, and never were, law. They were, also, only the private opinions of very few of the founding fathers. Those private opinions were not made into law. Therefore, they should not be considered when evaluating the law or the Constitution.

          • Frank Kahn

            They are, however, valid in evaluating the mindset and intent of those who both wrote the federalist papers and participated in writing the constitution. You seem to be trying to place a different meaning to the intent here. Yes, the federalist papers are not included directly in the constitution, however, they do contain many ideas that were refined and put into it.

      • DaveH

        Sleepee says — “Your reference makes no comparison between private health care insurance plans and Medicare concerning coverage’s and service to the patient. so it is meaningless and irrelevant to this as about ninety percent of your references always are”.
        Did you provide some references which did, Sleepee? I must have missed them.
        There are so many things wrong with any such superficial statements as yours, Sleepee, that I just don’t have the time to address them all. But an intelligent person knows that you can’t just compare Government Plans to Private Plans, because there are so many hidden costs in Government Plans as to make them virtually unaccountable by even experienced analysts. And with their Power to meddle in the Healthcare Marketplace they can stifle competitors at will.
        Also, the recipients of the Government provided Healthcare get a large portion of their bills paid by unwilling participants in the program.
        The only way a rational comparison could be made between Government programs and Private Programs would be if the Government Plans were entirely paid by willing participants.
        To think that we could achieve cost-effectiveness with Government middle men who have almost guaranteed jobs and little incentive to perform would be quite a stretch. A stretch that only ignorant Liberal Progressives could manage.

        • Smilee

          Your such an idiot, the caparison was between overhead costs only of private plans and Medicare which is comparable as those numbers are available and Medicare farms out much of it to private insurances for administration and any insurance expert can tell you what I said was true and if you do not like the truth you spin it to what you would like the truth to be and deny the truth and then go off on a tangent to prove something not being discussed You are so arrogant and such a fool, its so sad.

        • http://tlgeer.wordpress.com tlgeer

          “But an intelligent person knows that you can’t just compare Government Plans to Private Plans, because there are so many hidden costs in Government Plans as to make them virtually unaccountable by even experienced analysts.”

          What hidden costs, exactly, are you talking about? The Medicare regulations are much more up front than most private insurances. Just as with Smilee, I have had much, much better service with Medicare than I ever had with private insurance.

          You might try reading the Medicare Handbook. It is straight forward and clear (to me at least).

          BTW, changing someone’s name (ie. from Smilee to Sleepee) because you don’t agree with them is nothing less than childish. It makes you look foolish and completely out of touch with reality.

      • DaveH

        Sleepee says — “I thought you understood the difference but guess your more ignorant that I thought and this verifies you do not understand the constitution”.
        So we should take your interpretation of the meaning of the words in the Constitution over the interpretation of the man who was actually there?
        You are so ignorant, Sleepee, as to be almost comical, except there is nothing funny about people like you who want to take advantage of other people.

        • Smilee

          DaveH commented on Barack Obama’s Phony Mandate.

          in response to DaveH:

          Sleepee says — “I thought you understood the difference but guess your more ignorant that I thought and this verifies you do not understand the constitution”.
          So we should take your interpretation of the meaning of the words in the Constitution over the interpretation of the man who was actually there?

          Davie, grow up, I never said those were my Interpretations. I quoted Chief Justice John Roberts words and there have been others on the court who have interpreted it the way I said and the example I used was Obamacare as I felt you would know that without looking it up as it was so recent but none of what I said was my own words but I do agree with the justices on the supreme court. What you want us to believe is that Madison’s opinion is superior to the rulings of the supreme court which anyone with any intelligence knows is just pure BS but I assumed that you where intelligent enough to know that but I was wrong you really are arrogant and ignorant.

          You are so ignorant, Sleepee, as to be almost comical, except there is nothing funny about people like you who want to take advantage of other people.

          Your interpretation has always been on here is that any tax fits that description you credit to me here which is not what I think or feel, There is no way you can read my mind and as I have never said this, and as usual just your pure spin and stupidity. I believe in the rule of law even if I do not like the law but never go off like you and try to convince me and others that reality is something other that what the law is. We accept those laws we disagree with, you do not and you think you are so smart and think you can pull the wool over our eyes with you BS. You can not. You are a real sad excuse for a human being.

        • Frank Kahn

          DaveH, Smilee is a die hard ignorant Obama loving liberal. He is incapable of reason so it is worthless to attempt to argue the TRUTH with him.

          You will note that he says you fail to accept reality, when he refuses to accept FACTS.

          I was in, what appeared to be, a rational discussion with him on another subject. It seemed as though he was rational until I made the error of explaining why Obama was wrong. He swung swiftly into incoherent ranting about the GOD OBAMA and his great SALVATION of the RIGHT WING sinners of the country.

          He might try to deny his blind devotion to Obama and the LIBERAL hype, but if you read his posts you will see he is so deep in their control that he has no original ideas.

          I calmly pointed out the major differences between a DEMOCRACY and a REPUBLIC, showing the differences in the definitions which includes MAJORITY RULE in a DEMOCRACY, and he said I was splitting hairs, that they are the same because and get this “it is common for the words to be used interchangeably”. Like the fact that a large number of people using the wrong word makes it correct.

      • DaveH

        So let me get this straight, Sleepee. If 6 liars (5 of 9 Supreme Justices and Sleepee) say the Healthcare Law is Constitutional, then that makes it so?
        I say intelligent people will read the actual Constitution, and the Federalist Papers, and the notes taken at the Constitutional Convention by James Madison, and figure out for themselves what the intent of the Constitution was before lying Progressives twisted it and turned it to suit their own purposes:
        http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/debcont.asp

        • Smilee

          Hey stupid if a majority of the court votes to say it is constructional it is then constitutional and all the BS you throw at that fact cannot change it no matter how many lies you pitch in a feeble effort to say it is not true as I said you are a poor excuse for a human being. Pay attention Obamacare will be in your reality despite what you say so get over it as most adults will if they do not like it.

      • DaveH

        Obamacare won’t be my reality, Sleepee. I stay away from doctors with a passion. And I’m retired so they won’t be getting much money from me. But it will affect a lot of people negatively who right now are ignorant to that reality. Hopefully you haven’t bragged about it too much to your acquaintances because they will remember you for that when the SHTF.
        I am a survivor. I don’t need much to be happy. I know that, in the end, what I think about myself is all that matters. And I have skills.
        It is the people who you say you care for, Sleepee, who are going to suffer when the economy finally hits the skids and they have no desirable skills with which to trade and survive. You are dooming them (and maybe yourself) to a life of misery. You should be ashamed of yourself. But then, you won’t be because you’re a conscienceless lowlife.

      • DaveH

        Smilee says — “DaveH commented on Barack Obama’s Phony Mandate”.
        I said that, Sleepee? Where? Do you Liberal Progressives ever stop lying?

      • Smilee

         DaveH says:
        December 9, 2012 at 11:31 pm

        Obamacare won’t be my reality,

        IT SURE WILL IF EVEN TO JUST PAY THE REQUIRED TAX IF YOU REFUSE TO HAVE INSURANCE. BE HONEST DO YOU HAVE INSURANCE NOW OR ON Medicare???

        I stay away from doctors with a passion

        .SCENARIO: YOU ARE IN AN ACCIDENT OR HAVE A HEART ATTACK AND YOU HAVE NO CONTROL OVER EITHER AND THE FIRST RESPONDERS TAKE YOU TO THE EMERGENCY ROOM AND THE DOCTORS TREAT YOU THEN YOU ARE REQUIRED TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COSTS AND YOU CAN DO NOTHING ABOUT THAT, YOURS IS SILLY TALK

        And I’m retired so they won’t be getting much money from me. But it will affect a lot of people negatively who right now are ignorant to that reality.

        MANY NOW CANNOT AFFORD INSURANCE NOW AND HAVE NONE AND OR HAVE A PRE EXSITING CONDITION AND CANNOT GET INSURANCE EVEN IF THEY CAN AFFORD IT AND THESE WILL GO AWAY WITH OVAMACARE, I GUESS YOU SEE THAT AS NEGATIVE BUT THE PUBLIC WILL NOT

        Hopefully you haven’t bragged about it too much to your acquaintances because they will remember you for that when the SHTF.

        THERE WILL BE NO SHTF SO NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT THERE AND MY ACQUAINTANCES KNOW THAT NOW.

        I am a survivor. NO ONE IS A SURVIVOR, WE ALL DIE SOMETIME AND HAVE LITTLE OR NO CONTROL OVER ACCIDENTS OR ILLNESS BUT WILL HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT IF IT COMES OUR OR YOUR WAY AND WILL HAVE PAY FOR IT

        I don’t need much to be happy.

        YOU DO NOT APPEAR HAPPY TO ME, YOUR ALWAYS COMPLAINING ABOUT SOMETHING

        I know that, in the end, what I think about myself is all that matters. And I have skills.
        It is the people who you say you care for

        , I CARE FOR EVERYBODY EVEN YOU AND YOU DO NOT EVEN DESERVE BEING CARED FOR BUT THAT DOES NOT MATTER TO ME,

        who are going to suffer when the economy finally hits the skids and they have no desirable skills with which to trade and survive. You are dooming them (and maybe yourself) to a life of misery. You should be ashamed of yourself. But then, you won’t be because you’re a conscienceless lowlife.

        YOU’RE THE LOWLIFE ALWAYS SEEING THE GLASS HALF EMPTY AND I SEE THE GLASS HALE FULL. WHAT YOU SAY MOST LIKELY NOT HAPPEN ANYHOW, YOU CAN CRY HENNY PENNY TILL THE COWS COME HOME AND MOST LIKELY IT WILL NOT COME AT LEAST NOT FOR THE REASONS YOUR SIMPLE MIND PERCEIVES IT AS.

        • Jeff

          How often do you think the grandkids visit Grandpa Creepy? He eats his Wheaties so he’ll never get sick. The spirit of Von Mises protects him always. And I’m sure when he does get sick, he’ll turn down his Medicare benefits because they’re inconsistent with his personal philosophy. Ten thousand bucks?

          • Smilee

            i see davy was not able to fool you either

  • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

    Compare this Chart,
    Tax Cuts rallied Stock market over the years that they were cut since the high rates after WW2 . You can even see the bump from Kennedy Tax cuts and how the Carter years declined until Reagan cut them again !!!!

    http://investing.money.msn.com/investments/stock-charts/?symbol=%24US%3aDJI&Intraday=1&amp;

    • Dan

      It wasn’t the Tax cuts that helped it was the developement and Exspansion rewards. Increase the tax base and further reward the development.

      • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

        Dan the Tax cuts came before all of what you said , it was the Fuel to create that Expansion , that and the Trade Policy that Reagan Unleashed called GATT . Clinton opened the flood gates of Wealth and resource Consolidation of the Reagan Expansion when he Transformed the GATT into the WTO NAFTA policy that has Now fully consolidated and collapsed into the Governments lap in fact all the Worlds Governments laps in 2008 with the bailouts of all the Financial that funded these Industrial Giants called the Multi National Corporate sector , this is Now a Full Fledged Worldwide Fascist State !!

    • DaveH

      It’s difficult to detect the benefits of lower taxes because so many other variable factors are occurring at the same time — things such as Money Creation, Government Regulations, Government Subsidies, and many other Government actions which affect our Marketplace.
      Government Meddling in our Marketplace is all about enriching themselves and their Crony Capitalists at the rest of our expense. If you think about them as the Biggest Gang in the Country, you will get a much better perspective from which to judge their actions.
      The Real One Percenters:
      http://mises.org/daily/5776/The-State-is-the-1-Percent

      • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

        DaveH I disagree !!! The Tax cuts were the Catalysis for all of what you said was a Participating factor in the overall Growth , without the tax cuts none of those capital formations would have been Inspired to happen as you stated !!!!!

      • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

        What keeps happening is towards the tail end of any Capital and resource production expansion period is a Consolidation of those Resources and this time where that Consolidation of Power has taken place is in the BRICS , as they have become Independently able to be self reliant without the Developed nations support like before when they were undeveloped and dependent on Developed nations support if they choose that help rather than the practicing of Communist tactics that saw their societies experience Chaos , Oppressions and genocide !!!

      • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

        And DaveH the Governments reasons for Interviewing is not just to control wealth but to Control peoples activities , social, eating , child production , to be the smartest ones in the room of ecological Law and Order over the production and distribution of Earths resources , and once they gain a majority ruling over these vital needs is when Politics become Oppressive as History shows over and over no matter how advanced the society has become .

      • DaveH

        You need to reread my comment, Tony. Apparently you think I deny that Tax Cuts are beneficial. I didn’t say they weren’t. I said it is difficult to prove that they are.
        But Tax Cuts, by themselves, are only a short term solution because the Spending is the Real Problem, and eventually it will have to be paid for somehow.

        • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

          the Fubar of the Republic of the USA is a result of the GENERATIONAL CURSE , because history is forgotten as generations die and the new minds are with the experiences of history’s past ,and is why the founders were admit about having terms like ” In God we trust ” to help shield us from the Influential Spiritual Wars we are experiencing in todays Politics . This is our greatest battle for the Mind of society if freedom is to be sustained while everything else is being politically sustained .

      • DaveH

        If you read Chapter 33 (page 119) — “Clintonomics Revealed” — it might help you understand better the dynamics between Tax Cuts and Spending Cuts:
        http://library.mises.org/books/Murray%20N%20Rothbard/Making%20Economic%20Sense.pdf

  • Louis Lemieux

    If we go over the fiscal cliff Republicans have everything to lose. Democrats will bring forth a bill cutting taxes on those earning less than $250,000. and Republicans will have to go along or face the wrath of voters in midterm election.

    • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

      Louis The Republicans that were elected to cut spending and Hold the line on Tax reform will be voted out in 2 years if they give into Obamas Demands so going over the fiscal Cliff won’t matter .
      And you Know they way Obama and the Democrats are touting the Clinton rate Taxes were so Great on the economy then WHY is he ONLY wanting to tax the rich instead of calling for a Complete Restoration of the Clinton Era which is going over the Cliff ?

      • Louis Lemieux

        It is my belief that anything Republicans do that will keep taxes up on middle class after a fiscal cliff will hurt them.

        • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

          Ok Louis you know how Much extra Obamas tax hike on the Rich is going to generate ? it only will run the USA 8 days , so this is nothing but a Trophy for Him and the Radical Lefties who live with so much contempt for Individual prosperity because like Warrior said this is Nothing but a Control Appearance rather than a Economic Growth initiative .

      • eddie47d

        Yes Tony it is only symbolism but an important one. The wealthy Elites don’t play fair and have loopholes on top of loopholes.Their shenanigans have thrown the tax burden back on the Middle Class who’s income has either stagnated or gone down while those wealthy have gone up as much as 15%. I’ve seen too many polls saying that the majority of Americans are aware of what the wealthy are up to and that their taxes should be raised. I will call the author out on that one who claims the opposite. Obama like Bush didn’t have a strong mandate but a mandate none the less. Besides most of those voters who didn’t vote are generally the lower middle class or poor who are either working or can’t find transportation to the polls. I would assume those potential votes would have gone to Obama since folks on the right have means of transportation and frequently use mail in ballots. Oh yes its not about individual prosperity but theft by robber barons who do still exist.

        • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

          Eddie47d the Only reason why the Reinvestment of Cap Gains was Not in USA Jobs and manufacturing over the last 18 years is because the Clinton Trade policy was FULL of Flaws and did not inspire reinvestment in the states before those dollars went off shore to other volume production sites !!!! This is what is wrong and Still No One is doing Jack About it . Apple is a start but will that be met with higher taxes to the point it mutes the rate of gain ???

      • Flashy

        Tony…those House members from the extreme right aka Tea partiers, are going to be ion trouble come 2014. Come the summer, when further cuts begin being debated, folks are going to be getting hit with the current cuts being put into place…and they ain’t gonna be too happy abut it. Those TP members represent some of the poorest, most reliant populations on federal aid, and when they begin to put forth proposals to cut into those programs, and leave fat cat programs untouched…folks will be sitting up taking notice and counting coup.

        Add to that the changing voter profiles. The voting electorate was 72% this year…down from 74% in 2008, and will likely shrink further as more and more Americans begin to take to the polls as the cuts become ever more important. Hispanic AMERICANS are likely anti GOP for at least a generation with the extremist positions forced on the GOP these past four years. And, something just as impacting, the data shows that the younger emerging voters have their ‘identity’ set after two presidential elections. If they vote GOP in two presidential elections, it is highly likely they will always tend to GOP..and vice versa. You saw that realized in the Reagan years when the young were led down the wrong path of supply side trickle down economics. We have had 30 years of a strong GOP presence with the voting public ignoring the facts and reality. We have now had two presidential elections with a very high youth vote to President Obama.

        The conservatives have had their generation and screwed this Nation royally…time for the Moderates and Progressives to fix everything they broke … sit back, enjoy the ride, and reap the benefits.

      • Flashy

        Clarification…when referring to voting electorate being 72% etc…i was referring to White voters as a percentage of the voters. I apologize

      • DaveH

        Flashman says — “Tony…those House members from the extreme right aka Tea partiers, are going to be ion trouble come 2014″.
        As usual, Flashman is equivocating.
        The Extremists are those who are practicing policies which are logical failures and experiential failures. The Real Extremists are spending our country into 3rd World status.
        For those who are strong enough to rip off the Propaganda Blinders as promoted by Flashman and his ilk:
        http://www.freetheworld.com/2012/EFW2012-complete.pdf

      • Flashy

        “The Extremists are those who are practicing policies which are logical failures and experiential failures. ” <— DaveH

        you refer then to Libertarians since there hasn't been any instance you can cite where the Mises theology has been put into place or successfully practiced, and certainly defy logic in 21st century world economics..

      • DaveH

        Flashman equivocation at its finest — “We have had 30 years of a strong GOP presence with the voting public ignoring the facts and reality”.
        “strong” GOP presence? In other words — Democrat Control. Yet he blames the Republicans. And you might wonder — Why does Flashman always steer the issue to the Two Party paradigm? Obviously because he wants the large contingent of ignorant people to keep rooting for their team instead of waking to the reality that both Parties are just different sides of the same Big Government coin.
        For Real “change” (back to what our Founders envisioned), Personal Responsibility, Individual Freedom, Limited Government, Free Markets, and the PEACE that come with that Liberty — vote Libertarian.
        http://www.lp.org/platform

      • DaveH

        Here is a visual guide to the Party in Power:
        http://uspolitics.about.com/od/usgovernment/l/bl_party_division_2.htm

        Note that the President can’t spend anything (legally that is) without the complicity of Congress.

      • DaveH

        I said — “The Extremists are those who are practicing policies which are logical failures and experiential failures”
        Then Flashman said — “you refer then to Libertarians since there hasn’t been any instance you can cite where the Mises theology has been put into place or successfully practiced, and certainly defy logic in 21st century world economics”.
        Obviously Flashman, you are contradicting yourself. If Libertarian “theology has[n't] been put into place”, then they could not possibly be “experiential failures”, now could they? Are you just that ignorant, Flashman, or are you assuming your readers are?
        Isn’t it like you, Flashman, to talk about a vague concept of “logic in 21st century world economics” instead of naming any specifics which I can trounce you on?
        And actually, Flashman, we did have a predominance of Libertarian ideology for our country’s first hundred years, and as a result became the most economically sound and prosperous nation in the world. In those first hundred years, the buying power of the dollar actually increased. What cost 1 dollar in 1800 only cost 50 cents in 1900. So the people could actually save their money without fear of Big Government ravaging its buying power.

        Those who want to learn some truth, instead of the equivocal Propaganda that Flashman spreads, should read this book and learn something:

      • DaveH

        A History of Money and Banking in the US:
        http://mises.org/Books/historyofmoney.pdf

        • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

          The federal Reserve was installed to be a way to control the masses and those masses not just be US civilians but whoever the ruling elite saw as needing to be controlled in whatever way the elite saw as needing to be controlled . WHO built Concentration Camps were allied before WW2 with the same Ruling Elite who were Building CCC camps which were a result of a Depression that is always caused by these same Ruling elite who control the Money and allocate it when times look to be sustainable for growth to supply population expansion and then these same ruling elite take it away when they think population growth is Unsustainable , and it has worked as was planned beautifully .

      • DaveH

        For those who don’t really understand the concept of “money”, read this book first:
        http://mises.org/Books/historyofmoney.pdf

        • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

          For those of you who want to understand that the Money we the people use to control though the House of representatives that was taken away 100 years ago and since then has been a Tool for controlling the masses by ruling class elite generations by generation of these parasitic ideologues look up NSSM200 and read the quotes by this person that rules the elites around the globe , http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Henry_Kissinger

      • Flashy

        DaveH…you claim the first 100 years of this nation were those based upon libertarian principles?

        You’re sure of that? Absolutely certain? I ask you for confirmation because i don’t want to s[pend the time shredding your claim if you’re going to back out as you always do …

      • DaveH

        I said, Flashman — “we did have a predominance of Libertarian ideology for our country’s first hundred years”.
        I didn’t say it was called “Libertarian” in those days being that the word Libertarian is a relatively recent word in the English language, but we did have a “predominance” of those ideas which are now called Libertarian.
        I welcome you to attempt to “shred” me, Flashman, with anything that you can muster. But you won’t. You will just continue your broad generalizations and other vague statements which are too obtuse to address.

      • eddie47d

        The first 100 years of our nation was also filled with slavery, wars and expansionism (or theft)) of other people’s land. Got to love those old time “takers”.

      • DaveH

        What’s funny is that the Liberal Progressives act as my foil, thus giving me an opportunity to present ideas that most readers have previously not been exposed to. Most of the readers have heard the typical emotionally-charged Progressive Propaganda, from the schools and the MSM, so they learn nothing new by reading the Liberal Progressive comments, except that they are much more childish and bereft of logic than most people realize.
        How ignorant is that — for the Liberal Progressives to give me a platform to tell people how things really are?
        But thank you guys for helping me (even if unintentionally) to expose your logically-bereft agenda to the average citizen.

        • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

          DaveH you need to come out and say in your full name that ; “The Spin Stops with you because you are looking out for everyone ” , you would have more credit with your full name .

        • Jeff

          I can’t believe it. A post from DaveH that doesn’t include a personal insult. Watch out or you’ll lose your nickname.

      • Flashy

        “we did have a predominance of Libertarian ideology for our country’s first hundred years”.<<< DaveH

        We had unlimited land to grow west. Slavery artifically depressing basic commodities, the Industrial Age was just beginning transforming the nation from Agrarian to industrial, subsidized railroads, subsidized canals ..

        we had the

        the Panic of 1820, widespread foreclosures, bank failures, unemployment, a collapse in real estate prices, and a slump in agriculture and manufacturing

        Panic of 1825 .. see above

        Recessions averaging every 5 years from 1830-1855

        panic of 1857

        The Big One..Panic of 1873 … which really nailed everyone to the wall.

        Then we can start listing the trade wars and tariffs …

        business expanded slowly because of lack of expansion capital, and lest we forget, the monopolies of oil, steel, railroads, shipping and mining.

        Mind..that was WITH unlimited land to expand and unlimited resources to tap into. All of which we do not have available today.

        So, we were not having a "predominance of Libertarian ideology" were we? It was a short period of having unlimited resources, artificially low cost captive labor market, trade tariffs and restrictions, subsidized industry, monopolies, lack of credit available for business expansion.

        And you can find the unlimited expansion of land and resources where today? An artificially low slave labor market?

        Yeah DaveH….the environment and conditions were so perfectly matched to what we have in the 21st century…and those "libertarian principles' you so espouse … 47 recessions in the first 100 years of this country's existence.

        THAT is what you say represent Libertarian principles and success?

        • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

          Flashy so the answer is what ????????

      • Flashy

        Tony…I have asked DaveH time and again…show where Libertarian “principles” have succeeded. Time and again, he hasn’t come up with anything. today, he stated the first 100 years had a ‘predominance’ of libertarian “principles’ …

        So, unless I am mistaken, i don’t believe “principles” include tariffs, slave labor, unlimited land to grow, recessions every five years or so, non existent credit, monopolies, subisidies, etc…

        And I surely don’t believe the environment that existed when DaveH is claiming a “predominance” of Libertarian “principles” applies to anything we have in the 21st century.

        Doesn’t matter…he’ll make something up, ignore the post, or denigrate and avoid specifics. I believe his goal in life is to prove every day to folks he can’t comprehend even the simplest of basic thought processes…

        • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

          Flashy actually if we would have had tariffs as negotiating tools over the past 18 years of the Clinton free trade agreement we would have sustained a great part of our industrial manufacturing and tool and die and would have had a better change top balance our trade deficits and stay independently solvent and supplied and not near the consolidation of wealth distribution would have happened !!!!! To Obamas Credit I do think he has used the tariff in trade negotiations and may be the result of some jobs coming back like Apple doing some work here again , but will he be able to follow through in a Big Enough manner with the federal Reserve wanting to Continue to control the world trade currency position which does not bode well when more production is done in the USA , see this is where we are getting screwed !!!!!!!

      • DaveH

        Flashman,
        You are spouting nonsense, and you know you are spouting nonsense.
        The American Natives had all those same natural resources and open spaces, yet they were industrially handicapped.
        Hong Kong has 3 times the population density of New Jersey (our most densely populated state) and almost no natural resources, yet they are a thriving society. Why? Because they have Government less than 1/2 the size of ours, and they butt mostly out of the Economy.

        This is a very curious statement, Flashman — “those “libertarian principles’ you so espouse … 47 recessions in the first 100 years of this country’s existence”.
        I know you’re a Liberal Progressive, Flashman, and thus think you are entitled, but even you can’t have it both ways. First you say they didn’t have Libertarian Principles. Then you claim those Libertarian Principles were the cause of “47 recessions in the first 100 years of this country’s existence”. And of course, true to your lack of credibility, there were NOT 47 recessions in the first 100 years, and those which we did have were over in less than 2 years with the exception of the 1873 Depression which lasted 6 years but was a very mild Depression:
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_recessions_in_the_United_States

        In fact, pertaining to the 1873 Depression, in the decade from 1869 to 1879 the US “saw a 3-percent-per annum increase in money national product, an outstanding real national product growth of 6.8 percent per year …. and a phenomenal rise of 4.5 percent per year in real
        product per capita”. (From “A History of Money and Banking in the United States”).

        To make a long story short, Flashman, you have no credibility on this board.

      • DaveH

        Flashman says — “So, unless I am mistaken, i don’t believe “principles” include tariffs, slave labor, unlimited land to grow, recessions every five years or so, non existent credit, monopolies, subisidies, etc”.
        I said Predominance, Flashman, not exclusively.
        Now it’s “recessions every five years or so”? What happened to the “47 recessions in the first 100 years”, Flashman? You can’t even remember your lies from one comment to the next?
        And of course there was “credit”. It just wasn’t Fraudulent Credit like that issued by modern banks.
        Monopolies? Name me a single Monopoly that existed without Government Force, Flashman?

      • DaveH

        Flashman says — “Doesn’t matter…he’ll make something up, ignore the post, or denigrate and avoid specifics. I believe his goal in life is to prove every day to folks he can’t comprehend even the simplest of basic thought processes”.

        Typical Liberal Progressive. I’ll tell you what, Flashman. You show me where I made anything up, and I’ll show you comments where you made stuff up. Put your money where your mouth is, you lying Liberal.

      • DaveH

        Some reality for those other victims of our Public Schools:
        Federal Government Spending:
        1800 — less than 3% of GDP
        1810 — less than 3% of GDP
        1820 — less than 3% of GDP
        1830 — less than 3% of GDP
        1840 — less than 3% of GDP
        1850 — less than 3% of GDP
        1860 — less than 3% of GDP
        1870 — 4% of GDP
        1880 — 3% of GDP
        1890 — 3% of GDP
        1900 — 3% of GDP

        Now — 24% of GDP.

      • eddie47d

        Few kids were required to go to schools back then and only the wealthy ones gained much from that 3%.

      • DaveH

        Jeff says — “I can’t believe it. A post from DaveH that doesn’t include a personal insult. Watch out or you’ll lose your nickname”.
        What nickname is that, Jeff? Do you think that the readers are ignorant? Do you think they can’t read your many comments to see that you are the typical Liberal Progressive who can’t logically or factually rebut me, so you instead use adolescent personal attacks?
        Jeff, Folks, is a good example of those Liberal Progressives who can’t even act like adults on this board, but they want to run your life with Big Government.

        • Jeff

          Dave, I have rebutted your brand of selfish economics many times, but you assume everyone who disagrees with you only does so to protect their own welfare check or government salary. Who but a C.B. would make that assumption?

      • DaveH

        What does CB stand for, little boy?

      • Smilee

        Tony Newbill says:
        December 7, 2012 at 12:18 pm

        I just knew that would be way to deep for your to comprehend

  • ? Chocopot

    Everyone had better start accepting the fact that this country as we know it is finished. We have been sold out by all parties in D.C. We are in a downward spiral and are spinning down the drain faster and faster. Aside from food and water, the essentials for the next few years are gold, silver, steel, and lead. Stock up now while you can – it is going to be getting very nasty.

  • Louis Lemieux

    The economy added 146,000 jobs in Nov. and unemployment now stands at 7.7%

    • ? Chocopot

      If you believe those numbers, you need some serious counseling.

      • eddie47d

        Chocopot aka;crackpot does a little good news upset you that much? Seek help yourself!

      • Flashy

        LOL … would you be saying the same if the numbers showed a job loss and the unemployment rate going up? let me guess..then they’d be believable numbers ! Jeesh ….

      • momo

        The official employment numbers are as believable as the inflation numbers.

        http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/unemployment-charts

      • nc

        Chocopot. What numbers did you believe? The ones that the Republicans released saying that there had been 8.9% unemployment under Obama?

    • Steve E

      Christmas jobs.

      • Flashy

        seasonally adjusted. Nice try…didn’t work, but nice try

        • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

          All you have to do to see that this Obama Jobs Recovery is a Bunch of BS is look at this Chart and see that Real Unemployment today would be 11 % if we had the same Rate of labor Participating in the work force today as we did in 2007 before the Crash in 2008 !!!!! So what Has Obama engineered thats actually Creating Private Sector Job Growth ??? NOTHING , More Government Jobs is all !!!!! http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000

      • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

        Oh And look how well the GM Bailout is working out , and it appears to have been Planned !!!!! At issue is a backroom deal hatched by GM to fulfill the Obama administration’s demand for a quick bankruptcy, draining the automaker of nearly all of its cash on hand and leaving it in worse shape than it was when it collapsed in 2009.
        http://freebeacon.com/bailout-on-the-brink/

      • Steve E

        People dropping out of the work force makes the unemployment number lower. Who cares about what the number really is anyway, Everyone knows the economy is slow.

  • joszsrepublicanpage

    I say let ODUMBA have his way and take AMERICA over the cliff and show Americans what ODUMBA has done to all the country,,,,,,

    • Steve E

      That’s what I say also. People want to raise taxes on everyone but themselves. Let them all pay and see how it feels.

    • Nadzieja Batki

      But most Americans won’t blame O when he pushes them over the cliff, he will come out smelling like a rose. The blame and the hurt will go to people who had nothing to do with America going over a cliff. But for sure there will be is a reshuffling of who will be the new rich or who will be the new poor, no different than what happened in the crash of 1929.

  • Dee

    obummer is the worst president we’ve ever had. How about him cutting down on his 17 vacations, he’s already had and the $4,000,000 his wife spent going to Spain. He wants everyone else to tighten the belt so he can spend more. Doesn’t congress have the right to stop some of this. He will do whatever he wants if he even has to make a executive decision. Wonder if the idiots that voted for him are happy now?

    • Warrior

      Well, doesn’t appear those in detroit are yet, but I suspect that will change.

    • Flashy

      Dee…feel free to spend a moment and look up President Obama’s vacations and costs compared with past presidents. i believe you will find Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II all exceeded his numbers in both vacation days and cost.

      So lump those guys in with this President when you spout off.

    • http://twistingyarn.wordpress.com twistingyarn

      Ask Louis Lemieux he seems pretty happy about it. Nero’s fiddling and the hypnotized herd is dancing while our constitution and freedom goes up in flames. Washington is being run by traitors that are blatantly violating their oaths of office to protect and uphold the constitution. They are instead spitting, urinating and defecating on it without so much as a whimper from any of the 3 branches as they are all in collusion and complicit.

  • vietnamvet1971

    HYPOCRITES, the whole Bunch of these Big Mouth Liberal Elitist Know it ALL’S. Put your money where your Big Fat Lying Mouth is. Greedy Lying CEO’s. They all like to Spout off their Balderdash Garbage hoping their Boy hears so he can give them an “Atta Boy”. Jerks.

  • ToughGuy1

    Obama’s mandate. What mandate? (Doesn’t have one.)

  • Flashy

    President Obama is only the fifth President to win re-election with 50% plus in both elections. The second Democrat. He garnered 62 percent of the electoral college. The Dems gained seats in the Senate, and even with massive gerrymandering by GOP legislatures, gained House seats. Obama’s popularity is edging near all time highs at 55% and climbing.

    Now … what in those figures indicates anything other than a complete mandate and vote of confidence?

    Obama campaigned on exactly what he proposed. His budget proposal rejected in the Spring was given to the GOP, exactly what he had said he would do. Everybody understand that? he promised to send back his budget of the Spring. not a diluted version. Only twice did he mention any figure below what was in his budget…one time in each of two debates when he mentioned $800 million. The remainder of any mention of budget numbers always referred back to the 2012 budget proposal he sent to Congress in the Spring. his website, his speeches, his appearances…all referred to that budget.

    Nice try, but as most claims by the extremist Right, when examined the spin and twist of numbers and facts doesn’t wash.

    And if there was no strong mandate for the proposal by President Obama, why is the House GOP currently being purged? Committee chairs and seats are being allocated placing the extremists in the back seats. Rumors of promises to send funds or not send funds. Armey leaving the Freedom Foundation in a cloud of dust (and a few million in golden parachute monies). De Mint reading the future ahead for him marginalized in the Senate and bailing when the bailing was good enough to get him a mil plus salary. Potential replacements are all rumored to be non extremist GOPers.

    Only the hard core unable to see the facts and understand their extremism is rejected, and soundly rejected, are saying this President has no mandate from the People.

    The extremists are headed out…whether by choice or being shoved. The corner seat with the dunce cap awaits them. No solutions, divisiveness, under cutting anyone to the left of Attila the Hun, and placing politics above nation. That dog don’t hunt…not in America.

    • eddie47d

      The problem is Flashy will those Republicans who are bailing do more harm on the outside than they did on the inside. They may only be attacking from a different direction.

      • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

        EDDIE47D WHAT HARM ARE YOU PERTAINING TOO ???????

      • eddie47d

        Useless wars,the Patriot Act,TSA, opening the doors to civil liberties abuse. You know the usual. Heck I’ve seen civil liberties abuse back in the 50-60′s and most were Republican backed although Democrats aren’t blameless.

    • Chocopot

      “…what in those figures indicates anything other than a complete mandate and vote of confidence?”

      How about the massive voter registration and voting fraud we all know took place?

      • Flashy

        Choco…that was in spite of those GOP manipulations. Had it been fair and straight up, the numbers would be even better for this President’s four year extension …

    • Doc Sarvis

      Good summary Flashy.

    • Smilee

      Flashy says:
      December 7, 2012 at 8:12 am

      President Obama is only the fifth President to win re-election with 50% plus in both elections.

      This is true and it includes presidents F. Roosevelt, Eisenhower and Reagan, that sure puts him up there with the most popular and revered, and second to very few. Why do you suppose we get all this BS on here as deep down the far rights know he gave them the spanking of a life time and they are madder than hell about that thus throwing all these tantrums. At the outset they said he had no chance of winning because of how bad things are and after four years and their plans to make him a one term president which they did their best to execute but fell flat on their faces with their butts in the air giving Obama the perfect target for that spanking. I guess they will be crying for a long time as any naughty kid should after such a hard spanking.

      • DaveH

        For those readers who would like to know the truth about the “revered” Franklin Delano Roosevelt:
        http://library.mises.org/books/John%20T%20Flynn/The%20Roosevelt%20Myth.pdf

        We have all been severely Propagandized by those people who stand to gain from Big Government at the rest of our expense.

        • Smilee

          I know you and people like you do not revere Franklin Roosevelt but the majority do and generally he is revered by the american people as are Eisenhower, Reagan,
          T Roosevelt, Lincoln, Jefferson, John Adams and Washington and I’m sure you do not revere some of these either. Understand you are a small minority and if you were not libertarians would win elections and I have no memory of that ever happening, so your opinion is most likely not very important to most.

      • DaveH

        I always have been in a small minority. People who score in the 95th percentile are a small minority. People who actually abide by their own moral code are in a small minority. People who actually work for their money instead of taking it from others are in a small minority.
        Unfortunately the majority of people are like you, Sleepee, but that’s not something you should be proud of.

      • Smilee

        DaveH says:
        December 9, 2012 at 11:22 pm

        MINORITY OR MAJORITY IT DOES NOT MATTER YOU WILL ALWAYS BE ON THE WRONG SIDE AS THAT IS THE SIDE YOU WISH TO BE ON A

      • Flashy

        “I always have been in a small minority. People who score in the 95th percentile are a small minority. ” <– DaveH

        LOL…..one has to ask..the 95th percentile in what…juvenile postings, misleading information, proving time and again that your mental swiftness is akin to a herd of turtles racing through peanut butter, or number of Mises links posted to blogs per day?

        • Smilee

          GRRReat!!! LOL

  • http://Yahoo.com Frankie

    Just who gets to determine who “The Rich” are? Now they say those making over 250,000. After the tax hike…they will be dropping that down to those making over 25,000. Just wait and see. They’ve done it in the past.

    • Warrior

      Hey, wasn’t this just tried in england? Appears that the “progressives” in 2009 identified 16,000 people that were making over 1 million pounds and decided to tax them @ 55%. Well, the next year that number dropped to 6,000. What the @$#$%^^ just happened? LMAO. “FORWARD!

    • Doc Sarvis

      When has anyone defined the rich as those making $25,000?

      • mark

        No one ever has, Doc, except Frankie. The Obama adminstration puts the figure at $250,000.

  • Paul

    Throw this Lying piece of Camel dung to the curb or hang him

    • eddie47d

      Now be nice to George Bush!

    • Rick

      I would show up for that, and bring the pop corn.

      • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill
      • mark

        That’s just your opinion, Rick, that Obama is a traitor deliberately destroying America. You see in our country of laws, you cannot hang someone just on the basis of an individual or a group of individuals’ opinions. Our legal system doesn’t work that way. Thank God. This is why left-wing extremists in the United States could not hang George W. Bush as a war criminal because that was their opinion of him. Opinions are like …. well, you know that joke, everybody has one. But elections are different. Obama won. That is not my opinion this is a fact. He has been certified as our president for a second term. When you cannot accept this that means you are out of touch with reality. I did not like it when George W. Bush was elected with 550,000 less votes than Al Gore in 2000, but I accepted the fact that he was the president. Facts count in this world. Far-out, hateful opinions do not. It may be fun to shout them out in bars and on blogs. But they are irrelevant and ultimately meaningless. I hate Obama! Obama is a traitor! Obamas is destroying America! Say it all you want, it means nothing. President Obama is in the White House today, doing important things, working on policy, making history. You’re just spouting nonsense on a not-very-important blog.

    • Motov

      And make it quick!

    • mark

      This is all that pathetic, powerless, irrelevant people on the losing side of the political equation can do. Hurl juvenile insults to make them feel important. Something that in reality, they will never be. Fabricate sick and violent fantasy solutions that will never come to pass. But hey, what else do they have to do? The bars of America are full of these sad, impotent white men shouting at the television set. They don’t even qualify as men. They’re just mindless shadows, always on the sidelines, always irrelevant, while the real world moves on – and leaves them all behind.

      • Rick

        Mark, If you and, Flashy and others with your mind set, represent the real world, then the world is in serious trouble. Any one that wants to intentionally destroy my country is a Traitor and should be hung. You are the one being deceived by the Smiling Socialist Deceiver/Traitor/Destroyer. I do not understand the power he has over you. Maybe some kind of telepathic mind control that is only effective against weak minds, of which this country has many.

      • Flashy

        ” Any one that wants to intentionally destroy my country is a Traitor and should be hung.” <— Rick, when are you getting in the line waiting your turn at the scaffold ?

        typical rant though. you fall right into predictability. No solutions, only rants based in hate, fear and ignorance.

      • Rick

        OH, I have a solution Flashy. It is the only one that will work. It is about using, and sticking with our countries Constitution and Bill of rights, not trashing it, and shredding it like your beloved king, ofullocrap. He knows what he is doing Flashy. He is not dumb as many suspect.

      • eddie47d

        Rick: You said nothing but name calling and solved nothing. Is that another proud Conservative moment? The crony capitalist shafted America and abused the Constitution..

      • Nadzieja Batki

        But you have no idea what unintended consequences will occur when America goes over the cliff? Propping yourself up with what you believe are brave words.

      • Flashy

        Rick and Nad..y’all keep harping on President Obama acting unconstitutionally. Care to name any of those “unconsitutional” acts. try as i might, I haven’t found any SCOTUS cases supporting your claims…

      • Deerinwater

        They are too intelligent to do that Flash! ~ They only want to spread manure and talk about who is and who is not intelligent. ~ like they might have some grasp of the material and threaten us with maybe whipping it out! LOL~!

        They don’t won’t to be seen getting their clock cleaned, so at least their pilot light is lit.

  • http://Yahoo KAM

    The president is way too full of himself !! HOW does this get fixed when our Republican represenitives seem to be BRAINLESS? ” CRASH AND BURN “, is that where we are headed? The presidents supporters are ILL INFORMED at best, it’s really too bad these people didn’t bother to do some research on what Obama REALLY had in mind for America and it’s citizens. Whatever happens going forward, those very supporters of Obama will pay a steep price along with the rest of the country, THEY are NOT EXEMPT!!
    Mr. Obama, There was NO MANDATE. FAILURE is where you are headed.

  • Deerinwater

    Yea, ~ paying the bills is never a happy day.

    So we can complaint about the cost of interest borrowing

    unfunded tax cuts

    unfunded wars

    over budget spending in general .

    Bring our people home

    no more military spending

    no more foreign aid

    and quit attempt to cast a global shadow and effect events.

    Find us a good rocking chair and sit on the front porch and watch the world pass by.

    All I know is I didn’t spend it.

  • mark

    Obama won 51-47% with the popular vote, 332 to 206 in the electoral college. It was not a landslide but it was a solid, comfortable win that does give him increased political authority. He is not going anywhere and will be the president for the next four years with increased power in the Senate. At least that would be the understanding of sane people. But to those out-of-touch, living-in-the-bubble, bloggers on this site, (not all but many) who foolishly believed all the totally erroneous Fox News polling, this of course cannot be true. No, the Muslim, Kenyan traitor/terrorist stole the election – and now his Hitlerite regime is permanent! Here come the death panels, Sharia Law, the leveling of every church in America, FEMA concentration camps, the stripping of all gun rights, 10,000% Wiemar Republic inflation, the cancelation of all future elections and media outlets, the End of America!

    What can I say? There is zero hope of reasoning with people who have this kind of paranoid, psychotic mentality, and total disavowal of reality. There is psychiatric help for such people. But they have to want it. Rather than love livng in a world of racial hate, xenophobia, nativism, and paranoia. Oh, by the way, have a nice day!

    • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

      Its Totally Ironic that Romney won the % of the Vote he declared was What Would Never Vote for him because they were on the Obama Government Dole !!!!!!

      • mark

        Exactly. An almost perfect irony, Tony!

    • Deerinwater

      Don’t forget about their GUNs Mark , he’s coming for their guns. ~ I had leased a 60 ton Crane and operator this Tuesday, ~ on completion of 70 minutes of work while I’m cutting him a $709.00 check we made small talk of we of business. ~ He tells me that Obama wants framers to pay $300.00 so they can keep there guns and is just livid with the thought.

      Seemly, normal , sane people ~ believe this crap with all their heart.

      Only now do I see how such a man as Hitler could come into power and have people committing horrible acts on their neighbors believing they were doing the right thing.

      If he can command $100.00 per hour and me willing to pay it ~ while listening to his lies had me brooding the rest of the day.

      • mark

        Tell me about it. Some of these people are my own relatives! I had an older cousin, a retired cop yell at me while pointing at the president on the television: That [comment has been edited] is a racist!” I mean how do you reply to such invincible ignorance? These paranoid types will believe absolutely anything and I do mean anything. As long as they heard it on right-wing radio, a right-wing blog, or some crank mouthing off in a bar. I hear you, brother. A Kansas cab driver told me: “Half our budget goes them damn fureigners!” It is actually about 1.4%. But what do the facts matter? Another sage in a Tennessee diner told me: ” The UN is gonna come over here and conquer us all anyday now. Turn us all into Muslims and make us all speak Mexican! “(there is of course no such langauge. Mexicans speak Spanish).

        You are right these folks believe such absolute nonsense with all their hearts. I blame these vastly exaggerating libertarian and conservative media outlets that fuel this never- ending hatred of the government and particularly of the Obama adminstration. Despite the fact that none of these paranoid fantasies they predict ever come true: they will simply tell you: “Not yet! But it’ll happen tomorrow!” Or the next day. And on and on it goes into infinity. These kinds of delusions continue until people literally go to their graves. And then their indoctrinated children believe them, that the “government is gonna take away all our guns! Make us give all our money to black people! And turn us all into Muslims!” Good grief. Hey, don’t forget, higher-ups on the conservative and libertarian media chains make lots of money encouraging these fabrications and exaggerated nonsense. Big money!

      • eddie47d

        Yet the “Conservatives” on this site and elsewhere never admit all the indoctrination they receive from those talking heads. I’m still waiting for Martial Law and FEMA death camps or will they be used once THEY get back into power. (smoke and mirrors on their part?) The paper announced today the world was running out of Helium. No fear: The clowns in the Republican party have more than enough!

      • Deerinwater

        Yea, they are in my family too! ~ I’m 65 and still working my a$$ off in the city and staying productive, at the top of my game actually. While I’ve a 55 year old cousins that can’t work, out on disability for years, got all kinds of heath conditions, ~ living out in woods on the river bottom away from everyone , all 350 pounds of him, just a ranting and raving about OBAMA. ~ Hell what should he care, ~ he’s three quarters dead anyway, what part that isn’t dead , is just dead weight. A darn hermit antisocial misfit that everyone runs from when they see him coming.

        At the bar, and the VFW Hall , it much the same, ~ they are so crass and outspoken, who wants to wrestle with a pig? You both get dirty and he likes it. ~ and then they are in disbelief that Obama won.! ~ The Vote MUST BE RIGGED! they say.

    • nc

      Mark, What a great analysis of what the extreme right conservatives assures us will happen! Such absurd predictions! Such paranoia! As each of their “dire prediction” fail to materialize their warped minds just create others, more weird and more far out! They can’t control the nation,thank goodness, so they just resort to predicting it’s downfall!

      What a joy it is to get in the car and ride unafraid over this great nation without my mind creating dangers and roadblocks that aren’t there!

      • mark

        I hear you, nc. I’ll be taking that beautiful drive this aft myself. Enjoy, brother!

      • momo

        Take a ride in downtown Detroit and see how unafraid you are.

      • eddie47d

        Not everyone can live in gated communities with guards MOMO.

    • Rick

      Mark, Tony, Deerinheadlights, and nc, I would much rather be with those whom you call paranoid when barack Hussein obamas plan comes to fruition, You are the ones walking around with your eyes totally closed to what this mad man with the big teeth is doing to the USA right under your nose. But, you are trolls anyway right? No one could really be that naive. Could they?

      • Deerinwater

        I speak purely for myself Rick. I am to you and people like you, your opposition. ~ To love me, I would not expect but you will not be allowed to relabel me like you attempt to relabel everything else that annoys you.

        If at some point you actually manage to offer this thread anything of “content” , I will be on you like ugly on an ape.

        Since “content” is not your forte, I don’t expect it anytime soon.

        The sun is going down of 44′s tax cuts ~ end of story. It’s a clear checkmate at this point in the game.

      • eddie47d

        Did Rick give a rat’s patute when Wall Street was skipping down the Yellow Brick Road and selling hot ticketed bundled loans to the world. There were cities in Europe and in the USA that pert near went belly up because of their practices. Was he calling Bush names back then or is his rancor strictly an Obama exclusive! Didn’t “beloved” Bush originally “trash the Bill of Rights”? When you can admit the source of your frustrations then we’ll have a clearer understanding.

      • Deerinwater

        and don’t forget Newt Gingrich “the paid historian” ~ and many others on both sides of the isle. As I remember McCain offered as late as September on 08″ that the US Economy was “fundamentally sound”.

        • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

          Deer in water , That was Before anyone realized the Shariah Financial sector had Pulled all their M1 and 2 Guarantees out of the Bond market which was the first 2000 points leg down in the Dow Jones .

      • nc

        Rick, I have seen more people born underprivileged graduate from college in this country due to government aid than I have seen as political prisoners in FEMA Camps! More elections held than cancelled (0) and NO DICTATORS IN MY 77 YEARS!!
        If it makes your day to fear the boogers in you mind, have at it! I can’t do enough to repay for the joy of being born and reared in the greatest nation on earth! If we had never survived hard times before I could better understand your paranoia! This too shall pass now that Daddy’s Boy in back in Crawford!

  • http://www.facebook.com/elton.robb Elton Robb

    Well, one percent of us has to be right. If Obama was the president we the 1% who voted for Gary wanted, he wouldn’t be president.

    • nc

      Elton Robb, if it hadn’t been for the total incompetence of the last Republican President there is a good chance Obama would not be President anyway! Of all the candidates for the Republican nomination in 2012, Romney would have been the one the Democrats would have picked to run against! Just more proof that the Republican Party is the Democrats best friend! Keep up the good work GOP while we Democrats have lunch in the Oval Office!

  • roger

    for all of you people who have a job or a small private business, ask some questions of your congress-critter about the following. let us know if you get an answer…..

    26 USC 3401
    Definitions.
    (a) Wages. For purposes of this chapter, the term “wages” means all remuneration (other than fees paid to a public official) for services performed by an employee for his employer, including the cash value of all remunerations paid in any medium other than cash; except that such term shall not include remuneration paid -
    26 USC 3401
    This definition states that wages are defined by the relationship between an employee and his employer.

    This fact brings out the importance of knowing just WHO is an employee, and WHO is the employer referred to within these laws. The legal definition of “employer” states:
    26 USC 3401
    Definitions.

    (d) Employer. For purposes of this chapter, the term “employer” means the person for whom an individual performs or performed any service, of whatever nature, as the employee of such person, …
    BUT, before one can possibly positively identify the identity of the “employer”, one must first pinpoint the identity of the “employee”.
    Employee:
    26 USC Section 3401
    Definitions.

    (c) Employee. For purposes of this chapter, the term “employee” includes an officer, employee or elected official of the United States, a State, or any political subdivision thereof, or the District of Columbia, or any agency or instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing. The term “employee” also includes an officer of a corporation.
    Here is a classic example of how it is easy to be misled by the Code. Though it first appears that the definition of “wages” includes the earnings of every person, a closer look shows that the actual legal definition of the term employee does not include persons working outside of the U.S. government. (Certain corporations that were originally set up by the federal government and that are run by the federal government have appointed corporate officers, such officers are included in this legislation. But not the officers of any private corporations incorporated under the laws of one of the fifty states).
    Did you notice that under the law only individuals who work for the Federal government are “employees”. That of course means that the only “employer” addressed by the laws in Chapter 24 of Title 26 is the Federal government. This is because under the Constitution, the Federal government does not possess the territorial jurisdiction to dictate, alter, or attach to work agreements under private contracts. Under the law, no one else can be an “employer”, by mandate, except the federal government, and only those people working for the Federal government can be “employees”, have “employment”, and possess “wages”.
    DISCUSSION
    The term “wages” is defined here in Title 26 in Section 3401(a) where it controls the withholding of income tax on “wages” under Section 3402, under Chapter 24. “Wages” are “covered earnings”. Covered earnings are earnings that are taxed, at your request and Allowance if you are a citizen, and by lawful requirement if you are a foreigner, for the purpose of accumulating “credits” to be used in calculating future Social Security benefit payments.
    If you have voluntarily given a Social Security number to your “employer” on a W-4 Withholding Allowance Certificate, you have “wages”, and you are an “employee” and your work is called “employment”. If you do not participate in Social Security then you are NOT an “employee”, and you just have earnings, NOT “wages”, and you just have a job, not “employment”, and you have a boss, not an “employer”. Your employer became an “employer”, when he voluntarily applied for an EIN (employment identification number) to participate in the Social Security system as a withholder of employment taxes (employer) under subtitle C.
    That of course means that your employer (in the private sector) cannot claim any legal authority at all to withhold tax from you under Chapter 24 provisions, unless you voluntarily request it by submitting a W-4. Forcing you to provide a W-4 in order to work is unlawful coercion, unless you work for the federal government, and doing so effectively makes you nothing more than a federal peon for as long as you hold that job. Now what section did your employer cite as his authority to TAKE your money, wasn’t it 26 USC 3402(a)? Isn’t that in Chapter 24 ?
    You see the only “employer” required in the Code is the Federal government. A private company is not required by law to participate, but may do so by making an application to participate. Under the Constitution, Congress has no jurisdictional authority over private contracts between Citizens and the private companies that they work for in the fifty states. So by law, in recognition of that fact, the only employer required by law to participate is the government.
    In Title 20 WAGES are DEFINED as:
    20 CFR 404.1041 Wages.
    (a) the term “wages” means remuneration paid to you as an employee for employment unless specifically excluded….
    (b) if you are paid wages it is not important what they are called. Salaries, fees, bonuses and commissions on sales or on insurance premiums are wages if they are paid for employment…..
    20 CFR 404.1003 Employment.
    Employment means, generally any service covered by social security perfromed by an employee for his or her employer…
    20 CFR 404.1004 What work is covered as employment.
    (a) General requirements of employment. Unless otherwise excluded…, the work you perform as an employee for your employer is covered as employment under social security if one of the following situations applies:
    (1) You perform the work within the United States…
    (2) You perform the work outside the United States and you are a citizen or resident…
    I’m sorry, isn’t this where we started with wages. Don’t you just love circular legal definitions that define themselves with references to variations of themselves ? I mean, I hope you don’t just think I’m making this up on my own. I couldn’t dream this up, ever.
    These definitions (descriptive paragraphs) are in Title 20 – Education, because just like public schooling, Social Security is VOLUNTARY for citizens, not mandatory (one can choose a private school, and one can choose a private retirement program, if he wishes). If you have been forced to sign a W-4 in order to “be allowed” to work, you have been enslaved, and are now a federal peon.

  • Dorsetgal

    Just wait, they aren’t done yet. When the money stolen from working people is not enough (and it won’t be) the VAT (Value Added Tax) is coming next. Every time you make a purchase you will pay extra to the Feds. We will all be paying that one. The more you buy the more you pay. Look how well that’s worked out for Europe. We keep hitting our heads against the brick wall and come out with nothing more than bloodied heads. Doing the same thing as Europe puts us on the road to Greece. But then I forgot, that’s been Obama’s plan all along. Break the backs of the capitalists and spread the wealth to all.

  • taichirookie

    The problem with congress and the president (not capitalized on purpose) is simple. No one is telling the truth, no one is honest.

    • Steve E

      That’s how you get elected.

  • http://www.tax-freedom.com/ roger

    http://www.tax-freedom.com/

    keep asking questions, keep up the pressure, don’t quit until you get “correct” answers…

  • DTConcerned

    So this is terrible, Obama is going to make 1% of the population that has been parasiting off the rest and dodging putting in their fair share by bribing, er kickbacks, er persauding politicians to not even tax them on a par with the lower middle class, actually pay taxes. Almost at a rate tehy should be paying. The past 12 years the 1% demonstrated that giving them phenomenal tax breaks did not stimulate them to stimulate the US economy. Now, if they do not want their money taxed, they will have to invest it in the economy instead of just sucking the country dry. 99% of the US population will benefit from actually taxing the 90% of teh income held by the 1% of the population. There is nothing unfair about having them pay their share. Great they have used business and “earned” their wealth, well some of them, but all that money was made on the backs of the actual working people in America and they own the country that brought them their wealth a little more then just use and abuse. What is truly amazing is that such a large portion of the rest of the population support not making the 1% pay their share. If not paying taxes was going to do any good for our economy we shoudl be at the best economy ever since they got away with it for the last 12 years. I also think the banks should have to pay taxes on reserves that exceed the apropriate balance relative to that banks investment in the community. The banks themselves pulled trillions of dollars out of the economy to sit on it with from what I can tell the sole purpose of trying to make the economy look bad over the last four years. Obama is increasing how much he has to pay in taxes and guess what he will still do well with his income. Any of the 1% that collapse because they have to pay taxes will collapse from their own ignorance, not from the taxes they have to pay.

    • http://momathomeblog.wordpress.com leemckee1

      You are so right! What is this really going to do to those who are to be affected by this tax increase? Are they going to be unable to put dinner on the table? Or are they just going to have to sell their second yacht?

  • Tank

    Chairman Obama’s “mandate” is to destroy this country’s foundation and install a European-style socialist “utopia” where he and his marxist politburo dole out “social justice” in the name of “the people”. Chairman Obama is nothing more than a Saul Alinskyite dictator wannabe and will do and say anything to retain his power. Look at your history, folks. Germany, Italy, Russia. All taken over by a “man of the people” enforcing “social justice” in the name of “fairness”. Chairman Obama is a narcissistic megalomaniac sociopath with the media backing him as his propaganda arm. Chairman Obama can say and do whatever he wishes and his propaganda arm will either ignore it or try to make it look benevolent. Chairman Obama is actively recruiting his own private army – The Civilian Defense Force -
    and disbanding our standing military, plotting with the UN to enact “Agenda 21″ – taking our guns away and relinquishing United States sovereignty to the UN. And that is just the beginning, folks. We, the people must stand up and stop this deliberate destruction and takeover of our nation – either peaceably through elections or by force if necessary.

  • jopa

    The Democrats won the election or should I say the majority of Americans won the election and they voted for the Presidents plan and not the GOP mess we are living under with the Bush tax cuts.What is so hard to understand about that?The job numbers out today are the best in years and we have had steady job growth for the last four years and not the 170,000 jobs lost each month under Bush.American industry has faith in Obama and jobs are coming back to America finally, such as Caterpillar, GE and the big one Apple has announced plans to bring back a 500 million dollar facility back from China.Happy days are here again my fellow Americans.

    • Rick

      jopa, you are under the mind control of the Smiling Socialist/Traitor/Deceiver.

      • Deerinwater

        So, do you have any plans to support your statement or are you simply going to throw it out there for all to see and then go hide somewhere Rick?

    • momo

      Hostess just folded, 18,000 jobs lost. Citi Group plans to cut 11,000 jobs. Happy Days indeed.

      • eddie47d

        Hostess folded because they made a counter productive product to what the consumers wanted. Maybe it was those $3-5 million salary increases that management wanted that forced them to call it quits. Citibank like all the rest of the banksters are having a hard time selling their bundled scams.Besides their management can’t afford all their perks if they keep lower class workers hanging around.

      • Karolyn

        How about the companies that are bringing jobs BACK to the US? All we hear about is the closures, not the companies that are thriving, building and hiring. Freightliner in NC just expanded its line to enable them to handle increased orders. Schaefer Group (INA Bearing -very big here) keeps hiring, most recently looking for 190 new employees.
        http://abcnews.go.com/WN/MadeInAmerica/

      • Karolyn

        Why is it I never get any comments when I post links with good news? Is it because it would upset the conservative status quo view if there was a chink in the argument? Don’t you people want good news?

        • Frank Kahn

          What link with good news? I am not certain it was you, but I followed one that was, by implication, about increased jobs. When I got there it had nothing to do with jobs, it was about finding products made in the US. Now while it is good to find local products, this is not an indication of new jobs being created anywhere that I can find one.

  • Terry Bateman

    The only way the federal government will reduce spending is for Republicans to
    refuse any agreement and go over and stay over the cliff and trigger the automatic
    spending cuts. They just may do this. They would gain no political advantage by
    surrendering to Obama and specificly raising taxes on certain incomes. On the
    contrary, this would kill Republicans with their rank and file and win them no allies
    with democrats or independents either. Appeasement to Hitler did England no
    good either.

  • boyscout

    Chip, Chip, Chip,
    Still looking for principle from capital hill? Do you actually believe that Geithner is the only “tax cheater” (wow what a euphanism!) out there and that they’re only on one side of the divide? Do you really believe that the Republican leadership is so stupid that they could not foresee how events would unfold? they invented the term, pointed out where and how it would happen, and then proceeded to paint themselves into that corner.

    “only 60 percent of eligible voters even bothered to cast a ballot this year”. Hmmmm. Why do you suppose that happened? Perhaps the voting public is not as brain dead as many would assume; perhaps they are merely disgusted. Perhaps the electorate got exactly what they deserved. You can spin that any way you want, but it won’t resurect the conservatism of Reagon or of Kennedy; both are burried under too much corruption. Cleaning house (and senate) should be our mandated priority.

  • http://wildeyguns.com The Christian American

    I like Rand Paul’s position. Let the Democrats have their tax raise because then they will own it. These people work in a world that’s totally in the dark, but then we have to consider what their mentor said: “When you see things happening in politics, you can bet it didn’t just happen, it was planned that way”…FDR. When you see them on the idiot box (TV), you must have it in your mind to know every word is guarded. Before they say anything, their words measured for their impact on the audience. There is no truth coming from DC. If even they had hint of truth in them, we’d of been rolling in the clover a long time ago. I like to listen them like a detective grilling a prime serial killer suspect. They give us figures then they admit is impossible to audit the IRS. What would happen if a business used that excuse? Rand’s comment is one that tells me he sees dealing with them as a cat and mouse contest.

    Because there is no foundation to what they say, everything is in a state of flux. Because it is in a state of flux you have no idea where you stand. Our fear/terror of them is because we never know what’s happening. Everything that has ever been written has only served to prove what the author already believed. Writers react to conditions but then they find themselves changing their minds and writing something different as conditions change. There can by an underlying theme but that’s what we have to concentrate on, not the lies we’re fed everyday. We have bombs all around us with lit fuses. Foreign policy. Domestic conditions. As an insurance policy, I suggest reading and believing John 3:16 or some other passages outlining our future.

    • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

      Rand Pauls Idea is a good one ” IF ” there is a trigger in the works like the one they put in this Fiscal Cliff one where if they cannot come to any agreement on Cuts in Government spending then the tax rates restore back to the Levels that Simpson Bowels excreted as the plan for defecation reduction of the US national debt .

    • nc

      Christian, why do “Christians” fight with ever fiber of their body to postpone, as long as possible, that perfectly wonderful “everlasting life” promised in John 3:16? Do they fear a ” bait and switch”?

      • Mike in MI

        nc- Please allow me to enlighten you to one of the greatest concepts in the Word of God:

        “Eternal Life” is acquired, given from God, by believing. “Eternal Rewards” are by merit and their accumulation ceases when the believer expires.

        You’ll never deserve any in your present state.

    • Mike in MI

      T. C. A. –
      John 3:16 is what God did. If we want something to happen we’ve got to do something to get it started, so God can bring it to fruition.
      Christianity will continue to flounder as long as it keeps doing what it is doing. If God’s acting in it where’s the proof?
      How about any and every believer carrying out the admonition in Philippians 4: 8 – 9.
      You people want to see change? Do what they did in the first century after Acts 2:1 ff.
      Expect to get to the sort of pinnacle reached in Acts 19:20. In order for any such thing as worth while to happen we might want to try believing what Paul believed, doing what Paul did and expecting to receive the kind of results Paul received. Be aware that II Corinthians 1: 12,13 exhorts Christians to read and acknowledge that Paul’s writings (the gospel God gave to Paul) are to be acknowledged until v.14, “the day of the Lord”. God states here He’ll honor Paul’s Gospel until the Lord returns. That hasn’t happened yet.
      Anything else or another sort of gospel (Galatians 1:7-12) . . . you’re on your own.

  • http://momathomeblog.wordpress.com leemckee1

    I want to address not just the article but also one of the replies left earlier.

    First, as to the article: I understand that the idea that their taxes might increase will make those who live above the $250,000 income level a little frantic. However, if my family (and many others across the nation) can survive on less than $10,000 per year — they will survive too. It might even be a good learning experience for them — learning to live on less forces you to be more creative, which is always a good thing. Plus, you learn to appreciate more.

    As to the stimulus and extended unemployment, I have never received anything from either one of these sources so I have no personal stake in promoting them. I do know many others who have benefited from them who really needed it. Therefore I do approve of the increase.

    Secondly, as to the reply earlier regarding the increase in jobs: I am glad the economy in your area has gotten back on track. But as to overall improvement in the economy and job market, many areas have shown little to no improvement. Some areas have even gotten worse over the last year. And until all areas have an improvement, I don’t see the minimal improvements making a major difference.

  • Deerinwater

    I find it amusing that over the years I’ve heard people make the claim that there is nothing “temporary” about anything government does. Yet here we are today, carrying on about the sun going down on George W. Bush temporary tax cuts that help him secure his reelection.

    George W. Bush administration has been long spent, he has completed his 2nd term in office with the help of a thin majority of all voters.

    If there one thing to be learned for this experience, is to not give anyone “anything”, for as we see that today, to “withhold this giving” will be construed as “taking” by some people.

    These tax cuts were a gift from George W. Bush to the American people for supporting him and his administration. Some of us took our “gift” and upgraded to the new flat screen TV sets that was the rage of the times. Some bought themselves a new suit for Sunday, some bought new tires for the buggy while some invested in markets, bought new homes, a new Lexus for mother or a shopping trip in Paris. Myself, I took it as a “Credit” to my tax burden.

    But, ~ it’s over ~ this is the second time that the “end” has came up for review and consideration. ~

    No more unfunded wars ~ that fail to offer direct monetary returns to the American people please. Don’t ask us to send our sons and daughters to fight needless wars, to bleed out their blood and squander our currency for abstract foreign policy when it would be less expensive to buy it outright though markets and standard means of fair play and equatable exchange.

    • Steve E

      The wars are not unfunded, our grandchildren will pay for them. Boy, we really stuck it to the future generation this time. Sorry kiddies, please don’t hate us.

  • RobtELee

    A fake, a Communist, a Fascist, a murderer of this country and other countries of the world. Death to us all is the mantra in Wash World. Clamping down more on the Middle Class in the USA will cause great, great hardships but this administration cares not for any of us – they would rather see us dead or in their camps handing over our lives and our livlihoods and our families to them – complete and udder control. Thanks Libtards! Thanks for the totally FUBAR situation that has been created. May you get your just desserts.
    Till then we will scale down to nothing, we won’t spend even though it’s Christmas, we will get rid of TV and all electronic bullcrap devices and we will reject the entire Medical System and Big Pharma because they are killing us at a fast rate too. This whole country has gone to the dogs of hell.

  • s c

    As is typically the case with all manipulative, utopian con artistes, Obummer’s ‘mandate’ is between his large ears. The ‘King of Transparency’ has much to hide, folks. Some of his braindead minions still don’t understand what is so IMMORAL and anti-American about his FAILURE in Benghazi. Lives were lost via his INCOMPETENCE and INDIFFERENCE, if you have already forgotten.
    WHAT did you expect from an anti-American, thug Chicago politician? He’ll be transparent and honest and responsible and act like a REAL Commander-in-Chief when Muslims in and around the Iran area take anger management classes and let their women have a voice in religion and politics.

    • eddie47d

      Still trying to act informed SC well it ain’t working! That is wishful thinking that ANY President can go into another country and force their male chauvinists to change their ways in how they are treating women. Did Bush and Reagan change their behavior? I didn’t think so sweetie! Besides Muslims are a Conservative religion with strict Conservative rules of behavior. If you don’t like it then change Conservative thinking. Look how long it took for women to vote in America! Heck the Republicans are still trying to keep folks from voting and have all kinds of names for various segments of society in trying to keep them from the polls. According to the Right anyone that doesn’t fit into their neat little box is nothing but a turd rolling down hill and you exemplify that kind of talk. Our Embassy was abandoned in Lebanon after 71 died (6 within compound) there. Are you proud of Reagan’s “indifference” to the sacrifices in Lebanon or do you have a double standard for a Democrat President . Wasn’t the 241 Marines enough death for you to ponder on under Reagan’s watch (poor security) or are we back to sensationalizing four deaths in Benghazi. Isn’t that time bomb in your head ripe for an explosion SC. Its been ticking for some time now !! One thing for sure is that you crave “Incompetent Indifference” in your cold calculating comments. Drink up you pathetic fool!

      • nc

        Eddie47d, that was a great shot at SC! You nailed him right between the eyes!
        The conservatives have so many skeletons in their closet they can’t accuse Judas of wrongdoing without being hypocritical!

  • William

    The insistence that high earners pay more is less about deficit reduction than a liberal’s attempt to punish them for being productive,,,,,,,,,,,,

  • http://www.facebook.com/dale.hogeland Dale Hogeland

    I can’t stand the Liberals and the Republican’s are a bunch of [comment has been edited]! I’m an independent Conservative and after what I’ve seen over that last 10 years with the Republican’s, I’ll no longer vote for them…nor will I ever vote for a Democrap.

    Unless there is a true Conservative running for office (Tea Party), no reason to vote since any Republican will just cave in on principles, if he or she even has any!

    • nc

      Dale, Type “bulls, bears, donkeys and elephants” into a search engine and tell me why Democrats are not your best choice? We have never lost a war and we have a stronger economic record than the other bunch!

  • http://PersonalLiberty Julie

    I’ve been reading your post. I feel that you people on the left should tell Obama to raise the capital gains tax not the income tax. You raise the income tax you will only hurt the middle class and poor. The people that full in the $200,000 or more are businesses that are owned by the middle class, your bosses, which will afect you. It also will affect the poor too. When businesses get taxed higher it is put on the consummers price they pay, the higher the price of the product the more taxes you pay, that includes the people on welfare. If Obama says raise the capital gains tax, not the income tax (the rich pay capital gains tax, not income tax) he will hit the rich in their pocket book, not so much the 98%.

    • taichirookie

      Julie, what you fail to understand is that a poorer middle class and impotent america is just what the doctor ordered. Have you not see either 2016 or Dreams from my real father.

    • Smilee

      Taxes on $250,000 only effects 3% of business men/women so it will have little or no effect on job creation

  • Geoffrey Nwogu

    It seems to me that the last election was a proof that real, civilized, and well meaning Americans cut through all the lies and misrepresentations of the oppsing party and elected who they thought was genuine. In spite of all the money spitting empty headed tycoons, and hate mongers, the “God” that blesses America chose Obama over the Bishop, if anybody believed in the so called “God” why would you still be angry at God for his decision, unless you don’t believe he blesses America with a befitting ruler. i am an independent voter. It seems to me that each time the dems win a presidential election reps try to destroy the country.I have lived in this country for 32 years and have been voting for 20 yrs. During the Clinton erra it was the baseless Whitewater, then the Al Gore election Reps went to court to give the election to Bush. Obama now has gone from race, religion to nativity, but he won. In spite of all the dirt thrown at him, health care, he was born in Kenya, he is not a Christian, He is a communist, he is the 666, yet the world loves America for him. Why continue with all these irresponsible personal attacks on your president and help him make the country better. Gone are the days of fear mongering of the Dick Chenny / Rumsfeld , of “Alkeida is coming; Alkeida is coming!!” used as cover to run the country to financial abiss. It is not wrong to debate national issues as is being done in Washington, but for citizens to resort to pure hatred.

    • ronnie

      we do ask god why he has his reason what we ask is how so many can be so blind and dumb ,you have not read the bill have you you to will be paying higher taxes on everthing you buy .and that is if you still have a job oh yea you can work for your gov. are you so dumb to give o free spending and even if he taxes the rich it will only oay to run the gov. 8 days ,so how do think this is going to help .how how

      • nc

        Ronnie, If the proposed tax on the rich is so small it will only run the government a few days how did bush II, the incompetent one, expect the rich to create all of those jobs he promised when he was campaigning for it??? You do remember that, don’t you??? No??? Really??Here’s a clue to the truth. The tax break went into off shore accounts and the jojb went overseas!

        PS: That great fiscal policy of his also lead to the Loss of 2.6 million jobs in 2008 alone! Has that also skipped you mind

    • http://www.facebook.com/delbert.gue Delbert Gue

      God had nothing to do with it at all. In fact God’s own son proclaimed non interference when he stated give unto Caesar that which is Caesars and to God what is Gods. Additionally, god gave mankind a free will to do what he pleased, but with that came responsibility for his actions. Furthermore, God provided a basic guideline on how he intends to judge our actions thru the Commandments and the statement that he made “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” So we will essentially reap what we sew. Now, the margin that President Obama won was not really a mandate because a mandate requires a large margin of victory. That was not present despite what Obama and any of his supporters proclaim as the winning results show a 51 to 49 percent win. Far from anything close to a large margin of victory. In addition, the voters established a “return to status quo” by maintaining a republican majority in the House. Now the head of the Senate, wants to eliminate the time tested aspect of the fillibuster. Harry Reid seems to have forgotten that when the Republicans had control and attempted to do the same thing, how much he screamed and groveled to try and stop it. It did fail and filibustering remains, but won’t if Mr. Reid can muster enough support against it. Meanwhile, the POTUS and SoH remain at odds over the so-called fiscal cliff. In my honest opinion, I think Obama really wants the republic to fall over the cliff so he can proclaim himself lord and savior of his way to kill the republic and institute an on-going socilist form of entitlement state, just like Greece. Now we all see what is happening there!

    • Terry Bateman

      Obama won the election. That gives him no mandate to change a tax increase and
      federal government sequestered spending cut agreement into a tax increase without
      a federal government spending cut. He has a mandate to trade real federal spending
      cuts for real tax increases:He gets his tax increase, Republicans get their federal
      spending cuts, NOW.

      • Jeff

        Tell us what you want to cut that won’t send the economy back into recession. And remember, Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit.

        http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/05/obama-romney-deficit-debt-chart.php

      • nc

        Terry, if the Republicans give us spending cuts it will surely be a different Republican Party than the one during Reagan who tripled the national debt and bush II who more than doubled what Reagan created! Neither of whom inherited a war!!

    • Frank Kahn

      Well, Geoffrey, I have a couple things to address in your post.

      “the “God” that blesses America chose Obama over the Bishop, if anybody believed in the so called “God” why would you still be angry at God for his decision, unless you don’t believe he blesses America with a befitting ruler.”

      First “the “God”” places a notion which is enforced when you say “the so called “God””, that you dont believe in GOD. While that is okay, you have the right to your views on religion, it makes your statement that he “blesses America” by choosing Obama, either hypocritical or just plain ignorant.

      God does not always Bless his children, sometimes he allows them to fail. In this line of reasoning, it is not anger at God for blessing America by choosing Obama. It is arrogance to say that God decided to elect Obama, it was a slim majority of citizens that did it.

      And the last part of the quote from your post

      “unless you don’t believe he blesses America with a befitting RULER.”

      I have capitalized the last word for emphasis because this is the key to how wrong your statement is. I will bow to Charlie Freedom to supply the chapter and verse quote for supporting my statement. But God does not condone, in fact he admonished us against wanting a RULER. God is the ruler of everything, so he would not bless us with a RULER named Obama.

      We, who appose Obama, dont want a RULER, we want a LEADER.

  • Kinetic1

    Chip,
    “Nonsense! Obama won 51 percent of the votes for President on Nov. 6. But only 60 percent of eligible voters even bothered to cast a ballot this year. Winning support from 30 percent of eligible voters is hardly an overwhelming mandate.”

    So what is “an overwhelming mandate”? Was it Bush in 2004? Cheaney proclaimed the election results a “mandate” and Bush himself famously announced “I earned capital in this campaign, political capital, and now I intend to spend it,” Bush told reporters. “It is my style.” That year only 55% turned out to vote and Bush won just over 50%. In fact his margin of victory was more than a full point less than Obama’s (2.46% to 3.64%), but that probably looks awfully good considering he lost the popular vote to Kerry by .5% in his first election.

    Clinton’s 1996 margin was a big 8.5%, but he only took 49% of the votes and only 49% of voters came out, so that’s just …. oh, less than 25% of eligible voters. Well, how about Reagan’s margin in ’84? a whopping 18.2%. 58.8% of the 53% who turned out. Why that’s …. just under 31%.

    Fact is, your dismissive “only 60 percent of eligible voters” is a big number in American politics. We haven’t seen a turnout of 60% or better since 1968! Even longer when you count only second term elections. Of the 30 elections held since the year they began tracking turnout (1896 ) only 12 have had a turnout as good or better than 2012. Shoot, 8 of them were under 55%!

    So again, what number do you need to consider it a “mandate”? If 30% of the population isn’t enough, then why was Reagan’s 26.7% in ’80 such a big story?

  • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

    Bush tried to claim he was reelected with a mandate and the Left quickly went to work repudiating that !!!!
    And Once Katrina came to town in about a week the Media had bush all but finished ….. funny its been a month and a half and still the Democrats and Obama are Clean from Sandy Hummmmm.

    • Motov

      Gulf oil spill was OhBozo’s disaster as well, That will impact that area for decades to come

      • Kinetic1

        Motov,
        So now the President is responsible for the BP oil spill? Was Obama the one who poured the faulty concrete? Was it his design that went wrong? Did he fail to call out the government’s elite clean up squad?

        There’s no question but that our government should be better prepared to handle disasters like this, but the truth is we have little to nothing in the way of cleanup forces. As Coast Guard Commandant Adm. Thad Allen said “To push BP out of the way would raise the question of to replace them with what” The federal government doesn’t have the technology or expertise to deal with these sorts of problems.

        I’m certainly not happy with how the gulf spill was handled, but it’s just that much more proof that leaving safety up to corporations does not work. President Obama did just what the right always says, leave it up to the “experts”. But as was noted at the time, widespread oil spill cleanup technology had not advanced much in the 20 years since the 1989 Exxon Valdez disaster. If industry can be trusted to ensure the safety of their customers, as so many on this site have suggested, then why so little progress. Until the Right is prepared to fund a clean up team as part of the USCG, there can only be so much blame placed on the Government when an oil spill occurs.

        • Motov

          My point was how quickly the media jumped on the Shrub with criticism over Katrina vs how quickly they jumped Ohbozo for the gulf spill and now about Sandy.

      • Deerinwater

        No it wasn’t, Sir. ~ It was a BP disaster and a southern coastal states disaster. 45′s reaction was timely and Presidential. ~ An accounting was make of those responsible and the due process of law enacted and still ongoing no doubt.

      • Kinetic1

        Motov,
        I understand the point you were trying to make and the answer lies in the timelines of the two storms.

        When hurricane Katrina was announced, Bush was on vacation in Texas. He stayed on vacation. Not just until the storm was closer, or until it hit land, or until the levees were breached, or until people began dying in the Super-dome, but for 6 days after the first warning, and then he did a fly over. On the day the levee breached Bush was sharing Birthday cake with John McCain and traveling to Arizona and Florida to give speeches about a new Medicare bill. Rumsfeld went to a padres game. Gov. Blanco asks for help, again: “Mr. President, we need your help. We need everything you’ve got.” [Newsweek]
        Bush goes off to bed in Texas without responding. On Wednesday, August 31 at 4PM CDT, Bush finally gives his first major address on Katrina. One reporter says of the speech: “Nothing about the president’s demeanor… — which seemed casual to the point of carelessness — suggested that he understood the depth of the current crisis.” [New York Times]
        And at 7PM CDT, Condoleezza Rice went to the theater. She was booed by some audience members at ‘Spamalot!, the Monty Python musical at the Shubert, when the lights went up after the performance.” [New York Post, 9/2/05]

        Like Hurricane Katrina, Sandy was expected to be big. As it approached, President Obama was in Washington overseeing preparations. Oct. 26. President Obama convened a call with FEMA Administrator Craig Fugate, National Hurricane Center Director Dr. Rick Knabb, and Homeland Security Advisor John Brennan to receive an update on Hurricane Sandy and ongoing federal actions to prepare for the storm as it continues to move toward the United States mainland. “”At the request of states, FEMA is proactively deploying Incident Management Assistance Teams to multiple states up and down the Eastern seaboard to assist efforts as state and local partners prepare for the storm.”
        Oct. 28 Obama was on the air warning Americans to “listen to your local officials.” “My main message to everybody involved is that we have to take this seriously…”
        Obama canceled campaign stops Monday in Virginia and Tuesday in Colorado to monitor the storm but planned to go forward with other events Monday in Florida and Ohio, with former president Bill Clinton at his side.
        Oct. 29 — President Barack Obama issued a federal emergency declaration for New jersey and New York, allowing state Governors to request Federal aid in advance of the storms landfall.
        Nov 1: Obama visits New Jersey to view damage, then surveys New York from Marine 1 in respect of the mayor who told him that the cops of New York City were needed elsewhere and everywhere on this day.
        Nov 3: Before hitting the campaign trail Obama meets with FEMA officials for an update on recovery efforts. “The president emphasized five components of recovery: getting power back on as quickly as possible, pumping water out of flooded areas, making sure people’s basic needs are taken care of, debris removal and getting transportation systems up and running again.”

        Both had issues. Both have been criticized (Though I still don’t see where the lack of electricity is Obama’s fault) but the shear volume, the size and scope of Bush and his administration’s failure to show leadership, respect and competence in dealing with Katrina is in such stark contrast to Obama’s preparedness that your point is left meaningless.

    • Kinetic1

      Tony,
      You must be joking. The Bush administration was assaulted because of the dismal failure of their FEMA team. Have you forgotten the images of the convention center? Did you miss the fact that they all but ignored the storm until after it hit. And even then they couldn’t figure out what to do. Bush placed a bunch of political hacks and cronies in top positions and the results showed out.

      Contrast this to Obama’s FEMA and Sandy. The teams were set up in advance. they knew the storm would be big and they prepared for it. No, everything did not go perfectly and some far reaching areas felt forgotten at first, but the response was night and day compared to Katrina. Of course all FOX can talk about is the lack of electricity and gasoline, but the government does not control the electric or oil companies. This is one of those cases where Conservatives and Libertarians get a chance to trumpet the proof that private industry does a better job than government. The power is out, not because of government waste and inefficiency, but due to the challenges it poses for private industry. If they’re not doing the job fast enough, then complain or switch providers! If there’s not enough gas or the prices are too high, complain to the oil companies. This is the free market bubbie!

      • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

        Kinetic1 PULL away from the BONG for a minute and read this Please , http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/12/07/exclusive-fema-teams-told-to-ightsee-as-sandy-victims-suffered/

      • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

        And lets consider that being stoned while this Transition of Power in Egypt takes place is precisely what a appeasers do and will be the downfall of the USA and Israel before its all over !! Arming a radical GROUP like this will not go unused given the things that have been said about each other in the region . Maybe staying high is the best way to experience our heads being chopped off ……

      • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

        Kinetic1 oops I forgot to post this link on the subject , forgive me while I take another hit man ,,,, http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/dec/6/muslim-brotherhood-inherits-us-war-gear/

      • Kinetic1

        Tony,
        Perhaps you turn to drugs to deal with your dissulusionment at life’s injustice and the failures of your Republican “leaders”, but I never (as in NEVER) have touched the stuff. I don’t drink either. Nope, I’m looking at this stone cold sober, and if all you have is a hit piece where FOX interviews one disgruntled aid worker, I can see why you would want to be drugged. Do you really want to play a game of media wars?

        “In contrast, President George W. Bush and his administration seemed slow off the mark in their response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005. The powerful storm hit the Gulf Coast and New Orleans while Bush was on vacation at his Texas ranch, and his aides initially didn’t keep him fully informed about the devastation and misery Katrina was causing.

        By the time he found out — in a report by a senior aide — he already looked out of touch. He belatedly cut short his vacation, and the White House released a photograph of the president looking out a window of Air Force One at the devastation below, which only made Bush appear more distant from the calamity.

        Later, Bush did visit a disaster-relief site and praised Michael Brown, his FEMA director, with the memorable sentence, “Brownie, you’re doing a heckuva job.” The people of New Orleans, who had been waiting desperately for aid, had a different, and far more negative view. Brown resigned shortly thereafter.” [US News & World Report, 10/31/12]

        “Seven years after a disastrous response to Hurricane Katrina, the Federal Emergency Management Agency is winning praise for how it’s dealing with Superstorm Sandy.

        “This is the all-new FEMA, and the leadership is very, very good, very focused,” said Dr. Irwin Redlener, a pediatrician and director of the National Center for Disaster Preparedness at Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health. “They’re doing an excellent job.”

        New Jersey’s Chris Christie — a Republican whose state bore the brunt of the storm — told CBS News on Tuesday that “cooperation has been great with FEMA here on the ground,” while Delaware’s Jack Markell — a Democrat — told CNN that people in his state have been “really, really impressed by the response of FEMA.” [CNN, 11/2/12]

        And on and on, it’s a loosing battle. As I said, the response wasn’t perfect. There were holes and not everyone was as organized as they should be, but to compare the response to Sandy to that of Katrina …… now who’s talking high.

        • Deerinwater

          Kinetic says,”“In contrast, President George W. Bush and his administration seemed slow off the mark in their response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005. The powerful storm hit the Gulf Coast and New Orleans while Bush was on vacation at his Texas ranch, and his aides initially didn’t keep him fully informed about the devastation and misery Katrina was causing.
          By the time he found out — in a report by a senior aide — he already looked out of touch. He belatedly cut short his vacation”

          Well, I thought W was getting a bad rap of sorts, as Presidents don’t control the weather nor should we deffer personal judgement and responsibility and place in the lap of one man that heads the Federal government.

          But then too, ~ that said, ~ The recent changing of leadership of FEMA to a newly established arm of government and who was elected to serve as head leadership of FEMA does fall into the presidents lap. Not to mention the fact, that the states Nation Guard was stretched very thin having been employed by this same president to fight as line soldiers on foreign soil, a task they had never been organized to do.

          It was a bad deal all the way around for everyone. ~ Did the citizens of New Orleans learn something? I suspect so, while it is most clear that Chiss Criste and Obama certainly did and used this knowledge well and it serve not only them but the government and all people in their charge.

          And just a mention here, ~ Texans, as far north as Dallas, keep their nose to the wind during hurricane season. ~ These events has a way of displacing friends and family and our hearts and prayers are needed not mention drastically shifting our own weather pattern.

          • Jeff

            Nothing in the government works particularly well when someone opposed to the very idea of government is in charge. Bush put lackeys and unqualified people in charge of FEMA. To him, it was just a patronage job. That’s how we got “Brownie” as head of FEMA instead of Ambassador to Fiji. Democrats believe in government and take agencies like FEMA seriously. The President’s personal attention can help, of course, but the real trick is having competent professionals in the right positions.

            When we embarked on the Iraq misadventure, I knew it would not go well. How many military missions have succeeded when led by a Chimp? [The difference between W and Obama is that W earned the chimp comparison with his idiotic statements and actions. When right wingers have used it against Obama, it's based on nothing but old, antiquated racial bigotry.]

      • Kinetic1

        Tony?
        Tony, are you back with us? You do understand that your second link had nothing to do with our discussion, right? US aid to Egypt, which has been going on for 30 years has little to do with how FEMA handled hurricane Sandy. Neither does it have anything to do with the election results, the gulf oil spill or Chip’s comments about the budget talks. But hey, you just keep communicating until the effects wear off. We’re here for ya!

      • Flashy

        Tony…I wouldn’t go around citing FOX McNews if i were you. Seems they have a rep … a not good rep..

        http://m.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2012/12/04/five-lessons-from-fox-news-roger-ailes-david-petraeus-conspiracy/

  • Newspooner

    Get the US out of the UN, and get the UN out of the US. Otherwise, all liberty will be lost.

    • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

      I agree newspooner the UN is not made up of the same people it was founded with , they are haters of the USA so why be a part of that ?

      • Motov

        probably hate us for being the global cop. How many “wars” (police actions, etc) were fought “for our freedoms” since WW2? How many were necessary? Is it any wonder why we get despised?

        • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

          Motov consider this , all these conflicts that our foreign policy has been engaged in was to appease the federal Reserves Dollar Dominance in pricing as the worlds trade currency Oil , and then the Industrial development of the BRICS all in the name of Keeping the Custodians of Our Dollar in a position of profits , and today we see them conning all these past Presidents of Our time with the same policy to the point that now they are hanging this position of power on every tax payer and the devaluing trend of this debt was set into motion 100 years ago next Month , so considering the dollar cannot demand a Saving rate in Our Country any higher than 3/4 of a % I would say they have done a fantastic Job of Destroying our Nation while we worked our 40 hour weeks right into the ground !!!!

      • Newspooner

        Actually, the people who founded the UN represented two categories: the pie-in-the-sky idealists who thought that they were doing something good in “working for peace” (i.e. most of the US Senators who voted to ratify the founding treaty), and those who were working from the beginning to advance the cause of communism. Among this second group was “our” man, Alger Hiss, who was the most communistic person I have ever met. He and other traitors were instrumental in establishing the UN because they knew exactly what it would do and become. It was a conspiracy from the beginning. Our Constitution is based on the premise that rights naturally exist, while the UN Charter is based on the premise that rights come from government. That is the crux of the problem.

  • http://momathomeblog.wordpress.com leemckee1

    I just recently subscribed to this site and when I did I was really interested because I thought it was a forum for freedom of speech about political issues.

    I have been following this feed this morning and realized I was dead wrong. While some are on here to do just that, it seems that the vast majority are here simply to insult and degrade others.

    First off, just because someone is in the lower tax bracket does not mean that they are on welfare, foodstamps, etc. My family survives on less than $10,000 per year — every dime of which is earned through hard work and taxed! We do not receive any type of assistance. Although, there is nothing wrong with doing so if necessary. The Lord put us here to help each other not step on each other, we are supposed to aide those who need it — not just look out for ourselves!

    As soon as I finish this this post, I am unsubscribing to this site and spamming any emails I get from it.

    You want to know what is truly wrong with this country — read these posts! We are too busy fighting about who should be on top that we are never going to get anywhere. The only way any improvement will ever be made in this country is if we all stop fighting amongst ourselves and start working together.

    • Deerinwater

      “I just recently subscribed to this site and when I did I was really interested because I thought it was a forum for freedom of speech about political issues.
      I have been following this feed this morning and realized I was dead wrong. While some are on here to do just that, it seems that the vast majority are here simply to insult and degrade others.”

      Well Sir/ Madam, I understand your desire to leave and go take a bath and wash the nasty off after being so close. I feel the same way sometimes.

      I have learned to view it as “mining” a dirty job , moving tons of dirt to uncover a few nugget that make it worth all the effort. It gets in your blood. We are a dirty bunch with few exceptions.

      But I ask you, how can you defend yourself from something that you know nothing about?

      I say , you can’t ~ and why you will find me mining here often.

  • http://www.facebook.com/delbert.gue Delbert Gue

    This is no way a president should work to assure solvency. He has become a dictator, in essence demanding his way only. That is a sure sign of how he intends to not work with all representatives to congress. Consequently, he should be removed from office thru impeachment for not following his oath of office as well as his involvement in the Benghazi and Fast & Furious scandals. He is an embarrassment to the office he rules from. He has become a clear and present danger to our republic and unless the people wake up, our elected representatives start caring more about the country and less about their jobs, we will wake up one day in a fascist regieme where everyone fears the government. Time to refresh the tree of liberty or be prepared to suffer the consequences. IMPEACH Obama now!

    • http://Yahoo JD

      Your so right. Are we ALL forgetting, The Presadent of the United States, is representing America and her citizens. ALL her citizens. This man has, from very begining of his career,been a divider, and as Pres. is only concerned with the Demo”s. In fact, the far,left Progressive socialist type Demo. He is blatent about it. Last I believed, Demo’s and Repubs. are American citizens who love this country. Stop being just blind to Party, Lets start caring about each other, and take the best Both sides have to offer, for country.(us) Not for the polititions. Their just riding the gravy train, and ego trip till they retire.

      • Motov

        Actually they are owned by those !% people, They are in a very exclusive club, they call the shots. Kinda like the tv show called “The Outer Limits” when they took over control of your tv. They spoon feed us faulty information to get us to think as we do, while they quietly take whatever they want. Bigger Government means less freedom for all of us.
        They have been building ways to monitor our every move, hence all of the “security” camera’s that have sprung up, GPS systems to monitor where we go. We have been reduced to being just a number, while the elite push buttons to control our every move.

  • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

    will this be a trend that sweeps us into a dictatorship ??? http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20121207/OPINION03/212070365/State-laying-groundwork-managed-bankruptcy-Detroit?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

  • chuckb

    delbert gue, this administration has built an army of entitlement people along with illegal immigrants and the only way things can be changed is outright rebellion. the people behind barry are the ones to fear, he is nothing more than a mouthpiece for the bolsheviks, who use him as a propaganda tool, they furnish him with a kings lavish lifestyle he in turn uses his voice and the teleprompter to euthanize the dim witted mass.
    our country is in greater danger of collapsing than at any time in history. barry and company want tax increases to feed the pawns, either way it is a matter of time before the economy crashes. unless people put a stop to the bolshevik party, soviet russia of 1917 will look like a boy scout convention compared to us.

  • ONTIME

    I cannot believe that this Fraud in the WH is allowed to stay in office because of the cowardice of those we elected to serve in office to protect the oath they took.

    The Fraud is now doubling down in a move to try and intimidate and destroy the R side of the aisle, as if he has a right to voice his disfavor of their objections when he and his cronies have put forth no plan, addressed no oversight and reduce NO taxes as they claim. It is not compromise but being compromised by a criminal that is the fate of the R’s should they not act like adults and show spine enough to make the taxpayers aware on just how ridiculous this kind of residistribution action will imperil all americans regardless of status… the entire premise is another scam by the deemers to control and steal for years to come….if you like being sucker punched the sit on your hands, that’s how the SOB got in office.

    • Jeff

      No, there was no sucker punch. Obama won because people heard his opponents, like you, speak and experienced revulsion at the policies and attitudes expressed. All I can say is KEEP TALKING!

      • Deerinwater

        No doubt, there is much that you can’t believe. ~ So what must be done to correct this belief problem? ~ Change the world or change your beliefs?

  • Wyatt

    As a people , we must urge our legislators to tell Barry and the Democrats ‘ No Way’ ! Washington has to cut their spending and pass a budget . Congress has submitted budgets to the Senate for approval each year Obama has been in office yet Harry Reid and his pals have not voted on it as it does not meet the commander and thief’s approval , ie : it wasn’t enough and what he asked for .
    To those who say Barry O won , I say he stole the election . One only has to look at some of the many illregularities that have been shown . Obama has only one objective , destroy America and get rich while doing it . With so many Democrats supporting higher tax’s on the rich , and seeing that most of the Democrats who make up the rich , one asks the question , why would they support the government taking so much more of their money ? I have to suspect that they will not be paying very much in taxes at all . So if anyone cares to experience revulsion , there it is . Policies and attitudes expressed by the left are nothing but communistic in nature fed by a ego maniac who sits in the White House destroying America . All should be arrested and put on trial for treason

    • Jeff

      One could “engage” you in conversation or one could more profitably debate a tree. No fact can get into your head and no result of which you don’t approve can be legitimate. You are essentially not a rational person to be engaged. Thank you for your input.

    • Deerinwater

      Wyatt, spending is been cut ~ that is not what this thread is about ~ but about the few knot heads that want to defend the top 2% earner in our country.

      Like the top 2% are seen as somehow unable or incapable of defend themselves and they require some poor knot heads help!

      The same silly people that believe that somehow God requires defending and it’s their job to do it!

      I’m not quite sure of just how useful a God might be that cannot defend himself, but their mind is made up about this need to defend God none the less.

  • chuckb

    wyatt, barry won, he won because the majority of these little bolsheviks don’t have a clue what’s going on. raising the tax on the so called rich, is raising tax on small business throughout the country. this in turn will add to the jobless list. the nancy pelosi’s, kerry and george soros types are not efffected by this, their money is safely stored in the caymans or where it can’t be touched.

  • http://tlgeer.wordpress.com tlgeer

    “No more coming back to Congress, hat in hand, to increase the limit on how much money our bankrupt Federal government can borrow.”

    There is no valid reason for doing so. Once Congress passes a spending bill, and the President signs it, we (the USA) are legally obligated to pay for it. We do NOT have the right to NOT pay for it.

    • Frank Kahn

      You really dont have a clue do you. Keep up with the legal obligation to pay debts by our government (taxpayers), it is not the point here and never was.

      Sure, we legally have to pay the debts forced on us, but that does not mean we have to keep using debit spending to incur those debts.

      Increasing the debt limit only allows the government to BORROW more money that WE cant afford to pay back. Giving the president the POWER to indiscriminately increase the limit is not only wrong, it is extremely dangerous. Might even call it stupid.

      If you have a credit card, does the company issuing the card let you tell them to increase your cards limit? If you run out of money, and your credit card is maxed out, do you get another credit card to use for purchases? If you cant afford to pay your bills (credit card included) do you get another credit card to pay them with?

      Do you not see the stupidity of this credit cycle?

      • http://tlgeer.wordpress.com tlgeer

        “Increasing the debt limit only allows the government to BORROW more money that WE cant afford to pay back. Giving the president the POWER to indiscriminately increase the limit is not only wrong, it is extremely dangerous. Might even call it stupid.”

        No, increasing the debt ceiling allows the Government to issue bonds in order to pay for legal obligations that Congress has already approved of.

        You want spending to slow down? Talk to Congress. They are the ONLY ones that can pass funding bills or a budget. The President can choose to sign them when they come across his desk, but ONLY Congress can write and pass them.

        • Frank Kahn

          First you are arguing semantics here, the bonds that the government issues is a form of borrowing against future payment.

          Second, my statement on the debt ceiling is 100% accurate and yours is woefully wrong.

          Consider this, as a hypothetical statement because I wont attempt to use the actual numbers.

          The debt ceiling is 20 trillion dollars. We owe 19.5 trillion dollars. We now have a balanced budget that actually has a surplus.

          Question #1 – Why does the debt ceiling need to be raised?
          Question #2 – Why is this hypothetical scenario not true?
          Question #3 – If only congress can spend money, why is it the republicans fault?
          Question #4 – Who makes the budget proposal to Congress?
          Question #5 – If the president is the source of the budget, why does he want the power to raise the debt ceiling?

          Now, the only reason to want the debt ceiling to be raised is for the purpose of being allowed to borrow more money. The only reason they need to borrow more money is because they spend more than they get.

          Now, do you understand that it is a spending problem?
          Do you understand that raising the debt ceiling does in no way pay for anything with real money?
          Do you understand that the government never pays for anything?

          I agree that the government is legally obligated to pay what it owes (using our money), however, that does not mean they have a legal right to keep borrowing money from our descendants to pay for something they want.

          The bank wont let me borrow more money just because I cant pay what I already owe them. This is sound intelligent reasoning. If I cant pay my loan, I am not going to be able to pay for a new one either.

      • DaveH
    • DaveH

      TLGeer says — “Once Congress passes a spending bill, and the President signs it, we (the USA) are legally obligated to pay for it. We do NOT have the right to NOT pay for it”.
      You’re wrong, TLGeer. Congress does not have a Legal Right to bind future Congresses.
      They also do not have a Moral Right to bind future generations of taxpayers, who didn’t even have an opportunity to vote in such matter.
      Moral people would not even think of trying to bind future generations with their debts.
      Moral people would not even think of forcing others to pay for things the moral people want, by majority vote or otherwise.
      Moral people would not be Progressives.
      TLGeer is a staunch member of the Society of Criminals:
      http://mises.org/daily/4125

  • http://Yahoo JD

    FREEDOM !!!!!!!!. YOUR ALL PISSING IT AWAY !!!

  • Donna chapman

    Why are the republican stressing that they are trying to keep bush tax cut so taxes would not go up.? Obama had 4years to do something to not go over fiscal cliff and work with GOP and he refused. And he is blaming GOP. Well I blame Obama and the Democrats. Why do the American not see that. Democrats had first two years in both house and senate controlled by democrats and they did nothing but put us in debt and higher taxes.

  • Jimbo

    I still think he is the Anti-Christ. Or at least a Muslim extremist pretending to be a Christian. Either way, he is doing his best to destroy our nation.

    • nc

      Jimbo. you are so RIGHT(not correct just RIGHT as in extreme) that Obama is the antichrist and a Muslim out to destroy this nation! I could tell that when he gave the order to “Off” bin laden! Couldn’t you??

  • http://gravatar.com/bychoosing WTS/JAY

    The American’s for Tax Reform Foundation’s Cost of Government Day Report is a mindbender. Amongst the data it crunches, it finds that …the average American must work 230 days, or 63% of the year, to pay for the full cost of government.

    It essentially means that 63% of your labor output belongs not to you and the loved ones you care for, but to Washington.

    Here’s how it breaks down:

    Federal spending: The average American worker has to labor for 104 days just to pay for federal spending, which consumes 28.6% of national income.

    That compares to 90 days in 2008, a 15.5% increase. The chief increase in costs were the bailouts of the financial crisis. The bailouts cost the average American 14 days of worth of work to pay for them.

    State and local spending: This is also costing us all, big time. In 2010 the average American had to work 52 days just to pay for state and local government expenditures.

    That’s up from 42.5 days in 1999. A whopping 22.3% increase in costs.

    The regulatory costs of the federal government: Another shocker ― the average American worker must labor 48 days just to cover the costs of federal regulations.

    And then there’s …

    Another 26 days you must toil to pay the costs of state and local regulations.

    63 out of every 100 hours you work is to pay for government.

    You get to keep only 37% of your labor.

    • Right Brain Thinker

      Uh, Jay—–I’m seeing some apples and oranges in the basket here, and perhaps some things pulled out from other things and counted twice. Would you care to give us a source so I can look at your data and decide whether we’re on the same side? (or are you just trying to stir up the JYD and therefore what it SOUNDS like is therefore more important than whether it’s true?)

  • Right Brain Thinker

    DaveH—-I MADE A COMMENT TO YOU AND ABOUT YOU WAY BACK IN THE THREAD.

    MAYBE 1/3 OR A LITTLE MORE OF THE WAY FROM THE BEGINNING.

    GO FIND IT, READ IT, AND THEN TELL ME I’M A LIZARD BRAIN.

  • chuckb

    give barry what he wants, let the country go further upside down. that’s the only way out of this mess. if we continue with the band aid fix it will be a slow death. let’s get it over with and change this government, get rid of the bolsheviks and send 30 million illegals back to where they belong, that’s what is causing our demise along with 47 million on the government teat.

  • King of Diams

    I have a few questions for most of those who make multiple conflicting comments, notwithstanding the fact that their errors as pointed out by directs quotations from the Constitution, which they claim to honor and respect, According to most of the comments that are made the President is downright stupid (“mullah”, “Kenyan”, “Black”, etc., etc.) and devoid of sufficient knowledge, skills and ability to run the country. If, in fact, you do believe your own outrageous comments; how is it possible that such a person have the knowledge, skill, ability, and POWER, to alter the Country, Constitution and the entire world? Why does he have the power to place restraints on, and impose his will upon a Congress that, according to the Constitution, have the POWER to place restraints on him? WHY DON’T YOU ASK YOUR REPRESENTATIVES IN THE SENATE AND HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES how such could be? Especially since THEY control, or, according to the Constitution, suppose to control, THE MONEY!

  • chuckb

    king of diams, barry soetoro is nothing more than a street con controlled by communist jews, you do note that he spends the greatest part of his time behind the teleprompter, quoting what is printed for him to say and when the teleprompter is removed he is hard pressed to speak with knowledge.
    have you seen him negotiate with the congress? no, well that is why, he is directed by unseen people and the negotiations are never shown live. and what part of the world does he alter? benghazi? the arizona border? palestine? afghanistan? if you look hard he is a failure in almost every instant.
    “he does control the entertainment in the white house and what direction air force one flies”
    please tell me what accomplishment he has made as president other than keeping the borders open for illegitimate voters, running guns toi the drug cartel “fast & furious. destroying the best healthcare system in the world and he has run the country into more debt than any other president in history.
    we have a weak congress and they are afraid to confront this man, mostly because he is black. if he were white, impeachment proceedings would already be on the agenda.
    he was reelected by a society more interested in entitlements than saving their country.

    • Jeff

      “king of diams, barry soetoro is nothing more than a street con controlled by communist jews”

      So, Chuckie, your therapist finally “convinced” you to come out of the closet and do the full monte of bigotry. Here’s a clue: you will never convince anyone with an IQ above room temperature of anything once you reveal yourself as an old-fashioned, paranoid, southern bigot. Keep talking. I could use a good laugh.

      • chuckb

        jeffie, hope you don’t mind me talking about your relatives, maybe i should say leninist communist, same difference, does that ruffle your feathers.

        • Jeff

          When one watches a monkey throw its own poop, one does not get angry. One simply points and laughs.

      • DaveH

        What next, Jeff? Are you going to flash us? Or moon us?
        Thanks for your many childish comments, Jeff, so the blindered readers can see what the Liberal Progressives, who want to run our lives, are really like.

        • Jeff

          So does that mean you agree with Chuckie’s comments about Jews, Dave? Could you be even creepier than first reports indicated?

      • Mike in MI

        jeffie, jeffie –
        I’d like to congratulate you on your expertise. You are certainly an adept at your “craft”.
        Of all the things of substance that chuckb posted – which really deserve some thoughtful consideration – you focus on things of no consequence, obviously to draw attention away from chuck’s salient points. What a great professional propagandist’s ploy.
        When your ruling spirit pushes the “propaganda” button in your brain do you take direct revelation or do you just work from written propaganda talking points? There’s a whole bunch of your sort on Bob’s site that use all the old “double think”, half truths, word parsing, out-right lies, instigating divisions and other (there’s “no new thing under the sun”) tricks used by the Devil’s agents where ever they are seen at work in Biblical records.
        chuckb is right: Obama’s a con, just a dirt-bag ghetto con. I’ll bet you’ve got about five different knock-off “Seiko” watches on each arm that he’s sold you. Don’t you?
        Just because you do your valuable service for them, like this. do you think they’re going to help you when they pull the rug out? Good luck on that one.

        • Jeff

          All I can say is if you agree with or condone Chuckie’s open bigotry, the two of you deserve each other.

      • DaveH

        Jeff says — “So does that mean you agree with Chuckie’s comments about Jews, Dave? Could you be even creepier than first reports indicated?”.
        Did I say that, Jeff? Who’s creepier, the man who wants people to be able to control their own bodies and property, or the man who behaves like a child while he busily minds everybody else’s business? That includes putting words in peoples’ mouths.

        But please, Jeff, don’t let me deter you from posting because you are doing me a huge favor by coming out and letting people know what kind of people you Liberal Progressives really are.
        “Compassionate” is the last thing that comes to my mind.

  • Deerinwater

    LOL! “Barack Obama’s Phony Mandate”

    Where anyone wishes to see it that way or not is irrelevant at this point and so too is any need to defend Obama. He has secured another 4 year term and made gains in both houses. Any whining, crying and protesting will not change that fact while the Tea Party and the GOP are acting like they have been hit by a bus with tongues a wagging and fingers a pointing.

    Senator Jim Dement has decided that he no longer wants the job entrusted to him and his efforts best served elsewhere. For the first time, I tend to agree with him. May the Carolins be blessed and he welcomed back home..

    May I suggest that we each do some soul searching of our own for I do not think it wise to have a one party system while today the GOP does everything in it’s power to make the party irrelevant as it polarizes and divides itself from the rest of Americans along racial and social economic lines as it makes claims it’s not engaging in class warfare or social engineering.

    For “this” current GOP to claim any notions of a majority will require more screwing, having and educating more babies while curtailing this steady flow of new immigrants which means the Statue of Liberty needs to be disassembled and stored away somewhere.

    I did my tour of duty wearing a soldiers and father’s hat, limiting out at four with two bronze stars and one oak-leaf cluster and there will be no more, so someones else needs to pickup the slack, being semi-retired from both and 18 holes of golf now suits me fine.

    • http://wildeyguns.com The Christian American

      In the 70′s I worked for Sweden’s National Defense Werks, Forenade Fabriksverken. While their Iwas riding and talking to a Colonel about politics. Sweden is known for being a involuntary socialist state. He informed that less than 1/3 of the Swedes are socialist. The problem was, there was one socialist/communist party and eleven conservative parties all vying to be the one that saved Sweden. Every election the socialist party won out because they had a majority. America today mirrors Sweden. If all the parties leaning toward the conservative philosophy were to get together, they could easily rid America of the involuntary socialist blights that’s ruling America now. Republican Party, Tea Partiers, Libertarians, Constitutionalist and all the other state parties. The socialist know that and are laughing, and ruling

      • Deerinwater

        Interesting, sounds like a headgame of the highest order. I have never heard that before. What few Finns and Swed’s I’ve been around are few while they struck me odd, while highly opinionated in certain ways not clearly defined.

      • DaveH

        Actually Christian, Sweden is above average in Europe for Economic Freedom:
        http://heritage.org/index/country/sweden

        Socialism is negatively productive, so the wise Democratic Socialist Leaders know that they can only pursue that amount of Socialism that can be supported by the Capitalist portion of their society.

  • tom

    They keep your focus on the fiscal cliff and increasing spending to solve this problem. In reality here is another analogy ; Your on a boat and you’re taking on water , Hussein says , I know how to fix this , let’s make the hole bigger to keep us from sinking ! Brilliant master mind if your insane !!!

  • tom

    Ps. The water is the debt , the boat is America , stopping the water is stopping the spending , taxing the rich is putting a bigger hole in the hull of the boat ! You still sink ! This “is” Husseins’ plan from day “1″ ! The change ? Mirror image America to third world countries ! You don’t have to believe me , it “will” prove I’m right by the end of this 4 yrs.

    • http://wildeyguns.com The Christian American

      Lest people for get, we still have a congress. If the people install a good congress it can stop Obama in his tracks. All eyes should be on congress, not the would be Emperor. He is going to whatever he wants regardless what we say or do. He was installed like a Cauligula: If I am man, my subjects must be something else. If they are men, then I must be something more. God fearing people must remember, Christ is returning to Earth in all His power and splendor. Satan and his legions will be confronted by an unbeatable force, the power of God. This is where the world is heading. Read and believe John 3:16. There’s not only hope but a magnificent future for all eternity for those who believe.

      • Newspooner

        Excellent words of wisdom. Always vote for the candidates who truly favor lower taxes, less government, and more individual freedom. Getting good people elected to Congress is our only hope of saving liberty and our great nation. We must work hard to develop an informed electorate. “Low Information Voters” are doing much harm at the Ballot Box. Get the US out of the UN, and get the UN out of the US. Otherwise, all liberty will be lost.

  • Newspooner

    Speaking of mandates, there is a new proposed Constitutional Amendment, presently called “The Mandate Amendment” which reads: “Congress shall make no law mandating the purchase of any product or service from a private company.” Check out the new website being developed: http://www.MandateAmendment.com

    • Mike in MI

      Newspooner –
      So, if it becomes an Amendment all of Obama’s businesses will be classified “Government Sponsored Enterprises” – like Fannie and Freddie. Just another classical Fascistic con. But, we’ll still end up required to buy his crap. Just like we have to eat it, now.

      • Newspooner

        That is why future plans include a followup Amendment to address that kind of definitional subterfuge. The plan is to start with something that even the nitwit functinalists must agree with or else look like the hypocrites that they are.

  • chuckb

    i doubt very much if our political problems can be solved thru peaceful negotiations, the bolshevik party has all the power, and we have a very weak congress trying to pass any kind of amendment will fail.
    the education system has indoctrinated the young since the sixties leading to this progressive takeover (communist) they have the media as their tool and if you think for one minute they will make any attempt to change this course, forget it.
    we had one chance to cancel obamacare and thanks to chief justice roberts, they won.
    there’s only one way out of this mess before the country is completely destroyed, stop the entitlements to illegals, install voter id, remove the teachers unions and clean out the education system from top to bottom, we have few educators as it is, most are political organizers like barry,
    start a new party, one that has the interest of the country not their reelection.
    just as a case in point, check out detroit, there is an example of what every city is going to look like if we do not stop the 47%’ers.

    • Jeff

      Congratulations. You sound exactly like a Hitler voter circa 1932. Unfortunately one too stupid to learn from his forebear’s errors.

      • chuckb

        jeffie’ it seems to me like hitler was right in putting a stop to communism, unfortunately he took the wrong cure for the problem. we can see the marxist are doing here what they tried to do in germany. and with the support of people like you are succeeding for the time being.
        there will be an uprising in the future, if the black messiah doesn’t get the stimulus money to feed his pawns it’s all over, when the government leeches lose their teat that’s when the trouble will start. even if he gets some, it won’t be enough.
        you obviously are an orgasm from the sixties so get out your peace signs and braid your maggot infested hair, sing kumbaya

        • Jeff

          Chuck, face it. You’re a very sick man. Loose talk about sweeping out all the bums in the Weimar Republic and longing for a mythic simpler time with a strong patriotic leader is what lead to disaster in Germany and elsewhere (Italy). It is simply unacceptable to say Hitler was right on X, but he went too far. It was all of a piece, and everything he wanted to do was written in Mein Kampf. Of course, people like you couldn’t be bothered to read and even if you had, you’d have agreed with him about the Jews. The system Hitler swept away was a democratic system, not Communism.

      • Newspooner

        Actually, Hitler was a type of communist, just that his style was a bit different than Stalin’s and was given a different name. The fascist brand of communism runs the economic system somewhat differently from the bolshevik brand, but it amounts to essentially the same thing. The whole issue is the size and scope of government. You either have limited government or you have unlimited government.

        Here in America, the bad guys have been developing and trial floating several new brands of communism, most prominently corporatism. They will move whichever one seems to be doing best for them to the top of the plan and claim not to be communists because they are “opposing” the other brands. “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me many times, freedom ends.”

        Get the US out of the UN, and get the UN out of the US. Otherwise, all liberty will be lost.

      • DaveH

        For those who would like to be less ignorant than the rabid Jeff:
        http://mises.org/daily/1937

        • Jeff

          Dave:

          I wasn’t talking about your arcane definitions and whether Hitler was of the left or the right. He appeared to be of the right as opposed to the left because he did not set up a Party capable of surviving him as did Lenin, Mao, and others. But what I was talking about was Chuckie’s loose talk about sweeping out those elected and putting in a strong man who would do what he wants. It sounded to me like the kind of people who voted for Hitler and Mussolini, longing for an earlier, simpler time. The exact opposite of socialism.

      • chuckb

        jeffie, think what you may, communism really got it’s star
        in germany with karl marx, hitler was neither, he was a right wing dictator, he deplored socialism/communism. when he came into power it was a fight with the red shirts (communist) they were mostly jewish and the jews in germany controlled the country. they in a sense caused the rise of hitler due to their stranglehold on the german economy.
        a lot of hitlers programs turned into a socialist like movement, however, hitler was cathoplic and historians claim he strayed away after he came into power, this is a matter of debate. the jews in this country have rewritten history on hitler so it’s really hard to believe a lot of what is said. we will never know for sure.
        when hitler recovered the land lost in the treaty of versalles he offered to stop his march thru europe, the allies including roosevelt refused his offer, his goal at the time was communist russia. that’s when the second world war began to take root.
        of course the communist jews will never let go of what hitler did to them, that’s why we are bombarded with ww2 movies depicting the destruction of jews, they claimed at first six million were destroyed in the camps, then it went to three million, they sued the entire world including us for their misfortune, one of your heroes, the movie producer spielberg got a share of the lawsuits.
        this was a terrible thing to happen to any race, however, hitler did not tortue and kill every jew in germany, some were allowed to leave, if they were communist they got a one way ticket to a labor camp where most of the three million were worked to death thru starvation and disease.
        we lost hundreds of thousands of our troops freeing these people and i have yet to see the jews offer the surviving american families who lost their family members in europe during the war, one cent of the money they claimed were owed them due to their suffering.
        i had the experience of talking to some of the labor camp survivors (jewish) in la havre france in 1945, they said little about the ovens, a lot about hunger and sickness.

        little is said about the hundreds of thousands german people, women and children we killed in the bombing raids of the german cities.
        the communist have blood on their hands as well as hitler.

        also little is said about stalin and the millions of people he caused to die, hitler pales in that regard. the communist jews were prominent in his dictatorship.
        communism/socialism is a disease with no cure.

      • DaveH

        As usual, Jeff, you’re clutching for straws. The thing that makes a tyrant a tyrant is their conscienceless actions of Force against other people. That is exactly what you Liberal Progressives and Socialists (which is what Hitler was despite your vain denials) do, Jeff — Force your way on other people. But you hide behind the Government while they do your dirty work, somehow thinking like Pontius Pilate that washing your hands of the physical deed absolves you from culpability. Dream on, Jeff. No matter how hard you wash, you are just a common thief.

        • Jeff

          Creepy Bastard:

          You’re back in full insult mode, I see. Did you listen to Adolph in the original Austrian last night or what? Your creepiness factor is even higher than normal. Maybe you and Chuckie can discuss how the Jewish Commies holding the leash on Obama are ruining your perfect market economy. Chuck will agree with every idiotic thing you say. Let’s continue to have Depressions every 10-20 years. Who cares about the poor anyway? Certainly not Dave and Chuck. If von Mises came back, the first thing he’d do would be to eliminate you as his spokesman.

    • Smithkowitz

      Right on ChuckB:

      “start a new party, one that has the interest of the country not their reelection”

      We have 3 years to build it. Between now and then, there needs to be candidates lined up for major positions in the power states (CA, TX, IL, OH, PA, NY, FL) plus some other influential places like (MA, NC, VA, GA, MI, MO, CO, AZ, WA), we need State Senators, US Senators, Governors and Mayors of main cities in these states. We need to get as many people in offices between the next mid term election and the next presidential election as possible. It’s time to wake up the USA, before we sink into the darkness.

      • Newspooner

        I suggest that you get involved with the Libertarian Party or the Constitution Party. Each is creditable and would be far better than either the Democrats or Republicans. But, in any case, regardless of party, always support the candidates who truly advocate lower taxes, less government, and more individual freedom.

      • chuckb

        forget the existing parties, the libertarians have been branded, we need a new party one that can start new without any political history.

      • DaveH

        The Libertarians have been branded?
        You make no sense, chuckb.

      • DaveH

        The Libertarian Party is, far and away, the most Principled party of them all. There is no other party that even comes close to understanding Freedom the way our Founding Fathers understood it.
        To learn how we came to this point, read this great history of our country from the Discovery of the Americas to the American Revolution:
        http://library.mises.org/books/Murray%20N%20Rothbard/Conceived%20in%20Liberty_Vol_2.pdf

  • Smilee

    DaveH says:
    December 8, 2012 at 4:57 pm

    The first place to start would be anything that the Federal Government doesn’t have a Constitutional Power to address, such as the Department of Education.

    It is consttional and I defy you to point out where you think it is not

    But since Government doesn’t do anything as efficiently as the Private Sector,

    That’s not true either, Medicare efficiently is about 8% in overhead costs and private insurance plans have been mostly 25-40% in overhead costs but under Obamacare they will be required to keep it down to 15% in group plans and 20% in individual plans or refund the overcharge and Medicare has always had to over pre existing conditions and now under Obamacare all will have to while before they did not and being the private sector has to make a profit for their stockholders simple math says you cannot be as efficient as the public can be. And my experience the service from Medicare is superior to when I had private plans. These are all verifiable facts Davy and out there for your viewing if you are interested in the truth.

    • DaveH

      Apparently Sleepee thinks, like most Liberal Progressives, that if he repeats a lie over and over again it becomes the truth.

      • Smilee

        Again you make no effort to refute what i have said just call it a lie because you simply cannot admit your wrong when you are wrong and you are wrong and I have proved your wrong, repeat I said Judge Roberts on Obama care wrote the majority opinion and that was the reason it was constitutional and he actually did write it and you want us to believe you know better that the court. Have you even read this decision or any other on Article I, Section 8 paragraph one as if you read the Obamacare decision that would make you deal with the fact you have been wrong and little davy could never admit the truth about that, in fact I do not think you have any desire to know the truth as you cannot handle the truth as you would then have to admit you were wrong and your to much in denial to do that as I said you are a poor excuse for a human being dishonest people usually are

      • Mike in MI

        Hay Smilers -
        Get your hand off that truth and zip your pants.

      • DaveH

        I refuted it the first time you made the same comment, Sleepee. Now take some no-doze and come up with some new material.

        • Smilee

          Another stupid idiotic statement from davy, that is becoming so typical for you

      • DaveH

        Sleepee says — “I said you are a poor excuse for a human being dishonest people usually are”.
        That’s a laugh riot coming from a Liberal Progressive who thinks everybody’s pockets are his own. What’s it feel like, Sleepee, to be just a common thief? In the end, when money no longer matters, all you will have left is the struggle to lie to yourself and try to convince yourself that you’re a good man. Good luck with that.

        • Smilee

          Nothing you said is true it is just your opinion based on false information, I just feel bad you feel you have make these idiotic posts for what ever reason I do not know but it sure shows your lack of character

    • Mike in MI

      GAWLEE, SAUAWRGE, Saonds lak Smaillee’s goat’er awl fingered aout.
      Can’t fight that kind ‘a lawrgic.
      Efficiency and public sector saving potential is the by-word with you, eh? Well, dam-sam, that sucker’s gonna save us a bunch when it’s already CBNO’ed at TRIPLE the asking price and it AIN’T EVEN OPERATIN’ under a full head yet.
      HOW’S ABOUT A LITTLE HEAD, EH, Smilers?

  • Newspooner

    Have you read the Constitution? Neither education nor “healthcare” is provided for as something for the federal government to legislate. Also, pay close attention to the Tenth Amendment. Ronald Reagan fully agreed about this and promised me that he would get rid of the Dept. of Education. He did not fulfill his promise, probably because he was thwarted by evil people like Henry Kissinger and the fools who morphed into the Neocons.

    • Newspooner

      This comment was addressed to “Smilee”.

      • Smilee

        Newspooner commented on Barack Obama’s Phony Mandate.

        Have you read the Constitution? Neither education nor “healthcare” is provided for as something for the federal government to legislate. Also, pay close attention to the Tenth Amendment. Ronald Reagan fully agreed about this and promised me that he would get rid of the Dept. of Education. He did not fulfill his promise, probably because he was thwarted by evil people like Henry Kissinger and the fools who morphed into the Neocons.

        First you clearly do not understand the Constitution as the two examples you give are constitutional but that does not mean they are mandated by the constitution and by the same token Congress has the power under it to create them if they like and they have as the constitution gives them that power and choice, With healthcare, which is very recent decision of the court, finds Obamacare constitutional and in his majority opinion Roberts cites that Congress has the power to lay and collect taxes (and collecting money by any name is a tax) for the general welfare the same as the power it has to create defense and lay and collect taxes for it. See article 1, section eight, clause one, which is the one Roberts cited . The tenth amendment reinforces this in that if Congress has the constitutional power then the states do not. Reagan could not get rid of the education department as he could not sell congress on it so he failed to accomplish that. He could have challenged it in the courts to find it unconstitutional but he knew he would lose so he did not as he knew the tenth amendment did not apply on this case, Congress holds that power. Your position is the same as the far right rhetoric and that is all it is and that conflicts with the constitution on this.

      • DaveH

        Like anybody intelligent would expect a Federal Court to be unbiased about Federal Laws. Like expecting the Fox to guard the Hen House.
        What the Supreme Court says about the Constitution (and it was a 5-4) decision — Not exactly decisive — is meaningless. The Supreme Court was never given the Power to be the Final Arbiter of the Constitution. They just took that Power, and at the time were unopposed by the mostly ignorant population, so they got away with it.
        What IS meaningful is the actual Constitution which clearly Does Not give the Federal Government the Power to control education. And the “General Welfare Clause” was never intended to give the Federal Government unrestrained Powers. Here the Father of the Constitution — James Madison — argues against any such interpretation:
        http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa41.htm

        So who should we believe — Sleepee, who has a vested interest in promoting Liberal Progressive agendas, or James Madison who was the most instrumental man in the creation of the United States Constitution?

      • DaveH

        How many Liberal Progressives does it take to screw in a CFL lightbulb?
        Six.
        One to hold the lightbulb, two to turn the ladder, and three to file the environmental reports after they break the bulb.

        • Smilee

          Now I know your out of anything to say

      • Mike in MI

        Dave -
        You forgot the HazMat crew and the EPA monitor.

      • Newspooner

        With the number of irrational and seemingly uninformed comments to articles on this website increasing in recent months, I am convinced that there is a deliberate effort afoot to try to neutralize the common sense and factual documentation that is regularly provided by knowledgeable commentors like Dave H. It would not surprise me that hidden in the vast array of the federal bureaucracy’s agencies and offices are people whose job it is to read websites like PersonalLiberty.com and try to “debunk” the good information and constitutionally sound positions of the truly patriotic commentors. These debunking responses then appear are comments by other “ordingary readers” thus casting doubt into the minds of people who are reading the comments on articles to help themselves become better informed. And among the most annoying aspects of it is that if this subterfuge does indeed exist, we the taxpayers are getting stuck paying for it. Is this theory correct? Or is the real reason for the constitutional ignorance that is so prevalent in some commentors’ diatribes that our educational system has rotted to even a greater extent than I realize?

        Get the US out of the UN, and get the UN out of the US, Otherwise, all liberty will be lost.

    • http://tlgeer.wordpress.com tlgeer

      They are covered under the “general welfare” statement. And we have had public schools in this country for several hundred years. In fact, even before we were our own country, we had public schools.

  • chuckb

    dave h, when i said libertarians were branded, i meant there is a lot of people who have a negative view of the party and i don’t think they could draw enough people to form a larger libertarian party. personally i have nothing against the party i believe in pretty much everything they stand for.

    • DaveH

      That may be. But any party that represents Freedom is going to come under severe Propaganda attacks because the bottom line is that the people with the Power don’t want to lose that Power.
      There is no party with greater Principles than the Libertarian Party. It’s up to the people to shed the Propaganda Blinders that have been installed on them and do some studying.

  • DaveH

    Special thanks to Smilee and Jeff for exposing the Liberal Progressive Mindset (or lack of) to the average readers, many of whom used to associate the word Progressive with something good.

    • Newspooner

      See my comment posted on 12/10 at 9:34 AM. These two commentors whom you have cited are perfect examples of what I was referring to. Regular readers can surely identify a number of others who fit the bill. What do you think? Innocent uninformed victims of the rotted educational system and the Establishment Media? Or trojan horses? Or horses asses?

      Regardless of the answer, people should consider how truly “liberal” (in the real sense) it is that these people have a right to express themselves here! That isn’t always true on “liberal” venues and in public schools.

    • Jeff

      What’s been exposed here is the inflexibility of your formulaic thinking. All you can do is cite a libertarian article written by one dimensional zealots under the umbrella of an institute utilizing the name of Von Mises. Clearly, no first rate economist would write such drivel, and I’m sure von Mises is spinning in his grave. He was a scholar and his name has been adopted by polemicists and YOU. Real problems require real solutions and they’re not going to be arrived at by saying the whole federal government should go away because taxation is theft. You may get a few people on a site like this to agree with you, but in the wider world, yours will ALWAYS be a fringe belief.

      Now, see if you can write something that doesn’t contain a personal insult accusing me of receiving welfare or a government check. I don’t but that’s hardly the point. Millions of people disagree with you who are not such recipients.

      • Newspooner

        Can you show me even one Establishment article on economics that is better than even the worst Libertarian article on economics written by an established Libertarian author? Perhaps you need to read the book, “Why Government Doesn’t Work” by Harry Browne or the book “The Mainspring of Human Progress” by Henry Grady Weaver.

      • Newspooner

        If Ludwig von Mises is spinning in his grave it is because of the economic drivel that one hears on NPR or reads from Obama Administration officials, not because of articles written by Lew Rockwell and friends.

        • Jeff

          He lived long enough to witness the Depression, WWII, and the post-War boom fueled in part by Keynesianism. I don’t think at the end of his life he believed everything he did in the 1920s as Dave apparently does.

      • Newspooner

        After again reading your comments, I suspect that you can’t even correctly define inflation.

      • Newspooner

        Maybe I should have asked it directly as a question. How do you define inflation?

        • Jeff

          too much money chasing too few goods

  • Terry Bateman

    Cuts in government spending will not cause a recession. Cuts in corporate and
    consumer spending cause recessions. Government spending takes money from
    the private sector and taxpayers. The less the government spends, the more that
    taxpayers and business will spend and the economy will expand accordingly. The
    government should abolish the Pell grants and loan program for college students,
    and the entire farming support program. All other non SS/Medicare programs should
    be cut across the board 1% per year for the next decade. The economy would
    expand 5% or more yearly and increased tax revenues form the economic expansion
    would bring change the deficits into surpluses.

    • Lyndia

      Terry,
      I don’t know where you are from but I don’t think you will want to see the farm programs gone unless you are independently wealthy or you are on a welfare program! If the farm programs are taken away, the majority of the farmers will be forced out and farm products will be sky-high and out of reach for millions of people. This includes everything from vegetables, fruits, meats, eggs, milk, and even a loaf of bread, as well as our clothes on our backs! The small farmers will be gone and the bigger farms will be getting richer off of the increases in prices!! The middle class will be non-existent in a very short time.
      Taking away the education aids for students will basically have the same affect and it is the fault of the government that has caused the reliance of those programs since the government aids for the farmers were originally supposed to be a short term thing during the 60s’ hard times. Government kept extending & extending until farmers came to rely on it year after year!! The costs of farming/ranching kept rising as a result and the farmers/ranchers can no longer survive without that government funding!
      Cutting all of these government aids will eliminate the competition and only the wealthy will survive & prosper. The rest of us will be dependent on the soup lines!!
      The only students that will receive the education that will be required for most jobs except the waitresses/waiters, bellboys, & boxboys, etc, will be the wealthy….
      America will be pushed back to the early 1900s and prior and no longer will be the “country of opportunity”!!

      The only way that either of these programs should be eliminated without this happening is to “weine” them over a period of years so that these people do not have to lose everything in order to save a greedy, spendthrift government!

      One place to start eliminating ridiculous spending is by cutting the costs of politicians in our government…..start at the top levels and take away the congresses right to give themselves wage increases and senseless spending among them. limit terms in both houses to the 2 terms of 4 years as the president’s is and limit there “forever benefits & pensions”!!!!

      The worst thing this country could do is to lose the middleclass and become another country where the poorer people can have no hope of success for themselves and their families…becoming just another 3rd world country!!

      • edna.bowden@yahoo.com

        Impeach Obama before he totally destroys our great country. He is not a US citizen so why do we allow him to continue as The President? What is the matter America???

        • Jeff

          The problem is that too many citizens get their information from unbelievably unreliable sources. Dick Morris is not a credible source, and neither is Glenn Beck. Donald Trump is a narcissistic blowhard with no regard for the truth or intellectual honesty. If you continue to believe everything these con men tell you, you will always be upset about some imagined insult or controversy. And that is what they count on.

        • http://tlgeer.wordpress.com tlgeer

          ” He is not a US citizen so why do we allow him to continue as The President?”

          Nonsense. Of course he is a US Citizen. Both Hawaii and Arizona, along with about 7 State courts has affirmed that Obama in not only a US Citizen but that he is also a Natural Born Citizen.

          The only people that still insist that Obama is not a US Citizen are those that either have no idea what a valid bc consists of, or hates Obama so much that they are more than willing to suspend reality and choose to believe in whisper campaign, rumors and anything else that will confirm that their “feelings” are valid as opposed to facts and evidence that they are not.

          Grow up.

    • Jeff

      Just like under W. I think the ultimate irony will be if Bush and Rove go down in history as the two who killed the Republican Party. “The architect” and his dirty deeds, gay-bashing, and swift-boating have made the Republicans as popular as sour milk.

  • chuckb

    batemnan, please understand our country is run by a third world president and third world electorate.

    • http://tlgeer.wordpress.com tlgeer

      Interesting idea. Do you have any facts to back up what you stated?

      • Jeff

        You must be joking. Chuckie’s idea of a fact is something he heard from Rush. In Chuckie’s World, it is a fact that all Democrats are Bolsheviks, it is a fact Blacks and Jews are inferior to His Idiocy, and it is a fact Obama was placed in the White House to destroy America. Did I get it about right, Chuckie? Wouldn’t want to put words in that vile mouth of yours, would I?

  • chuckb

    jeffie, the most likely scenario will be the downfall of the united states at the hands of an ignorant black president controlled by a bunch of marxist jews. in four years they have denigrated the u.s. economy to the lowest level since the days of their idol, fdr. they used the black race as pawns, they rigged elections and opened our borders to the world, they controlled the media and financial institutions, they infiltrated the education system and lowered the standards to accommodate people who could not succeed, they created a welfare society and consequently now have a majority, by the way the teaching personnel came out of this same system. you might say something like what happened to the russians, huh, jefffie.

    • Jeff

      Dave, is Chuckie your kind of guy? If so, you’re welcome to him. I know how defensive you get when I mention his obvious bigotry, so I’ll just leave it to you and the Von Mises Quartet to sort out.

    • Jeff

      “you might say something like what happened to the russians, huh, jefffie.”

      You might say it if you’re an ignorant, bigoted S.O.B. Otherwise, I think you’d say something a bit more intelligent.

    • Newspooner

      Only a few of the people who control Obama are “Marxist Jews”. Most are from a wide variety of ethnicities. The desire to control and enslave the general population cuts across a very wide range of people. You should decry the motive and actions rather than any cultural backgrounds.

  • chuckb

    it wouldn’t make any difference, you haven’t the ability to understand, you are a product of the that same education system.

    • Jeff

      The one that teaches students to think logically and to write clearly using punctuation? Which system did you attend – The Jim Crow School of Bigotry?

  • chuckb

    as long as it irritates bolsheviks like you, who cares, you certainly don’t have any problem discerning my meaning. and what gives you the idea your writing is so masterful? however, the feminine style you use does give away your gender.

    • Jeff

      Chuckie, you can’t irritate anyone but your long-suffering wife and kids. Your stupidity amuses me. You are certainly consistent in that you are ALWAYS wrong.

      • Jeff

        Chuckie, you never fail to deliver the laughs. Please seek help before you hurt someone.

      • Jeff

        Insults? The bigot is concerned about insults? I may never stop laughing. The book I’m writing about the nuts on this cite – you may get the cover!

        • Frank Kahn

          Actually, Jeff, if you want to put “nuts” on the cover, you might consider yourself and a few other Obama lovers before chasing shadows.

          I consider Obama to be totally useless as a leader, I do not hate him, I do not loath him and I dont call him names.

          There are several different opinions on how things should be handled when it comes to foreign policy, the economy and race relations. I believe that Obama has totally failed in every one of these categories. I am not a racist so his color (whatever it is) has no bearing on my opinions. I dont think he is stupid, nor do I think our current economic problem is JUST his fault. I do, however, think that he is responsible for failing to improve the situation with his lack of control in spending and his intransigence in dealing with the opposition. He has, during his first term, promoted racial divisiveness in his words, actions and EO’s. He has lied many times, he blames Bush for everything and he only takes responsibility if something good happens.

          I dont watch Fox news, I dont watch any news, because I dont trust the efficacy of their reporting.

          I dont agree with much of what is said by radical extremists on either side of the issues. I believe that saying something WILL happen is WRONG, but saying that something is POSSIBLE is not out of the question.

          I consider that the LEFT (whatever that is) is wrong when they chant the mantra that making the 1% or the 2% pay their FAIR SHARE will solve the problems with the economy. The reason, simple math, the top 2% of the holders of wealth in this nation dont have enough money and assets to pay even 1 full year of the national budget. This means that the main problem is expenditures not revenues.

          I consider that the RIGHT (whatever that is) is wrong when they say that increasing the tax rate on the rich will hurt job creation. The process of job creation is much more complex than just having money, it is also having a viable product and a customer base to sell it to.

          I also believe that your use of derogatory statements is counter productive and misdirected. The people that say that Obama is totally evil are no more nut jobs that those that say he is a great leader. Those that say that everything Obama says is a lie are no more wrong than those that dont see all the lies that he has said. Those that say the rotten economy is Obama’s fault are no more ignorant than those that say it is all Bush’s fault. Those that say Obama is a Muslim are no more wrong than those that say he is a Christian.

          So it is, in fact, actually the radical extremists on both sides that are the nut jobs, not just those that dont agree with your brand of nut jobbing.

          Now, that is my opinion, it is open to debate and any facts are welcome. I Just dont agree to or accept name calling as a means of disputing my opinions.

          • Jeff

            Frank:

            You are referring to my “conversations” with Chuckie who has shown himself to be not simply anti-Obama like you but an active racist and anti-Semite. When called on his racist rants, he clumsily attempts to say he really meant to criticize the Bolsheviks, meaning the Democrats. As you can probably tell, I usually don’t take Chuck too seriously and consider his posts low comedy – like watching reruns of The Three Stooges.

            You have suggested both “extremes” are equally at fault. Well, I don’t think the Democrats are very extreme, while the Republicans have moved so far to the right, they have really ceased being a serious party. They control the House because of gerrymandering as Democrats received more votes than Republicans even in Congressional races. Pennsylvania is a perfect example. Obama won the state comfortably as did the Senate Democratic candidate. And Democrats got more votes for Congress than did Republicans. Nevertheless, Republicans “won” 13 of Pennsylvania’s 18 Congressional seats.

            While no politician or political party is above pure partisanship, the Democrats are essentially a fact-based party. Their positions are based on actual principles of math, science, social science, and economics while the Republicans seem to be retreating to the Bible as the source of their political philosophy. They deny evolution, global warming, and the most basic facts about science. How do you even pretend to make policy when a member of the Science Committee says the earth is 9,000 years old, people lived with dinosaurs, and evolution (even of antibiotics?) is “a lie from the pit of Hell”? Why do Republican politicians, even the doctors like Broun, need to pretend to be as stupid as Homer Simpson? Even Bobby Jindal has recognized that the Republicans have become “the stupid party.”

          • Frank Kahn

            Stupid is not a political association. In this you are as wrong as any other radical LEFT wing person.

            You did, in this last post, pose some very interesting and incorrect assumptions. We need to be cognizant of the myriad of evidence available to assess the possible truths of certain things. I am pasting a quote from your post that contains several questionable statements.

            “While no politician or political party is above pure partisanship, the Democrats are essentially a fact-based party. Their positions are based on actual principles of math, science, social science, and economics while the Republicans seem to be retreating to the Bible as the source of their political philosophy. They deny evolution, global warming, and the most basic facts about science. How do you even pretend to make policy when a member of the Science Committee says the earth is 9,000 years old, people lived with dinosaurs, and evolution (even of antibiotics?) is “a lie from the pit of Hell”?”

            Now, I will leave out the fact that the Democrats use lies and deception quite often in their portrayal of Republicans when debunking your first sentence. The Democrats use “FACTS” in a misleading and manipulative manner. This cannot and must not be confused with using “FACTS” to advance the whole truth of a situation. The use of HYPERBOLE is another way that Democrats distort the truth when stating FACTS. You even used it in this quote from your post.

            You fall into the trap of attributing the views of the FANATICAL EXTREMIST members of the party to the entire party. And you are somewhat of a hypocrite in this since you dont make the same correlation with the FANATICAL EXTREMISTS in the Democrats.

            You claim that the Democrats are essentially based in science and math. Well that might be true, however, economics is not either one, and social science is marginally science. On the subject of social science, it is arguable that the teachings of the Bible do contain a great deal of social science.

            Now for your specific claims about the GOP, and its beliefs in areas of “science”.

            The age of the earth is always a big question that science and theology disagree on. Some of the disparity can be attributed to religious people not reading and understanding the context of some passages. I.E. God created the Heavens and the Earth in 6 days (yes they all say 7 but God rested on the 7th day so he had already finished by then). What many fail to take into account is another passage that says, to God a day is as 1000 years and 1000 years as a day. This calls into question the correlation of Gods time and Humans time. If taken literally, it took God 6,000 years to perform his creation. That correlation is not necessarily accurate, it may have taken much longer so the age of the Earth is getting older and older according to the Bible.

            Although the Bible says God created everything, it does not say he did not create the ability of things to evolve. The fact that some things are obviously evolving in modern times proves this concept. However, it can be said that God is behind the evolution of everything.

            Humans and Dinosaurs coexisting? I have seen reports of ancient (thousands of years old) drawings showing men fighting massive animals. The reports also included pictures of those drawings. The animals in the drawings accurately depict what we now call dinosaurs. Now, I have not seen the original drawing so I am not an expert but, if the report is accurate then humans did coexist with dinosaurs.

            The, insane, argument about Global Warming is fostered by the EXTREMISTS on both sides of the subject. Global warming is a current trend, this is scientifically proven. The reason (cause) is debated even within the scientific community. Some say it is GREENHOUSE GASSES, and others say it is SUN SPOT ACTIVITY. There is good SCIENTIFIC research that supports both ideas so maybe it is BOTH. There has been some evidence recently that Mars is currently going through global warming along with Earth, this would bolster sun spot activity more than greenhouse gasses. So I have covered debunking of the EXTREME view of the RIGHT that it is not happening, now lets get to the EXTREME stance of the LEFT. Assuming that it is just caused by greenhouse gasses (not supportable in reality), we must look at the SCIENTIFIC FACTS about the nature and cause of GREENHOUSE gasses. Any reputable SCIENTIST will say that MAN MADE GREENHOUSE GASSES “CONTRIBUTE” (NOT CAUSE) global warming. This again is an undeniable FACT. The contribution of HUMAN CAUSED GREENHOUSE GASSES is a very small portion, compared with the total amount. So, when Democrats say that GLOBAL WARMING is caused by HUMANS, they are wrong. When they say that the majority of SCIENTISTS say the same thing, they are either lying or relying on a bad sampling of SCIENTISTS.

            I am not sure what you mean by basic facts of science so I might leave it alone other than to say that it is HYPERBOLE.

            Now, as to “RETREATING” to the Bible. Hmmmm, not sure that the word retreating is valid here, it is more like referring. Whenever there is a question of Morals, what better reference can you site? When did it become BAD to subscribe to the Christian values?

            Finally, the movement towards radical disposition. You state, incorrectly, that Democrats are not “very extreme”. Compared to what? You state, incorrectly, that “the Republicans have moved so far to the right, they have really ceased being a serious party”. Again, compared to what? If you have a stationary point of reference (the middle) which is only subjective on the positioning of the LEFT and RIGHT, one end of the spectrum can move substantially farther from center and by reference force the other end to also be farther from it. If you have three stationary points LEFT, RIGHT and MIDDLE, you have a better scale to judge by. If you then impose a subjective middle as the point between the two parties you get a skewed picture. Say the RIGHT is just a little right of MIDDLE, and the LEFT is also just a little left of MIDDLE. If the LEFT moves almost all the way to the left, and the RIGHT stays where it is, you now have two middles the MIDDLE of the spectrum, and the middle of the two parties. If you use the MIDDLE, the RIGHT is still close to moderate. If you use the middle, suddenly the RIGHT is amost at the far right of the two parties. The reverse of this analogy is also true, so which party has actually moved?

            As to your assertions about Chuck, I have also noted that you dont take very many who oppose Obama seriously. And, that is a failure on your part not theirs.

          • Jeff

            What I mean is there are many Republicans perfectly willing to allow the U.S., for the first time in its history and contrary to the 14th Amendment, to default on the lawful obligations of the U.S. Anyone who seriously proposes (i.e. not as a pure protest) default is by definition not a serious person. What I mean is the Republicans talk about deficit reduction (when a Democrat is president), but what they really care about are tax cuts even if they increase the deficit. Here’s what I’m talking about:

            http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/06/paul-broun-evolution-big-bang_n_1944808.html

            Democrats may pretend to be smarter than they actually are, but at least they aspire to the acquisition of knowledge. Republicans, on the other hand, in an effort to sway these Tea Party types, pretend they never learned a thing in college.

          • Frank Kahn

            Sorry, the link you provided did not support the post above it. It was just about the erroneous claims of the age of the earth and the big bang theory being from hell.

            I have never said that the GOP is any better than the Democrats when it comes to deficit reduction. It is not about taxes though it is about spending cuts.

            The Democrats (Obama) plan to tax the 2% on their income is not even close to enough money to address the deficit in the budget. He should get off his High Horse about taxing the rich and make serious budget cuts a priority. The Democrats as a general group appear to support BIG GOVERNMENT SPENDING, just the same as the GOP. These spending cuts are a very complex issue and requires lots of deep thought and strategic planning. Neither side seems to be willing or maybe even capable of such extensive intelligent work.

            Once again, you fall into the generalizations about the two parties and their inherent attributes. THE DEMOCRATS dont aspire to greater knowledge any more than THE REPUBLICANS do. Some members of each group aspire to increasing their knowledge, some dont. And, remember that when we generalize, we usually are referring to what the politicians of each group do not the constituency.

            I am neither party, however, if I was a Republican, I would take great offense at you lumping me into the same category as the senator that said something stupid. If I was a Democrat I would get very upset if someone called me a communist by party affiliation. It goes both ways, you cant say something about a specific person simply because they are one or the other.

          • Jeff

            I communicate seriously with you because you write in a respectful manner unlike some others. You don’t engage in racial or over-the-top rhetoric. But there’s a certain inevitability to your conclusions. You pretend to look at things objectively, but your conclusions are reliably conservative, so I don’t expect we’ll ever agree on much – except that Paul Broun is wrong. But if a Republican saying the same things were on your ballot, I expect you’d vote for him, reluctantly perhaps, but you’d still vote for him. Maybe I’m wrong about that, but it’s my impression from your posts.

          • Frank Kahn

            I dont pretend anything, I am not actually conservative, I am moderate. I would not vote for any candidate based on party affiliation. I refused to vote for either Obama or Romney because they both failed to address the serious issues with serious solutions.

            I am personally against abortion, and I believe that homosexuality is wrong. I dont think that I have the right to force others to comply with my opinions nor do I think that they have the right to force me to go along with theirs. Government has no right to interfere with any persons personal social behavior. They should stay out of both the abortion and marriage issues, totally, not for one side or the other.

          • Frank Kahn

            PS. the gridlock over what needed to be done along with raising the debt ceiling was not just the Republicans fault, it takes two to tango. Obama refused to compromise so the Republicans got stubborn. Same blame for both sides. The Democrats (and anyone who believes that we HAVE to raise the debt ceiling) are wrong, it is the borrowing that is the problem not how much we are allowed to borrow. The debt ceiling should be abolished, slowly but reduced every year by achieving budget surplus that pays down the debt.

          • Jeff
          • Frank Kahn

            I dont see a clear correlation with my post in that site. I do however see that it is disparaging of the GOP but also bolsters the claims of the RIGHT that the LEFT are socialists.

            It depends on how you regard social programs, are they good in the long run or are they ultimately bad for the citizens. To applaud the massive increase of socialization in health care insurance is not what I would call a reasonable and intelligent thing. To say it is an “in your face” move by the LEFT is probably accurate but that makes it even more worthless.

            If you take such a move by government and change it to an action of an individual, you will see how the properly expected reaction might be violent. If you acted this way to me personally, I would get physical to the maximum allowable extent of the law. The government should not expect any different reaction from the citizens it is abusing. Dont give me that worn out diatribe about the majority of the nation agree with the mandate, Majority does not rule this nation. I support personal freedom, and I will stand beside, behind and defend anyone who refuses to accept tyrannical force from our government. And, if you dont agree with the word tyrannical, I suggest you look up the definition.

            As stated in my original post, the “nut jobs” are the RADICAL EXTREMISTS on both sides of the debate.

  • chuckb

    jeffie, reserve the first copy for me, i can’t wait, it’s not every day a bolshevik writes a book, especially one that can’t write. lol, lol lol, why don’t you write about the escapades of the black messiah and how he was put into power by a bunch of communist jews.
    he was elected without proving he was a legal citizen, he destroyed the economy and blamed someone else, could only speak intelligently thru a teleprompter, he visited the white house only long enough for photo ops, otherwise, he spent his time campaigning, playing golf and vacationing with his fat ass wife. at this same time he was running the country into the greatest debt in history, spent more for vacations than all the presidents before him in his spare time he traveled throughout the world promoting islam and the muslim brotherhood. (he has a custom made prayer rug) the ony time in history when jews and muslims cavorted to change the world. and after all this, the weak minded idiots in this country elected him for another four disastrous years. praise be to allah!!

    see what a nice guy i am to give you all these ideas for your book.

    • Jeff

      Chuckie, I’d be willing to bet that Michelle Obama could destroy you at any activity involving thinking, talking, walking, or running. Race baiting? Maybe not.

  • chuckb

    jeffie, moochella is a product of affirmative action, so there’s no competition there, she may out talk me, most women do, most blacks run like gazelles so she would probably win, walkng, she would lose that one. race baiting? i call’um like i see’em, i do not patronize blacks like the bolsheviks do, i appreciate people for what they stand for, i do not agree with liberal blacks, jews, latinos and whites. so if that’s race baiting i’m guilty..

    • Deerinwater

      It’s does not take much bait to get you to bite Chuck as you pride yourself with being 100% unfiltered. I have been told much the same while one must consider the source of such comments.

  • chuckb

    i don’t follow your comment, i’m 100% filtered? one must consider the source of such comments? what is there too consider? i take people for what they are, some i don’t like and that’s my privilege. i consider myself not a republican, a very conservative conservative.
    i don’t like barry and what he stands for, not because he’s black, jeffie thinks anyone that doesn’t like barry is a racist. well, if that is what racism is based on then i guess i am a racist. i believe he is controlled by communist/marxist jews. now if i cannot call marxist jews communist, what am i supposed to call them. are they immune from the label? most jews do lean toward communism, after all their race originated the term. i know a few jews who are as conservative as i, and don’t call them anything except my friends. so?
    if barry was as patriotic and appreciated the country as much as allen west, then my opinion of him would be different.i tink barry is nothing more than a street con with a good voice, george soros and axelrod use him like a pupett.i believe barry is a genuine muslim and an addicted liar.
    it’s quite obvious they allow him the good life if he follows their instructions. i do not think he is an intelligent person, nor has any idea on how to run the government.

    • Jeff

      Allen West is nuts. I know you like him because he says crazy things on the TV and thinks all Democrats are communists just like a moronic blogger. Here are some facts about him while in the military:

      While serving in Taji, Iraq, West received qualified information from an intelligence specialist about a plot to ambush his unit. The alleged plot reportedly involved Yahya Jhodri Hamoodi, a civilian Iraqi police officer. West had his men detain Hamoodi.[12] Soldiers testified that in the process of detaining Mr. Hamoodi, he appeared to reach for his weapon and needed to be subdued.[12] Hamoodi was beaten by four soldiers from the 2/20th Field Artillery Battalion on the head and body.[13] West then fired his pistol near Hamoodi’s head,[12] after which Hamoodi provided West with names and information, which Hamoodi later described as “meaningless information induced by fear and pain.”[12]

      At least one of these suspects was arrested as a result, but no plans for attacks or weapons were found.[12] West said “At the time I had to base my decision on the intelligence I received. It’s possible that I was wrong about Mr. Hamoodi.”[12]
      West was charged with violating articles 128 (assault) and 134 (general article) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. During a hearing held as part of an Article 32 investigation in November 2003, West stated, “I know the method I used was not right, but I wanted to take care of my soldiers.”[13] The charges were ultimately referred to an Article 15 proceeding rather than court-martial, at which West was fined $5,000.[12] Lieutenant Colonel West accepted the judgment and retired with full benefits in the summer of 2004.

      Asked if he would act differently under similar circumstances, West testified, “If it’s about the lives of my soldiers at stake, I’d go through hell with a gasoline can.”[13] At his hearing, West pointed out that there were no further ambushes against American forces in Taji until he was relieved of his leadership post on October 4.[14] After West’s retirement he received more than 2,000 letters and e-mails offering him moral support.[12] A letter supporting West was signed by 95 members of Congress and sent to the Secretary of the Army.[12]

      • Deerinwater

        Unfiltered Jeff, ~ you offer unfiltered commentary. ~ you display every thought that you think.

        • Jeff

          Deer:

          I’d say “thinking” is a bit generous for Chuckie. “Vomit” or “regurgitate” might be more descriptive terms to describe his racist, anti-Semitic diatribes.

          • Deerinwater

            I understand but we must learn to not be offended, we have the power to control how we react. ~ I like to know what other people think or believe, while agreeing, supporting or defending or just ignoring is an option that I choose to make.

            There are many Chuck’s in the world ~ we are left to live with and deal with them in a way that best serves us best. I would rather know they exist than be blind to them.

            It’s much like dealing with road rage, ~ allow them to pick what part of the highway they want and allow them to pass you by. At some point in time, they will receive their earned just and rightful rewards without you lifting a hand. Or we can report them and hasten these process ever so slowly.

            Chuck has shown the world a predisposition and at some point in time he will be subjected to defending it. ~ I have found that it takes time for this to occur but it does occur.

            The young child that you scorn today with be the man that decides your fate tomorrow.

          • Jeff

            Reading Chuckie’s posts is one of my guilty pleasures in life. Seeing him wrestle with the English language in an effort to say his racist remarks should not be read to imply he’s in any way racist, well – nothing has been that good since Moe hit himself in the head with a hammer meant for Curly!

          • Deerinwater

            Yea, I know ~ poking the tiger just to hear him growl can be fun. ~ But I’d budget such activities and save my efforts for more worthy opposition.

            There is no “pin” , no “tap out”, no “calf rope”, no “checkmate” with such banter which leaves us with only inconclusive silence or more roaring.

            Engage Kansas or Vicki if you enjoy brisk debate. ~ Kansas is begging someone to take her to task with Article 21, some UN resolution that she claims as a serious threat to personal autonomy and self rule and let the old tiger roar by his on volition. Where it’s a mating or hunger call, I’m not sure. ~ but I do know hundreds of Chucks that like to roar.

  • chuckb

    jeffie,
    watch that road deer talks about you guys might run into each other.
    you talk about allen west, he sure as hell has more on the ball than stupid barry, the black messiah of the weak mindset. at least he can talk without a communist jew putting words in his mouth thru a teleprompter. you relate the situation west had in iraq, well, what the hell was so bad about what he did, it shook up you anti-american protestors, media pawns, how about the black messiah? what part of the service did he attend? when did he ever serve this country other than getting a free ride of affirmative action and then his grades are so bad they refuse to show them. he did accomplish one thing, he sure knows how to sucker in the weak like you, of course that doesn’t take much effort.
    maybe you should relate the antics of your other hero, bill clinton, what honor did he do his country? oh, i forgot he did demonstrate against the country in england and russia, that should get him a medal of dis-honorable service. his wife committed murder and now these same bolsheviks are going to run her for president, that’s fitting for this crowd, a badge of honor. this is what you and your party (bolsheviks) stand for.
    how about your hero kerry, a turncoat against the men he served with, these same men showed what a fake he was, claiming medals for something he didn’t do and also lied about.
    so you see jeffie, most all of your crowd are nothing but draft dodgers, liars and are now showing their true colors, the hammer and sickle is their symbol. lenin is their george washington and you are nothing, a lowly comrade who has nothing to do except spend his time trying to defend the actions of these swine.

    • Jeff

      Thank you. Ever since 2004, I’ve wondered who could have been stupid enough to buy those idiotic swift boat ads. I’ve finally found him. My quest is complete.

    • http://tlgeer.wordpress.com tlgeer

      “black messiah of the weak mindset.”

      We don’t have a black messiah. Jesus was mid-eastern, not black.

      “when did he ever serve this country other than getting a free ride of affirmative action and then his grades are so bad they refuse to show them.”

      While there is no evidence that Obama got into college by affirmative action (do YOU have verifiable facts that he did?) he graduated on his own, as ALL students do. As for releasing his grades or school records, there is no reason for him to. At all. They are not public records, and have not been since 1974. Therefore you have no right to them. Period. It doesn’t matter how much you wish to see them. You still don’t have the right to them.

      “he did accomplish one thing, he sure knows how to sucker in the weak like you, of course that doesn’t take much effort.”

      WE are not the ones who rely on propaganda sites, like this one, for facts and news. You DO know what a fact is, right? And how to evaluate them?

      “maybe you should relate the antics of your other hero, bill clinton, what honor did he do his country? oh, i forgot he did demonstrate against the country in england . . . , that should get him a medal of dis-honorable service.”

      He didn’t demonstrate against his, our, country. He demonstrated against the Vietnam War. Since when is dissent wrong or illegal.

      “his wife committed murder”

      No, she didn’t. Even Ken Starr admitted that she didn’t. What’s your problem with admitting facts?

      “and now these same bolsheviks”

      I don’t know where you got the insane thought that the people that you don’t like or agree with are bolsheviks, but that kind of thinking is nothing less than insane. You, quite apparently, have no idea of what a bolshevik is. You might want to educate yourself with FACTS.

      “are going to run her for president”

      It doesn’t matter what anyone wants for Hillary Clinton, she will not be running for President. She has said this repeatedly for 4 years. What FACTS lead you to believe that she is lying?

      “this is what you and your party (bolsheviks) stand for.”

      I can’t speak for anyone else (no one can) but I am a Democrat. Not a progressive, not a liberal. A Democrat.

      “how about your hero kerry, a turncoat against the men he served with, these same men showed what a fake he was, claiming medals for something he didn’t do and also lied about.”

      You really are an ignorant person, aren’t you? ALL of what you said was validly debunked, both before and after the 2004 election.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Kerry_military_service_controversy
      http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21239-2004Aug21.html
      http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/11/16/1202991/john-kerry-hannity-swift-boat/
      http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/11/16/1202991/john-kerry-hannity-swift-boat/
      http://www.snopes.com/politics/kerry/swift.asp
      http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/11/15/hannity-hosts-dishonest-swift-boat-veterans-fou/191419
      http://www.factcheck.org/republican-funded_group_attacks_kerrys_war_record.html

      “so you see jeffie, most all of your crowd are nothing but draft dodgers, liars and are now showing their true colors, the hammer and sickle is their symbol. lenin is their george washington and you are nothing, a lowly comrade who has nothing to do except spend his time trying to defend the actions of these swine.”

      Comrade means “friend”, “colleague”, or “ally”.

      You are relying on hate, and nothing more, to fuel your imagination. Try looking at FACTS, even if you don’t like what they have to say.

      • Jeff

        Good luck engaging with Chuck. You can probably have a more intelligent conversation with your cat. Did you ever see True Believer? It’s a movie featuring James Woods as a formerly legendary civil rights attorney and Robert Downey, Jr. as his new graduate assistant. In one scene, they need an insane witness to testify in order to reopen a murder conviction. The guy is on record believing the phone company killed Kennedy because Kennedy wanted to break them up and “they’d never allow that.” Robert Downey offers to show him the article proving the phone company had been broken up. The look James Woods gives him is priceless.

      • chuckb

        good god, another jeffie, i didn’t think it would be possible to find one more like comrade jeffie. did you guys go to the same school? or are you just lovers?

        anybody that would go to the trouble to log all these nothing websites to prove a point has to be in mental disorder, does any one of those sites prove anything, absolutely not, but, it gives weak minds a distortion of the facts, trying to cover for the liar kerry.
        face it, most liberals or should i say bolheviks are slackers, draft dodgers and anti-american
        and as far as barry is concerned, can you prove he didn’t go to school by affirmative action? or can you prove he ever went to school, i would be inclined to believe that one.
        he can only fool those who are less mentally deficient, so that covers you and jeffie.

        too bad jeffie, this guy is almost as mentally restrained as you, however, you might find a match for yourself so don’t blow him off too soon, you never know,

        • Jeff

          Much as you might like to believe the converse, we humans are in the majority. You knuckle dragging bigots lost. Get used to it. You used to be able to salve your wounded ego over your lack of intelligence by assuring yourself you were in the majority. Well, not any more.You just barely have a majority on this blog! You can call me anything your tiny brain can conjure. It really doesn’t matter. As I said once before, when the monkey throws his feces at you, all you can do is point and laugh.

        • http://tlgeer.wordpress.com tlgeer

          “and as far as barry is concerned, can you prove he didn’t go to school by affirmative action? or can you prove he ever went to school, i would be inclined to believe that one.”

          As you have been told before, it doesn’t matter HOW Obama got into Harvard. What DOES matter is what his standing was when he graduated, and it had nothing to do with affirmative action. School standing doesn’t. He graduated from Harvard with a J.D. magna cum laude, meaning “with great honor”. He was selected to be the Editor of the Harvard Law Review at the end of his first year, and that made national news. Go ahead, look it up at Harvard and at newspaper sites. I bet even you could do it and find facts. Whether you accept those well known facts is completely up to you. But they are still facts whether you choose to believe them or not.

  • chuckb

    jefie, your quest will never be complete, ignorance has no end. so happy hanukkah.

    oh. by the way. those swift boat guys did a job on the cowering liar and you anti war activists couldn’t prove them wrong.the truth always prevails,

  • chuckb

    my aren’t we conceited, “we humans” did you appoint that classification for yourself? only bolsheviks need a majority, i have to agree you are in the majority, we now have a nation full of third world people, so jeffie, look around the world and see what happens when you get that mentality running the country. i don’t see any that are successful, i see countries ran by despots, muslims, take any country in africa, talk about ignorance, none of these countries can build a bicycle much less a car. of course they have camels and donkeys, so take a look at your future jeffie, you have that braintrust running the good ol usa.
    this jackass in washington will have you riding a jackass before too long so get your shovel ready. we now have elected a third world genius to lead us down the path of destruction. i see the bolshevik party has a majority of third worlders, so you are in vogue. the time may come jeffie when a lot of people will become tired of watching their country torn apart by you bolsheviks. the south may rise again.

    • Jeff

      When it comes to magical thinking, you right wingers actually have a lot in common with the Muslims you so despise. You both reject science in favor of Jesus/Allah (take your pick) who will save mankind from its own shortsightedness. Most educated people voted for Obama, primarily because the Republicans have become the Party of Stupid People. Even Bobby Jindahl has admitted as much. In order to get the votes of people like you, otherwise intelligent Republican politicians have to pretend they know nothing about evolution, think the Earth is 9,000 years old, and that “The Flintstones” is a documentary.

      Your continuing to call everyone you disagree with a Bolshevik demonstrates you haven’t a clue what you’re talking about. So in Chuckie’s World, Social Security and Medicare are tantamount to Government ownership of the means of production? That is a view that anyone with a functioning cerebral cortex will dismiss as insane nonsense.

      And your comments about the third world are pure gold. You may be the most bigoted [comment has been edited] I’ve ever communicated with. Do you miss George, Lester, and Strom that much? What do you have to be so proud about? The fact you have white skin? The fact you’re not Jewish? The fact you’ve remained untouched by education all these years? Just keep thinking you’re better than everyone who looks or talks differently.

  • chuckb

    tigeer, i don’t have a clue where you get your info, please advise me where you got the information on barrys school records, there’s a whole nation full of people that would like to see this.
    the only information leaked was from an anonymous source who claimed he had the worse grades ever recorded at the school and the liberal faculty passed him with b’s and c’s even tho he hardly attended any class.

    there’s no available information on his school records or much of his early life, people like jeffie who worship this guy are inclined to believe anything that pertains to his genius, they will accept any kind of praise regardless of truth.

    unfortunately for the blacks of americq their first president is a fraud manipulated by communjst jews, he is nothing but a mouth piece for them.

    so when you present these well known facts you speak of, there are lot’s of people that would appreciate this information, not supposition by propagandist.

    • http://tlgeer.wordpress.com tlgeer

      Actually, the majority of the country already know where Obama went to school, the he graduated magna cum laude from Harvard.

      ANYONE who knows how to look up information already knows that Obama was born in Hawaii, graduated from Columbia and Harvard, that he is a Christian and not a muslim.

      http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_multi=MH|&p_product=MH&p_theme=realcities2&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&s_site=miami&s_trackval=MH&s_search_type=keyword&s_dispstring=Law%20Review%27s%20first%20black%20president%20aims%20to%20help%20poor%20AND%20date%28all%29&p_field_advanced-0=&p_text_advanced-0=%28Law%20Review%27s%20first%20black%20president%20aims%20to%20help%20poor%29&xcal_numdocs=20&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&xcal_useweights=no

      http://diverseeducation.com/article/11791/

      http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/latimes/access/60017156.html?dids=60017156:60017156&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT

      http://web.archive.org/web/20081013083027/http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/may/09/barackobama.uselections20081

      http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1835238-2,00.html

      http://web.archive.org/web/20080608225931/http://www.law.uchicago.edu/media/index.html

      Do I have anything else to say to you? Yes. Stop being stupid. Just because you don’t LIKE the facts doesn’t mean that they are not facts and not valid. Choosing to NOT believe verifiable facts is not smart, it’s stupid.

    • http://tlgeer.wordpress.com tlgeer

      “the only information leaked was from an anonymous source who claimed he had the worse grades ever recorded at the school and the liberal faculty passed him with b’s and c’s even tho he hardly attended any class. ”

      No, Chuck, it wasn’t leaked. It was simply lied about and the idiots among us have chosen to believe it.

      • chuckb

        tigeer, face it, there is a reason why his records were never made public. and if you have that information you are the only one in the country.

        newspooner, you can google “jews in obama cabinet” some of these people have lineage back to the soviet communist party.

        • http://tlgeer.wordpress.com tlgeer

          “tigeer, face it, there is a reason why his records were never made public. and if you have that information you are the only one in the country. ”

          The reason that they were not made public is because they are not public records. It’s that simple.

          LOL You didn’t even read the links that I sent you, did you?

    • Newspooner

      Most of the communists who are manipulating Juan Peron Obama are not Jews. They are a wide range of single and mixed ethnicities.

      • chuckb

        newspooner, you better recheck his cabinet.

      • Newspooner

        Yeah, I think I remember going to Hillary Clinton’s bat mitzvah with Stephen Chu and Janet Napolitano. Or was it with Eric Holder? BTW, that was fictional sarcasm.

  • chuckb

    tigeer, yes i did read the links. there is nothing there except undocumented opinion, one states that barry was raised by his kenyan father and white mother in indonesia and los angeles, you know better than that, his father never raised him, a man by the name of soetoro adopted him, hence the name barry soetoro.they lived in indonesia and he was raised as a muslim.
    there are no records showing him to have outstanding grades in any of his known schools.
    in fact there are hardly any records of who this guy is, .as president the media should have vetted him far better than what they did.
    here is an article from the washington post:

    I too have become disillusioned.
    By Matt Patterson (columnist – Washington Post, New York Post, San Francisco Examiner)

    Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, the result of a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world’s largest economy, direct the world’s most powerful military, execute the world’s most consequential job?

    Imagine a future historian examining Obama’s pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League despite unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a “community organizer”; a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, so often did he vote “present”); and finally an unaccomplished single term in the United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions.

    He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as a legislator. And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama’s “spiritual mentor”; a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama’s colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president?

    Not content to wait for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz addressed the question recently in the Wall Street Journal: To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers, would have lasted a single day. But because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of liberal Dom to have hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they were a bit extreme, he was given a pass. Let that sink in: Obama was given a pass – held to a lower standard – because of the color of his skin.

    Podhoretz continues: And in any case, what did such ancient history matter when he was also so articulate and elegant and (as he himself had said) “non-threatening,” all of which gave him a fighting chance to become the first black president and thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest?

    Podhoretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the Obama phenomenon – affirmative action. Not in the legal sense, of course. But certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action laws and regulations, which are designed primarily to make white people, and especially white liberals, feel good about themselves.
    Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves on the back. Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which they are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable poor performance and high drop-out rates which follow. Liberals don’t care if these minority students fail; liberals aren’t around to witness the emotional devastation and deflated self-esteem resulting from the racist policy that is affirmative action. Yes, racist. Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the color of his skin – that’s affirmative action in a nutshell, and if that isn’t racism, then nothing is.

    And that is what America did to Obama. True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? As many have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for Columbia despite undistinguished grades at Occidental; he was told he was good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois; he was told he was good enough to be president despite no record at all in the Senate. All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the contrary.

    What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time Obama speaks? In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obama’s oratory skills, intellect, and cool character. Those people – conservatives included – ought now to be deeply embarrassed.

    The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of clichés, and that’s when he has his Teleprompters in front of him; when the prompter is absent he can barely think or speak at all. Not one original idea has ever issued from his mouth – it’s all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years.

    And what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and everything else for his troubles. Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited this mess. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise his own powerlessness, so comfortable with his own incompetence. But really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly?

    In short: our president is a small and small-minded man, with neither the temperament nor the intellect to handle his job. When you understand that, and only when you understand that, will the current erosion of liberty and prosperity make sense. It could not have gone otherwise with such a man in the Oval Office.

    .

    • Right Brain Thinker

      This article never appeared in the Washington Post. It was published on American THinker, a right wing OPINION site. Matt Patterson IS NOT a “columnist” for the Washington Post like George Will and Charles Krauthammer, or for the other two papers. He is an occasional contributor to their opinion pages..

      Did you know that, Chuck? Is so, it’s a bit dishonest to let everyone think that Patterson is a frequent “voice” in some of the country’s major papers rather than the second stringer that he appears to be.

  • Deerinwater

    I can not help but think some or most people quite simply trust their eyes while the mind filters what the eyes see. The mind filters what it does and does not wish to see.

    I don’t see Obama as a black man, while I might others. You want to see a Black man let’s go to Louisiana. ~ They not really Black but blue.

    But judging people by the skin they were born with is quite simply a bad thing to be doing for anyone, I don’t care who you are.

    Jesus told us to walk by faith and not by sight ~ and I would not be here today if I just depended on my eyes. If you allow your eyes to cloud you vision, you are walking alone. I don’t walk alone, I always have company. I am told where to step and what I must do. While times of uncertainty do happen to appear, ~ a good nights sleep and my answer will be waiting for me in the morning.

    You know the best part about practicing this simple teaching? ~ It make life and living easy to do. You are free from so much baggage we feel this need to carry around EVERYWHERE we go. It get heavy! Don’t you feel heavy?

    Allow your God to carry this heavy load, this is just one of the many “benefits” of having and practicing faith.

    It’s not important for me to convince you that I am right, I’m just the messenger delivering “Good News”.

  • chuckb

    deerinthewater, i think it is time for you and others to get off the color wagon. it’s time we all step back and face facts. god made some people smarter than others, this society has chosen to grant black people a free ride in some cases to make up for the fact that some had ancestors as slaves, they allowed them into schools by granting them affirmative action. some were even granted grades they did not earn ir capable of learning, to me this is more harmful to the black person than allowing him to gain his knowledge thru the normal. i am white and my ancestors were some of the first to settle here, i was never given any kind of assistance in my schooling and what i did earn, was on my own ability. i am not qualified to be a brain surgeon nor an engineer, i know my limits.
    the black people like every other race should earn their way in to society and the respect that comes with it. they don’t win by forcing people to accept them and society loses by granting them positions they are not educated for.

    you say you don’t see barry as a black man, well, neither do i, however, i can’t help notice his skin is darker than mine. i see a person that is put into a position he is not qualified for, in my mind it is obvious. when i criticize him, it’s not because of his color, it’s because i feel he is disingenuous, if you want to accuse me of anything otherwise, have at it. i don’t believe he has the same patriotic feelings for this country as i. i believe he hides his muslim religion and shows it by the regards he gives the muslims as a whole.

    in this day and age the black people have every opportunity to succeed and more than every other race, however, they should earn their way by their own ability and knowledge just like every one else.
    the democratic party has kept the black people in bondage with entitlements and apparently they don’t have the intellect to understand this. also i believe the communist are using barry soetoro as their queen and the black people as their pawns.

    we have to look no further than south africa to see what will happen to our country on the course we are taking.

    • Deerinwater

      chuck say; “deerinthewater, i think it is time for you and others to get off the color wagon”

      I say; I could not agree with you more. ~ Racist comment should be ignored so we can make all the racist comments that we wish to make without interference from anyone?

      As for myself Chuck, I have not led a sheltered life but been thrown into the mix of sweat shops, crew men, rank and file of all caliber of men, I have had to contend, cope and survive. I’ve been an active player in race wars, not be my own choosing other than the color my skin it was chosen for me. For my personal safety, I was required defend myself in numbers against numbers of lesser men, hoodlums, thugs greater in might that behaved as if they had nothing to lose and took pleasure in pain and violence in an effort to dominate the smallest of things , but a place in a chow line.

      I have had to hurts some people real bad along the way Chuck, but I refuse to permit such experiences to control me. Just being mad and harboring hatred is a poison that darkens the soul. You have to let it go and allow the All Mighty to sort it out. It’s just too heavy to carry.

      Today, as a businessman, I am required to conduct business affairs with all segments of society while everybody’s money is “Green”. My first 30 years was the hardest as I could not turn down anyone that appeared to be a paying customer. Over this time I have developed strong ties with the community and made inroads among the wealthy and powerful to the Kingpins in the barrio that sleep by day and comes alive at night, I going places where few white men dare venture.

      In the last 10 years, I have made strong connections in the Middle Eastern communities, that was without a doubt the hardest nut to crack~ by all accounts.

      Today, ~ I have people I can go too and ask questions and get straight answers about people that solicit my services. I could say that I am protected but that would not be true. I have only learned to place barriers and hedge my bets if matters get out of my control.

      In someways they are all different but in other ways they are all the same while the money is always green.

      I’d like to see 44 resend “Affirmative Acting” , if any president could do it, Obama would be the one. As like yourself, I feel the need is just not there anymore and now it has became self-defeating in purpose. If a person of color can rise up from humble birth and become President then it is inside the realm of possibilities that others might achieve great things without the need to spot other contenders bases on race.

      Affirmative Action is a thorn in our side and I understand your feelings about it.

      But allow me to say Chuck, you are wrong about Obama, ~ he got some breaks along the way due to his mixed heritage ~ sure, certainly ~ but he is a bright man regardless if you choose to accept it or not.

      ~ anyone in this country, regardless of their heritage can aspire to educate themselves. ~ They only need to want it bad enough and willing to put forth the effort. ~ and people of all colors have. ~ to diminish such personal achievement by anyone that has failed to do so themselves does not ring clear and true to my ears.

      Don’t deny the hard work of a family that has cultured and raised a child to aspire to greatness. Obama is a produce of family and culture that tells an American story and you should be proud to be a part of such a remarkable story.

      • http://www.facebook.com/paul.torsiello Paul Torsiello

        Obama is NOTHING TO BE PROUD OF! He is a Disgrace to everything this great country stands for..

    • http://tlgeer.wordpress.com tlgeer

      “ome were even granted grades they did not earn ir capable of learning,”

      Who, exactly, was granted grades that they did not earn? Please, be specific, use verified facts. Not just guesses.

      • Jeff

        Don’t you know? It’s a Chuckie Syllogism: All Black people get special preferences. The Obamas are both Black People. Therefore, the Obamas both got special preferences. Didn’t you know Obama didn’t even have to take the LSAT to be Editor of the Harvard Law Review? All he needed was black skin. It works that way for all Black people. Chuckie is smarter than all of them (He graduated from the 6th grade 1 slot below Jethro, you know.), but because of special preferences, there are Black doctors and lawyers, and even a President. It’s just not the same as back in the Chuckie Good Old Days when they knew their place.

      • Frank Kahn

        I cannot support or defend any specifics about race playing a part in people getting grades they dont deserve but, I can attest to the fact that this does happen with the “no child left behind” policies in place in the public school system. I visited an elementary school where my niece was in first grade. I was appalled that the curriculum for these kids was below a reasonable standard for entering kindergarten. The kids were learning their ABC’s, when they should have been reading. Now, in my opinion, kids that get an A for learning their ABC’s in first grade, are getting a grade that they dont deserve. They are getting an A in kindergarten learning.

        I also taught computer science courses at ITT Technical Institute for 4 years. My last year there, and the reason I left, I was told that “Every student that comes through the front door and pays for an Education, will leave out the Back door with a Degree.” Now, it was not stated directly, but if I did not give the bad students passing grades (they did not deserve) I would be wrong in some way. And, please believe me that I had some 2nd year students that could not comprehend the most basic ideas of computer science that was supposed to have been learned in the first 2 months.

        So, giving grades to students that dont deserve them can and does happen in some cases.

        • http://tlgeer.wordpress.com tlgeer

          “I can attest to the fact that this does happen with the “no child left behind” policies in place in the public school system. I visited an elementary school where my niece was in first grade. I was appalled that the curriculum for these kids was below a reasonable standard for entering kindergarten. The kids were learning their ABC’s, when they should have been reading. Now, in my opinion, kids that get an A for learning their ABC’s in first grade, are getting a grade that they dont deserve. They are getting an A in kindergarten learning.”

          I agree with you completely on this. The “No Child Left Behind” program has helped dumb down this nations children. Partially because their parents haven’t challenged it.

          “I also taught computer science courses at ITT Technical Institute for 4 years. My last year there, and the reason I left, I was told that “Every student that comes through the front door and pays for an Education, will leave out the Back door with a Degree.” Now, it was not stated directly, but if I did not give the bad students passing grades (they did not deserve) I would be wrong in some way. And, please believe me that I had some 2nd year students that could not comprehend the most basic ideas of computer science that was supposed to have been learned in the first 2 months.”

          I understand, and agree, with you. I never understood grading on a curve either.

          • Frank Kahn

            Actually, I place the blame on family for a slightly different reason.

            Education begins at home. Every child that has normal learning abilities should be ready to begin reading before attending 1st grade if not kindergarten.

            In our family, the children are all started with letter recognition and sounds before they are 3 years old. We also encourage counting at that age along with basic addition and subtraction skills. A child’s mind is like a sponge and it is thirsty for knowledge. If you make it fun and exciting you will be amazed at how fast they learn.

            I have one niece, who is scary intelligent, that actually took second place in a K through 6 reading competition in her school. She was beat out by a 5th grader. This competition took place near the end of her kindergarten year. She was lucky and had a really good teacher in 1st grade that encouraged her to help the slower students learn how to read.

            Now I know that she is a special case, but both of her sisters and her brother all knew how to read above the Dick and Jane level by the time they started kindergarten.

            So, when they say no child left behind, what they actually mean is no child getting ahead. Lets not reward superior effort because it makes the slower student feel bad? Maybe if the slower student sees rewards for improving they will try harder. It is encouragement that helps them succeed not handouts. If you tell a kid they are doing okay, when they are substandard, you just reinforce their belief that they dont need to try. It is the way you handle it when you reward someone. It is bad to say “look what happens when you are smarter than everyone else” you say “look what you can all achieve if you put your mind to it”. Common sense is critical in handling the education of our nation.

          • Jeff

            Congratulations on being an educated person. As such, your kids enter school with certain resources and with certain advantages we should hope all kids would have but many do not. My wife teaches at a fancy private school, but she used to teach at a very poor school at the border. A couple of times we drove down there when a kid (This was middle school.) was having real problems with her parents. We even took some kids in for a day or two or more if necessary to defuse a really bad family dynamic. What you see at the apartment complexes where these kids live explains why you might have a different standard than for middle class kids. Little kids running around unsupervised at 11 PM. I’m talking about 3-year-olds. Students living in apartments without a desk, without paper, and often without a well-lit place to study. Parents who may have never gone to school themselves – speaking little English and often illiterate in Spanish. If a kid from a background like that managed to score a 1200 on the SAT, it would mean a lot more than George W. Bush scoring 1200 with every imaginable advantage working for him.

            That is the essence of affirmative action. Now, it probably should be class based and not race based, but we’ve had affirmative action for the rich and well-connected for generations. It’s called “legacy.” So George Bush as a legacy of his father and grandfather and maybe more can get in to Yale with test scores that ordinarily might get him into Texas A&M. I don’t hear the Obama haters saying a word about such preferences.

          • Frank Kahn

            I never one time mentioned affirmative action in my post. I will elaborate on it now that you have pushed that button.

            I believe that affirmative action is the worst part of the no kid left behind mentality. It does exactly the opposite of what is needed. lf you give someone special treatment and advancement not from skills or accomplishments you are harming them not helping.

            And I will leave mexicans out of this for the first part.

            Blacks, who were the original reason for AA have had many years to crawl out of ignorance and avail themselves of the opportunities of modern education. The fact that affirmative action gives them advantages due to their color, they dont have the push to drive themselves to achieve on their own. This causes many of them to be lazy and unconcerned about bettering themselves through education. This problem is a culturally self perpetuating situation.

            I have lived among blacks in rural settings where they perform equally with everyone else in school. their families understand and practice good educational and work ethics. It is not a racial problem, it is a cultural problem that is often centered around large metropolitan areas where community project housing is the norm. Humans usually emulate what they learn as children, if you live in a family that cherishes education, you will too. If you live in a family that is apathetic towards education then that is probably how you will feel also. So affirmative action does nothing to help black kids learn better in school.

            Now to Mexicans, and I will add other nationalities to this list, such as Russian and Bosnian. There is something called cultural bias, and there is cultural pride. Many times you will encounter both of these in foreign emigrants, especially the grownups. Even highly educated people from other countries sometimes refuse to let go of their cultural bias and accept the social requirements of a new country. They will insist on keeping their native language as the only one spoken in their homes. This is detrimental to a childs development in language skills as it pertains to education. We, as a nation, have exacerbated this problem when it comes to Mexicans. In Tucson Arizona the schools were required by law to provide translator teachers to repeat the lectures in Spanish for the Mexican students. Now, forget the extreme waste of money involved in providing two teachers for every class, and just think about who this concept is helping in the real world. If those children remain in this country when they grow up, they will need to have English language skills to function normally here.

            Now, to the scholastically underprivileged. It is sad, but true, that some children are born to parents that either dont have an education or dont care about it. It is sad for the children because they are at a disadvantage when they start school. I think that this was the original purpose of the program called head start, to give those kids a leg up on learning before being thrust into school.

            But, you must also not forget to include parents that are not illiterate but have some other social handicap like alcohol and drugs. Some are violent to their mates which forces the kids to live in abject fear. Some families have fathers that are missing and mothers that spend so much time working to provide for the family that they dont have time to spend teaching the kids.

            We cant solve all their problems, we can try to help with those we encounter but that will still leave some without early childhood educations.

            I disagree with your contention that money is the determining factor in a persons educational opportunities. In reality, a stupid rich kid will not get a better education than a smart poor one. The money might buy them grades, but it wont give them knowledge.

            And, most of this is conjecture when it comes to a multiple child family. The first child is the only one that has a true disadvantage. If the first child goes to school, he / she can teach his / her siblings the necessary prerequisites for going to school.

            So, lets give disadvantaged first born children a boost in the form of a year of preschool tutoring to bring them up to speed with the rest of the children.

          • Jeff

            Frank:

            I don’t think what disagreement we have concerns our perceptions of the problem but over what can be done. We hear repeatedly that teachers and teachers’ unions are to blame for the problems in our schools and for the poor outcomes for our most disadvantaged students. I think that is wrong as you will never normalize the schools until you normalize the kids’ lives outside school. I know that in the current climate, there is no appetite for any social investment in poor people. So long as that attitude predominates, we will have a permanent underclass closely correlated to race.

            You can place the blame (and thereby absolve the middle class of any blame) on the parents, the culture, the teachers, whoever, but the bottom line is another generation of kids will mature into economic powerlessness and irrelevance. I don’t know what can be done to improve the situation given our obsession with taxes at all levels, but I do know that it’s not the child’s fault he lives in a dysfunctional situation.

            Do some kids rise out of that situation and succeed anyway? Yes, there are always extraordinary people who will do extraordinary things. But most people are not extraordinary. If you are born to well-educated, upper middle class parents, your minimum expectations likely exceed the wildest dreams of kids born into other circumstances. I don’t know that that situation can be effectively remedied, but smugness and gloating by the system’s beneficiaries are inappropriate.

          • Frank Kahn

            I dont think that I have made myself totally clear here.

            And, it is possible that I am misunderstanding your position.

            If it is your opinion that affirmative action is good and will somehow help underprivileged kids get ahead in school, then you are wrong and that is where our disagreement lies.

            Affirmative action is racist in intent and action. It is also racially divisive in its effect on white people. It causes an increase in racial hatred, whether that hatred is misplaced or not is not important, it is only important that it causes it.

            The first misconception that I think you have is that I think the school system is just broken for racial minorities. I think the system is just broken. I am certain that attempting to bring the teaching level down to the lowest achievement level of a member of a class is a disservice to all the students.

            Are the teachers to blame? NO, at least not most of them. In most school districts the teachers dont set policy in terms of what is taught or how fast of a pace is set. A good teacher, however will recognize the different learning capabilities of each individual student and design separate tasks that challenge each one to the best of their abilities. A bad teacher will just make them all learn at the same pace.

            Are teachers unions responsible for the problems in our schools, probably to some extent the answer is yes. A teachers union is not setup to address the concerns of the students, it is there for the concerns of the teachers. It is the same problem that exists for all unions, they are self serving and never consider the general well being of the people most affected by their actions. Take a couple of possible situations into consideration. A school has a set budget, this budget is used for all operating cost including salaries, utilities, maintenance, books, extracurricular activities, etc.. Everything is accounted for and funded in this budget. Now, in comes the Union, and they demand an increase in wages and benefits for the teachers. Strong arm tactics are threatened (walk out or strike), if the demand is not met. The school board, unlike the Union, is concerned for the children’s continuing education so they rework the budget to accommodate the new wage and benefit costs. The problem is that they had to cut funding for after school activities like sports and cheer leading. They also had to cut the funding for the arts (music or dance). In extreme cases they even had to reduce the spending on school supplies like books and paper for teachers. Now, the kids are still being taught the same subjects, but they have to share books. They have a teacher that is frustrated and unhappy with the working conditions. There is no “fun time” at school. Is the union good for the school? Is the union good for the kids? Did it hurt the teachers it was supposed to help? Did the problem it caused only affect the poor kids?

            Upper Middle class advantages? Beneficiaries of the middle class? I have always had a hard time finding out what makes someone middle class in this country. I am 100% certain that I was not in it when I was a kid. Had second hand clothing and shoes donated to us. Survived on a very limited variety of foods. Dad hunted for deer, and a single deer was our total source of meat for the year. We grew our own vegetables in a garden in the back yard. We collected bottles for money to go swimming a couple times each summer. I know that there are many levels of poor, and we were not dirt poor, but we were poor. I had the same educational opportunities afforded the rich kids in town all the way through high school. I served in the military to get money to get an associates degree. I worked hard to pay for my bachelors degree. Neither of my parents graduated high school, my father did not even graduate from grade school. But even though we were poor, and my parents were not highly educated, I knew how to read when I started kindergarten.

            So, it is not economics (being poor) that is the problem, it is social structure or cultural circumstances that causes their scholastic disadvantage. You say that maybe an exceptional person can overcome their situation and succeed, I say that almost every one of them can succeed if they put their mind to it. It wont be an easy thing to do, and they might need help getting there, but affirmative action is not help. Social programs that give them access to tutors and learning materials like books or computers is what they need. They need adults that encourage and support them in their struggles. But they have to do the work themselves and earn their own rewards.

            I hope this gives you a clear understanding of where I came from and how I think about the education of all the kids in our society.

          • http://tlgeer.wordpress.com tlgeer

            I agree with you completely on this. Both of my boys were reading before pre-school and were able to count. But I, also, read to them every night and we did counting games from the time that they were toddlers. I have a Granddaughter, who is now in college, who is a physics wiz. She, also, got a 4 year, $4,000 a year scholarship to any college that she wants to go to. YAY! We are so very proud of her.

            OTOH, one of my Sisters believed that the school was responsible for teaching her children manners. I have no idea where that line of thinking came from. She certainly didn’t learn growing up.

            My ex-brother in law (we didn’t like each other from the beginning) was impressed that my boys said thank you, please and you’re welcome from the time that they could talk. It was because I said it to them from the time they were about 6 months old.

            Both of my Parents were very involved with both our academic life and our sports life. They made sure that we knew what our homework entailed, and were always ready to help us figuring things out, if we needed it.

            My youngest sister went back to college about 6 years ago (in her early 40′s). She graduated from the University of Arizona with a 4 year degree, and is on her way to earning her Master’s Degree. She teaches learning disabled and learning deficient children, mostly in the K-6 ages. She had dropped out of school at the beginning of her senior year (she was bored and saw no reason to keep going), she got her GED while her children were growing up and owned a business with her now ex-husband for 12 years.

            I think that we have great families! :-)

          • Frank Kahn

            She went to UofA, what a coincidence, I was employed there. I used to live in Tucson for about 12 years. I was working with the department in charge of the TCES (Teacher Course Evaluation System). I handled much of the online, internet application portion of the evaluations. The Department head in charge of the TCES was a former colleague of mine where I was her supervisor. My work on that system started around 1997 and ended in 2009 so I was working on it when she was studying there.

          • Frank Kahn

            PS. Being polite, saying please and thank you, are also standard practice with the members of our family.

  • chuckb

    good post deer, we only disagree on barry, i see just the opposite of what you do. there are a few others that would have been a much better choice for this country, i look for a patriot along with being a good person.

  • http://www.facebook.com/paul.torsiello Paul Torsiello

    Kick his pathetic Muslim scum sucking ass out!

    • Jeff

      Did you come up with that on your own? What a Hell of a guy. And how will you feel when we have our first Italian president and blog after blog accuses him of being in the Mafia and people keep saying it despite the lack of any evidence. But you don’t need evidence, do you?

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Remember that Barry H. O’Bama is already a member of the IRISH mafia. (And I said it so it must be true and no further “proof” is required)

  • Chris Condon

    The Federal Government can go ahead and raise taxes, but all it will do is tank the economy and result in a net reduction of revenue. So i say go ahead and raise them because it will bring down the system that much faster.

  • BR549

    With all this discussion about the “budget” and “taxes”, Obama, like the Bushes and Clintons before him, have been throwing phrases around to imply that Congress is to blame and why won’t Congress pass this bill? Well, whenever the House OR Senate is led by either of the two parties, Congress is STILL being blamed by the president, no matter who is in office.

    When are we going to have our elected officials start discussing how PAST legislators and presidents had caved in to banking family interests and that the debt we are embracing today has been an intentionally managed monkey on our back to drive us back to the 1300s? I don’t seem to recall that discussion on any of the major networks … EVER.

    All the discussions about spending and and taxes don’t mean squat as long as the globalist kingpins like Rockefeller keep dictating that the US keep using its forces to knock down pockets of resistance to the advancement of globalism, all the while our legislators and presidents have been fully cognizant of the debt it would incur. THAT is where our money has been spent and why we are in debt.

    We don’t see the current globalist shoe shine boy actually discussing how the Rockefeller and Warburg families conspired to financially enslave their “fellow” citizens or, even before that, how, under the Act of 1871, the sovereignty had been secretly stripped from the American citizens. As for individual sovereignty, I’m redeclaring mine. Screw the NWO.

    We don’t see, for example, the UN having to pay for ITS own expansionism, not while Rockefeller can coerce evil minded traitors like the Bushes and Clintons to use OUR own troops under whatever false flag du jour the elites can devise. That’s why the only continual supporter of US hegemony has been fly specks like Samoa.

    Over 1,700 architects and engineers have now signed on to (and the list continues to grow) the “Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth” and yet we still have boneheads in the general population who think they somehow know more than the engineers and can’t wrap their pea sized brains around the possibility that 9/11 was yet ANOTHER false flag contrived by some very ugly people that took place right their noses. These small people are the first ones to casually dismiss their ineptitude by accusing others of wearing tin-foil hats. (It helps them sleep at night.)

  • WILDFIRE

    Its comical how a bunch of you are disputing what the constitution says about how many terms or term limits for President when this President has made it clear he thinks the Constitution is an outdated document and don’t see it to be valid in this day and age. He and the rest of the liberals and communist have done everything they can to void the 1rst Amendment and relentlessly are working to void the 2nd Amendment they have voided the 4th and 5th Amendment with their NDAA and the list goes on. So what makes you think Obama will not void the 22nd Amendment and term limits before 2016?

    • BR549

      Wildfire wrote: “…….. this President has made it clear he thinks the Constitution is an outdated document and don’t see it to be valid in this day and age.”

      The elites have always seen that document as Bush so asininely put it, “just a piece of paper”. And since the corporate takeover of the government, all this BS about elections and the legality and Constitutionality of laws has all been a ruse, since the Rothscilds and Rockefellers, according them, OWN this country. The longer they can keep the population anesthetized into thinking the Constitution is still valid, the longer they can keep threatening or bribing the members of Congress to cave in to their demands.

      All this bickering back and froth between legislators has been one of two things; either it has been sheer ignorance or it has been intentionally sabotaging this country having taken an oath to protect it. There is no middle ground.

      With respect to Obama, he knows that Congress had become an increasingly lame duck over the last 140 years and that is why he has been able to thwart Congress so effectively. Eventually, he will just step in and take over, and watch what happens then. Not one person in Congress will say a word against it. Those dcikless bsatards will sit by and not one of of them will stand up and call for the military to side with the Constitution.

  • Chris

    They’ll never cut spending as long as they continue to allow hordes of immigrants to come into this country to “ride the gravy train”. They need to close the doors for a while until we get our current “american-born” United States citizens who are here LEGALLY “off” the gravy train and WORKING!

  • http://Personallibertydigest Robert Mo

    Congress has one ace that Barry can’t take, congress can defund ever government program every government mandate. Congress needs to grow some balls to stop government spending. There lays the problem, there are just as many republicans who have voted for entitlement as democrats.
    Barry doesn’t make the rules on spending our taxes, congress does.

    • http://tlgeer.wordpress.com tlgeer

      “Congress has one ace that Barry can’t take, congress can defund ever government program every government mandate.”

      Actually, they can’t. That has been the ruling by the US Supreme Court for 80 years, starting with the beginning of Social Security.

      I don’t know where you are getting your information from but they are lying to you.

  • Wayne M.

    Give him(Obama) an inch & he will take 10ft.. I question whether “spending less” is part of his makeup. “Mr. Tax & Spend” has spoken again.

  • Smilee

    I have made it crystal clear that is not the case several times, Your reading and comprehension skills are at the kindergarten level so it is understandable you cannot understand what I said or what power Roberts is in reality. This power is given to the court and he currently is on the court so that power rests with him regardless of you stupid analysis and Obamacre is the law now and will be enacted and nothing you say will or can change that. Don’t you think it is time you grew up????????

    • Smilee

      I do not know why this got posted here rather than where it should of been, Theses responses are to Frank and has to do with Judge Robert’s majority opinion on Obamacare

    • Frank Kahn

      I never said anything about changing the law, I was speaking of nullifying it, which is much different. If you want to learn, google jury nullification and read up on the concept.

      • Smilee

        Either way you will lose as neither will ever happen so hang it up frankie boy.

        • Frank Kahn

          Actually, jury nullification would not be useable in fighting a tax unless you were sued by the IRS for non payment. I was not using the two items in support of each other. They are two distinctly different issues here.

          • Smilee

            SO????????????

          • Frank Kahn

            So your response was invalid.

          • Smilee

            NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

          • Frank Kahn

            YES

            now we degrade into a childish “did not” “did too” argument.

  • chuckb

    now we know, jeffie came from affirmative action. his wife teaches at a private school, a fancy private school. what the hell is that, a hut with a leak proof roof setting on the border? now we know. jeffie is a kept house husband whil;e his wife works on the border,. teaching more socialism, how to get food stamps and most of all how to swim the river.
    nice going jeffie, most bolsheviks have learned how to live off the people. even their own family.

    • Jeff

      Chuck:

      It really wasn’t necessary for you give us a demonstration of your pathetic “thinking” skills; we already knew. Apparently you are incapable of reading the simplest post and gleaning its meaning. Read it again or have one of your kids read it to you and you’ll see just how limited you are.

    • Frank Kahn

      Interesting concept, bolsheviks, the name is derived from the Russian word for MAJORITY. Which was descriptive of their movement ideals. They used a form of Democracy to foster Socialism for the purpose of moving to Communism.

      Now, I have heard many here claim that our Republic is actually the same thing as a Democracy. Although this is not true, it does point out the possibility that those people think or wish that it is. Whenever you read someone say that the MAJORITY of our citizens decided, you might infer that it is a way of saying we have a Democracy (MAJORITY rule). So now we can agree (only by incorrect assumption) that we are a Democracy. Now we must find evidence of a push for Socialism with regards to moving towards Communism. The move towards Socialism (socialistic policies) is debated, and in some cases documented. However, we must be certain that it is not just some social programs that truly benefit the nation. Here is the rub, many feel that the Social support programs are necessary, some even feel that forcing people to get health insurance is good for everyone. If you fall into that category then it is not Socialism, but if you disagree with both points it is Socialism. So, yes, you can describe some citizens as favoring the bolsheviks movement, but you must be careful how you identify them.

      Now, that was an exercise in what if’s and maybe’s, not necessarily factually based. The final assumption about those people wanting Communism was not addressed nor is it documented or verifiable.

      Now, your assumption that he is a bolshevik, that his wife is the main breadwinner and he is trying to live off others is unsustainable. Even if his wife was the main income earner in the family, that would not be an indication of anything more than her ability to provide a greater income than him. This is not a problem socially in this nation. And finally, why do you assume that his wife is teaching, I assume Mexicans since you say on the border, how to scam us out of entitlements? Just because she is a teacher?

      • Jeff

        Chuckie enjoys baying at the Moon. He is capable of no other.

        Ironically, the term “bolshevik,” meaning majority as opposed to the “mensheviks” was used by Lenin for psychological purposes. Lenin never held a majority, not even of the original Communist Party. He did a quick head count and took a vote while he held a majority of those in the room. He called his wing of the Party the Bolsheviks, implying he represented the majority view. It was never the case.

        Yes, we have a Republic and not a pure democracy meaning we elect representatives and that there are rights not subject to majority nullification. Beyond that, majority rule is pretty much the system. It seems like when individuals or groups go to court to enforced their rights, if those rights are unpopular, we hear a lot about the “legitimacy” of the process. Somehow, minorities were supposed to wait until the Chucks of the world were ready to grant them their civil rights. Can you imagine a world in which Chuckies were in the majority? Well, it existed for a long time. Fortunately, there were Courts to tell the bigots they were wrong despite their voting power.

        • Frank Kahn

          So, you can agree that the majority is not the final say in our government, otherwise the minorities would never have any rights. This concept of not allowing the majority rule is exemplified in the court system, where jury’s rule. In a capital crime, the decision of the jury to convict requires not just a majority but a total 100% agreement. If just one person votes not guilty there can be no conviction. That is minority rule, or individual rule depending on how you look at it.

          On the subject of Chuckb, I had not payed close enough attention to his slurs in his posts before. I can see now what you meant about his close mindedness and lack of intelligence in posting. He really made some absurd assumptions pertaining to your post and that is why I responded in the way I did.

          • Jeff

            [comment has been edited]

            As for majority rule, you are right. There are areas where majority rule is pretty much the law, and there are areas (e.g. civil rights) where it is not. In the Court system, one juror can delay (fillibuster?) a conviction, but following a mis-trial, particularly if it’s 11-1 for conviction, there will be a retrial. There may be some examples of jury nullification, but wrongful convictions due to juries believing whatever the prosecution says are far more common. We know because of DNA how often juries get it wrong. Of course, Texas juries NEVER convict and sentence to death the innocent.

          • Frank Kahn

            You need to be careful what words you use when talking about this subject. Usually it is a rule not a law that guides the usage of a majority. And you are 100% wrong with your assertion that majority does not rule in civil rights. The same set of rules governs the use of a majority decision in the case of civil rights. And, even when we say a majority of the members of congress passed a bill, we are not saying that it was a result of MAJORITY rule. If you check the mathematics you will find that there are exactly 2 congresspersons for every state in the union regardless of the number of citizens. So, even though California has 100 times as many citizens as Oregon, the majority of the people (in California) have no greater effect on the outcome than the minority (in Oregon). And never confuse the use of the word minority as meaning a group of people in this case.

            It would be incorrect to use the term filibuster when talking about a hung jury. That term implies delaying or preventing a vote, and in the case of the jury it is when the vote is taken that you know you dont have a unanimous decision. A hung jury is not usually due to a person or people trying to delay anything, it is usually because they believe that the person does not deserve to be convicted. Yes, in a case of 11 for and 1 against you will probably have a new trial, but if it is a split decision or heavy with the nays then you probably wont. Jury nullification only happens when the majority of people agree that the person should not be convicted and punished, making a series of new trials meaningless.

          • Jeff

            When I mentioned civil rights, I was not referring to the Civil Rights Acts passed by Congress in the mid-60s but to Court decisions in the 50s. The Brown decision could not have been passed in Congress in 1954, let alone in state legislatures in the South. That’s what I was referring to.

            As for the built-in advantages given to small states, most of them conservative, that is clear. When Wyoming gets the same representation in the Senate as California, the term “democracy” is no longer applicable. Conservatives can hardly complain as your concerns are over-represented in the Congress. The states won by Obama contain some two thirds of the nation’s population. The only reason Republicans hold the House is the outrageous gerrymandering in some of the states Republicans took over in 2010. In Pennsylvania, for example, both Obama and the Democratic Senate candidate won handily. The Democratic House candidates won more votes than did the Republicans, yet Republicans hold 13 of the 18 House seats. Republicans are holding on to “power” through trickery and artifice. Their “ideas” have been roundly rejected by the majority of Americans.

            Frank, I know the difference between a hung jury and a filibuster. My use of the term was ironic because your post implied that 1 juror could effectively acquit a defendant. I do hope the Democrats change the “silent filibuster” rule and restore the traditional filibuster. Perhaps if McConnell, et. al. have to be filmed in the act of filibustering everything, the people will realize what a bunch of boobs represent them in the Senate.

          • Frank Kahn

            I think you might be beginning to see a divergence of our ideas and how the FACTS relate to them.

            Our nation was never meant to be a Democracy, it is a Republic. The proof of this is obvious in the design of Congress, where MAJORITY rule can never happen.

            Although Gerrymandering can be used for dishonest acquisition or retention of a political position, it can also be used in a beneficial way as in protecting the voting power of minorities. Redistricting is another means of avoiding MAJORITY rule. When it is applied properly it achieves the desired effect, however it can be used to manipulate voter outcome in an unintended way. To accuse the GOP of it without acknowledging how Democrats use it is unfair. Pelosi’s district was reformed to assist in getting her elected in California. Gerrymandering has been around for 200 years, and both sides have used it to gain political advantage.

            It is unpatriotic to complain that Conservatives are over represented in Congress by virtue of the rules set forth in the Constitution.

            The BALANCE of this policy for ELIMINATING the TYRANNICAL rule of the MAJORITY is a good thing. It would be insane, and probably disastrous to allow the MAJORITY of citizens (living in large metropolitan areas) set all policies regarding the entire nation (including rural communities).

            Most suburbanite’s have no concept of the needs and desires of rural residents.

            This also hits on the separation of powers from federal and state. The federal government is not in a good position to set state policies because they are too far removed from the actual conditions being affected.

            We even have a further breakdown of government within the states to better serve the people. We have county and local governance that is even closer to the real conditions being ruled on.

            Some of the LOCALIZED problems and concerns I am referring to are the original reasoning behind creating voting districts. These districts might seem to be random and make no sense but if they are set up correctly, they give more power to the voters in rural communities which have smaller numbers of voters.

            To some people, like those that want to believe we are a Democracy, this seems to be a bad thing. Taking the power for the MAJORITY of the citizens away and giving equal power to the MINORITIES.

            Now, considering your support of minorities (racial, ethnic, etc), I would think that you would not want MAJORITY rule. How much opportunity would blacks have if the MAJORITY (White voters) had always had absolute power to decide policies? In that case, it would have been very hard to extend the privilege of voting to the black citizens.

            Until we can ALL agree on what is right, MAJORITY rule is not a good way of governing the people.

            On the subject of jury nullification, I never used the word acquit in my description. I hope that you understand the difference between failing to convict and acquitting. In most instances acquittal requires the same unanimous vote as conviction does. However, in jury nullification, a hung jury that results in the case being put on the shelf so to speak, has the same effect. The accused person is never convicted and does not get punished. The only real difference is that if they were acquitted they could never be tried again for that crime, whereas, with a hung jury, they can be retried again as long as the statute of limitations has not ran out for that crime.

          • http://tlgeer.wordpress.com tlgeer

            “If you check the mathematics you will find that there are exactly 2 congresspersons for every state in the union regardless of the number of citizens.”

            Congress is made up of two Houses – the Senate, which is made up of 2 Senators of each state; and the House of Representatives, which is made up of Representatives from each state according to that states population.

          • Frank Kahn

            I’m sorry the senate not congress, he knew what I meant

  • Terry Bateman

    I think Obama is thinking more of the 2014 congressional elections than balancing
    the budget in trying to get the Republicans to vote for tax increases.If they do, democratic
    attack ads will lambast Republican congressional candidates for voting for tax increases
    and abandoning Republican promises of no more tax hikes. Remember George Bush
    in 1992: “Read my lips, no new taxes.” Too bad for him he failed to stick to that. The
    democrats today would like for the same to happen to congressional republicans.
    Republicans would hold onto more seats if they did nothing and we got tax increases
    on the rich and everybody else AND sequestered across the board federal government
    spending cuts. Since the economy is in a cyclical secular expansion after a severe
    recession AND we will have ever increasing U.S. oil and gas production decreasing
    the cost of gasoline, natural gas, heating oil, diesel fuel, propane and crude oil to
    U.S. consumers, industries, manufacturers, and power generators, I feel the U.S.
    economy will absorb the tax increases and spending cuts without so much as the
    blink of an eye.

  • chuckb

    what’s this “we” business, have you got a mouse in your pocket. you are always hoping for some one to back you up, there are a few that sound like you so maybe that’s where the “we” comes from, maybe your wife? she teaches at a fancy private school, wow, that really impresses me, “a fancy private school.” wow.

    your problem is not only your politics, you think too highly of yourself, so that tells me you have an inferior personality and want people to believe you are something you’re not, so why not take a class the wife teaches, maybe the fancy will rub off on you.

    i have a hard time believing you and your wife are not of the same gender..

    • Jeff

      Chuckie:

      You think I’m trying to impress you? Your opinion of me means about as much as a cockroach’s. I was conversing with a human at the time I mentioned the schools, not a subhuman bigot. I was pointing out the vast differences in opportunity. Your babbling personal insults based only on your own inferiority and bigotry will henceforth be ignored.

      • chuckb

        careful jeffie, you’re mascara is running.

  • Dee

    obummer has spent way too much money and none of it helped the economy. No one in
    the government seemed willing or unable to stop him. Doesn’t the congress hold the purse strings. He doesn’t seem to understand that when you put more taxes on people, they have less money to spend. That doesn’t help the economy. He also has spent too much taking his lavish vacations at the expense of the taxpayers. He needs to be stopped.

    • http://tlgeer.wordpress.com tlgeer

      “He also has spent too much taking his lavish vacations at the expense of the taxpayers.”

      ?? What lavish vacations has he taken at the expense of the taxpayer? Do you have any links that proves that what you said is the truth?

      “obummer”

      His name is Obama. Only children change someone’s name because they don’t like them. Grow up.

      “has spent way too much money and none of it helped the economy.”

      You do realize that our economy has slowly been getting better, don’t you? And that has been without the cooperation of the GOP. Just imagine what more could have been done is the GOP hadn’t been deliberately trying to tank our country’s economy.

      “No one in the government seemed willing or unable to stop him. Doesn’t the congress hold the purse strings. He doesn’t seem to understand that when you put more taxes on people, they have less money to spend. That doesn’t help the economy.”

      Actually when the tax rates are lowered too much, as they were, that is when our country fell into an economic sink hole. They should never have been lowered as much as they were, and they need to be increased. DO NOT tell me that we are being taxed to death as we are at the lowest tax rates in almost 100 years! That is yet another lie being put about by the talking heads.

      Yes, Congress is the body that spends the money. I have no idea why so many people believe, falsely, that it is the President. ALL spending starts with Congress. Those bills have to pass with a majority in each house in order for it to pass. THEN it goes to the President to be signed.

      What one Congress authorizes ALL the following Congress’s have the legal obligation to pay for. Those bills do not just count for the Congress that passed them. In fact, they do not have the right to NOT pay them.

      This grandstanding by the House is just that – Grandstanding. If they are not aware of the fact that they do not have the right to not pay for the funding that other Congress’s have authorize then they have absolutely no business being in Congress.

    • http://tlgeer.wordpress.com tlgeer

      What, exactly, has Obama spent money on that was not approved by Congress? Facts please.

    • Jeff

      Could you possibly be more specific about Obama’s spending? Here are the real sources of the deficit, regardless of what Glenn Beck may have told you.

      http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/05/obama-romney-deficit-debt-chart.php

  • chuckb

    tigeer, barry and moochella have broken the record for vacations, especially at the tax payers expense.
    the following editorial was made in 2011, so imagine what it would look like today and after their xmas vacation in hawaii estimated at $10 million.

    they have a state workers mentality, like school teachers, the world owes them their luxury. regardless of what they produce, ignorance and socialism.

    Expensive massages, top shelf vodka and five-star hotels: First Lady accused of spending $10m in public money on her vacations

    By Daily Mail Reporter
    Created 3:33 PM on 24th August 2011

    Comments (200)
    Share

    The Obamas’ summer break on Martha’s Vineyard has already been branded a PR disaster after the couple arrived four hours apart on separate government jets.

    But according to new reports, this is the least of their extravagances.

    White House sources today claimed that the First Lady has spent $10million of U.S. taxpayers’ money on vacations alone in the past year.
    Expensive taste: Michelle Obama, pictured yesterday in West Tisbury, Massachusetts, has been accused of spending $10m of public money on vacations

    Expensive taste: Michelle Obama, pictured yesterday in Massachusetts, has been accused of spending $10m of public money on vacations

    Branding her ‘disgusting’ and ‘a vacation junkie’, they say the 47-year-old mother-of-two has been indulging in five-star hotels, where she splashes out on expensive massages and alcohol.

    More…

    Revealed: How Obama goes hobnobbing with friends and donors while on Martha’s Vineyard family holiday
    Michelle Obama shows up her husband in tiny purple bike shorts as the President lags behind in jeans
    Nothing like a world of porn kings and gangsters to take your mind off things… Obama gets stuck into his holiday reading amidst global turmoil
    Get Mrs Obama’s sense of style with MailLife.co.uk

    The ‘top source’ told the National Enquirer: ‘It’s disgusting. Michelle is taking advantage of her privileged position while the most hardworking Americans can barely afford a week or two off work.

    ‘When it’s all added up, she’s spent more than $10million in taxpayers’ money on her vacations.’
    His and her jets: The President and his wife, who are spending nine days on Martha’s Vineyard, have come under fire for travelling on separate planes

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2029615/Michelle-Obama-accused-spending-10m-public-money-vacations.html#ixzz2FGRMRQAm
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

  • chuckb

    face it tigeer, you’re black messiah is like the temporary teachers in the classroom, all mouth and little substance,
    do a little research, not the bolshevik links, barry is not responsible for anything, he’s nothing, he reads the teleprompter for the communist jews, they in turn pay him off with a luxurious life, a free jet and all the golf he wants to play. wake up.

    • http://tlgeer.wordpress.com tlgeer

      It appears that you need psychiatric very badly. I strongly suggest that you get is as soon as possible. That way you can join us in the real world.

  • chuckb

    tigeer, the real world you speak of is a liberal illusion, full of ignorance, no thanks, you stay there, you fit in well..

  • Leslie

    If you think Joel`s story is surprising…, three weeks ago my sister in-law got paid $5306 just sitting there a fifteen hour week an their house and they’re friend’s ex-wife`s neighbour was doing this for 7-months and actually earnt over $5306 parttime on line. applie the steps here, FAB33.COM

  • James

    Sorry!!! NO matter how much money Obama, take in—-he will spend it and it will never go against the debt!!! His idea spend and tax. We are so far in debt and nobody to control this spending machine.

    • tgeer

      What, exactly, is the problem with you people?!?!

      The President does not spend ANYTHING without the approval of Congress. Not anything! Didn’t any of you take a basic civic class, read about the powers of Congress in the US Constitution?

      Just how many times is it going to take before this FACT gets into you brain and you acknowledge it?

      Once Congress has passed the spending bill in both houses of Congress it goes to the President to be signed. All of that makes it a legal US obligation. It doesn’t matter if the current Congress doesn’t like what a previous Congress passed. Once it is a law, Congress has no right to not pay for the bills that have passed. No right whatsoever.

      If you want to slow, or stop spending, then it has to be done during the budget talks, not in the talks about the debt ceiling (which is to raise enough money to pay for things that are ALREADY law).

      • Jeff

        These right wingers will call Obama a big spender no matter what he does. To them, Obama is personally responsible for everything they don’t like, even those things that predate his presidency. They are completely immune to facts, but this chart clearly shows the actual sources of the deficit (Deficits matter only when a Democrat is president.):

        http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/05/obama-romney-deficit-debt-chart.php

        Good luck getting anything but racist tirades from Chuckie, by the way.

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.