Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

The Battle Lines Have Been Drawn

November 16, 2012 by  

The Battle Lines Have Been Drawn
PHOTOS.COM

The fiscal cliff draweth nigh. A lame-duck Congress and a triumphant President have six weeks to effect a deal that will keep the country from plunging over it. And right now, while both sides pay lip service to the idea of compromise, it looks like they’ll play chicken right up to the edge.

Earlier this week, President Barack Obama met with a bunch of left-wing labor leaders and social activists — all of whom were happy to take credit for his election victory. Afterward, the President doubled his demands for higher taxes. Instead of the $800 billion in additional tax increases that were on the table before the election, Obama now says he wants $1.6 trillion in additional revenue over the next decade.

Anyone who hoped we’d see a milder, more moderate occupant of the White House this time around just got a very loud wake-up message: It’s going to be war on the haves on behalf of the have-nots — and the bureaucrats who get to distribute the spoils, of course.

In case you’re just waking up from a Rip Van Winkle-type nap, the fiscal cliff is what will happen when the George W. Bush tax cuts expire at the end of the year (they’ve been extended once already) and automatic spending cuts kick in. The spending cuts, known as “sequestration,” were part of the last agreement to raise the Federal debt ceiling. If they aren’t undone, the military budget will face $500 billion in cuts, starting in January.

It should come as no surprise that the Congressional Budget Office says that the combination could be devastating to our economy. The supposedly nonpartisan CBO says that economic growth in this country, which is already dreadfully anemic, will drop 0.5 percent. At same time, unemployment will climb from 7.9 percent to some 9.1 percent, the CBO predicts. Of course, the “official” unemployment figures are a cruel distortion of what has actually taken place; when the underemployed and long-term unemployed are counted, the actual number is more than 20 percent.

So, yes, we’re facing some pretty serious problems. Meanwhile, although Obama likes to say that he’s willing to compromise and that “all ideas are on the table,” there are a couple that he says absolutely won’t be considered. One is making significant cuts in spending on his favorite programs. The other is giving any sort of tax break to “millionaires and billionaires.”

Meanwhile, a majority of members of the House of Representatives have made a promise to their constituents not to vote for any tax increase. Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform, which created the no-tax pledge, reminds us that it has been signed by 271 members of the current Congress and 258 members of the one that will take office in January. The pledge promises that signers will “oppose any and all efforts to increase the marginal income tax rates for individuals and/or businesses.”

And don’t look at closing deductions as a way to raise revenue, either. Signers have also pledged to “oppose any net reduction or elimination of deductions and credits, unless matched dollar for dollar by further reducing tax rates.”

House Speaker John Boehner hinted at the possibility of compromise when he said: “For the purposes of forging a bipartisan agreement that begins to solve the problem, we’re willing to accept new revenue, under the right conditions.”

Boehner didn’t explain what those “right conditions” might be. But so far I haven’t heard any proposal that will satisfy the tax-and-spenders on the left and the no-tax crowd on the right. From what I’ve heard, compromise looks a long way off.

Oh, and did I mention that we are also approaching the ceiling for the Federal debt? The Treasury can do a little check kiting for a while. But sooner or later, we will reach a point where we won’t be able to add to the national debt. That’s going to be a heck of a problem, since that borrowing provides the funds for about 30 percent of Federal spending.

So what should our fearless leaders do? Let’s look at a few hard facts.

First, the Obama tax increases on the super-rich won’t solve our deficit problems. In fact, they won’t come anywhere close. The most generous estimates are that they will raise an additional $60 billion to $80 billion a year in revenue.

But the deficit has topped $1 trillion a year for every year that Obama has been in office. Washington will need to raise 15 to 20 times that much revenue if our leaders are serious about balancing the budget.

Here’s another example that should help bring some perspective to this discussion. It’s been estimated that repairing all the damage caused by Hurricane Sandy will come to something like $50 billion. That’s a staggering amount of money, isn’t it?  The devastation we’ve seen on our TV screens (and many people have witnessed in person) has been incredible.

But consider this: Obama’s deficits have amounted to 20 such hurricanes every year for the past four years.

That brings me to the second fact that the politicos in Washington — on both sides of the aisle — will have to face. This country doesn’t have a revenue problem; it has a spending problem. When you add together taxes collected by all levels of government, the combined bite from Federal, State and local taxes comes to more than half of the money the more successful people among us earn. What sort of incentives will successful people have to try even harder and do even better if the government grab goes even higher?

The answer can be found somewhere between “very little” and “none.”

But there’s even more bad news waiting for us around the corner. What happens when the badly misnamed Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as Obamacare, becomes fully operational over the next two years?

Well, for one, an awful lot of us will be paying more in taxes, thanks to various fees and add-ons the bill includes. That’s bad enough. But even worse, a lot of full-time jobs in this country will vanish, as more and more companies replace them with part-time workers. Employers will not be required to provide health insurance for anyone working 30 hours a week or less. A lot of companies will prefer to hire four part-time workers to three full-time ones. Can you blame them?

A lot of these problems could be solved by a vibrant, growing economy that saw millions of new jobs being created — which also would mean billions more tax dollars being collected. It’s happened several times in the past, under both Republicans (see Ronald Reagan) and Democrats (see Bill Clinton’s second term).

What are the chances that an even more liberal Senate and a President who no longer has to worry about being re-elected will do the things necessary to get the economy growing again? I fear they are very, very small.

If I were a conservative legislator in Washington today, what would I do? I’d stick to the promises I made that got me there. I’d insist that our government needs to spend less and tax less, and I’d vote only for legislation that helps move the country in that direction.

More freedom, not more government, will produce the prosperity we once enjoyed — and can enjoy again. But that’s not what we’re going to get from Washington anytime soon.

Better batten down the hatches, folks. I’m afraid we’re in for a very rough ride.

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 “The Battle Lines Have Been Drawn”

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

  • KG

    It’s funny (yea….right) when you guys talk about the Debt as a zero sum game. And then, turn around and say that tax cuts will help the economy.

    We are paying less taxes than ever, and yet, have the worse economy ever. Accumulation of wealth never helped a Nation to prosper. Just look at Mexico. Some of the richest people in the world live there – but would you want to live there? There are very rich people who live in Sweden. Would you want to live there?

    When wealth got too concentrated in France, the “rich” were beheaded. That is what happens when you have too many poor people. It’s time for America to become America again. I’m tired of seeing white-washed windows in our old town areas. I’m tired of seeing rusting hulks that used to produce the best steel in the world. I hate seeing our Harbor areas with empty warehouses and rusting cranes that used to unload American ships.

    So, you want to “cut” our way out of recession? That is impossible. it would be like a guy who is bleeding, and instead of fixing the bleeding, we cut off his arm.

    We must start to build our way out of this. And that means taxes. Remember, freedom isn’t free, so stop your whining and pay your taxes!

    • http://personaliberty.com A-New-Hope

      Taxing more is not the answer. The reason we are in such a rut right now is because the people that do the hiring are waiting to hire until they see the ramification of upcoming legislation. You demonize them for wanting profit but it’s that profit that provides for research and development and expansion. Before posting such nonsense I would suggest reading a book sometime.

      • Robert

        GOD gave us the answer to our woes in his Holy Scripture. “If my people will humble themselves and repent and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from Heaven and heal their land”. Until this happens America is under the judgement of GOD.

      • Polski

        They’re not going to use the information for improving anything except the executive salaries and bonuses. The CEO who’s making $23 MILLION a year is trying for $46 MILLION a year and all the executives under him are just following that line.

      • Gordon

        Robert, I agree we need to pray and be a nation of faith in God the creator Jesus Christ…… but your pray doctrine sounds a lot like the “TV prosperity teachers” that say pray and God will send you money. “IF you want a new car, buy it, and trust God to provide the money.” Sorry friend, money does not appear that way, and fiat is not real money.

      • KG

        There was supposed to be billions of dollars just waiting to be invested – that is the biggest crock in the world. I’ve been hearing that ever since the last economic chaos in 1989.

      • Nancy in Nebraska

        This I know is true!!! Whenever government says they want to raise taxes on the rich, they raise taxes on the middle class!!! The middle class gets shafted every time! They lie!!! The rich and the corporations are protected by loopholes and deductions! Why do you think that GE paid NO taxes last year?!? Why do you think that deductions are off the table?!? KG thinks that we are paying less taxes than ever! I don’t know what world he’s living in!!! We’re in the lower half of the middle class and we’re being eaten alive!!! Every dollar we earn is being taxed over and over again!!! Federal income taxes, social security taxes, Medicare taxes, state income taxes, property taxes, automobile taxes, wheel taxes, sales taxes, restaurant taxes, hidden taxes like driver’s license fees, dog and cat licenses, marriage licenses, telephone taxes, cell phone taxes, special taxes on our utilities, it never ends!!! In Omaha, they even tax our taxes!!! If you eat out, they charge you a restaurant tax, then charge sales tax on the tax! NOW the federal government wants a value added tax and a tax on carbon! The UN even wants to tax us on carbon and financial transactions!!! I SAY ENOUGH!!! STOP STEALING OUR MONEY!!! LET the fiscal cliff happen!!! CUT the military budget and END these ILLEGAL wars!!! MAKE them STOP spending OUR money!!! Everyone in our government belongs in PRISON!!! Our economy is going to collapse!!! THEY have already spent more than WE can EVER pay back!!! They keep putting it off because they want to get every last drop of blood that they can get!!! When they own everything and we own nothing, they’ll let it all collapse!!! I DO NOT understand WHY the people just stand back and LET them do this!!! READ THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE!!! We are right back where we started!!! Are we going to let them take it ALL?!?

      • Old Henry

        Absolutely Robert! Absolutely. The United States is ancient Israel.

      • mr Jan Haveman

        Robert,Robert,Robert

        still buying that bull ???

      • Bert Cundle Sr.

        Robert: Christianity is a DREAM WORLD! Reality is NOW! If you can pinch yourself till it hurts… Thats Life!

    • Flashy

      KG…funny how the extremists are crying about the stance taken by the President, and insist the GOP membership stick to a pledge which will send us over the cliff. No compromise seems to remain in their twisted thought processes.

      What they continue to refuse to accept is…the president ran on what he is stating as his position. No surprises, no lies or changing stance. He promised American voters that he would insist on revenue raises by way of increasing the top tax bracket for the wealthy elite who have been receiving welfare for the past decade paid for by the Middle Class. He ran on the promise to cut tax loopholes used by the wealthy. He promised to end the bizarre system where the wealthy who made millions paid less in percent of earnings than the laborer sweating every day allowing them to rake in the profits.

      So, the GOP extremists can say “no” and tell the American electorate ‘screw you” and continue to insist that the wealthy 1% be allowed their welfare program. And what happens? Automatic tax increases for ALL (how’s that pledge doing for ya Grover ?). Then they either have to agree to lower taxes for the Middle class without the welfare for the wealthy…or be branded once again and take the rightful blame for being the party raising taxes.

      The GOP may refuse to deal on the Sequestration deal THEY demanded and voted for. Boom…send the nation back into recession. Try telling the voters you placed politics above nation and that’s why the economy went down. Ouch.

      The extremists have had their day. the screams and rantings and refusal to deal have been seen for what they are..meaningless rantings of petulant children who have no clue what life and reality is about.

      The American people soundly spanked the GOP this past election. Everyone but the blind and the ignorant know it. The GOP has to deal …. and they are grinding their teeth wishing they took the deal this past summer. For what they now have is their worst nightmare…a path to a stronger Middle Class and a dismantling of the welfare programs for the wealthy. no more free ride…pay your way. .

      • Warrior

        Comrade, you’re getting pretty good at cutting and pasting I see. Where do I locate the “drivel” you espouse on a daily basis? All day, every day. Careful, one may actually start to believe this is your job.

      • rabidconservative

        The “American People” soundly kissed the hand that feeds them you mean. The proposed tax increases will be consumed in less than a month at the current skyhigh, out of control spending rates. Employers fled an extremely business unfriendly America. You don’t risk investing where governments are hostile to employers. It’s clear what s happened here: the left joyfully raided the treasury to pay off their supporters and thus stay in power. Liberals realized to their glee that Americans can be bought. O’s election was paid for with deficit spending (borrowed money). When the dollar crashes you’ll discover once again that “there’s no free lunch”.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        EXCELLENT comments, Flashy. Among your best.
        Ignore the ignorant responses and keep telling it like it is.

      • Bob Jeffrey

        You are absolutely correct!!!

      • Nadzieja Batki

        So your new word for the day is “extremists” and you must use in every comment. Big whoop!

      • Nancy in Nebraska

        Flashy, when are you gonna WAKE UP and recognize that it isnt just one side or the other?!? It makes NO difference WHO’S in office!!! You are so wrapped up in having the democraps win that you don’t even care WHAT happens to our country!!! As long as its the democraps who destroy everything, you’re fine with that!!! But of course you can blame the republicraps!!! IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE!!! They are ALL destroying our country!!! YES, bush too! But don’t ignore the truth!!! Come out of your hypnosis and SEE what is really going on!!!

      • DaveH

        Flashman knows darn well what the truth is, Nancy, he just doesn’t want to tell it.

      • kkflash

        Flashy, get something through your thick skull just once. There was NO electoral mandate in the 2012 presidential election. According to Politico.com, he won the popular vote by 3,476,775 votes, a narrow 51/49% margin. Two-thirds of that margin, 2.3 million votes, were in the state of California. Obama also had a 1.65 million vote margin in New York.
        Now, guess which two states have the greatest number of people on government welfare. Good guess! It’s CA and NY leading the pack in government handouts. (And, it’s not just because those states have high populations. CA is #3 in welfare cases per capita, at more than 3%. That’s more than double the rate of the next most populous state – Texas.) So, if you take out the two biggest welfare states, Obama LOST the popular vote in the rest of the country. Obama was elected primarily by freeloaders who don’t understand that freedom isn’t free.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Let me get this straight, KKF

        O’Bama wins BOTH the popular vote AND the electoral vote TWO times by big margins in 2008 and 2012 but there is NO mandate?

        George W Bush LOSES the popular vote and only squeaks by on the electoral vote in 2000 because of the Supremes, and then nearly sinks the country. And you most likely think he was NOT one of the worst presidents we ever had and think he had a mandate to do what HE did? Do I detect bias and motivated reasoning there?.

        Then you make the predicable leap to “O’Bama was elected by freeloaders”. Freedom is certainly not free but stupidity and closed-mindedness must be—we certainly see a lot of it on this site.

        • George E

          Right,

          I notice that a lot of liberals/progressives/socialists spend a lot of time on this site. Do you include them in your last statement or is that just reserved for conservatives and libertarians?

      • Flashy

        KKF..ignore reality. be my guest. The GOP lost Senate seats AND house seats (even as the GOP insulated themselves from losses via gerrymandering House Districts) and the Dems take 26 of 33 Senate elections. The GOP stifled voting access with restrictive voting laws based on made up lies about voter fraud. Obama garners 50% + of the vote in TWO elections (not since FDR has a Dem done that..and only FDR and Obama can lay claim to that. He nails the election with 332 Electoral votes. Ummmm … what makes that not a mandate?

        I guess if it’s not a mandate, the GOP are falling all over themselves like gaffed salmon flopping on the pier because they’ve won a resounding victory eh?

      • kkflash

        Read what I wrote, not what you think. Take out the two biggest welfare states, and Obama LOST the popular vote in the rest of the country. You can take your “mandate” to California or New York and preach the socialist gospel there.

      • kkflash

        RBT, In 1980 Ronald Reagan won the popular vote over Jimmy Carter by 10%, carrying 44 states. Now that is a wide margin and a mandate. Your boy won 26 states and lost 24. That’s a squeaker. His popular vote margin is more than accounted for by only 2 states, those being the one’s with the largest number of welfare recipients. My facts are unerring.

      • Nancy in Nebraska

        Way too much FRAUD in this election!!! Believe what you want!!! And when people critisize obumass, it doesn’t automatically mean that they were FOR bush!!! They’re BOTH lousy criminals!!! Just because bush was terrible doesn’t mean that it’s ok for obumass to be terrible!!! Instead of sticking up for the democraps or republicraps, stick up for America!!! These people(?) are destroying our country!!! And it isn’t ok just because bush did it!!! Grow up!!!

      • Flashy

        KKFlash….y’know, if you took away the votes from the largest populated Red States…guess what? Pres. Obama wins with a greater margin. And…tadaaaa…those two red states have the largest 9as a % of population) of gov’t aid recipients.

        Your facts may be unerring, your analysis and conclusions are grossly erring

      • Right Brain Thinker

        George, I think you overstate when you say “a lot” of progressives/liberals spend time on this site. This site caters to conservatives and they far outnumber the libs/progs. Maybe your mind set is so far right that you view moderates as libs?

        I see little evidence of any socialists it all—that is perhaps a figment of your need to express your deeply rooted (and wrong) beliefs by overstating where people fall on the spectrum.

        I reserve “stupid” for those who demonstrate “stupidity” and am sorry to say that the folks on the FAR right are much more afflicted with it than the more moderate conservatives. I have seen little evidence of it on the left on this site, although that doesn’t mean it can’t ever exist there.

        Closedmindedness is a defining trait for conservative (left brain) thinkers, and again it becomes more extreme the farther right you go. I see much evidence of that on this site, as would be expected. Folks on the FAR left can be closed minded but none of them have appeared here that I have seen. Most of us libs/progs posting here fall in the openminded part of the spectrum, which is a defining trait for libs/progs, (who tend to be right brain thinkers and look at things from many angles and reserve judgment rather than operate from the base of emotion and belief that left brains do).

        If that’s all too hard to follow, the simple answer is No, I don’t include libs/progs ON THIS SITE very much. And Yes, it fits a significant portion of the conservatives ON THIS SITE, perhaps even a majority of them (and that is based on evidence and somewhat offhand analysis—one day I am going to do a real study on it—actually count up and categorize who said what and put some numbers on it).

        • George E

          Right,

          I don’t know how you can tell the difference between libs/progressives and socialists/communists. They all say the same or similar things. I know the technical definition for socialists is that they want government ownership of everything. In my book, there’s not much distance from that definition and wanting control over everything like liberals/progressives seem to strive for.

          From where I sit, it doesn’t look to me like libs/progressives are any more objective than conservatives and libertarians. Everyone has a certain mindset which they use to filter and judge information with. Certainly, you might expect to find more conservatives and libertarians on this site who are spelling and language challenged because there are more conservatives and libertarians here than liberals/progressives. Aside from that, I’m just not positively impressed with the liberal/progressive argument that capitalist business people are greedy rich brain-dead bastards while socialist government bureaucrats are compassionate all-knowing intellectuals. That nonsense doesn’t play well with me, and as long as the libs/progressives continue to argue from a socialist point of view like that, count me out because those arguments are discredited with me from the get go.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        KKF doubles down on his denial and brings up Reagan Carter? 30 years ago? In a world far far away and long long ago—like Star Wars? Your facts about 1980 may be “unerring” but your attempt to make something out of them that is relevant to TODAY is not.

        O’Bama won and he does have a mandate, no matter how much you need to play with the numbers to make yourself feel good. The number of states is irrelevant—what counts is the number of voters—-that results in the awarding of electoral votes and 332 to 206 is not a “squeaker” but pretty much a drubbing. They don’t give votes or to jackrabbits and armadillos or award them on the basis of square miles of territory.

        (And why didn’t you use McGovern as an example? He won only one state. Although that too is irrelevant).

        And don’t you know that referring to the president as “your boy” can be considered offensive for several reasons? Do you intend to be offensive?

      • B rian

        “the president ran on what he is stating as his position. No surprises, no lies or changing stance.”

        Dear god!!!!!!!! Flashy! Are you really that blind and deaf….. This statement is crazy…. Would you like to see it and hear it in his own words, uncut…. Unedited!!!! How can you defend this liar?! I voted for him in the first election….. And he lied about everything! So this last election I made sure everybody around me knew it!

        Promises…… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaQUU2ZL6D8&feature=youtube_gdata_player

        Unpatriotic…. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kuTG19Cu_Q&feature=youtube_gdata_player

        Patriot act….. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gF3MC-TkpRQ&feature=youtube_gdata_player

        Government transparency….. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CU0m6Rxm9vU&feature=youtube_gdata_player

        Civil liberties….. (ndaa specifically)…… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8qWB4Si__Q&feature=youtube_gdata_player

        Obama only lies if he talks…. No other times! Which is interesting…… Considering he hasn’t met with the whitehouse journalist in 8 months….. And when he did….. Right after he got elected….. The press started asking him about all these things he promised to be transparent about…. And Obama got mad and started threatening…… “you got a problem with me!”.

        His own words flashy! Obama….. Him….. He said these things….. But he won’t do them! He is a liar! He divided this country almost 51 to 49 percent…. He did not unite us! “I’m gonna unite america!”. If you consider civil war uniting American on the same battlefield to fight each other uniting…. Ok well he’s almost succeeded! What he meant to say was “untying Americans!”.

        Wait till you see him go after the second amendment! He’s gonna do it! Just wait and see what happens when he actually Signs an executive order to damage the 2nd amendment.

        Oh yeah….. Almost forgot this one….. Executive orders….. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xc0i6N7zVSs&feature=youtube_gdata_player

        So you keep defending this liar! He promised sequestering “would not happen”. Kinda hard to make that promise during the debate when congress makes that decision….. You can’t make a promise that is not your to make!

        Frankly….. We…… The 53%ers have paid by ourselves long enough! I’m willing….. Me….. Am willing to pay 600 more a year…. To see most of the 47% have to pay…. Then they may understand why paying for everyone else [comment has been edited]! Wow! What a concept! Having to struggle to pay taxes over and above daily living!

        Your guy may have won….. But you have lost! So have the rest of us! He said it was unpatriotic for president bush to accumulate 4 trillion in debt in 8 years! He beat that in half the time! So what is that considered?! And his promise was he’d cut the deficit in half…… Lies! Lies! Lies! Lies! Lies! Lies! Lies! Lies! Lies! Lies! Lies! Lies! What else do you call that?! His pants are on fire hanging from a telephone wire!

        Congress… It’s congresses fault! Yes! Precisely…. It’s congresses fault! The people made sure he couldn’t damage this country further by taking away his majority in congress 2 years into his term! And guess what?!…… Nothing has changed! Still has a republican congress! Blame congress! Blame the American people for choosing congress! It was the citizens that put republican congress in place as is to revoke obamas platinum credit card! When are you going to get it?! Checks and balances!

      • DaveH

        I don’t care if you’re using your Right Brain, your Left Brain, or your Lizard Brain, Thinker, your comments are illogical, conjectural, and laced with the typical manipulative techniques (name-calling, ridicule, condescension, etc.) that are the hallmarks of Liberal Progressives.

      • AJ

        Someone up there said Obama stands on no lies? I think it was Flashy something. Are you smoking Crack? You know when Obama is lying? His lips are moving just like Georges. Obama is trying for Liar of the decade neck and neck with Bush. I guess Obama will take it he has four more years to tell us woppers.

      • Doug Rodrigues

        Interesting….the left-wing propagandists are really active on this site.

      • http://tlgeer.wordpress.com tlgeer

        rabidconservative,

        “O’s election was paid for with deficit spending (borrowed money).”

        No, it was paid for by citizens donating money. Their own money.

      • Gary

        Obama is the boss, it is his job to figure it out and get it done. Blaming everybody else is not figuring it out. Wow aren’t we lucky another four years of no leadership and llstening to him blaming every body else because he can’t solve a problem.

    • Rita Paige

      How many “poor” people are actually employers? NONE that I know of. If a business owner is bringing in $1,000,000 a year, pays taxes at a rate of 35%, and he pays his 5 employees $100,000 each, he is able to take home for himself $150,000. Now, due to taxes rising and ObamaCare being implemented, he now pays 50% in taxes, he can no longer pay himself a wage. What fool will do that? He now has to lay people off so he can afford to pay himself, or go get a job from someone else at the same time as running a business, which is a full time job, or close his doors and put 5 people out of a job that will now be competing with him in the job market. Who has benefited from the rise in taxes? Oh, yeah right! No one! A bankrupt anything be it person, business, city or country simply cannot spend it’s way into prosperity. And you can only take OPM before the OP get tired of you taking their money and they quit playing and leave the game.

      • Karolyn

        Actually, Rita, there are poor people who are employers. Though their businesses may be small, they believe in them and keep striving to build that business. As far as the poor rich employers who “have” to cut their workforce or hours because of health insurance, they are a bunch of bloated, greedy, unamerican pigs, who have no regard for their fellow Americans and only regard for enriching their already overflowig coffers. Take Poppa John, for example. He lives in a 40,000 sf castle witha moat and gold course but can’t afford to pay a little more for health insurance, which could even be offset by charging another14 cents per pizza.

      • Warrior

        karolyn, sing along with me……And the wheels on the bus go round and round….round and round…..round and round…and the wheels on the bus go round and round…all through the town. There, don’t we feel better now?

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Sounds like the workings of the “free” market should be able to take care of the problem. He can do all of the things you suggested, even if you did state the extreme case to push your point. How about cutting his own wages and the wages of his employees a bit, or laying off just one employee, or raising his prices? And your business owner may be impacted some by O’BamaCare but O’Bama doesn’t want to raise his taxes if he only makes $150K.

        The obsession we see with “TAKING (or “stealing”) OPM” on this site is a straw-man cum red herring that is beloved by the JYDogs but not really valid . You ask who will benefit from an increase in taxes ON THE RICHEST 2% WHO CAN AFFORD IT AND HAVEN’T BEEN PAYING THEIR FAIR SHARE? Simple—the whole country, even the 2%—-because the only answer to deficit and debt reduction needs to be one in which a balance is struck between revenues and spending. Once we get the economy back on high speed, the rising tide will float ALL boats.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Good comment, Rita. Did you hear someone singing a song in the background because he had nothing intelligent to say? Annoying.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        OOPS—-I misspoke. I meant to say “Good comment KAROLYN”. Sorry—I would hate to further confuse the already confused on this site.

      • Jane

        Our recession has nothing to do with high taxes. They have been low for the past 10 years and this has not helped job creation. The only tax that should be lowered is the corporate rate which would bring jobs back from overseas. I am an American and feel sickened and ashamed by the disparity in wealth…….It is obscene that we have allowed this to happen. I couldn’t live without social security and medicare, my grand children are benefiting from lower interest on student loans, we recieved help from FEMA…..if this is socialism then it is the moral choice for a great country to remain great. Right now the 1% can kick in a bit more until we get back to the Clinton surplus.

      • Gordon

        It is almost humorous how some people find that increasing the expenses for consumers is expedient, yet increasing their income, or getting them a job is seemingly ignored. There is an old saying that money isn’t that important, but that only applies to folks who have lots of it.

      • Flashy

        Actually Rita…using your example…his income is $150,000 and would not be subject to any higher tax rates under President Obama’s plans.

      • Flashy

        Rita…every person who buys some article or good is an employer. There wouldn’t need to be a factory if nothing was purchased.

        That’s the con job the GOP , TPers and American Taliban are playing you with…they want you to believe the wealthy are the “makers” and “job creators”. false..the real makers and job creators are the Middle Class and other mass consumers and purchasers …without them, there’d be no factory.

      • shoalsvillagewebmaster

        ummm, Rits, you have a misconception of how this works. Employees are considered part of the cost of doing business and their pay is subtracted from gross receipts, along with other expenses like paper, computers, and amortized items, such as vehicles, before tax is applied. Therefore, using YOUR numbers $1million minus $500k (5 employees at $100k each) leaves the owner with $500k in take home profit, if there is nothing else to deduct, that would then be taxed. At a 35% tax rate (your number) would leave him with $325k.

      • http://gravatar.com/bychoosing Wake The Sleepers(Jay)

        Warrior, too funny! LOL!!!

      • DaveH

        Karolyn says — “As far as the poor rich employers who “have” to cut their workforce or hours because of health insurance, they are a bunch of bloated, greedy, unamerican pigs, who have no regard for their fellow Americans and only regard for enriching their already overflowig coffers”.
        Wow, Ms. Positive comes out of the closet.
        To the contrary, Karolyn, those “Greedy UnAmerican Pigs” are invested their own legally earned money and in the process giving otherwise useless people like yourself, Karolyn, an opportunity to earn a living without working the long hours and taking the personal and financial risks that are inherent in this heavily Socialistic System that we all labor under. And then you Greedy Liberal Progressive Pigs look a gift horse in the mouth and proceed to hire the Big Government Gang to steal their money and inhibit their productivity.

    • Joe H

      KG,
      The problem in europe is not the rich nor the concentration of it. It is their birth to death entitlement program! It is causing further debt and further shortcomings each year and THAT is what you liberals want for US!

    • Wonder

      Well said! They dont wait to increase tax at the same time they dont want to cut expenditure but expect to reduce the debts!

      • johnC

        They Increase taxes so they can increase spending …never worry about the debt ..the next guy will have that problem…lets just spend, spend, spend …some day when the bill comes in your children and grand children can pay it…we are steaing from our future generations and making them slaves to debt

      • Gordon

        John, it has worked for 50 years. Won’t it work forever?

    • http://newstips@personalliberty.com Redfray

      Raising the taxes has never worked in any society where the government is out of control.

    • George E

      KG,

      Everyone should have the same objective. That is, grow the US economy so that we have the resources to be able to afford the things we need/want. The economy grows from investments, not taxes. When the government taxes the economy it takes money that could be reinvested to grow the economy. Obviously, we need a government and the government needs to provide infrastructure, defense, law enforcement, and other critical services to support a stable and growing economy. However, when the government takes more money out of the economy than absolutely necessary (for whatever reason), it drains the economy of investment capital which could help the economy grow. Right now, the economy is struggling, so increasing taxes may cause the economy to go back into recession or even depression. Obviously, that would further decrease tax revenue and increase unemployment. Absolutely not helpful.

      Having said that, if I were a lawmaker, I’d probably be willing to agree to the increased taxes Obama is demanding IF I could get agreement on balancing the federal budget without increasing tax rates further over the next 10-15 years, and had assurances that future Congresses couldn’t alter the agreement without a super majority and Presidential approval. That would mean cutting federal spending many times over tax increases and would set us on a path of fiscal responsibility that would eventually get us out of the current financial mess we’re facing and would support a healthy and growing US economy.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Well said, George. And all that would be true if “investment” meant today what it meant back in the “golden years of the middle class” when everyone’s boat was floating higher on a rising tide of prosperity.

        Unfortunately, “investment” today means bleeding money out of the pockets of the 99% by the greedy 1% and socking it away rather than using it to grow the economy . The money that accumulates is used to just create more money for the 1% and dos not trickle down or create jobs. Look at the income and wealth inequality data—the figures are shocking and getting worse every day. The data shows the USA sinking down with third world countries rather than up with the countries of the developed world where it used to be. .

        • George E

          Right,

          Sounds like you’ve bought into the socialist propaganda. Let’s get back to building wealth and growing the economy instead of trying to equalize income. In a healthy economy there will always be disparity between the rich and poor, but most people’s situation will tend to improve over time, even if not at the same rate or amount.

      • DaveH

        Is that what the Right Brain does for you, Thinker? Lots of Conjecture?

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Well said, George. And all that would be true if “investment” meant today what it meant back in the “golden years of the middle class” when everyone’s boat was floating higher on a rising tide of prosperity.

        Unfortunately, “investment” today means bleeding money out of the pockets of the 99% by the greedy 1% and socking it away rather than using it to grow the economy . The money that accumulates is used to just create more money for the 1% and dos not trickle down or create jobs. Look at the income and wealth inequality data—the figures are shocking and getting worse every day. The data shows the USA sinking down with third world countries rather than up with the countries of the developed world where it used to be. .
        George E says:
        November 16, 2012 at 10:55 am

        Right,

        Sounds like you’ve bought into the socialist propaganda. Let’s get back to building wealth and growing the economy instead of trying to equalize income. In a healthy economy there will always be disparity between the rich and poor, but most people’s situation will tend to improve over time, even if not at the same rate or amount.

        To George,
        PROPAGANDA?…..and SOCIALIST, no less?. No George, I am talking about building wealth for ALL, not just the greedy plutocrats. We are really pretty much on the same page except for that “equalizing income” thing. I never suggested that.we should “equalize income” (that’s communist, and even they didn’t really believe it and couldn’t make it work). I suggested only that we restore a “level playing field of opportunity” and stop the greedy rich from stealing and taking from the the 99%. That we return to the investment philosophies of old where we DID create jobs and build companies and build shared wealth.

        To DaveH,
        And here I thought we were finding common ground. Instead you revert to the mindless Dave of old and get “snarky” like Snarky Bill (and I do love that word “snarky”). What “conjecture” are you talking about anyway? It is not conjecture to talk about the ever-increasing income and wealth inequality in this country. Look at the data—some of the best comes from the CIA’s yearly analysis and reporting on the issue. Look at the GINI numbers—the USA is way down the list. It is not conjecture to say that the plutocracy is privatizing gain and socializing costs and bleeding the 99%. Look at the declining incomes and wealth of the middle class. What Right Brain does for me is allow me to look at things with an open mind and try to understand underlying truths rather than react in left brain knee-jerk fashion as you so often do. You need to move over, at least closer to the middle—it won’t hurt you too much—I promise .

        • George E

          Right,

          You may not be socialist or agree with socialist ideology, but you do use some of the same slogans often used by socialist in promoting their ideology. You certainly see the world in “greedy rich versus oppressed poor” terms……….right out of Marxist teachings. If you’re not preaching socialist ideology, let’s discuss the world in real capitalist terms and solve the problems that exist using capitalist solutions. As a capitalist you would know, and believe, that capitalism is the best economic system the world has ever known, and has raised the standard of living of more people over time than any other economic system.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        OOPS! Sorry—-I often copy comments into the reply box so I can see them easily as I compose my reply. Forgot to delete all of them before I hit “post” this time. All before “To George” should be disregarded.

      • kkflash

        Right Brain, you are simply wrong. You’re NOT “talking about building wealth for all”, nor about a “level playing field of opportunity”. You’re supporting stealing from those who earned their money and giving it to those who didn’t. The 1% aren’t stealing to get their money. They have jobs and businesses that produce money through their own efforts, unlike those who rely on the government to take money by force from those who earned it and redistribute it to those who produce nothing.

        And, your statement that the top earners aren’t paying their fair share is also a fabrication. By any measure, the people at the top pay MORE than their fair share. According to the Congressional Budget Office, in 2009 (latest data I have) the top 1% of households had 13.4% of all the income but paid 22.3% of all federal taxes. Even your “right brain” should be able to do the math on that one and see they are paying a disproportionately high share of the federal bill. Meanwhile 47% of tax-filers had $0 federal income tax liability in 2010. No, it’s not about “fair” for you liberals. It’s about envy.

        • George E

          kkflash,

          I think it’s about getting power and control over everyone, especially the wealthy who have the means to challenge their political power. They don’t want to be challenged.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        KKF enlightens us with the same old broken records—-”stealing from those who earned their money and giving it to those who didn’t”—”take money by force from those who earned it and redistribute it to those who produce nothing”. That’s just not true, anymore than if I said the 1% LITERALLY steal from anyone. Stealing is against the law and the !% are, if anything, law-abiding. They show this by using every legal means possible to maximize their wealth at the expense of the 99%. I only use the “stealing” reference because it seems to be so popular among the singing parrots of the right like you—too bad you don’t really understand what you are saying when YOU use it, never mind when I do.

        Another little “parrot song” titled “….the people at the top pay MORE than their fair share” (do parrots sing?). And “by ANY measure”? BOTH THOSE SONGS ARE WRONG. Too bad you parrots like to cherry pick the data and only look at FEDERAL INCOME TAXES when you say they are paying more than their fair share. To be fair about the question of tax fairness, one must look at ALL taxes paid and compare them to total income to see what the real TAX BURDEN is. Only then can you begin to decide what “fair share” means.

        I’m quite sure I can “do the math” and I will lay out some TRUTH for you. Figures are taken from the Citizens for Tax Justice who got them from the CBO and other government sources. You can find the truth IF you look at primary sources and not at filtered and cherry-picked data from biased websites as you have likely done.

        Compare two cases. (A) makes $4,000,000 a year and may pay on that at the 35% rate if he isn’t a tax avoider like Romney and therefore pays $1,400,000 in federal income tax. (B) makes $40,000 a year and pays $0 in federal income tax. (B) is one of those moochers in the 47% that are getting a free ride according to you. Wow!—how unfair! (A) is out $1.4 mil and (B) is getting a free ride. It’s SO obvious!

        Let’s get back to TOTAL TAX BURDEN as we seek “fairness”. When you factor in federal PAYROLL taxes and all state and local taxes—property, sales, state income, gas, telephone, etc, we find that they fall much more heavily on the 47% than they do on the 1%. The actual figures for TOTAL TAX BURDEN?

        The bottom 20% pay around 17% of their income in combined taxes.

        The top 20% pay around 30% of their income in combined taxes

        …..and GUESS WHAT, the top 1% pay only 29%, slightly LESS than the rest of the top 20%. If anyone should complain about unfairness, it should be the top 19% just under the moochers in the 1%.

        So, (A), even if he pays at the top FEDERAL rate, likely has maybe $2.500,000 left after all taxes. (B), even though he has paid NO federal tax, has $33,200. Now we can talk about “fairness”. If we CUT federal income tax rates, (A) would benefit significantly and (B) would get nothing, since he “doesn’t pay taxes”—-he’s a 47%-er, a moocher that steals etc.. If we raise taxes, the little guys will be hurt more. Every dollar means a lot more to the $40,000 a year guy—the $4,000,000 a year guy probably wouldn’t bend over to pick up a $100 bill. I know which one I’d rather be—I’d gladly pay 50% on $4,000,000 and struggle to survive on the $2,000,000 that’s left.

        So, knock off the idiotic crap about “liberals” and “envy” and look at the TRUTH of the numbers. All the screaming about not raising taxes on “the job creators” and “stealing” is just a smoke screen for the greedy rich to hide behind.. The very top 1/10 of 1% make nearly all of their money by manipulating money anyway, and not by actually producing anything.

        PS I purposely used full numbers, i.e., $4,000,000 rather than $4 million so we can see how big these numbers are. (A) makes 100 times what (B) makes and to me it’s quite striking to see the full numbers laid out.

      • DaveH

        Yes, Rightbrain, Conjecture. Like this statement — “Unfortunately, “investment” today means bleeding money out of the pockets of the 99% by the greedy 1% and socking it away rather than using it to grow the economy”.
        Socking it away? Where? You have proof for that? It’s their money, so what business is it of yours if they burn it even? And if they did, the remaining money would be buy more goods and services, so you should
        rejoice instead of villifying them. Right Brain or Left Brain, the truth is that you have little knowledge about economics.

    • Gordon

      Sure, I’ll be happy to pay taxes. Know of any JOB that I can get that will net me more than $2 per hour after my direct expenses to get to it and work it?

    • DaveH

      More conjecture from KG — “We are paying less taxes than ever, and yet, have the worse economy ever”.
      Less than ever? Here is a chart of US Government revenue since 1900 as a percentage of GDP:
      http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/revenue_history

      And revenue is only part of the picture. The real issue is the Spending.

    • Bill

      You seem to be talking in circles. On one hand, you want prosperity, on the other hand you want to get those rich with higher taxes. You are a good example of America being so dumbed down, that they have no idea how economics work.

      Increasing taxes will not increase revenues. Politicians have tried this for decades and it does not work. The only way to increase tax revenues is for the economy to grow… and higher tax rates do not pave a path to prosperity.

      A vibrant, free market economy is the answer. But until people wake up to reality, we will not see that.

    • robert

      We need to cut the SPENDING…quit sending billions of dollars to foreign countries, Pakistan, Egypt, countries in Africa and Europe.. Then we can take care of the less fortunate here, the ones that have no education or desire to work at any job. If we continue to amass this DEBT, we will not be able to pay it off, we will encumber our grandchildren and they will not be able to help anyone.. STOP Spending. NO NEW TAXES ..

      • Bill

        Good comments, Robert

    • mary beardslee

      Fiscal cliff is a myth, prospects of spending cuts and tax increases is not a fiscal crisis it it a POLITICAL crisis brought on the the GOPs attempt to take the economy hostage. They are manufacturing the crisis to make the Dems extend Bushs tax cuts and accept painful cuts to social security and medicare. Stop the BS the real crisis is Jobs. We have enough of the games from all of you in Wash. Jobs..

      • Ted Crawford

        Thank You Richard Trumka Jr.! GEEZE to quote a lout, maybe ten years seperated from a street thug, surly you can find a better source for your material than that!

      • George E

        Mary,

        If “jobs” is your priority, you’re not likely to get them by 1) increasing taxes and regulations, 2) ignoring small businesses which creates most of the jobs, and 3) doing everything you can to snuff out our fossil fuels industries like the Obama administration is doing, unless of course, you want one of those “good government jobs” that pays a lot, has almost permanent job security, and has fabulous benefits all at the expense of the other poor folks out there who pay for all that.

      • Joe H

        George E.
        yup those “government Funded” jobs like solyndra where BamBam invested half a billion dollars of our tax dollars just to have it go belly up in less than a year! Good job, Bambam!!!

    • Charles A

      KG has a twisted, perverted sense of reality. He reverses all logic to claim that over-burdening us with taxes is the only way out of this situation. The government just isn’t extorting enough. He slices and dices, he uses a pseudo-medical example which has no correlation to the economy. And, as liberals always do, he ignores the fact that our problems were caused by the government, not by the economic system.

    • Warrior

      Luke ”The Drifter” says:

      “We Americans got so tired of being thought of as dumbasses by the rest of the world that we went to the polls this November and removed all doubt.”

      • Joe H

        Warrior,
        Speak for yourself, my friend. Bambam has NEVER gotten a vote from ME!!!

    • Jim Wright

      Lets get something straight, people, including me, do not invest money out of the goodness of their hearts. Employers do not hire out of the goodness of their hearts and they do not normally lay off employees for the heck of it. There is a cost to hire people and the employer must see a reason to take that risk of limited capital. If there is nothing to gain from investing (risking) my money, which is where Mr. Obama desires to take this country, investments will continue to dry up and along with that hiring (employment) will fall even further. People are not being taught how economies work and I have met several both young and older who have no idea how economic systems work. From the policies Mr. Obama espouses, he has a limited understanding of Kensington economics which have been completely refuted in more recent times. This is typical of the left. If you desire this country to get going again and avoid the economic and social problems of the western European socialist countries we must correct our path and not follow their example.

      • Bill

        Good Comments Jim,
        You are so right about people having no knowledge about how economics work. Just listen to some of the comments from the progressives who have invaded these posts. I have never heard any of the progressives discuss GDP numbers, which indicate how our economy is doing. Or how after taking over the Carter recession ( with 10% unemployment, 15% inflation and 21% interest rates) Reagans GDP numbers after three years in office were in the 6 and 7% range.

        Or how Hong Kong, with one tax only of 17% on businesses, has created the most vibrant economy in the world. Hong Kong people think that 4% GDP is recession.

        Yes, the dumbing down of America is alive and well

      • Right Brain Thinker

        “Kensington economics”? Haven’t heard of that “school”—-can you recommend a source so we can study up on it?

        • richard brooks

          to Jim Wright:
          Lets get something straight, people, including me, do not invest money out of the goodness of their hearts. Employers do not hire out of the goodness of their hearts and they do not normally lay off employees for the heck of it.<<

          a business requires customers. will your low wage employees earn enough to be a customer?

          btw- i do invest occasionally simply to help without any expectation of return. you should try it. i also give money that i can not write off. never heard of compassion have you.

    • Public Citizen

      To use your own analogy – it’s like a guy trying to cut off his arm, the solution is to stop cutting ~~and staunch the bleeding~~.
      This country is ~~haemorrhaging~~ jobs and money.
      The only solution offered from the left is to spend more and raise taxes. The only solution coming from the right is to not raise taxes and cut spending.
      We have seen a concentration of wealth in this country since the 1970s that is of historic proportions in the entirety of recorded history. At the same time we have seen entire industries subjected to taxes and restrictions that have driven them out of the country [I'm including the excessive demands of unions in the restrictions column].
      Meanwhile we have allowed a free ride on the “welfare” [ the only ones who have gotten well are the professional welfare workers] train for an ever increasing percentage of the population,a percentage that has now reached the point where the train is being slowed down by the drag on the system. In the background the sound of “Helicopter Ben” ferrying in another load of “free” money gets louder as the ponzi scheme of the Federal Reserve buying Treasury Debt with money magicked into existence out of thin air continues.
      The only way out is for everybody to give something. The left is going to have to give up on the notion that the government as Santa Claus can replace a functioning traditional family and that the corrupt spending deals can continue without consequence. In addition the red tape and regulation have to be cut to a level that will allow industry to once again function in this country. The right is going to have to accept marginal tax rates similar to those we had in the Eisenhower and Kennedy years, the high water mark for the success of the US as providing the most for the greatest number of people.
      The people are going to have to get off their Obamaphones and American Idol Stupor and get to work instead of expecting somebody else to provide them a lifestyle above what the majority of the world is able to obtain with hard work and sweat.
      The consequences of not compromising will be the Weimar Republic 2.0 and all that followed.

      • richard brooks

        Meanwhile we have allowed a free ride on the “welfare” [ the only ones who have gotten well are the professional welfare workers] train for an ever increasing percentage of the population,a percentage that has now reached the point where the train is being slowed down by the drag on the system. In the background the sound of “Helicopter Ben” ferrying in another load of “free” money gets louder as the ponzi scheme of the Federal Reserve buying Treasury Debt with money magicked into existence out of thin air continues.
        The only way out is for everybody to give something. The left is going to have to give up on the notion that the government as Santa Claus can replace a functioning traditional family and that the corrupt spending deals can continue without consequence. In addition the red tape and regulation have to be cut to a level that will allow industry to once again function in this country. The right is going to have to accept marginal tax rates similar to those we had in the Eisenhower and Kennedy years, the high water mark for the success of the US as providing the most for the greatest number of people.
        The people are going to have to get off their Obamaphones and American Idol Stupor and get to work instead of expecting somebody else to provide them a lifestyle above what the majority of the world is able to obtain with hard work and sweat.<<

        the free ride is being given to the professional corporate welfare raider. the farm blocs and the foreign country's.

        end the gop manipulation of the labor pool.

        tax rates will have to be increased on the high end earners.

        the majority of the world is what we are becoming. hard work and sweat labor does not provide a better life style. low wages are the problem. and will continue to be the problem.

    • wandamurline

      So what you are saying is that you are a socialist and believe that the working should take care of the nonproductive…just because the rich actually worked for what they have and this is somehow evil and they need to give it to others. Ridiculous. People gripe about CEO and what they make, but as long as the company is making a profit and not asking for a government bail out, it is the company’s business how and who they pay….that is the true nature of capitalism….a form of business that has helped America prosper for decades and now, suddenly it is bad? More of the problem are the unions, who are sucking the livelihood out of the entire business world as they want more and more….the unions are a bigger problem than the overpaid CEO’s because of demographics…there are more of them and then you have to calculate into the problem, the illegals who cross our borders without any invitation (they call it tresspassing) and then have their hands sticking out for us to provide for them instead of providing for themselves as the legal immigrants have done in the past….look at California….it needs to go back to being part of Mexico. Whether or not you like taxes….you are fixing to get a gut full of them….from the Bush tax cuts expiring, and Obamacare….hope you like what you are going to receive.

    • Bud Tugly

      Taxes are the price of civilization. They pay for military, infrastructure, education and all the other things a society needs to prosper. Of course there are moochers in the welfare system, but the majority of recipients are those incapable of functioning in society (my mother was a welfare worker and most of her “clients” fell into that category. Consider Dickens-era london. There was no welfare. The tiny minority of the rich held all the power and the poor were forced into perpetual petty crime as there was no alternative for survival.”Scrooge said “Are there no prisons? …Are there no work houses?” Is that what we want for America?

      Let those who have benefited most show their real patriotism by chipping in a bit more. Every rational economist debunks the “trickle down” theory – or as it really is the “tinkle down” theory. I will not set foot in a Walmart anymore because of what they have done to many American businesses. The Walton family, who INHERITED the once great American company, has as much wealth as the lower 40% combined yet they reward their employees who earn the money for them by withholding benefits and paying subsistence wages.

      Who is Grover Norquist anyway? Did anyone elect him to anything? He started out as a right wing nut job flunky for Bill Maher – someone to look stupid on the show to make Maher look smart by contrast. Why does the GOP voluntarily give that nerd so much power? Hooray for the real American heroes, Republicans in congress who are walking away from their pledge to that colon and dealing with the pragmatic realities of today’s problems.

      And how about Marco Rubio? – so afraid of Taliban-like fundamentalists that he denies science. If this is the type of rising star the GOP is looking to for leadership we are in deep doo doo as a nation.

      I long for the likes of Dight D. Eisenhower… a great man with the vision to understand the core problems and warned us against them… sadly his warnings are being ignored for the sake of dogma convenient for the rapacious to stay in control.

      • macgyver1948

        Bud Tugly… Excellent example bringing in the Dickens-era London. It happened that way there, then, and it always has in history when an apathetic small percentage of the populous tends to control the major percentage of the wealth. Any who think it cannot happen here are renting their gray matter out to that small percentage of wealth controllers. Give in to self serving conflict-of-interest pledges like the Norquist one, which favors only the wealthy and gives all the control to the corporations/banks, and we have our own Dickens-era economy in the making. Without a strong middle class we, the forgotten middle class, will all be ugly unwanted orphans.

        In Dickens day there was nothing like Social Security, Medicare or any kind of deserved welfare because those who had it all refused to share and help. We have that today with those who wanted to leave the deserving out in the cold. But we do have a lot of welfare for those who need it the least, those with the money. I am not saying take it all from those who have the money but let’s not give those at the top more than we give those in need and deserve.

        You ask ‘who is Grover Norquist?’. Well, he was a bush jr advisor and he holds no elected post now either. He is super wealthy with huge amounts of clout. He controls the lives and careers of over 270 TPGOP in Congress and he controls their votes in Congress with his pledge. He promised the TPGOP loads of financial backing and all the help they need to be elected for the purpose of yielding power. He also says if they betray his pledge, or they do not sign it, “they will become toast”, his words. Sounds like extortion to me. Romney and Ryan are signors and Norquist also said, when Romney is elected President (LOL), “Romney will do as he is told”.

        Maybe that is why they hated Obama since so long before he was elected the first time, Obama wouldn’t sign the Pledge. We should all know what is controlling the TPGOP in Congress by way of this pledge so we can really know who the TPGOP really represents. He says he wants the tax base and the budget to go back to what they were at the start of the 20th century, “small enough to fit in a bath tub”, again his words. This way all the programs which he wants dead, such as Social Security and Welfare, would starve out of existence. Guess who else would starve.

        You mention Eisenhower. Well, the group the TP evolved from, The John Birch Society, labeled Ike as a commie perhaps because Ike wanted fairness and balance and didn’t favor the Corporations exclusively. Meet the new group, same as the old group in that ‘all are commies who do not agree with us’. The JBS also fought vigorously against Civil Rights in the 1960′s and one of the creators and huge financiers of JBS was the father of the Koch brothers who are chips of their old block.

        You also mention Rubio… With them you have to deny science because with science you might have regulation, even the very necessary kind, and you cant have that. Anything for the best benefit and protection of the big corporations and the mega wealthy.

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

      kg; It was a Demo-rat, JFK who first came up with the idea of tax cuts across the board and it worked, Rommey did it and it worked, Bush did it and it worked then the Demo-rat house screwed it all up and want to continue down that path.
      With obozo care you’ll see less Doctors and more elderly, planned to kill of those who draw SS and get Medicare, the dead don’t need to be paid. You libs are like rats on a sinking ship, you’ll be eating each other soon. Higher taxes hurt everyone except those who live off the labor of others and there are way too many of those under this administration.
      Get oil from our enemies when we have more oil then them and who’s fault is that? The Demo-rats and the greens who just love obozo-green. You guys are the problem.

      • Bud Tugly

        Bush did it and it worked? On what planet? Certainly not Earth.

        Norquist and his cronies have successfully deluded you.

      • http://tlgeer.wordpress.com tlgeer

        “With obozo care you’ll see less Doctors and more elderly, planned to kill of those who draw SS and get Medicare”

        This has not happened with SS or Medicare in all these years. What facts lead you to believe that it will happen now?

    • Doug Rodrigues

      How about an extreme (by Liberals standards) cure for the debt?: STOP SPENDING MONEY WE DON’T HAVE !

      • richard brooks

        How about an extreme (by Liberals standards) cure for the debt?: STOP SPENDING MONEY WE DON’T HAVE ! <<

        two wars. drug intervention in 57 country's. foreign aid. corporate welfare. when is the gop going to stop spending money???

  • Adrian

    When I read the point about the federal deficit being $1 trillion a year, I thought – he’s got that wrong, there’s no way it could be that high, that would just be crazy. So I went into Wikipedia and looked it up, sure that I was going to be posting a ‘you’ve got your facts wrong’ comment. But no, it has actually been over $1 trillion for each of the last 4 years. Crazy, If it’s true that this is a third of govt spending, then that means that the govt is essentially borrowing the equivalent of half their income. If I knew someone who was spending the equivalent of half their income on their credit card each year, without paying off a penny, I would tell them that they were crazy and would easily go bankrupt in no time. It seems the govt is that person, and is saying ‘I’ll get a pay rise sooner or later and then I’ll be able to pay it off’. This is delusional. The US would need China-size levels of growth in national income to be able to even stop borrowing and that’s not going to happen to a developed economy. So my advice to this credit card addict would be ‘just stop. spend what you earn, live within your means, and then when your income does grow, you will be able to pay the debt back’.

    • johnC

      You do realize that Congress and the president have no intention of paying off the debt after all when they are out of office it will be someone elses problem. The President blames the Republican house but ignors the democrat controlled senate who have not passed a budget in 4 years…seems the house sends bufgets to the senate and Harry Reid decides to not even allow it to come to a vote.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        You do realize that you’re just parroting the wing nut talking points, don’t you? The reason that the Senate hasn’t passed a budget is that they will not capitulate to the Ryans of the House that keep slipping insane and unacceptable things in there. The Ryans then turn around and go “see?” when the senate does the right thing.

        I am reminded of what some “dirty” football players do. Do something to get an opposing player incensed, go tell the ref to:”Watch that guy, he’s been doing bad stuff”, and hope that the player WILL do something and get penalized for it. In this case the whole country would be penalized if Harry passed a budget. Those of us with any sense see through all that and thank Harry and the Senate for holding the line.

      • DaveH

        You do realize, Thinker (yeah right), that both major Parties are taking us down the Road to Serfdom? It’s interesting that you used a football reference because that is exactly how the Crony Capitalists ply their trade. While the people chant mindlessly for their team, the Leaders and the Crony Capitalists are robbing us blind.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        We can agree on something for once, Dave.

        Yes, BOTH parties have contributed to the mess. Read “Winner Take All Politics” for a good take on that. And it IS the crony capitalists of the !% that drive it all with their greed. And it’s also true that the Repugnants have been far more culpable.

        And it’s not “right” as in “correct” but a metaphor for certain personality traits and thought processes that used to be associated with right and left sides of the brain but are now moving more to amygdala vs frontal cortex as new research is done. You should try to use the “right side” more and get out of the “left side”—it would help you wrap your brain around the problems from a more complete perspective.

      • DaveH

        You should try some actual Thinking and Reading, Thinker.
        Both Parties have been infiltrated by Crony Capitalists. Some of the Cronies play both sides. Read this book and learn something:
        http://www.amazon.com/The-Big-Ripoff-Business-Government/dp/0471789070

      • DaveH

        So, Thinker, how would you address the issue of Crony Capitalists? What policies would you implement if you were King that would benefit the citizens most?

      • Right Brain Thinker

        I DO read, DaveH. A lot. And I DO think, also a lot. And I use the right side way more in my thinking so I can see the big picture, rather than be like you, constantly playing your left side two-note tune for us.

        And why are you so “snarky”? Why can’t you just engage in a debate without “snarks”? Or is it that I and many others have wounded you deeply by having better arguments than you or pointing out the serious shortcomings in your “thinking” (and I use that word with reservations). It’s perhaps OK to be a bit hurt and resentful when you lose, Dave, but adopting that at your permanent “style” is immature.

        Now let’s see if you are even listening. If you aren’t, we can all expect a brief and “snarky” response that says nothing of importance.

      • DaveH

        As usual, all I get from the Liberal Progressive is double-speak and ad hominem attacks.
        Come back when you can give me a coherent response, Brain (Right).

      • Right Brain Thinker

        That’s it Dave. I have tried to counsel you and help you “see some light” on several occasions. You refuse to pay attention and have again made a “snarky” response that says nothing of importance. Someone asked me if I thought some people on the site were “stupid”. You are perhaps the best example of that on the whole site, and I say that after watching you in action across many threads. I’m too old to waste time on stupid so I will not respond to your comments or “come back” to another one of your replies. Go play with those who will tolerate you but don’t be surprised if fewer and fewer enter into exchanges with you. If you haven’t noticed, that seems to be happening already.

        Double-speak, ad hominem, and coherent. Lord love a duck.

        DaveH says:
        November 16, 2012 at 9:45 pm
        As usual, all I get from the Liberal Progressive is double-speak and ad hominem attacks.
        Come back when you can give me a coherent response, Brain (Right).

      • DaveH

        The Liberal Progressives don’t “exchange” with me, Brain, because they have no logical or factual comebacks to my arguments. So like yourself, Brain, they must resort to adolescent manipulative tactics like I might expect from my 12 year old grandchild.

      • Joe H

        Right brain thinker,
        you DO remember that in his first term Bambam locked the repubs out of all talks on Bambam care, don’t you?

      • Right Brain Thinker

        In scanning through the postings, I saw something significant in a post from “He-who-is-ignored by nearly all” and though it needed pointing out.

        Doing a little arithmetic, it appears that H-W-I-I-B-N-A is older than his posts would indicate. In order to have a 12-year-old grandchild as he states, he must be at least 26 himself. I look forward to hearing the news when he announces that he is a great-grandfather in a couple of years.

        Congratulations in advance! May the dynasty of ignorance live and prosper!

      • Right Brain Thinker

        OOOOPS In my attempt to be “Snarky” like “He-who-is-ignored by nearly all”, I got over-eager and made a mistake. (My only excuse is that I’m new to “snarky” and got excited). The math needs to be carried out one more generation. It’s H-W-I-I-B-N-A’s CHILD who is around 26 and H-W-I-I-B-N-A himself is therefore maybe 40. Definitely older than his posts would indicate. Sorry for the error. Never said I was perfect (and I am one of the few on this site that have ever admitted that and/or apologized for an error). My congratulations on impending great-grandfatherhood still stand.

    • Cliffystones

      Won’t it be an interesting day when the Chinese send in their repo guys?

      • DaveH

        China only owns a small percentage of US Debt. The majority is held by the Federal Reserve. China held about $1.15 Trillion of US debt in 2011 (about 8%).
        The Federal Reserve held about $4.7 Trillion of US debt in 2011 (about 47%).

      • DaveH
    • DaveH

      Good for you, Adrian, for investigating. It’s good to know there are still people who are interested in truth.
      I always advised my children that if they couldn’t live within their means and borrowed now, how were they going to be able to live within their means later with the additional debt burden to pay back?

  • Tony

    KG I’m pretty sure you do not pay taxes or you would know how it feels to work and pay taxes for a bunch of lazy able bodies.

    • Joe H

      WELL SAID, TONY!!!!!

  • hipshotpercusion

    Socialism is a great form of government, until you run out of other peoples money.
    Margret Thatcher

  • http://gillysrooms.blogspot.com GILLY FROM AUSTRALIA

    Your tax policies are a mess and i find them impossible to understand, And you have state death duties another rort and not very smart… the states that get rid of it will prosper i can assure you.

    The Chicken game is a very dangerous game your playing with everyones money being put at risk in a rollercoaster ride on the stockmarkets and lifting everybodys STRESS LEVEL, some may even get heart attacks and die just so some politician can get a lift in their egos?

    Fix it fast is my opinion.

    • Right Brain Thinker

      Gilly, it is NOT just something that involves “ego lifts” for politicians. We are engaged in a deadly serious battle for the future of this country and, as you have pointed out, by extension, the world economy. The plutocracy drives this battle, and they have apparently sheltered their assets enough that they don’t care what happens to the 99%.

      • George E

        Gilly,

        I hope you can see socialist talk when you read it. “99%”…………..These guys are going to take care of us if we’ll just give them all of our money and personal liberties……………“We’re from the government and we’re here to help you!” Yeah, sure…………… I’m not buying that line, and I hope others won’t either.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        George,
        You are showing that you allow your buttons to be pushed when you go off like this just because you see “99%”. You prove it by launching into the mindless talking points like

        “give them our money” “personal liberties” “government”

        Which tells us nothing except that you have some deeply held beliefs that you are not really willing to examine in any way. That’s left brained and of little use in dealing with a situation that requires rational analysis of FACTS rather than emotional outbursts based on pure belief.

        • George E

          Right,

          I’ll look at the “facts” when presented to me, and I will consider them as objectively as I can. However, like everyone else, I’m not 100% objective because I have my built-in biases constructed on a foundation of traditional conservative values, Christian teachings, and capitalist economics. What are your foundational values?

      • DaveH

        Right Brain, Left Brain, or just another name-calling manipulative Liberal Progressive?
        Can you tell us who those 1% are, and how we can remedy that?
        Yeah, I know, I will brace myself for more verbal abuse.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        George, you said: “I’m not 100% objective because I have my built-in biases constructed on a foundation of traditional conservative values, Christian teachings, and capitalist economics”. It’s good that you show such self-awareness and are honest enough to say it. You need to read The Republican Brain to understand the implications of all that and become even more self aware..

        You ask “What are your foundational values”? I was probably quite close to you 50 years ago but have moved a bit since then, especially in the past 30 years, and definitely in the last ten. What has happened since O’Bama’s election in 2008 really sealed the deal for me. (And when I look at it, I haven’t moved all that far—it’s just that so many others have gone screaming past me to the right, many of them into the land of the junk yard dogs). I subscribed to traditional conservative values more strongly back when, but those “traditional” values have become so corrupted that I can no longer recognize them.

        I subscribe to Christian TEACHINGS, but not to the teachings of many of our present day Christian churches—their IS a big difference, Since Jesus was and is a liberal, I am too. I think the teachings of Christ about having concern for the poor and his egalitarianism pretty much says it all for me. The golden rule should “rule” us all.

        I support capitalism but not the run-amok “free markets” that have corrupted capitalism by allowing the plutocrats and “greedy rich” to steal from everyone else.

        I subscribe to rationality, open-mindedness, and looking at the facts of a situation before taking a stand—-the right brain type of thinking so characteristic of liberals. (As opposed to the closed-minded left brain thinking style of conservatives, who resist change in spite of clear evidence that it might sometimes be necessary)

      • Joe H

        George E.
        Yup just like Greece. Cradle to grave care & Dam the consequences! Like your countries debt being higher than your GDP! Like having to borrow massive amounts of money from foriegn countries who will now have a say in how you will run your country if you want to continue recieving these funds!!! The price is TOO HIGH!!!

        • George E

          Joe H,

          I think it’s likely our government will default on its promises to the American people before defaulting on its obligations to its bondholders. At least that’s the way it should work out, difficult as it will be for the politicians. I expect the Democrats, after seeing the “handwriting on the wall”, will figure out a way of doing this and blaming it on the Republicans, even though it’s been the Republicans who have been trying to call attention to the fact that our entitlement programs need to be reformed if we don’t want them to go bankrupt.

      • DaveH

        What you “subscribe” to, Brain (Right), is the typical Liberal Progressive manipulative techniques, their conjecture, and their lack of logic. Whether that comes from your right brain, your left brain, your lizard brain or some other has no bearing on your arguments.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        I am now convinced that JoeH and DaveH are the same person. Look at the time stamp on their postings. That means that DaveH, in addition to being stupid and immature, has a split personality and is now TALKING TO HIMSELF I wonder if we will meet any other H’s along the way. LOL

        It’s a shame that George and I can’t have a serious discussion without having Mr. Snarky and Stupid get in the way. And yes, I know I said that I would ignore DaveH (and now also JoeH), but I thought it would be valuable for the group to see this new revelation about Dave—or is it Joe?—or really Dave? Back to ignoring him and all his “others”.

        (And it should not be forgotten that a fart in church does get one’s attention).

      • DaveH

        You just proved my point, “Brain”. Thanks.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        George E,

        It’s a shame some of us can’t have a decent discussion without others getting in the way and cluttering up the thread with what can only be characterized as “turds in the punchbowl”. That they then think they are intelligent and clever for doing so is beyond understanding.

        I do quarrel a bit with your statement that “it’s been the Republicans who have been trying to call attention to the fact that our entitlement programs need to be reformed if we don’t want them to go bankrupt”. In fact, rational people of all political stripes (our president first and foremost) have recognized the need to make some adjustments to entitlement programs, including “entitlements” such as those that allow some corporations to pay no taxes, oil companies to get unwarranted subsidies, and the rich to pay less than their fair share in taxes.

        The real problem is the refusal of the Repugnants to deal with the need for increasing taxes on the 1% or 2% as part of a balanced debt reduction strategy. They won’t do the rational thing because GROVER and the specter of what happens to those who go back on THE PLEDGE governs their thinking, NOT the wishes of those who elected them or the greater good of the nation. GROVER wants to “shrink the government down so that it’s small enough to drown in a bathtub” and the Repugs follow him like sheep—THAT’S
        the problem.

        And be reminded that I have already said that Grover is just a shill for the rich and that’s why he came up with pledge—-so that the rich wouldn’t have to pay their fair share—-and the circle is now closed.

  • Jim

    Both sides of the isle gave away the store. NAFTA has shipped millions of manufacturing jobs overseas and left nothing in their place other than a growing debt and a growing group of marginalized people. The suits in Washington don’t really give a flip about the common man. Obama wants more taxes, he promised to increase the cost of fuel so we could go green, that will happen; He promised to take us out of war by shakes a mean sabre. UN observers at the election polls?! UN gun control?! Remember, the Democrats are also millionaires and billionaires. Wake up! No country has risen out of ecomoniuc disaster without a strong manufacturing base. So-called service jobs are not only demeaning, but they do not bring a real sense of accomplishment to those who work them.

    • Gordon

      Demeaning? Maybe for those with too much pride to actually have to work for a living. I was offered a job at 1/5 of what I was making but had to go 150 miles and stay at my own expense to work it. Netting $2 an hour after taxes and non-deductable expenses. Would you do that?

      • Gordon

        Oh ya, and I was expected to wait 3 weeks to get paid. Another thing, the new unemployment rules say that I made too much money last summer so now I can draw ZERO. wth?

      • Jim

        Worked for a living since I was fourteen. I’m 67 and still working.

  • http://www.thelonepatriot.blogspot.com OrionRon

    If the Republicrats were smart (and by and large they are not), they would give the President the Tax increases on high income earners that he wants in exchange for FREEZING (not cutting, freezing) all Federal Spending at the 2012 levels for the next 4 YEARS. The freeze would include delay of any further implementation of ObamaCare until 2017.

    The rationale is simple; tax hikes will stall the economy and we cannot risk hammering the taxpayers with another 2500 pages of more taxes, regulation and spending until it recovers from this next shock and until the debt curve starts to at least flatten.

    Citizens will then see first hand whether or not “taxing the rich” really helps or hurts (or neither) and the Republicans could not be accused of making drastic cuts in the middle of a fragile recovery as 2012 spending levels are way above pre-crisis spending.

    Most importantly, they give the President his precious tax increase which he would then own.

    As I said, they are not smart enough to do this as I really believe that they’d rather be political punching bags for another 4 years.

  • http://gillysrooms.blogspot.com GILLY FROM AUSTRALIA

    Governments have over time become just like the Union Movement or Crime Syndicates made up of politicians who have been given the power to take from the haves to give to the multitude who are poor. A legalised crime gang…nothing more really. Eventually the haves wont bother trying any more and the whole nation becomes poorer….destitute…America and Australia are both heading in that direction.

    I know many people who have decided to stop taking risks or doing anything much really deciding to retire early and selling up or closing down…after all why should they bother fighting all these regulations where even in Australia you cant rent out rooms in a house without a multitude of regulations in case of fire, whilst thousands die on roads every year they dont ban cars.. The result is the homeless sleep in tents because thats legal in a caravan park and freeze to death beause tents dont have locks only zips in case of fire they can get out quick whilst almost frozen to death in winter…. what a load of belone…but thats whats happening in socialist Australia today under our conservative government in the State of Victoria..they are no better than the official socialists running the Federal Government today.

  • AL CRACKER

    KG is right, to a point. It is time to shut up and allow the fools that continue to vote for the idiots,democrats,liberals to destroy everything America stands for. I for one have shut down my business,terminated all labor(i enjoyed that as they voted for Obama) will be moving to South America and do what they do. One exception, I will live off of what I generated …because I did do it. America is not yours or mine. Our fore fathers left europe because of the same socialist policies, Now it is time for those who understand freedom to move on.

    • Mark Esche

      Adios, Dude! Could you take Rush along with you?

      • Nadzieja Batki

        Al Cracker is as much of a fool as you are, Mark Esche.Al Cracker you will be loved in South America as long as you have money to throw around, once it is gone what will you do? They don’t have enough jobs for their own people and you think they will be tripping over themselves running to give you jobs because you are you.

    • Right Brain Thinker

      Uh, Cracker—do you really think our forefathers left Europe because of the SOCIALIST polices that George III and the other kings and aristocracies were following?. Enjoy SA—maybe you think there is no socialism down there?

    • KG

      Uh… I wouldn’t count on any Navy SEALS to come and rescue you when your neighbors find out that you are a rich American. Remember, there will ALWAYS be more people than bullets.

    • walter agard

      AL Cracker, you are calling the president senseless names that is not true. How much you want the president to do in such short time.Don’t you have patient.Nothing can be done overnight. You have so good here in america that you do not even realize it .Are you sure you want to move to S America? You couldnt make 2 weeks there.There are too much good things here for you That you are accustom to.In south America, the people are accustom to what they have.If they come over here, they can adapt to this system more than you con adapt to theirs faster, because you would have to start all over again and how much time do you have for that?

      • Joe H

        Walter agard,
        Short time?? Let’s not forget that even HE said if he couldn’t fix the economy in four years he DESERVED to be a ONE TERM PRES!!! It would be different if his policies were making a GOOD difference. In August of 2011 there was a ZERO job growth rate and that hasn’t happened since the great depression!!

  • http://www.chandostransportsolutions.com GraemeB

    Who the he!! is this Grover Norquist?. Not even an elected representative. And he has all these twits sign a pledge to not raise taxes?? Are they nuts. It’s no wonder Romney was soundly beaten. Tell your representative to get a life. You cannot have two wars, lower tax revenues and a failed trickle down fiasco of a welfare tax plan for the wealthiest, and then expect them to create jobs. They don’t have to, they are making too much money as it is now, and in the meantime the balance sheets of corporate America, have $6 tillion in cash sitting there doing nothing.
    Cut the military addiction to crazy spending, raise the taxes on the 2%, and cut earmarks and entitlements. But this craziness that is Norquist, Cantor and Ryan has to change. The rest of the world looks askance at the US and thinks we are nuts. And GOP are nuts. The electorate re-elected Obama to do this very thing. To do otherwise will mean the demise of the GOP in 2014. They elected you to work in the interests of the nation, not the welfare billionaires and banking interests. Cut the tax loopholes that allow a billionaire to deduct $6 million when buying his new executive jet. That is obscene!

    • Right Brain Thinker

      Hear, hear, Graeme and Marc. I have often asked the same about Grover Norquist. He is a shill for the 1% through his Americans for Tax Reform group. He was a close friend of Jack Abramoff back in college, where they both worked to start the Young Republicans group. Jack later went to jail. Grover should also—or maybe be shot for treason because that’s what his activities border on in terms of the damage he has done to the country. The no-tax pledge he and his ilk have coerced so many legislators into signing is a subversion of the system in that it takes away the rights of the citizenry to have true representation. A congressman should be able to vote his conscience and for the best interests of his constituents without worrying that GROVER will get him if he violates the pledge. It is INSANE to say NEVER to a tax increase. Grover is a hostage taker and little more than a thug in a suit.

  • Marc

    ” Never have so many suffered so much
    For so few to be so happy”

    • walter agard

      You best cling on to what you have right now, OBAMA , along with us also yourself is working to try to make living better for all of us-that is if you want to join in-,and it cant happen overnight,this economy is badly damaged.So if you are in a hurry,I would say, take what you get and wait for what you want.

  • Jim B

    Money is being pulled out of the markets by the billions daily, and government barrows by the billions daily. This simply cannot continue for long, and frankly I’m surprised it has continue for so long without devastating affects…. Yet! America is slowly losing its way, you can see it, feel it as expressed within these pages. Have we become so dumb and blind that we cannot see what government has become, and what they have taken from us piece by piece. America is asleep, and it can be no more evident, for if we saw with our own eyes what is happening to us we surely would fight back. Surfdumb has taken over, government is in charge of us now and our free nation is disappearing… quickly.

  • Polski

    It would be nice if our President, our Senators, and our Representatives actually REPRESENTED us, like they are supposed to. Our President is going to turn over the United States of America to the ILLEGAL ALIENS OF MEXICO AND THE REST OF THE LATINS. Here in Washington state, our 2 Senators, Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell, are ILLEGAL ALIENS. Well, according to NUMBERS, USA they are both rated F-. They have NEVER VOTED FOR US, THE UNITED STATES CITIZENS. They have ALWAYS VOTED FOR THE ILLEGAL ALIENS. So with 20 MILLION ILLEGAL ALIENS taking the jobs that are meant for US CITIZENS, why do you think we have high unemployment? Why do you think we have an economic crisis? Why do you think the MIDDLE CLASS HAS DISAPPEARED?

  • jopa

    Some more gloom and doom being predicted here again I see.When you take this 1.3 trillion and divide that by ten which is a decade that doesn’t sound like a whole lot in todays world.Most writers put the ten year number out to impress their readers with these huge sums.Why not say 2.6 trillion over two decades and really be scary.Also there is no such thing as a fiscal cliff we are going to plunge over on a specific date.If it’s a little late it would merely be a little bump in the road but that’s not as impressive or scary enough for the public to start trembling.Or should I say the readers that are here in this bubble.

  • richard brooks

    how many business’ can remain solvent with out a customer. as we continue to pay less, and increase the number of unemployed, business’ fight over the few remaining customers. the inevitable result is fewer business’.
    a study of the most prosperous economy’s reveal that wages were the highest during those times. that created more customers which increased the number of company’s and their profits.
    unless you are willing to accept less income, how can you demand that someone else take less?

  • http://wildeyguns.com The Christian American

    No, it’s a congress working agains the America it swore to protect and a president working against the America he swore to protect. In the middle there’s a huge bowl of vanilla pudding watching and waiting to be eaten by them. They all, except for a few Americans in their midst, should be tarred and feathered and run out of the country. When wolves come around, sheep circle. The one’s in the middle feel safe as the wolves eat the one’s on the outer perimeter, to stupid to realize they’ll be next.

    I know the magicians have us looking at celebrities, what they wear or drive or eat but it looks like Armaggedon is starting in the mid east people. The Zionist are pulling out all strings to get us involved in a war with Iran, and now. Are these bomb shelters they’re building in the district of criminals to protect us? Take a look at RT.com if you want some world news. Not even Drudge is reporting this.

    • DaveH

      Of course. Leaders have always looked out for themselves first. As this article states — “To say governments were formed to protect the rights of men would be historically incorrect. Almost all governments were formed by ruthless men exerting their will over others through the use of force”.
      http://mises.org/daily/3427

      • http://wildeyguns.com The Christian American

        America was the exception. Now it’s just another wave rushing to the beach. 2Corinthinians 3:17 Now the Lord is that Spirit; and hwere the Spirit of the Lord is, there is Liberty. No Lord. No liberty, and no America.

      • DaveH

        Even with America, Christian, there were those wishing to thwart the concept of Freedom and Force the Gang on the rest of their citizens. People such as the deceptive Alexander Hamilton who was smart enough to bide his time and achieve his power gradually as people over time forgot how dangerous Big Government was to their Freedom and Prosperity. Read this to learn who the real Alexander Hamilton was:
        http://www.amazon.com/Hamiltons-Curse-Jeffersons-Revolution-Americans/dp/0307382850

  • DaveH

    Chip says — “If I were a conservative legislator in Washington today, what would I do? I’d stick to the promises I made that got me there. I’d insist that our government needs to spend less and tax less, and I’d vote only for legislation that helps move the country in that direction”.
    But what if you were a Neoconservative legislator (most of them) who got there with funding from their favorite Crony Capitalists?

  • LC

    I would raise the minimum wage to 10 dollars an hour before I would raise taxes. At least this would add to taxes being paid in and encourage consumer spending to aide the economy at the same time. Health care should stay at the state level. Cut spending for foriegn countries. How come it’s ok to take billions from our education programs yet continue to send billions to foreign countries? I for one am sick of government accomplishing nothing and getting paid the whole time. Put them on a results driven pay structure. NO work! NO pay! As for entitlement, just like any other paycheck, if you can’t pass the fed enforced drug test you don’t get a check,food, benes,etc…. Enough of the free loading on all levels. End the rich tax breaks, stop supporting drug addicts with tax dollars, no tax break for corps or migrant workers, stop spending overseas, stop spending on endless,unproductive war, stop paying a gov’t that doesn’t work. There’s alot to be done and gov’t needs to get off their ass and start doing the work required to restore this nation.

    • DaveH

      When minimum wages go up, employment goes down. If an employer is faced with paying an employee $10 an hour, and the employee is expected to produce only $9 an hour, what employer in his right mind would be expected to hire that guy who will lose him money?
      Business owners aren’t in business to lose money.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        And workers are not “in business” to be treated like slaves.

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

          Dear Right Brain Thinker,

          You write: “And workers are not “in business” to be treated like slaves.” As there is no overseer to hunt them down and flog them (or worse) if they choose to leave for greener pastures, they are not slaves and aren’t treated as such. I don’t recall reading or hearing of any employers standing over their employees while holding whips or guns.

          Best wishes,
          Bob

      • cawmun cents

        Even if you sock them in the gourd with knowledge,these persons will not learn.
        The fiscal cliff is just the tip of the iceberg,yet ou cannot get them to steer their Titannic away from danger.They will never know what happened until they are floating in the icy drink.They will stagger about like drunkards on the deck of their doom,until it comes to greet them.
        You cannot educate those who do not wish to be educated,unless some marxist professor claims it as truth.We have a looming water shortage crisis,energy shortage crisis,food shortage crisis,clean air shortage crisis,resource shortage crisis,war crisis,and in order to keep from total war(which would inevitably likely mean the deaths of 1/3 of the earths populace,or at least therebouts,our industrious leaders are willing to break down what we have grown accustomed to,i.e.,a higher standard of living,to accomodate sharing the resources with the growing population of the planet,thereby avoiding,or so they think,a huge war which threatens the existence of mankind itself.)
        Technology is said to be able to bail us out of this current world FU,but that remains to be seen,as the scientific community has coopted a darkmatter approach to the origins of the universe.The darkmatter does exist,but only in their feeble understanding of what amounts to nothing at all.
        The worlds leaders are looking for solutions in the marxist manifesto,the nations leaders are throwing their hands up and going along to get along to stall for time so total war doesnt break out,because to have war here on our soil would be bad for their political livelihoods.
        The growing unrest here at home doesnt seem so bad because there are all these other considerations jumping to attention at once,so they choose to lie to you so that you will bury your heads in the sand(not really understanding that you can still get your ass kicked)and they can go on planning what lies to whisper into your ear to make you feel better about the stinking conditions which you find yourselves in.
        And meanwhile you argue left and right,right and wrong,back and forth,froward and leeward,not realizing that you have run clean out of solutions to the fecalstorm coming into your Doppelor Radar,and the forecast gets grimmer with each growing moment.
        So bicker if you will,but I suggest you take the time to prepare for disater,because if a worst case scenario develops in a neighborhood near you,and your pants are still around you ankles,you may not have a safe second to bend over to pull them up.
        But what do I know?
        Apparently very little…..
        Cheers,
        -CC.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Good afternoon, Bob.

        NIce to see you talking to me again. I’m glad you took my advice and let the other exchange drop—a smart and right-brained thing to do.

        I have contributed many longer and more detailed comments on this topic today. I wonder why you haven’t responded to any of my arguments there rather than to this quick “one-liner ” I popped into the thread in passing (mostly because virtually everything DaveH says needs correcting). Perhaps that would have been dangerous for you to do because my arguments in those comments were irrefutable? This one is also if you THINK about it rather than just let it push a button.

        Are you saying that we must actually go back to before 1865 when there were in fact overseers to flog “them” and hunt “them” down before we can speak metaphorically of workers being “slaves”?

        Ask any Wal-mart employee if metaphorical guns and whips are being held over them. Do not low wages, poor or no health benefits, poor working conditions, and retaliation against any who speak out constitute a form of “slavery” and “guns and whips”?

        Especially since there are NO “greener pastures” to go to in the present economy. Go to any Wal-mart on Black Friday and you will perhaps see the the “slaves” demonstrating against their “slavery”. Come to my Local W-M and you may find me on the line with them. I will get you a sign to hold if you do show up.

        And you “don’t recall reading or hearing”? That’s also a wee bit “snarky” thing to say. DaveH would approve, though—he loves snarkiness over substance.

        Best wishes,
        RBT

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

          Dear Right Brain Thinker,

          You write: “NIce to see you talking to me again.” I didn’t realize I had stopped.

          You write: “Perhaps that would have been dangerous for you to do because my arguments in those comments were irrefutable?” Yes. I cower in fear at your superior intellect. In truth, I’m usually doing many things during the day. Sometimes I don’t have time to read any comments. Some days I have a lot of time. Sometimes I pop in and see a comment that interests me and I respond.

          You write: “Ask any Wal-mart employee if metaphorical guns and whips are being held over them. Do not low wages, poor or no health benefits, poor working conditions, and retaliation against any who speak out constitute a form of “slavery” and “guns and whips”?” No, low wages, poor or no health benefits, poor working conditions and retaliation do not form a kind of slavery. They are free to seek greener pastures. That’s what rational people do if they find working conditions unbearable.

          You write: ” Go to any Wal-mart on Black Friday and you will perhaps see the the “slaves” demonstrating against their “slavery”. Come to my Local W-M and you may find me on the line with them. I will get you a sign to hold if you do show up.” I make a point not to shop at Walmart. I prefer to purchase quality merchandise.

          Best wishes,
          Bob

      • Nadzieja Batki

        RightBrainThinker, I will go along with Bob L., if you don’t like the job or the wages the employer offers you don’t work for him. It is as simple as that. Better yet, form your own business and work for yourself.
        You and other Leftists being control freaks, you attempt to gather followers by offering yourself as a messiah if they give you control of their lives. Sympathy and caring for the gripers and malcontents is how Leftists gather followers. It is the same thing O is doing.

        • macgyver1948

          Nadzieja Batki… “if you don’t like the job or the wages the employer offers you don’t work for him. It is as simple as that”…

          Realistically speaking what does “It is as simple as that” mean? When we know that so many companies pay “competitively” which generally means “we pay as poorly as our competitors for similar jobs”. And so many low payed people are treated the same ways in different companies where could they go even if the different companies do have openings? If there are openings. They would ‘meet the new boss’ who is ‘the same as the old boss’ from the dissatisfying company they just left.

          I do agree the best thing for us to do is to create our own company if we can. That has always been the best way to feel like you own your job and money and you can make your own decisions. Working for another company will never mean you own the job, the job belongs to the company, which is why they can dump you if they want to or if the accountants say so.

          As for the rest of your comment. Wow you do not see anything positive or with light, do you? You are only seeing the dark. You really do not have any realistic concept of the Left. That’s fine, you can continue to fool yourself about us because you have the right to your wrong opinion just as we do. I would even fight for your right to your wrong opinion. The First Amendment is a beautiful thing.

      • Karolyn

        Bob – Not many people can just go find another job. We are not all itellectually or even physically capable of doing anything other than working for whoever is hiring. Where I live, there is no work period. WalMart and a few plants are all there is, other than small mom-and-pops. Too many people are wont to say “Anybody can find a job.” That is BS, and they are not living in the real world. Yes, people like me who are resourceful find other ways to bring in some income; however, the majority is not like that.

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

          Dear Karolyn,

          You write: “Not many people can just go find another job. We are not all itellectually or even physically capable of doing anything other than working for whoever is hiring.” I have worked many jobs in my lifetime. Some I hated and equated with eating crap. That is life. It is not always a bed of roses. If one is not “intellectually” capable of doing certain things, one has the option of working to improve his intellectual capabilities and thereby improve his condition. You are correct in that some mental and physical disabilities limit work choices.

          You write: “however, the majority is not like that.” I disagree that it is a majority that is incapable of being resourceful if they choose.

          Best wishes,
          Bob

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Dear Bob,

        You say “I didn’t realize I had stopped (talking to you)”. Yes you did stop, Bob—on another thread, but you terminated our discussion after I suggested you do so. Glad to see you’re not mad at me and have come back for more discussion.

        And just as I said in that prior exchange, I will again say “nice tap dancing” as you again evade any real discussion of anything substantial.. You try some “snarkiness” (love that word) and talk about how you “cower in fear at my superior intellect”. Looks like a little bit of self-awareness may have crept in there if you admit that to yourself. And you’re BUSY “doing many things”? LOL I can see you down in the vaults doing a Scrooge McDuck and rolling in your money.:

        And you say “No, low wages, poor or no health benefits, poor working conditions and retaliation do not form a kind of slavery. They are free to seek greener pastures. That’s what rational people do if they find working conditions unbearable”. Isn’t that basically what you said before? Don’t you subscribe to that endlessly repeated and misapplied wing nut quote of Einstein’s about insanity? To paraphrase a bit—”Saying the same thing over and over and expecting it to mean something different is insane”. It is irrational of you to say that those at the bottom of the pile are able to find “greener pastures”. Karolyn understands even if you don’t—back to Karolyn later.

        And the kicker. You say “I make a point not to shop at Walmart. I prefer to purchase QUALITY merchandise”. You asked somewhere in one of your comments “Who have I insulted?”. With that comment you have insulted me for one, and a lot of other folks too—certainly those who shop at W-Mart because they have to watch EVERY penny. I am a bit ashamed to admit that I shop at W-Mart for certain things to save a buck, being a 70+ year old “moocher” on social security and pensions. (I feel less bad when I run into my doctor, dentist, and lawyer also shopping there). Ashamed because that helps W-Mart to continue to hold its workers in “slavery”. But I DO enjoy buying that non-quality merchandise like Campbell’s soups, Cheerios, Kraft’s cheese and thousands of other good AMERICAN things that are also found in the “up-scale” stores while saving a buck along the way. If W-Mart raised its prices AND used that $$$ to do better by its “slaves”, my moral dilemma might be ameliorated.

        In closing, Bob, reading your comments here could give one the idea that you are an elitist, a member of the greedy 1%, and someone who would say “let them eat cake” about the less fortunate.

        Your rather arrogant dismissal of Karolyn just works to cement that impression. You told her “If one is not ‘intellectually’ capable of doing certain things, one has the option of working to improve his intellectual capabilities and thereby improve his condition. You are correct in that some mental and physical disabilities limit work choices”

        Really? Sounds like you are talking out of both sides of your mouth here, Bob. Please explain how you can say one has “the option of improving his intellectual capabilities” if they are not up to “doing certain things” and “thereby improve his condition” while saying in the very next sentence that it is “correct that some mental disabilities limit work choices”? Maybe I’m pre-senile, but I see some serious contradictions there. And what “choices” do people with serious intellectual or physical handicaps really have anyway?

        Karolyn, I will apologize to you on Bob’s behalf. I am embarrassed for him.

        Best wishes, Bob
        RBT

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

          Dear Right Brain Thinker,

          You write: “Yes you did stop, Bob—on another thread, but you terminated our discussion after I suggested you do so.” You are living in fantasy world. This never happened.

          You write: “LOL I can see you down in the vaults doing a Scrooge McDuck and rolling in your money.:” Gold and silver coins only.

          You write: “And you say “No, low wages, poor or no health benefits, poor working conditions and retaliation do not form a kind of slavery. They are free to seek greener pastures. That’s what rational people do if they find working conditions unbearable”. Isn’t that basically what you said before? Don’t you subscribe to that endlessly repeated and misapplied wing nut quote of Einstein’s about insanity? To paraphrase a bit—”Saying the same thing over and over and expecting it to mean something different is insane”. It is irrational of you to say that those at the bottom of the pile are able to find “greener pastures”. Karolyn understands even if you don’t—back to Karolyn later.” This works both ways.

          You write: “In closing, Bob, reading your comments here could give one the idea that you are an elitist, a member of the greedy 1%, and someone who would say “let them eat cake” about the less fortunate.” What I do for others I do with my own money and without fanfare.

          You write: “Really? Sounds like you are talking out of both sides of your mouth here, Bob. Please explain how you can say one has “the option of improving his intellectual capabilities” if they are not up to “doing certain things” and “thereby improve his condition…” Are you familiar with education and training? Or are those words foreign to you?
          You write: “And what “choices” do people with serious intellectual or physical handicaps really have anyway?” There are a number of non-profits that train and place those with intellectual and/or physical handicaps in jobs they are capable of performing. You really must get out more.

          You write: “Karolyn, I will apologize to you on Bob’s behalf. I am embarrassed for him.” You are not authorized to speak for me.

          Best wishes,
          Bob

          • richard brooks

            You write: “And you say “No, low wages, poor or no health benefits, poor working conditions and retaliation do not form a kind of slavery. They are free to seek greener pastures. That’s what rational people do if they find working conditions unbearable”. Isn’t that basically what you said before? Don’t you subscribe to that endlessly repeated and misapplied wing nut quote of Einstein’s about insanity? To paraphrase a bit—”Saying the same thing over and over and expecting it to mean something different is insane”. It is irrational of you to say that those at the bottom of the pile are able to find “greener pastures”. Karolyn understands even if you don’t—back to Karolyn later.” This works both ways. <<

            i know a fair number of people who used to say if you did not like your job, regardless of the reason, you could just go find a better one. many of those same people no longer have jobs. they are unemployed. replaced by cheaper labor.

            the manipulation of the labor pool by cheap immigrant labor is designed to keep wages low, eliminate benefits and force workers to accept poor working conditions.

            another problem with such a simple solution.

      • DaveH

        Brain (Right), you contribute nothing to the conversation but name-calling, ridicule, conjecture, and the other typical boring adolescent manipulative comments that we read daily on PL from Liberal Progressives. If you truly had a brain, you would be laying out thoughtful, factual, and logical comments. You do none of those.

      • DaveH

        Karolyn says — “Bob – Not many people can just go find another job. We are not all itellectually or even physically capable of doing anything other than working for whoever is hiring”.
        Then you should thank those people who make the sacrifices to create those jobs for you, Karolyn, instead of voting to steal their money, throw up numerous regulatory hoops for them to negotiate, and otherwise denigrate them.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        DaveH,

        Maybe you didn’t see this when I posted it earlier so I’m going to repeat it. Your latest “contribution” (which is really a “detraction”) only reinforces my decision.

        Right Brain Thinker says:
        November 16, 2012 at 10:10 pm

        That’s it Dave. I have tried to counsel you and help you “see some light” on several occasions. You refuse to pay attention and have again made a “snarky” response that says nothing of importance. Someone asked me if I thought some people on the site were “stupid”. You are perhaps the best example of that on the whole site, and I say that after watching you in action across many threads. I’m too old to waste time on stupid so I will not respond to your comments or “come back” to another one of your replies. Go play with those who will tolerate you but don’t be surprised if fewer and fewer enter into exchanges with you. If you haven’t noticed, that seems to be happening already.

      • Joe H

        DaveH,
        I must disagree with you on rbt. If he TRULY had a brain, from what I’ve seen here he would take it out and play with it. Or have to return it to it’s rightful owner!!

      • DaveH

        And there you have it, Folks. Read Brain’s comments carefully because this is typical of the kind of Liberal Progressives who want to run your life. If you think the ones who have actually gravitated to the top are any more “compassionate” than Brain is, think again. If they truly were, they would fund their compassion with their own hard-earned money instead of your hard earned money, and they wouldn’t dream of Forcing their way on you through Big Government.

        • macgyver1948

          DaveH… You are generalizing again and again etc. and as usual you are wrong in those generalizations, as you are with your Right thinking, with your “And there you have it, Folks. Read Brain’s comments carefully because this is typical of the kind of Liberal Progressives who want to run your life”.

          Not typical at all actually. Most “Liberal Progressives”, as you refer to us, do not want to control anyone. But you can continue to convince only those who chose to believe the c*r*a*p that comes out of the TP/Right about us and continue to be wrong in your denial about us. Honestly, I do not know any “Liberal Progressives”, or Left moderates for that matter, who have a need or desire to control anyone outside themselves and I know plenty around the country. This is part of the TP/Right delusions and you want to be of them in that. Good for you, and they, but you are not convincing any who know better about us.

          I am not saying you are a member of the Tea Party but your thinking is Tea-like for sure – no acceptance of differing beliefs and views and telling others what their feelings and beliefs are. No Liberty for others in those thought processes, is there? Where is the an Americanism in that? :-)… Please do not think or assume, and especially your irrational generalizations, for anyone but yourself because you really do not have the ability.

          Have a great day and enjoy your TP-like programming… :-).

      • Right Brain Thinker

        JoeH and DaveH must be related. Or perhaps DaveH has changed his handle in the hopes that we will not notice that JoeH sounds exactly like DaveH. How clever! My message applies to both “H’s”. Stupidity and immaturity do not deserve anyone’s attention.

      • DaveH

        MacGyver says — “Most “Liberal Progressives”, as you refer to us, do not want to control anyone”.
        Proof by bald assertion? Then why, pray tell, do you Liberal Progressives vote for Politicians who take other peoples’ money and dictate other peoples’ life choices?

        • richard brooks

          MacGyver says — “Most “Liberal Progressives”, as you refer to us, do not want to control anyone”.
          Proof by bald assertion? Then why, pray tell, do you Liberal Progressives vote for Politicians who take other peoples’ money and dictate other peoples’ life choices? <<

          interesting declaration. just whom do you vote for that does not take other people's money and will not dictate life choices for others?

          • macgyver1948

            richard brooks… I have answered this question of yours several times in great detail on here and recently too for others. Politicians on both sides of the aisle take our money and spend as well as make decisions in our name. That is it in short…. Also in brief, I see the GOP as being in business mainly, maybe exclusively, for the benefit and protection of the corporations and the Dems much less so but they do that too to some extent. Just depends on your perspective.

          • richard brooks

            richard brooks… I have answered this question of yours several times in great detail on here and recently too for others. Politicians on both sides of the aisle take our money and spend as well as make decisions in our name. That is it in short…. Also in brief, I see the GOP as being in business mainly, maybe exclusively, for the benefit and protection of the corporations and the Dems much less so but they do that too to some extent. Just depends on your perspective. <<

            the perspective is rather simple. all politicians are crooks. we simply try to choose the crook(s) who do the least amount of harm. the problem is the selection of the crooks we get to vote for. and the lack of term limits.

          • macgyver1948

            richard brooks… LOL. yep. That is the brutal truth. We choose our version of the least of the evils in elections so they can forget who they really represent and we reward them by giving them a career with great benefits, better than the ones we get. The sad question is who are the real dummies, we or them?

            Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But then I repeat myself.
            – Mark Twain

            There is no distinctly Native American criminal class…save Congress.
            – Mark Twain

            I don’t make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts.
            – Will Rogers

          • richard brooks

            The sad question is who are the real dummies, we or them? <<

            if you want to find who is to blame for the state of the country. simply look in the mirror. i do every day,

          • macgyver1948

            richard brooks… Yeah, I agree and that was my point too. I read when some get into politics they might have honorable intentions for us at firsdt but soon they see to stay in politics they have to go along with what their party wants of them. Then there are some who get in for the power and glory. One of the questions I ask myself is “what is the point in voting?” but I always do anyway..

          • richard brooks

            I read when some get into politics they might have honorable intentions for us at first<<

            honorable. that is a personal definition. as differing as those who use it. much like the gop definition of the terms freedom, liberty, justice or equality.

          • macgyver1948

            Richard… Yeah, Honorable. It is one of those subjective words that is defined by the user. When I feel slighted and then insulted by someone on the right because I do not agree with them I know they are “honorable”…

          • richard brooks

            Richard… Yeah, Honorable. It is one of those subjective words that is defined by the user. When I feel slighted and then insulted by someone on the right because I do not agree with them I know they are “honorable”…<<

            lol. seems to epidemic for the gop. they always assure me they have my best interests at heart.

          • macgyver1948

            Richard… Whose best interest? How can they say that when all they cater to is the wealthy and the big corporations? I suppose they can say it and expect you to believe it…

          • richard brooks

            Richard… Whose best interest? How can they say that when all they cater to is the wealthy and the big corporations? I suppose they can say it and expect you to believe it<<

            well, they believe increasing the net wealth of the wealthy and the corporations at my expense, the country's expense, is really in my best interest. they never seem to consider or care what i think is my best interest.

          • macgyver1948

            Richard… You have that right. If you aren’t in control of enough money or a huge tax payer your interests would not be a concern. I often laugh when I read or hear welfaring the wealthy and big corporations, deregulation where regulations are needed, etc will benefit the country and each of us.

            While I was a business analyst for Walmart, in their home office, I learned more where and how the benefits are generated and for whom. Walmart is typical and they treat their associates as government treats the non-wealthy citizens, and with the same BS lip service. It is funny what you can learn when you take meetings with the execs and see why they love the GOP. As I said, not exclusive to Walmart.

          • richard brooks

            Richard… You have that right. If you aren’t in control of enough money or a huge tax payer your interests would not be a concern. I often laugh when I read or hear welfaring the wealthy and big corporations, deregulation where regulations are needed, etc will benefit the country and each of us.

            While I was a business analyst for Walmart, in their home office, I learned more where and how the benefits are generated and for whom. Walmart is typical and they treat their associates as government treats the non-wealthy citizens, and with the same BS lip service. It is funny what you can learn when you take meetings with the execs and see why they love the GOP. As I said, not exclusive to Walmart. <<

            i received my education from several large international corporations. and you are absolutely correct.

          • macgyver1948

            Richard… I worked for other corporations before Walmart and I was learning in those years too but Walmart gave me my best education in this.

        • macgyver1948

          DaveH… I say what I said about most  “Liberal Progressives” that I know and it could be the majority of us but you get very specific by singling out a small group of politicians. We could get very specific about politicians on both sides of the aisle who we feel are passing laws which are or could control us. I am saying I and so many I know do not want to but you guys on the Right seem to want to change our reality and you do not have the ability to do that. Speak for your self and stop taking the talking points of those you allow to control your thinking. Stop being so general about those who have the audacity to disagree with you politically. We do have the right to feel differently than you whether you want to accept that or not but when you generalize as you do you can be so wrong.

          We “Liberal Progressives” can see the politicians we vote for as doing more to help the country than the ones you vote for. I see the GOP as a party who is more so in business for the benefit and protection of the very wealthy and the big corporations than they are there to help the non-wealthy. So much of what the GOP does is to protect the corporations at our expense. For example, deregulation blindly without regard for what is needed, is a blatant attempt to protect the corporations and we lose with those concepts. Regulations should be there to protect all of us and the ones that over do it should be reevaluated. But the GOP will do what the Corporations want and need and we are only in the way. Corporations want to do all they can with less expense to them so naturally they want deregulation and if the GOP wants their continued support the GOP better protect the corporations. It’s a matter of perspective.

          Regulations can be considered a form of controlling if you factor out the human element and only consider what is important to your bottom line. We see this in mining where the safety of the minors are less important than the saving of expenses to the execs. Without regulations the minors would be paid much less and their would be so much more safety hazards, as there were before regulations. It’s a matter of perspective.

          I suppose you are referring to ObamaCare and how it forces people to have what they should be deciding for themselves. Well, let’s remember President Reagan suggested a national health policy and let’s remember the GOP put together its own package in the early 1990s and it failed in Congress. Let’s also remember What’s his name, oh yeah, Governor Romney of Massachusetts put together RomneyCare for those of that state. Let’s remember there is so much from the GOP and the RomneyCare versions in ObamaCare. Let’s remember nasty things in ObamaCare, such as “if you cannot afford health insurance we will fine you through the IRS until your get it anyway” comes from the GOP/ROMNEYCARE versions which was insisted on, as with other GOP items, into ObamaCare by the GOP. Isn’t that controlling? So politicians do that so-called, as you say, “dictate other peoples’ life choices” from both sides of the aisle. It’s a matter of perspective.

          Also if you are talking about raising the wealthy’s taxes to help pay for the extreme costs of running government that too is a matter of perspective. Who could more afford to help the country with that tax raising, the very wealthy or the shrinking middle class, many of whom live from payday to payday? That is if they still have jobs and weren’t canned or downsized or “BAINed”.

          “pray tell”, did I answer any of your questions or do you have a different perspective?

      • DaveH

        Nice try, Brain (Right), but the only people who might fall for your obfuscation and manipulation aren’t smart enough to understand my message anyway.
        Do all you Liberal Progressives use the same bankrupt adolescent manipulative tactics, or are you yet another incarnation of Flashman, Brain?

    • Nadzieja Batki

      You are wrong that minimum wage should be raised to $10. What employer would be willing to pay such an amount for work that did not require much physical or mental effort. Minimum wage jobs were starter job for the young entering the work force and for the under educated who needed a footing to establish themselves.
      Minimum wage jobs were not meant to have people live on them forever contrary to what the government meddlers decreed.

      • macgyver1948

        Nadzieja Batki… You said “Minimum wage jobs were starter job for the young entering the work force and for the under educated who needed a footing to establish themselves”.

        In theory you could be right but realistically in these times there are so many people in their 30′s through their 60′s who are forced to accept these unrealistic wages and many are not under educated. People cannot live on minimum wage jobs unless they are also living off of mommy and/or daddy. It is just to hard to get jobs for many so the many are stuck taking what is available. They were starter jobs initially and they still can be for the student and the just out of high school but when you have to pay rent and utilities and other things each month, for your self or for your family, minimum wage jobs are starvation and homeless jobs for many. They are for the time being until many can get a real paying job, if the many can with how Execs are not creating them in the needed numbers and with salaries that can meet needs.

        Notice I said “meet needs” and not pay $100/hr for a Walmart cashier. By the way, many corporations are doing well enough to create more jobs, it is just cheaper and more cost effective not to. Do more with less just so the execs do not have to make up the slack. It may sound like a joke but I think the real corporate exec motto could be “We pay our people less so we can live better”.

        I do not know what the happy medium is for minimum wage but as it is now and less, if many corporations get their way, minimum wage means minimum living, and that can mean from the streets or under a bridge. If you think I am exaggerating please think again. I have always been lucky but I see and read about it all to often.

        “Minimum wage jobs were not meant to have people live on them forever contrary to what the government meddlers decreed”. Unfortunately for so many who are no longer living off of mommy and daddy minimum wage can seem like their new “forever”. “Government meddlers”? If it isn’t for the attempts by concerned government meddlers the homeless rate would be so much higher. The undertakers would be busier too.

      • DaveH

        MacGyver says — “People cannot live on minimum wage jobs unless they are also living off of mommy and/or daddy. It is just to hard to get jobs for many so the many are stuck taking what is available”.
        So you prefer no jobs at all, MacGyver, for those people? If a company can’t afford to hire people at minimum wage, those people then have no choice but to go jobless. You know MacGyver — Choice, that quality that you Liberal Progressives give lip service to, but take away from other people with the Force of Government. No company is in business to lose money. Unlike Government, they can’t tap the bottomless pockets of the American Taxpayer, so they just don’t hire as many employees when the Government raises the minimum wage.
        I don’t know if you’re a propagandist or just genuinely ignorant about economics, MacGyver, but if it’s the latter you can cure that condition by reading the section titled “How Government Creates Unemployment with Minimum Wage Laws” (page 58) in Chapter 8:
        http://mises.org/books/capitalism_kelly.pdf

        • macgyver1948

          DaveH… You say to me “So you prefer no jobs at all, MacGyver, for those people? If a company can’t afford to hire people at minimum wage, those people then have no choice but to go jobless. You know MacGyver — Choice, that quality that you Liberal Progressives give lip service to, but take away from other people with the Force of Government”. 

          Choice huh? It seems you are taking my choice away in how you are answering your question for me. Why bother asking if you are going to answer for the person you ask? Why have you decided, for me, that I “prefer no jobs at all, MacGyver, for those people”? I do not prefer that at all. I would prefer for jobs to pay enough for people to live on and care for themselves and their families if they have one. I prefer a fair wage, one that will not over burden the company but will make it worth while for the worker to go to work each day.

          I joke about the Walmart Motto “Pay less, live better” because it is corporately a joke in its real meaning to the Execs and it is common in essence for so many corporations, not only Walmart. The Joke I offer is “We pay our people less so we (execs) can live better”. Payroll is an expense and it is the easiest expense for any company to control. Keeping expenses down is one of the biggest efforts for any company or household and it should be. But when we bundle that effort with greed and the concept of keeping as much money at the top as possible then it becomes a no win situation for the employee or associate, as Walmart chooses to call the workers.

          Many corporations, especially the huge ones but not really exclusive to them, see the employee/associate as a tool or piece of equipment and as very expendable. This is especially true in hard high unemployment times when the Execs can be their cost saving selves and say “if you do not like the low pay and bad treatment leave, there are always more of you out there to take your place”. Where can they go with good jobs being scarce and the same exec attitude awaiting them most likely where ever they go?

          I just want fairness for all sides and not only have greed and apathy control the lives of the “expendable”. We need business for the country to prosper and businesses need people to do the work the execs do not want to do themselves. People need to feel the job is taking care of their needs at home and employers should have the decency to pay a fair wage and still not feel their bottom lines are being overly burdened with this major expense called payroll. So employment should be considered a business arrangement, one that works for both sides. Both sides need each other but many execs do not want the employee to know that so they can treat the employee in not so respectful ways. Employers want to be respected by those on their payroll but many do not offer that respect in return. If it is not a two way street respect is fake in both directions.

          I did not major in economics so I took only the required coursed in grad school. I do know something about it but I am no expert. You, in your attempt to insult me (LOL) seems to be saying, with your suggestion of ““How Government Creates Unemployment with Minimum Wage Laws” (page 58) in Chapter 8: http://mises.org/books/capitalism_kelly.pdf , thank you, I will read it later.

          The way I see it is, in my ignorant ways, if we eliminate minimum wage there will be so many workers who wouldn’t be able to (afford) get to work, with the cost of gas or perhaps public transportation, let alone pay rent or buy food. So what would be the point to being an employee to any one but the execs? Again, in case you missed my point above, one of the execs main goals, in any corporation, is keeping expenses down and also to keep as much money at the top as possible so the expense of payroll will be one of their necessary easy approaches to limit. Lowering minimum wage, or eliminating it, is a win-win only for the exes. Again the employee will lose.

          The elimination of minimum wage, as the title of your suggestion to read seems to imply, is to support what is wanted by the corporations. It might also suggest the government has a need for high unemployment but I hope not. I also say that because no in party wants to explain high unemployment while under their watch. It is harder to win election that way.

          Do you still want to imply or tell me what I mean when I write?

  • Dianne Lee

    The Republicans agreed that if there was no budget deal by January, the budget would be cut, with half of the money coming out of defense and the other half out of unspecified domestic programs, with the White House in charge of which programs those would be. I figured they must know something I didn’t know, because this was such a blatantly stupid move on their part, I couldn’t believe that they would do it. I’m still waiting for them to come up with some evidence that they aren’t idiots.

    At this point, unless the Republicans cave to whatever the Democrats want, on January 2, every pay check in America is going to be cut– on average about $2000 a year ( assuming a $50k salary), when the Bush tax cuts and payroll tax cuts expire. Now that Washington totally has everyone’s attention, they will notice that everyone in congress agrees that money should be restored to their paychecks. However, the Republicans will only agree to that if families making over $250,000 a year also keep their tax cuts.

    Since their defense of the 1% is causing the voters to, by about a 30 point margin, blame the Republicans for that hole in their paycheck and believe that the Democrats are trying to fix it, what incentive do the Democrats have not to drag this out as long as they can? They don’t want to solve the problem before that hole actually appears in the checks and DC suddenly has the undivided attention of everyone, even people who couldn’t tell you who won the presidential election.

    . Maybe electing a bunch of rookie Republicans in 2010 was a mistake, because they totally got played.

    • Right Brain Thinker

      Yes, Diane, somebody surely did get “played” by electing Tea Party extremists. That’s what happens when you unleash the junk yard dogs—-you never know who they’re going to bite.

      When we go over the cliff, there will be such screaming from the public that the middle class cuts will be quickly restored. But the higher rates on the 2% will remain because the Repugs will have NO leverage at all to “demand” that they be cut too. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.

      • Nadzieja Batki

        You sure don’t seem to have been bitten so in effect you are making up lies about the Tea Party people.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Right Brain Thinker says:

        No, NBatki, I have not been bitten. I am too smart to get close enough to let the JY Dogs bite me. Anyone with good right brain thinking skills knows exactly how long their chains are and stays just far enough away that they break their necks trying to get at us..

        I’m not sure what “lie” I have told about the Tea Party people. They ARE extremists almost by definition, so it can’t be that. The 2010 election that put so many of them in power WAS unfortunate for the Repugs and does constitute a “foot shooting”, so that can’t be it. The overall point Diane and I were trending towards is that the Repugs are now backed into a corner and O’Bama is going to kick their butts is true, so that can’t be it.

        Hmmmm. I’ll keep pondering what my lies might be. Maybe it will come to me.

        • George E

          Right,

          Is it extreme to want the federal government to manage its budget without raising taxes? If that’s your definition of extreme, I’ll have to say you and I have two different definitions of extreme.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Yes, George. It IS extreme when a splinter group takes the whole country and the legislative process hostage as they blindly DEMAND that they get their way and their “way” is based on ideology rather than reality.. It IS extreme when they blindly refuse to recognize that there are TWO sides to look at when you talk about balancing a budget—revenue and expenditures. I think what we probably differ on more is our definition of “rationality”.

      • Joe H

        RBT,
        you mean like with Bambam care????

    • kkflash

      OK, let’s cut the BHO BS about the 1%, and start dealing with the truth. The Dem’s proposed tax increase for the top tax brackets will affect at least 5% of the households, not 1%, and that’s more than 6 million households. Those 6 million households, the top 5%, earned 25.9% of all the income in 2009, but they paid 39.6% of all the Federal Tax Liabilities. (per the Congressional Budget Office) Meanwhile 47% of tax-filers paid $0 income tax that same year. BHO’s favorite phrase, the “middle-class”, is not paying a proportionate share either, contrary to his repeated lies. Households in the 3 middle income quintiles earned 45.6% of the income, but paid only 31.5% of the Federal taxes. (For the mathematically challenged, that “middle-class” group excludes the bottom 20% and the top 20% of earners, leaving 60% or about 70.6 million households. ) So, how do you justify asking the top earning people to pay a still larger share of the Federal government’s bloated spending?

  • factnotrhetoric

    Until Bernanke’s speech in February 2012, the FISCAL CLIFF meant America going bankrupt and falling over a fiscal cliff. Picture a bunch of tiny people dragging a sleeping giant up to the edge of a bankruptcy cliff.

    The 2013 Bernanke Fiscal Cliff is a Federal Reserve Bank fallacy. The only real fiscal cliff is America going bankrupt.

    Think about it. Bernanke says that if we return out taxes to a normal level, and decrease government spending by 5% were going to crash the economy. That’s Bernanke’s Federal Reserve Bank lies. If you don’t realize it, Bernanke and the Federal Reserve Bank are owned and operated by foreign enemies of the US. They want you to believe China will cough up another $1 Trillion real dollars when in fact it’s all fake, imaginary dollars created out of thin air by the foreign owned Federal Reserve Bank, China, Russia and Saudi Arabia. It’s a joke on you for believing there is such a thing as a 2013 Bernanke Fiscal Cliff.

    To put the Bernanke 2013 cliff in perspective. Obama has increased the deficit by 100% every year he’s been in office over Bush’s largest deficit on record. But according to Bernanke, a 5% decrease in government spending, and returning taxes to normal, is going to throw us over a fake fiscal cliff.

    Facts: The highest Bush deficit was in 2008 and was only $0.64 Trillion Dollars. The lowest Obama deficit was in 2010 and was $1.37 Trillion dollars. That’s well over 100% increase in the trillion dollar deficit every year Obama has been in office. Bernanke’s fiscal cliff is all CIA style spin by the Foreign Owned Federal Reserve Bank. The real fiscal cliff is American Bankruptcy.

  • Steve E

    I say let’s run head on into the fiscal cliff and get it over with and stop kicking the can down the road.

    • George E

      Steve,

      If the fiscal cliff just meant shutting down some government services, I wouldn’t care too much. However, as I understand it in this case, the fiscal cliff means raising taxes across the board, and that would hurt the economy pretty badly which I don’t like. The one thing we need to do is get this economy on its feet again. Aside from that, I don’t care too much because the “pain” incurred may serve to clear folks minds a bit and help to expedite a solution.

  • Walt14

    The important thing is to protect the middle class from the problems created by the fiscal cliff, hence the need to let the Bush tax cuts expire for the 2% wealthiest, and extend the tax cuts for the middle class–what Obama has been working for and what America voted for just a little over a week ago. Cutting loopholes won’t generate anywhere near the money we need to deal with the deficit. Many middle-income Americans would be hurt if they could not make the deductions they currently use for their mortgages, church donations and other causes. That is a key reason Romney lost. The results of this election showed that the current breed of Republicans are not in touch with reality with regard to dealing with the deficit–12 years of tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans did not create jobs here in the U.S.–it only promoted offshoring of earnings.

    The Booth School of Business surveyed 40 leading economists of both parties back in July, and the survey results confirmed that a mixture of taxation of the wealthiest Americans combined with spending cuts must be done in tandem (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-23/the-u-s-economic-policy-debate-is-a-sham.html). It also confirmed that Obama’s stimulus saved the U.S. from the type of Depression that Republican President Hoover’s policies only made worse. In dealing with the current U.S. economic situation, spending cuts alone would just turn us into Europe, which is being torn apart right now by austerity-related joblessness and protests. It all goes to show that there should never have been any Bush tax cuts in the first place–we should have just continued the economic prosperity program of Clinton. And, if the Republicans are so fiscally minded, why didn’t they pay the trillions of dollars that the Iraq and Afghanistan wars cost AS THEY WERE HAPPENING rather than leaving payment for our children and grandchildren? So, if we do go over the fiscal cliff after Dec 31st, the anger against the Republicans will be so great that in 2016 many won’t be re-elected. These Republicans need to remember that although Ronald Reagan decreased taxes once, he subsequently had to increase them in 1982, 1984, 1985, 1986, and 1987, which helped American get back on its feet again (http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2012/jun/25/gerry-connolly). We need to follow the Reagan taxation example now with Obama at the helm. Only in this way can we save middle America.

    • Right Brain Thinker

      Well said, Walt. You Do see the irony behind the fact that Grover would have worked to unseat Reagan after he so wisely raised taxes?. (to say nothing of the fact that “Saint Ronald” would fail the “tests” that have given us the present day Republican Party?

      • macgyver1948

        Right Brain Thinker … I so agree with you when you say Norquist would have tried to unseat the tax and spend Republican Reagan if the PLEDGE was around at the time. I believe a precursor to the Conflict-of-interest Norquist Pledge helped considerably to bring down the Sr. Bush’s second run for the office for raising taxes soon after he took office and after his “READ MY LIPS, NO NEW TAXES” campaign promise. It is so clear that keeping taxes low, or eliminated (and that goes for letting “temporary” tax cuts to expire because that is like “raising them”), is so much more important to the TP/Norquist-like/GOP than to do what is necessary/helpful and prudent for the county at any given time. I listened to Norquist say he wanted the FED budget and tax base to go back to that of the turn of the century (one that would fit in a “bathtub”, as he put it) and he was talking about the start of the 20th century, not the current one.

        So many needed programs, such as Social Security, and Medicare to name just a couple, would starve out of existence at those tax and budget levels, which is some of what they want. I believe he meant the 20th century, and not this one, because at the start of this century it was before the little bush tax gifts for his buddies so that wouldn’t work for them. No increase in taxes at any cost is the TPGOP way and the Norquist Pledge (over 270 TPGOP members of Congress have pledged their souls to Norquist in this) holds the signers careers as hostage in the bargain. The get, in return, major support in elections, the chance at power and disgrace if they violate the PLEDGE. With this Pledge in place it is so easy to see why the filibuster is used to defeat Obama in his wants for us and why the TPGOP is so much an obstetrical in his attempts in other ways as well. I can see more hate in his second term as well, unfortunately for us.

        Norquist has the clout and the huge money to back it all up. I think they hated Obama since way before he was first elected because they knew he wouldn’t betray us by signing. Maybe many also hated him because Obama is black but I try not to think in those terms when I can.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Good thoughts macgyver. A small clarification on Grover’s “bathtub” comment. What he said was “Our goal is to shrink government to the size where we can drown it in a bathtub”. Grover wants to DROWN our government, i.e, put it to death.

        George H.W. Bush had something to say about Grover and the pledge. He said:
        “The rigidity of those pledges is something I don’t like,” Bush said. “The circumstances change and you can’t be wedded to some formula by Grover Norquist. It’s — who the hell is Grover Norquist, anyway?”

        I will answer the former REPUBLICAN President’s question as I did when someone asked it earlier on this thread. Grover is a stooge for the plutocracy, a thug in a suit, and should be prosecuted for treason for actively working to destroy our government. He has taken away the right to representation of every citizen who is represented by a legislator who has signed the pledge. They are beholden to Grover now.

        • macgyver1948

          Right Brain Thinker … Thanks for the George Sr, quote. I am not sure what Grover is other than a treader to Americanism, as is all his signers. The Founders, I believe, would have wanted us to shut Grover and his kind down permanently. This Pledge is clearly a threat to all who aren’t of his ilk, so UN-American or libertarian, the real kind. I agree he should be prosecuted for treason, as should his signers.

          You say, and I totally agree “He has taken away the right to representation of every citizen who is represented by a legislator who has signed the pledge. They are beholden to Grover now”.

          I have been saying this for a long time since I first learned about the anti-American Immoral PLEDGE and I have been writing, and publishing, about it. Those who have signed are obligated by extortion to obey Norquist and that dooms the rest of us. How can those who signed still be seated in Congress? How can they not be arrested for treason? This kind of pledge is one of the biggest threats to Americanism and our liberty and freedoms. Apathy and greed is running wild in these kinds of pledges.

          The decision to raise taxes should always be avoided unless necessity and prudence declare so at the time. No one wants his/her taxes raised so it has to be determined by necessity/prudence and not by the wants of the super wealthy and greedy for their sole benefit. George Bush Sr. saw the necessity to raise taxes, which is why he did, and he was buried by the greedy and the apathy because of it. That is why the signers of the criminal Norquist PLEDGE are afraid to NOT comply with Norquist – whatever he wants. We lose if the the 270 plus TPGOP signers do comply with the tyrant Norquist.

  • alpha-lemming

    Perhaps it’s time to get serious about a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution again. Not enough money in the coffers is no longer a deterent, whereas $1.40 is currently being spent for every $1 recieved. Why stop there… spend $1.66..$2… whatever it takes to buy more votes. Borrow, raise the debt ceiling… they’re all gimmicks in play now….. the old “lower taxes to starve the Government” game plan will no longer work because they’ll just create the money out of thin air…. Government refuses to be starved. Constitutionally binding the Government to live within their means (I know… I have to) and leave a $0.00 balance at the end of the year to end deficit spending is a good start. Of course it does nothing for the 16 trillion national debt but…. “stop taking on water…. we’ll start bailing when we stop sinking”!!!

    • Warrior

      Bravo!

    • Right Brain Thinker

      We don’t need a balanced budget amendment when we have Grover’s pledge, do we? Of course, an amendment would (or should) include provisions for both raising taxes if absolutely necessary as well as cutting spending. So, Grover won’t like it and will go after any legislator who supports such an amendment. Remember, this is the USGR, not the USA (that’s the United States of Grover and the Rich).

      The quick and easy answer is to work to balance revenues and spending right now, over the next few months and years. Reform the tax code to eliminate so many tax dodges and raise the rates on those who can afford it. Cut some spending. Make adjustments to Social Security and Medicare. Lots of good ideas have been put forth over time but they have all run aground on the rocks of the Party of No and Grover’s pledge.

      President O’Bama now has a mandate—it will be a very interesting few weeks as we watch him exercise that mandate

  • macgyver1948

    There is a lot of discussion about if the very wealthy and the big corporations are taxed more they will lose their incentives to invest in their companies, as in creating jobs or in other ways. There is a lot of truth in that so I wont dispute it. But we should all know when there are higher taxes, or not, on the mega wealthy they have the clout and the tax/finance advisers to work the loop holes where we, the UN-wealthy, cannot. The taxes have to come from some place, like the middle class, if needed government programs are to continue. This too I will not dispute. Sad for the middle and lower classes since we can less afford it than the wealthy can.

    There is a point Chip Wood makes in this article I believe is a bit one sided and perhaps slanted, well, at least one. He says “If I were a conservative legislator in Washington today, what would I do? I’d stick to the promises I made that got me there. I’d insist that our government needs to spend less and tax less, and I’d vote only for legislation that helps move the country in that direction”.

    I say one sided for this because of one of the little realities in politics. Yes, GOP elected officials were elected because of the campaign promises they made and for their alignment with their party policies.

    Here is the dilemma, or one sided thinking. The same is true for the Democrats who received the most votes for them to be elected. That is why we have the fighting between the sides of the aisle on any policy. Well, at least we know what Chip Wood would do if he were elected as “a conservative legislator in Washington today”. I’d also “stick to the promises I made that got me there”. As a voter I would hope the guys I voted for would do that or why would I vote for them again? That seems to be another issue for many. Why would we vote for the same guys again if they didn’t at least fight for the reasons they received our votes, even if blocked in their attempts, in the first place? See, Chip Wood’s “what I would do if” statements should apply to all elected in all parties.

    If I were elected I too would work as Chip Wood suggests he would with “I’d insist that our government needs to spend less and tax less, and I’d vote only for legislation that helps move the country in that direction”. But when it comes to never raising taxes under any circumstances, that would be nice, I would hope we would allow reality and prudence guide us. If we never raise taxes, and that includes adjusting tax bases back to their pre-“temporary” levels, eventually there will be no money to support necessary and helpful programs.

    There are times when taxes need to be raised, and I hope that is rare, and it could be destructive to adhere to a “under-no-circumstance” pledge which could contradict reality and what is needed under the circumstances at “the” time. Let’s also remember the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy were billed as “temporary”. I wonder if the “temporary” Bush tax cuts for the wealthy would have passed at that time if they weren’t billed as “temporary”.

    Thanks Chip, interesting article.

    • macgyver1948

      By the way, the battle lines are always drawn in politics. Unfortunately it is generally at our expense…

      • kkflash

        You have stated the point that is central to all political arguments: The cost of government is ALWAYS at the people’s expense. When those expenses benefit ALL the citizens, the expense is for the “general welfare” and MAY, after careful consideration, be part of the proper function of government. National defense and interstate highways are examples on the federal level. Whenever government expenses are for the welfare of only a particular fraction of the citizens, e.g. food stamps, unemployment compensation, agricultural price supports, etc., government should refrain from involvement. Wealth redistribution is in no way the proper constitutional function of government, and is the cause of all our economic problems.

        • macgyver1948

          kkflash…. Let’s see…. Ok, Here is how I see it. Wealth distribution, as many see it, I am for only if the burden on those who cannot afford to pay more is just. I do not want redistribution just for the sake of taking it and to appear those in office are doing their jobs because they are doing something.

          Government expenses are never exclusively for “Whenever government expenses are for the welfare of only a particular fraction of the citizens, e.g. food stamps, unemployment compensation, agricultural price supports, etc., government should refrain from involvement” but if these expenses are justified in their application they are good moral spendings. What I mean is if you do not deserve (showing need) and if you do not qualify then you should not get. At the same time if you need it and do qualify they Government should be compassionate enough to help. We cannot just let these people starve or die of exposure.

          I agree that wealth distribution is not the “proper” constitutional function of government but we cannot have a apathetic government either. If we do then why or how can we be loyal? Why would any of us want o join the military or care to vote when we are in need and the government ignores our needs? How different would we be than the governments we talk about being not as good as ours for their people? I have heard that apathy is the opposite of caring and love and not hate. It can be worse than hate too.

          I have to say this to help explain my last paragraph. We as individuals, are ultimately responsible for ourselves. We need to go as far in school as we can, we need to learn how to save and do for ourselves as best we can> I, for one, do not want hand outs or welfare but if I was not capable, whether temporarily or permanently, I would hope I lived in a caring nation until I could get back on my feet. I do not want to hear that it the is fault of the unemployed for being employed, that comes from a party of the selfish and apathetic. So many of the unemployed were made that way by their employers (it very much was not the idea of those unemployed) because of downsizing or just plain “we will do more with less“ greed. So, many of them deserve help with unemployment compensation until they can get back on their feet.

          If all we do is return the tax levels to what they were before Bush gave his tax gifts to his wealthy buddies, especially since he billed those gifts as “temporary”, I do not see this as redistribution of wealth but rather a return to proper and perhaps needed levels. And, after all, the wealthy can afford many tax loop holes and great tax and finance advice that we cannot. It seems to be an attempt at a fairing of the playing field, especially in this economic climate, although the UN-wealthy will still budget so much more and harder than the wealthy just to make ends meet. Otherwise it can be like their telling us to tighten our belts while the wealthy go out and buy larger belts.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Well said, macgyver!

        You show many signs of right brain thinking in your comments, and that is something that is in rather short supply at times on this site.

  • Rod Ems

    Don’t worry Chip, Boehner will cave in the end. And a fiscal cliff will be averted, and we’ll all live peacefully for ever more.

    • George E

      And the economy will go to hell in a hand basket, and the Democrats will still find some way of convincing the American people that it’s the Republican’s fault. Amazing.

  • Average Joe

    I have decided that it is impossible to reason with liberal/progressives…since reason and logic do not enter into the picture for them.. So, I have decided to get on board with them …and back Obama’s agenda 100%. Yes, I know…it’s a shocker….but I am going to stick by my decision….I’m getting out the pom poms and actively promoting the Obama dream!
    Why, you might ask? Since reason, reality, facts and numbers don’t seem to phase these folks…maybe reality will. SO, the faster the current administraion kills the economy
    ( right now it’s on life support)…the sooner they will wake up.
    I say that the Repubs should get on board and pass every single thing this administration asks for…I mean seriously…we don’t want to be accused of obstructing them any longer….Let’s just give them exactly what they want….and smile when it all falls apart.
    The Dems keep telling us that the Feds have a revenue problem…I say that they have have a spending problem…but hey, what do I know? So, I say go for it Libs…I’m on board with you now…100%!!!
    Best Wishes,
    Good Luck
    and may God have mercy on us all.

    AJ

    • macgyver1948

      Average Joe… you say you “have decided that it is impossible to reason with liberal/progressives…since reason and logic do not enter into the picture for them..

      Why is that? Could it be because if liberal/progressives do not agree with you they have to be illogical and unreasonable? Yeah, that makes sense. Why do we have to agree with your ways of thinking and believing if we too are Americans? I accept your ways of thinking and believing for you so why can’t you be more American about it when it comes to us?

      You could say you have all the “proof” and we liberal/progressives do not accept that proof but maybe that is because we do not trust the sources of your proof. You guys seem to not accept the sources we have when we show your proof is out of context and contrived. See how easy it is to deny others because of their “proof”?

      If people do not accept “your” source of proof how can it be expected for them to accept your proof? That is just not logical. I have seen so many so-called TP based GOP proof in the form of video and articles that were later proven to be super edited to achieve their desired false result but so many on the Right have just eaten it up as true proof. It does not mean we liberal/progressives are not logical, although you could find many of us who aren’t just like we can among the Right.

      One example of how much Obama and his Mrs are so anti-American was a picture the TP was circulating of them saluting the flag with their left hands. That had to be ‘righteous’ proof, doesn’t it especially since the hands they were saluting with had their wedding rings on that obvious left hand’s ring finger? Well, until it was shown by some it was a played with Photo Shop job. By the way, I can do that too with Photo Shop, :-). I have also seen a number of heavily edited videos the TPGOP have circulated which, if you see the real original, you would know they were propagandized for the purpose of misleading.

      So, it takes real righteous proof to get people to change their minds and become your ways of being ‘reasonable and logical’. Try not to discount us as Americans just because we do not agree with you. As Americans we have the right to not agree with you just as you do with us. The great old US Constitution, there is nothing better man written.

      • Average Joe

        Hey, I’m on your side now….bit your quitchin!

        See…you prove my point…I join your ranks…and you’re still whining…see…no logic…no reason… What do we have to do to please you folks?
        Praise Obama!
        Let the money flow!!!!

        • macgyver1948

          Average Joe… NO, NEVER should you have to please anyone you do not agree with, not that you need to be told that. If you decide to support Obama it should be only because you see why you should and not because I or anyone else asks you to. That was part of my point, to prove why I should change my mind with real proof, not contrived. We can discuss the differences while not agreeing with each other and respecting those differences. It does not mean I am unreasonable or illogical. It only means we do not see these things in the same ways. That is what Liberty is about, accepting the different views of others without shooting them or calling them names like a spoiled child would.

          By the way, I did not prove your point, that you do for you.

      • Average Joe

        oh…AND …TAX THE RICH!!!!!!!!!!!!

        • macgyver1948

          Average Joe.. “oh…AND …TAX THE RICH!!!!!!!!!!!!”. What is your point with This. I could just as easily say “oh…AND …TAX THE un-RICH!!!!!!!!!!!!. Please do not suggest what I am trying to say.

      • Average Joe

        My original statement:
        “I have decided that it is impossible to reason with liberal/progressives…since reason and logic do not enter into the picture for them.. So, I have decided to get on board with them …and back Obama’s agenda 100%. ”

        Please take note of the first three words in each sentence,” I have decided”.

        Rather than address my statement in a logical fashion, you choose to specuate about my motives, draw your own conclusion as to what those motives might be …and based on what?
        Next, you go on to bloviate for two pages of text……. about something that was nowhere to be found in my comments. Do you simply have too much time on your hands? Did you somehow think that I needed to be educated in how the liberal mind works? I made this decision…based on 56 years of dealing with liberal/progressives….trust me….I have a lifetime of reference material to base my opinions and decisions on.
        Where in the hell did you come up with all of the photoshop crap? Just something hanging out of your back pocket?…thin air maybe? So, in your mind, you got the idea for that longwinded diatribe….from my original post…..delusional much?
        You seem to talk an awful lot …for a man who has nothing to say…..

        “Every man is a damn fool for at least five minutes every day; wisdom consists of not exceeding that limit”
        Elbert Hubbard

        Praise Obama!
        Turn on the printing press!!
        Let the money flow!!!
        Tax the crap out of the rich!!!!
        Open the borders!!!!!!
        Free…….. everything!!!!!!!
        Unicorns!!!!!!!
        Rainbows!!!!!!!!
        Utopia!!!!!!!!!

        • macgyver1948

          Average Joe… LOL.. you are funny when you decide to miss the point(s). Ok., if I missed your points I apology. I was trying to show a point of needing to see credibility for the so called source of proof we get for things but you decided to not see it. The Photo Shop thing was just one of many examples… These examples were for showing many of us on the Left do not agree with the Right when given proof comes from sources that are phony. So we are taken for not being reasonable or logical. Another of my points was we want that credible source before we can agree. But you decided to say I “seem to talk an awful lot …for a man who has nothing to say…..”. That too is ok because we do not have to agree with each other… So you very much can decide it is impossible (for you) to reason with liberal/progressives because they do not agree with you since that is your right. There are so many of you guys thinking as you do on the Right, meaning all who do not agree with you have to not only be illogical and unreasonable because they do not agree with you. Yeah, you are very logical. LOL, That was fun…

      • Average Joe

        It is obvious that you don’t know me or my views very well,so I will try to fill you in.
        I am a Ron Paul or Gary Johnson kind of guy. As far as I am concerned…if Romney won the election, we would still be going over the fiscal cliff…just as we will under Obama. I feel that BOTH party’s have disenfranchized me as a voter and as a citizen and that both will destroy this nation. So, since (in my view) the same outcome is inevitable…why shouldn’t I get behind the agenda and help push it along quicker? I’ld just as soon get it over with fast…rather than to linger along in misery for another 2-6 years…. the result will still be the same……
        The government is a crime syndicate with a spending problem…denying it…won’t make it change.

        AJ

        • macgyver1948

          Average Joe…. I wasn’t so far off about you, so you like Ron Paul. I like him enough for the most part but he has some policies I can not get behind, foreign and domestic. I do not see the Government as being of the people, any party. There is way to much money controlling them all for them to care about us. I do not dislike Obama enough to not vote for him and I saw him as the best of the choices, including Paul. Romney is so much an owned and controlled property I could not consider him at all. Also Romney can disrespect other peoples religion if how they believe differs from his. I do not see Obama as the evil the TP Right wants to make him out to be. As I said so much of their accusations, and their so-called proof, is phony. I need to know more of this violent fiscal cliff the Right sees so much but all they seem to see is gloom and doom in everything unless they are in charge because no one but them can be right. That is so much UN-American as I see it, the not allowing for any views which do not agree with theirs. So they get creative with their accusations and especially with their proof.

          I read all side and then decide but I will not just accept only because one side or another says so. But what do you care since you say I use a lot of words and say nothing. I guess you see nothing if I do not agree with you either but I do not need you to agree with me and I do not get angry if just disagreeing with me is the issue.

      • Average Joe

        Psssst…this isn’t Wall Street…you can stop speculating now. Address the actual comments made by others…not the (imaginary) parts you decided to add in yourself. If you must add your own spin…do so in your own words as a statement made by you (you know, start a topic)…not as a reply to someone else. What you add…is your agenda…and has nothing to do with what others posted. I get the impression that you add comments…just to see yourself in print ( I am neither amused…nor impressed).
        Pretty much every tidbit that you added to my original post…is …your agenda…and has nothing to do with my comments.. Please stop trying to add your own spin to everything that others say. You seem to worry more about other peoples motives….rather than just dealing with your own motives. It does not matter what our motives are….it is irrelevant….And you wondering about it….won’t change it. It is what it is…and quite frankly…none of your concern. If I need to see a therapist to anylize my motives, I’ll hire a proffessional….and not some bloviating windbag commenting on a blog site….who thinks he knows it all.

        You’ve exceded your limit….

        Praise Obama!
        Turn on the printing press!!
        Let the money flow!!!
        Tax the crap out of the rich!!!!
        Open the borders!!!!!!
        Free…….. everything!!!!!!!
        Unicorns!!!!!!!
        Rainbows!!!!!!!!
        Friggin’……..Utopia, Baby!!!!!!!!!

        • macgyver1948

          Average Joe… LOL.. So I exceeded my limit, did I. Your delusion is in your thinking of us with, at the very least:

          “Praise Obama!
          Turn on the printing press!!
          Let the money flow!!!
          Tax the crap out of the rich!!!!
          Open the borders!!!!!!
          Free…….. everything!!!!!!!
          Unicorns!!!!!!!
          Rainbows!!!!!!!!
          Friggin’……..Utopia, Baby!!!!!!!!!”
          888

          I praise ONLY God and never anyone who has walked the Earth.

          I too understand the dangers of flat or Fiat money. I did to some extent before I worked for the Federal Reserve Bank Of NY long ago and more so since. This kind of Monopoly-like thinking has hurt societies since (at least going back as far) as the Romans. For decades the FED had this rule, “there can be only so much printed money in circulation at a time”. This meant when new money was printed a like amount of old paper money must be destroyed to preserve the value of our money. Many on the Left understand this concept even if they do not know the details. More printed money on this side of the equation the less that money is worth. I do not like the printing of extra unbalanced paper being out there and many on the left feel that too so what the hell is up with your delusional thinking about us?

          And you, in your continued and often from your side, delusional thinking feel we all want “Free…….. everything!!!!!!!”. We just met on here but I am wondering how much more your mind is programmed for this stuff. Is it easier than thinking for yourself? You will drown in “tea” some day…

          All the rest of your delusions’ list and programming would take to long to address now. So, go on believing of us what your were programmed. You really do not know anything about us outside of what you are told to believe. Good for you…

          Oh, I do enjoy Rainbows but do you know what you can do with your “ Utopia” item from your fantasy list as well as the rest? How is it on your dark side of reality? See, we can all really say things we choose to believe but I know so many of us on the Left do not think as many on your side believes of us so who is the more rational?

          How is this for addressing the actual comments? You seem to miss so much when you do not want to see ‘it’.

  • Big Rick

    This is easy…it takes some political will, but it will have a positive effect – much later. The House majority leadership should advise all members to vote “present” on the “fiscal cliff” legislation and explain the reason why to the citizens…the Libs keep chirping that the conservatives are obstructionists and are keeping their Godlike President from the truly great success his programs will bring to the masses. So, tell America “We will not be painted by this bunch as the enemy of society…we will not be party to this…we will not vote for or against the legislation, but will remind the citizens that this is owned 100% by the Democrat Party, and they bear sole responsibility for what we believe will be the absolute failure of this approach.” Then watch it fail miserably…just who will the Dems blame then? Bush? Tough love is a tough thing, but sometimes it is necessary to let the children understand the folly of their ways.

    • Average Joe

      Bravo,
      Someone else gets it!

      AJ

    • Right Brain Thinker

      Works for me! How can we make it happen? Anything that gets the Party of No out of the way of moving the country FORWARD is a good thing. And what if it doesn’t fail miserably but succeeds spectacularly? Will the children of the right then understand the folly of their ways and change their focus?. It will be too late unfortunately, because they will spend 40 years wandering in the wilderness before they can get back in power.

      • macgyver1948

        Right Brain Thinker… It always amazes me when I read or hear groups of people think they have the ability to think and express for people they do not know. For example when I see someone refer to Obama as “their God like president” and I know people can only think and express for themselves, maybe, I have to wonder why the TPGOP refers to Obama as God-like. I do not know any on the Left who believes Obama is God-like or the chosen prophet so it must be the Right who sees him that way since those are some of the ways they continue to refer to him. Then there are those who call Obama a Nazi/Commie socialists so they must think they know that too. It appears to be some form of delusional psychosis for people to feel they can think and express for others who they do not know or represent. LOL…

        Also, your reference to the guilty and sinful Israelites and their wandering in the wilderness for 40 years refers biblically to having the guilty and immoral generation die off before they reach the “promised land”. Is 40 years enough for these ‘party of no’ guys today? LOL

      • Big Rick

        Oh man, you guys kill me. The entertainment value is uplifting. RBT, you obvioulsy have never done any serious study of ecomomics, or you would know that spend, spend, spend ultimately leads to a devaluation of the currency and hyper inflation as the government prints more fiat money to pay the debts it incurs. So, eventually a $100,000 federal note will buy what $1 buys today, but I guess the fact that you will have the worthless $100,000 note will give you solace, because you will then be “Rich”. As I said, let them ruin the economy, because that is the only way this will go…it will not be successful, but will ultimately destroy those who are the true believers of the monstrous lie you swallow without any critical thought.
        Macgyver – One short word for you and your idiotic comment regarding the “Godlike” President…this is not a TPGOP phenomenon…dude you need to study up a bit and quit listening to the “current talking points”…this idea of O being “Godlike” was promoted by Evan Thomas, the Newsweek Assistant Managing Editor on Hardball in August 2010 to Chris Matthews who’s reaction to the “Godlike” comment was a quick “uh=huh” in agreement…so much for objective journalism in the MSM, and so much for the derision this comment elicits from most normal people.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Macgyver,

        You must read The Republican Brain by Chris Mooney, one of the most significant books I have read in my 70+ years, and I have read many thousands, so that is saying something.

        What these folks suffer from is not a psychosis—that is abnormal. They ARE delusional, but are within the “normal” range of behaviors, believe it or not. Unfortunately, their “wrongness” in so many ways would lead to the death of the country if they ever take control.

        Forgot about the “die off factor”. Thanks for reminding us. Since there appears to be both a genetic and a nurturing base to their malady, it might be best to leave them out there forever since their kids likely wouldn’t be much better. LMAO

        Big Rick,

        I’m sure macgyver is as pleased as I am to provide you with some entertainment. I will try to give you some more laughs and “kill” you some more. Among the many thousands of books I have read, there HAVE been more than a few on economic issues—-not as many as I’d like, but they tend to be rather dense and soporific. The most recent one was End This Depression Now by Paul Krugman—I recommend it highly for the TRUTH it speaks.

        I have NEVER said spend, spend, spend—-that’s one of those “talking points” that your ilk PFTA and try to stick on anyone who says something you don’t like. I HAVE stated that we should CUT some spending but ALSO increase revenue, particularly by raising taxes on the 1%. And thanks for “killing” me with the implication that YOU think critically and macgyver and I DON’T LMFAO over that one.

        Note to macgyver—aka “dude” and maker of idiotic comments. It is typical of the syndrome that its sufferers seize on one tiny piece of purported “evidence” that supports their delusions and then apply it globally. Just as BR has done here with an exchange that took only SECONDS to occur. It is truly sad that he is so far over the edge. It is also indicative of the long hard road we face in ever getting these folks to be less delusional.

        • macgyver1948

          Right Brain Thinker … Thanks for suggesting the book “The Republican Brain by Chris Mooney”, I will put it on my list of things to read. I am not sure when I can get to it but I will. I have so much on that list to keep up with what I do to earn money so I will not be a super burden and drain on the Right who think we all on the Left live off of their hard earned taxes. WOW, when most of us on the Left do not think the ways the Right says we do but they know better than we do about how we think and feel and act. Being a former Programmer Analyst and designer/Manager this all sounds to me like all those on the Right who know they can think for us were severely programed with some kind of far Right TP algorithms which depresses self thought and allows only what is transmitted to them. Sounds like zombies to me, LOL…. I am in a great mood today so that was mostly for fun but I believe there is some truth to it.

          When I suggest “psychosis” I am doing so to express a point but some of them are delusional about how they speak of us and Obama. Discussions with them would be so much better and more mature if they would be respectful and accept what we say for us and not get nasty and insulting right away. I seem to have an ongoing “dispute” with a woman on here, for example, who would not accept how I feel and I believe, because she seems to feel, if she isn’t agreed with she has the right to be insulting and nasty. How is that for Liberty and American like thinking? Eventually I reciprocated in sort-of kind, and I do not like doing so, but I will always respect her ways of believing for herself in spite of her intolerance for non-Right compliance. I really wish she too would ignore me, and the others who will not accept views which do not match theirs. Then only those on the Right who can be respectful and accepting can contribute to decent exchange. I do not need to be agreed with so why MUST they??? That was rhetorical…

          Thanks again for suggesting the book… I guess in the mean time we just have to put up with their insults and their telling us how we think and feel and believe. Must be so great for them to believe they have such supernatural gifts and talents – to be the expert mind readers and empaths they seem to believe of themselves, :-).

          They do seem to want to apply “it” globally, don’t they? Well, except for the Ron Paul followers who might want the US to go back to isolationism, as if that were possible any more. They have to want to be less delusional before they can override their “far Right TP-like” algorithms and be self thinks again, if they ever were to begin with.

      • DaveH

        As usual, the Liberal Progressive operatives are trying to steer the readers to the Two Party Paradigm. Rah, Rah, Rah!
        The truth is that it’s a Big Government problem, and the Propagandists want to keep people chanting for one team or the other while the puppet masters rob us blind.
        Don’t fall for it, Folks. Read this book, written for the lay person in simple language (with rare exception) except for a few chapters that get heavy in the Economic Jargon:
        http://mises.org/books/capitalism_kelly.pdf

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Put the The Republican Brain at the very top of your list if you intend to keep engaging in “discussions” (or what passes for them) on this site. Trust me—first, it will help you understand yourself better. More importantly, it will help you understand “them” and why they are the way they are. Some are pretty rational and honest and we can talk to them—George E comes to mind—many are so far gone as to be “sick” (and I won’t mention names but notice whose useless comment is taking up space between ours here).

        You are seeking answers in your paragraph that starts out mentioning “psychosis”. I had some of the same questions and THE BOOK has answers. I also had some of the same regrets you have about “fighting a battle of wits with those who are half-armed”. Your questions are not rhetorical but real. And you WILL find the answers in Mooney’s book..

        They really can’t help much of what they say. They are, unfortunately for the sanity of the political discourse in this nation, hard-wired by biology to behave the way they do, They rely on deep seated beliefs and closed minded and emotional thinking rather than the open-minded, rational, and fact-based thought processes we use. And the more folks like you and I hammer on them, the harder the fight back. It’s “backfire”—-that’s a psychological term too, and discussed in THE BOOK.

        And when I said “globally”, I wasn’t referring to the world per se, although their beliefs that the USA is an “exceptional” nation and is justified in “ruling the world” can come to mind. I was referring mainly to taking one small thing and stretching it to support a much broader argument, i.e., a few words exchanged on a talk show are plucked out of context and said to have meaning in other contexts.

        You say in closing “They have to want to be less delusional before they can override their “far Right TP-like” algorithms and be self thinks again, if they ever were to begin with”. You MUST read THE BOOK to understand that you don’t really understand them yet. It will be a revelation for you.

    • Average Joe

      “The most recent one was End This Depression Now by Paul Krugman”

      LMAO…now that’s funny stuff!….My sides are hurting from laughing so hard.
      Another friggin “braindead” Keynesian…who woulda thunk? Keep reading those books of fairytales…
      I’m with Big Rick on this one…..you guys have at it…we’ll just stand back and watch. After the bottom falls out…we’ll pick up the pieces for you.
      I’m going “John Galt”…I’m taking my toys and going home. Let me know how it works out for you…..

      AJ

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Laugh away, AJ. Anyone who is not delusional can see that it was Keynesian-like spending by O’Bama through his stimulus plan that saved us from the Greater Depression brought on by the Bush fiascoes. Just as anyone who is not delusional can see that the austerity programs being tried in Europe are not getting the job done.

        I’ll save you the trouble of reading Krugman’s book by spoiling it for you (you probably don’t read much anyway). Krugman thinks the way to end this mess is not to cut spending and lower taxes but to strike a balance between spending and revenue, with more emphasis on spending, in order to restimulate the economy. And, unlike Grover, he recognizes that higher taxes on some will be necessary. He faults O’Bama some for not doing a bigger stimulus in the first place.

        If I have to choose between listening to you and listening to Krugman, who won a Nobel Prize in Economics, I’ll go with Krugman every time.. His arguments make sense—yours don’t

      • Average Joe

        “Laugh away, AJ”
        No problem…
        BTW, I already said…Go for it…I certainly don’t want to stand in your way…Spend,spend, spend…..borrow and print your way out of debt…..let me know how it plays out.

        AJ

  • old hillbilly

    It’s like going to paddle wheeler race to see who goes over Niagara Falls first! What better opportunity to watch the bastards who created this crisis go over the edge into infamy! I want no part of another $5 trillion or much more debt over the next four years. Deny any and all new debt spending & save the calamity of more mushrooming debt we’ll never be able to pay back! I want no part of it! VOTE NO or get replaced next time!!!!!

  • Big Rick

    old hillbilly, I appreciate what you say, but we will never pay off the 16 trillion of debt we have, much less additional debt. I ask you, when the US goes bankrupt, just who will we owe money to? If our currency is worthless, does that mean you can pay your debts in dollars which have no value. Who is going to come with the Sheriff to evict the US from this territory? Money will not be what you think it is now, but something more basic. Bob Livingston made a point a few months back regarding our fiat currency, and he was 100% correct…you can buy a gallon of gas today for what you paid in 1969…a very true statement, all you need is two silver dimes…current valus is a bit under $4. Let that sink in for a moment. My parents bought a 4 bedroom house in 1966 for a little under 30 thousand dollars, bread was 5 cents per loaf, milk was between 5-10 cents a gallon, I could go on and on, but hopefully you get the point. Our currency, and the world currencies are hopelessly inflated, and there needs to be an adjustment…it will be ugly and probably fatal for the unprepared. So, put together a plan for your family or extended family (close friends who you can rely on), stock seeds for a garden, canned and freeze dried foods, a way to purify water, stock basic metals – gold, silver, and lead, and when it hits the fan melt into the background and disappear.

    • Right Brain Thinker

      Rick says “hopefully you get the point” when he again slings you-know-what against the wall and hopes that it will stick. Bread at 5 cents a loaf and milk at 5-10 cents a GALLON? In 1966? A quick Google of “what things cost” turned up the following:

      “A 24-ounce loaf of wrapped split bread sold for 9 cents in 1927. In 1940 three 1.5-pounds loaves of bread cost 25 cents. In 1960 two 1.25-pound loaves cost 41 cents. Three 16-ounce loaves of bread cost 89 cents in 1980″.

      We haven’t seen 5 cent bread and 10 cent milk for a LONG time, Rick. Can you say Teddy Roosevelt?

      Too bad Rick has to muck up an otherwise half-way intelligent comment by throwing garbage in there. That makes everything he says suspect, even though what he says may be nearly all correct. Do some critical thinking before you leap, Rick. We will be more likely to listen to you if you do.

  • Right Brain Thinker

    I’m reposting this comment because it hasn’t garnered a single response. Maybe it got missed? I t speaks to many comments folks have made in this thread and I offer it up again as an answer to those who rant about “stealing other people’s money”, “the rich pay more than their fair share of taxes”, “redistribution” and other hugely wrong talking points.

    Right Brain Thinker says:
    November 16, 2012 at 6:06 pm

    KKF enlightens us with the same old broken records—-”stealing from those who earned their money and giving it to those who didn’t”—”take money by force from those who earned it and redistribute it to those who produce nothing”. That’s just not true, anymore than if I said the 1% LITERALLY steal from anyone. Stealing is against the law and the !% are, if anything, law-abiding. They show this by using every legal means possible to maximize their wealth at the expense of the 99%. I only use the “stealing” reference because it seems to be so popular among the singing parrots of the right like you—too bad you don’t really understand what you are saying when YOU use it, never mind when I do.

    Another little “parrot song” titled “….the people at the top pay MORE than their fair share” (do parrots sing?). And “by ANY measure”? BOTH THOSE SONGS ARE WRONG. Too bad you parrots like to cherry pick the data and only look at FEDERAL INCOME TAXES when you say they are paying more than their fair share. To be fair about the question of tax fairness, one must look at ALL taxes paid and compare them to total income to see what the real TAX BURDEN is. Only then can you begin to decide what “fair share” means.

    I’m quite sure I can “do the math” and I will lay out some TRUTH for you. Figures are taken from the Citizens for Tax Justice who got them from the CBO and other government sources. You can find the truth IF you look at primary sources and not at filtered and cherry-picked data from biased websites as you have likely done.

    Compare two cases. (A) makes $4,000,000 a year and may pay on that at the 35% rate if he isn’t a tax avoider like Romney and therefore pays $1,400,000 in federal income tax. (B) makes $40,000 a year and pays $0 in federal income tax. (B) is one of those moochers in the 47% that are getting a free ride according to you. Wow!—how unfair! (A) is out $1.4 mil and (B) is getting a free ride. It’s SO obvious!

    Let’s get back to TOTAL TAX BURDEN as we seek “fairness”. When you factor in federal PAYROLL taxes and all state and local taxes—property, sales, state income, gas, telephone, etc, we find that they fall much more heavily on the 47% than they do on the 1%. The actual figures for TOTAL TAX BURDEN?

    The bottom 20% pay around 17% of their income in combined taxes.

    The top 20% pay around 30% of their income in combined taxes

    …..and GUESS WHAT, the top 1% pay only 29%, slightly LESS than the rest of the top 20%. If anyone should complain about unfairness, it should be the top 19% just under the moochers in the 1%.

    So, (A), even if he pays at the top FEDERAL rate, likely has maybe $2.500,000 left after all taxes. (B), even though he has paid NO federal tax, has $33,200. Now we can talk about “fairness”. If we CUT federal income tax rates, (A) would benefit significantly and (B) would get nothing, since he “doesn’t pay taxes”—-he’s a 47%-er, a moocher that steals etc.. If we raise taxes, the little guys will be hurt more. Every dollar means a lot more to the $40,000 a year guy—the $4,000,000 a year guy probably wouldn’t bend over to pick up a $100 bill. I know which one I’d rather be—I’d gladly pay 50% on $4,000,000 and struggle to survive on the $2,000,000 that’s left.

    So, knock off the idiotic crap about “liberals” and “envy” and look at the TRUTH of the numbers. All the screaming about not raising taxes on “the job creators” and “stealing” is just a smoke screen for the greedy rich to hide behind.. The very top 1/10 of 1% make nearly all of their money by manipulating money anyway, and not by actually producing anything.

    PS I purposely used full numbers, i.e., $4,000,000 rather than $4 million so we can see how big these numbers are. (A) makes 100 times what (B) makes and to me it’s quite striking to see the full numbers laid out.

    • richard brooks

      you are using facts. the gop sheep are unwilling to accept them. they simply believe.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Unfortunately, you are 100% correct there. But I AM surprised that the Junk Yard Dogs haven’t come out on this. They love to try to substitute their “facts” for reality.

    • richard brooks

      the current gop supporters believe the gop policy’s will make them the next nouveau rich. they fail to grasp that the policy’s they support are designed to stop that very possibility.
      they are unable to grasp that the low wages, with lower taxes, will still not leave them with any financial means to improve their status.
      they simply blame others for their own failed belief system.
      the gop ‘facts’ have been exposed so often that no one even listens to them any more.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        You say “the gop ‘facts’ have been exposed so often that no one even listens to them any more”. I wish that were true. The studies cited by Mooney in The Republican Brain indicate that all too many on the right just double down when they hear the truth. The REAL FACTS challenge their deeply held and mostly wrong BELIEFS, so they cling to them even more. They listen to EACH OTHER with more intensity. Sad but true.

  • Old Henry

    Anyone who hoped we’d see a milder, more moderate occupant of the White House this time around just got a very loud wake-up message: It’s going to be war on the haves on behalf of the have-nots — and the bureaucrats who get to distribute the spoils, of course.

    Anyone who thought that is an absolute MORON. Or, as anti-United States as the communist foreign nationl criminal conduting his illegal occupation of OUR White House.

    Boehner and the House can solve the issue of Little Barry Soetoro next month – December – by simply doing their Constitutional Duty and declaring the truth – Little Barry Soetoro is not quailed, nor eligible, to be POTUS do to the FACT that he is NOT a Natural Born Citizen. That eliminates him and his little moron side-kick. We then install Romney, which is not much better, but at least he is Constitutionally qualified.

    However, expecting Boehner and the Republicans to do what is Constitutional is a pipe dream.

    “the deficit has topped $1 trillion a year for every year that Obama has been in office.”

    That is EXACTLY what Little Barry campaigned on in 2008 – Trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see.

    No surprise there. And the “Republicans” who have complete Constitutional control over the checkbook HAVE DONE NOTHING about the Communist foreign national’s spending.

    As far as the tax bite, Chip, successful people DO NOT earn their money – they STEAL it. Everybody knows that!

    On Friday I read an article telling the Denny’s in FL will be cutting their employees down to 28 hours per week from 40 due to Soetoro’s communist “health care” plan. And I would hazard a guess that many of them voted for the illegal.

    There will be millions of new jobs created, Chip. They will be < 30 hours per week, so everyone can work multiple jobs, make no money, have no benefits, all curtsey of Little Barry and his fellow communists.

    • Right Brain Thinker

      What a stunning parody of a wing nut. I wasn’t aware that Jon Stewart was posting on this site under a pseudonym.

      • Old Henry

        What on Earth are you rambling about RBT?

      • Right Brain Thinker

        I was gently making fun of you, Henry. Saying that much of what you said was so outrageous that it sounded like Jon Stewart of the Daily Show pretending to be a wing nut. Are you familiar with Jon Stewart? He is a master of parody, satire, irony, and hypocrisy. His show is one of the most watched among the libs and progressives.

        I do apologize to you—-I know you are a good American and can’t help being so left-brained. As I’ve said in many ways and at many times in my postings, our personalities and thought processes are wired differently and that shapes a lot of our politics—-you can’t help it (and that’s not meant to be a dig at you but just a recognition of the fact that research shows there IS such a thing as a “Republican Brain”)

    • Average Joe

      Old Henry,

      “It’s going to be war on the haves on behalf of the have-nots ”

      Don’t you mean …on behalf of the will- nots? ( I’m talking… fourth and fifth generation welfare families in this country). There are generational, whole families in this country, that have been on the public dole…. from cradle to grave….this is not acceptable in a functional society.

      TANSTAAFL

      • Old Henry

        Yes Average Joe, this “welfare” system will not be able to continue and those poor parasites will be screaming like spoiled brats. However, we must remember that our governmnet is a reflection of the citizens.

        We are (have become) a completely immoral, croorupt society, generally speaking, and are coming under the judgement of God. He will be bringing this nation to its knees. The “leaders” will not be able to fix anything until the nation gets right with God. It is really just that simple.

        • richard brooks

          the welfare we pay to corporations, farmers and foreign entities is far bigger than the welfare paid to individuals. the gop passed the bill that allows immigrants to receive food stamps. some one has to subsidize their cheap labor.
          which god? keep your mythology out of govt and i will keep govt out of your mythology. or we could start taxing religion. set age limits. restrict church hours.
          it really is just that simple.

          • macgyver1948

            richard brooks… I would have to agree with you with all you say with the exception of one piece of your terminology. I’ll get into that.

            I very much have to agree for a free society there has to be freedom of religion included and that means freedom for all in how each person chooses their method of worship. Each and every religion must have the same and equal rights as each and every other religion or it will be meaningless and it will be as it was in history before the Founders felt the need to place Freedom Of Religion into the Constitution. And the Founders were wise enough to make this freedom non-religion specific, which is why this is not a Christian, or any other faith, nation.

            We should be a nation of morals. I know a good number of atheists and agnostics who are very moral which h shows how the Constitution, in a number of places, is a Yin-Yang kind of document. This means, along with Freedom Of Religion, we have Freedom from Religion. It has to be this way or we do not really have Liberty in this regard.

            So when you seemed to refer to religion as a mythology I have to accept your terminology or I would be denying your Constitutional rights. I am very much a believer in God and I have my chosen religion but even with all that I have to respect free choice for all.

            Back you your comment. You say “keep your mythology out of govt and i will keep govt out of your mythology. or we could start taxing religion. set age limits. restrict church hours. it really is just that simple”.

            If we are as students of history we would know if any one religion dominates or controls all other religions, and denominations of that same controlling religion, all but the controllers will suffer. A great example of that is the story of the Pilgrims and why they left England and wound up here eventually.

            In a free society, such as ours, we cannot allow any religious group to have any influence on law and public policy making. If a religious group tries, as you suggest, that religious group should then be treated as any corporation and lose their tax exemption status.

            An example of multiple attempts of religious domination, and law violations on the Constitutional and federal levels, was multiple occurrences by one religion performing immoral baptisms on the dead members of a religion which forbids baptisms. Who knows where this could lead in government and law if allowed or over looked? Those people guilty of these religious and legal violations should spend years in a cage at a federal prison.

            Wow, I wrote more than I expected to. Well, I bet there will be those who will say I am ranting and those who say how wrong I am and at the same time claim to be for Liberty. I really do not care (‘Yin-Yang’ly speaking, Freedom Of Speech also means Freedom to not listen or ‘Freedom From Speech’, meaning I do not have to listen just as they do not to me. LOL) so they can deny my liberty all they want as they deny liberty for all equally except for how they define liberty for only themselves. Which way is more American as it was intended 236 years ago?

            It is so obvious we pay more welfare to the wealthy, those who are not so much in need, than we do to those in real need.

          • richard brooks

            social morals are not the same as religious, or mythology influenced, morals. slavery, chattel property, adultery, etc, is accepted by many religions, yet society enacted a different set of morals, or rights. your reference to bringing this country back to some god is the problem. i like carlins observation. keep thy religion to thy self. i am not against religion. i am tired of religion trying to force it’s self on me thru the govt.
            this country was founded on the principle that change would be required. the constitution gives us the ability to affect peaceful change. with out influence or intimidation from any religion or entity.
            religion should be treated as a business. there is no reason for the exemptions we allow.
            if we eliminate the wealthy welfare, we will not have any financial problem with the social services we provide to those in need.
            btw- the pilgrims fled persecution by religion. many wanted to insure that never happened again. there were others who simply wanted to impose their particular brand of mythology in place of the one they had fled from. seems to be a continuing problem. even today. there are still some who feel they have a right to force others into their particular brand of mythology.
            your liberty to believe does not equate to forcing me to follow your belief’s. you are not required to stop believing.
            too many resources are being used or mis-used in the fight over religious beliefs. abortion and gay rights should not be decided by the same group that fought emancipation or women’s rights. the same ones that brought us prohibition of alcohol and drugs.
            i would like to see equality for all. including religion. they should be just as equal in their taxation as i am. follow the same laws and rules.
            fixing the problems in this country is simple. so simple that most will never accept the simplicity.

          • Old Henry

            Yes, the “corporate welfare” should come to an end as well.

            Which God? The Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The God that created all we know and that which we do not know. The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

          • richard brooks

            es, the “corporate welfare” should come to an end as well.

            Which God? The Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The God that created all we know and that which we do not know. The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. <<

            you do know that many will disagree with your defintion of 'god'. i wonder if you realise that islam is a form of christianity.

          • Old Henry

            Islam is a form of devil worship. The Quran was written by a pedophile profit who corrupted God’s word. Over the last 10,000 years of the Earth’s existence there have been many who have “disagreed” about God. However, they worshipped satan, or one of his demons.

            Jesus Christ is alive and well in Heaven sitting on the right hand of His Father’s throne. Mohammad is nonetheless still dead and burning in hell.

          • richard brooks

            Islam is a form of devil worship. The Quran was written by a pedophile profit who corrupted God’s word. Over the last 10,000 years of the Earth’s existence there have been many who have “disagreed” about God. However, they worshipped satan, or one of his demons.

            Jesus Christ is alive and well in Heaven sitting on the right hand of His Father’s throne. Mohammad is nonetheless still dead and burning in hell. <<

            islam is the religion of abraham. which does not change the fact the you do not believe in freedom of religion.

          • macgyver1948

            Richard…. It might be a leap, maybe, to say to Old Henry “you do not believe in freedom of religion”. But I wondered too if he subscribes to what I have come to believe is the Tea Party’s, and some elected GOP, “acceptable religion’s list”.

            By the way, Abraham is considered the first Jew but I think I understand what you are saying about Abraham being of Islam but only through his son by his mistress. It is that some who might be considered the father of Islam.

            Anyway, as I reread Old Henery’s words maybe your statement is not a leap. I have met and befriended many Muslims over the years, both on the Internet and in person, and most of them do not believe in “the Muslim Jihad”. But when we think about it “Jihad” is only the word for “Holy War” and there have been many in history in many languages and cultures, as with the Crusades by the Church. These days I see a Jihad emerging here in America by some so-called religious, or not, Americans. Hi Old Henry and TP. If we cannot be totally in favor of religious freedoms for all equally, as we would want for ourselves, we deserve no liberty as per the Constitution for ourselves. And that is taking into consideration even bigots have the rights granted to them by the First Amendment.

          • richard brooks

            These days I see a Jihad emerging here in America by some so-called religious, or not, Americans. Hi Old Henry and TP. If we cannot be totally in favor of religious freedoms for all equally, as we would want for ourselves, we deserve no liberty as per the Constitution for ourselves. And that is taking into consideration even bigots have the rights granted to them by the First Amendment. <<

            i agree.

          • macgyver1948

            Richard… Sorry,,, one of my lines shouild have been ” It is that son who might be considered the father of Islam. That typo was missed…

          • Old Henry

            Freedom of religion? Sure, they are absolutely free to worship any false god / demon / satan that they choose. However, Islam is really not a religion, it’s a political movement. Those who worship Islam are sworn to kill any and all who do not.

          • richard brooks

            Freedom of religion? Sure, they are absolutely free to worship any false god / demon / satan that they choose. However, Islam is really not a religion, it’s a political movement. Those who worship Islam are sworn to kill any and all who do not. <<

            they sound a lot like you and the other 'christians'. who follow your false mythology which is nothing more than a political sham.

            it would be best for the country and the world to simply ban all religion. perhaps over time we can finally eliminate all of the hate and violence derived from religion.

          • George E

            Richard,

            Like it or not, our moral code, and that of most societies, has been handed down from religious teachings. Most religions teach love, tolerance, and something like our “golden rule.” Unfortunately, some religious leaders teach hate, intolerance, etc. toward those of other religions and cultures. The fact that a few do this, shouldn’t cause us to turn away from religion. Rather, we should turn away from these kinds of leaders. If we didn’t have religion as the source of our moral code, what would replace it? You may say “laws” but I don’t think that’s a good idea since laws are created by men, and are as flexible as the times. Laws are not a good standard for morality since they don’t stand the test of time, and are no better than the men who create them, and as we all know, man is fallible.

          • richard brooks

            Richard,

            Like it or not, our moral code, and that of most societies, has been handed down from religious teachings. Most religions teach love, tolerance, and something like our “golden rule.” Unfortunately, some religious leaders teach hate, intolerance, etc. toward those of other religions and cultures. The fact that a few do this, shouldn’t cause us to turn away from religion. Rather, we should turn away from these kinds of leaders. If we didn’t have religion as the source of our moral code, what would replace it? You may say “laws” but I don’t think that’s a good idea since laws are created by men, and are as flexible as the times. Laws are not a good standard for morality since they don’t stand the test of time, and are no better than the men who create them, and as we all know, man is fallible. <<

            the use of mythology to control is very old. that does not equate to it being moral. the christian mythology is full of hate and violence. as are many others.

            social laws are the only laws of any consequence. and their worth can be determined by the willingness of society to follow them.

          • George E

            RIchard,

            I believe most of our laws have their foundation in religious teaching. If we didn’t have that, what would we use to determine morality, ethics, fairness, good, bad, etc? I doubt we could write laws or hold courts of law without these teachings.

          • macgyver1948

            George E… To interject, I have no problem infusing “morality, ethics, fairness”, and also big time The Golden Rule in the foundations of our laws. These concepts very much should there. But there should be no infusing of any religious specifics in our laws or we might have a Taliban type society where the most influencing religion(s), or denominations, will shape the laws according to the specifics of their religion. What if particular Christian churches do this without regard to Freedom Of Religion? What kind of life would those who aren’t of those churches have in these cases? We only need to look at the countries with Taliban like rulers to know the answers.

            Because of what I mention above I an very much on favor of putting “Separation Of Church And State” into the Constitution next to “Freedom of Religion”. With what we know from history, even in our country – not only world history, I believe it was a mistake not to. I also believe the Founders didn’t put Christian wording into the Constitution for some of my same reasoning even though most of them were Christian. It is not in the Star Spangled Banner either.

          • George E

            Macgyver,

            I agree with your concept of including religious principles in our laws without religious specifics that favor one religion or another. The problem I see is that we are trying to remove all references to God (or creator) from our public documents and institutions which goes well beyond the concept of removing specific religious teachings.

          • richard brooks

            I agree with your concept of including religious principles in our laws without religious specifics that favor one religion or another. The problem I see is that we are trying to remove all references to God (or creator) from our public documents and institutions which goes well beyond the concept of removing specific religious teachings. <<

            i have a problem with any god(s) or mythology being included in civil govt.

          • George E

            Are you atheist?

          • richard brooks

            i am a realist that believes in equality for all. not just a few chosen believers.

            which is probably rather odd. considering i was raised baptist and southern baptist. and then would up marrying catholics. but neither of my ex-wives would agree with your philosophy.

          • George E

            I also believe we are equal in the eyes of God, should be judged equally in a court of law, and have equal, or near equal, opportunity to succeed in the market place.

          • richard brooks

            I also believe we are equal in the eyes of God, should be judged equally in a court of law, and have equal, or near equal, opportunity to succeed in the market place. <<

            lol. no you don't. you support abortion & gay marriage? you would allow islam to be incorporated into our laws?

          • George E

            Richard,

            You may feel that I don’t believe in the things I say, but I do. Please don’t call me a liar.

            I think you’ve got a strange test of whether I believe in equality. No I don’t support abortion. I believe in protecting the rights of the unborn child. I don’t approve of gay marriage, but that has nothing to do with whether they are equal to me or not. Gays should be treated equally under existing law. I wouldn’t adopt Islam religious doctrine into US law because we already have a religious basis for our law, and I wouldn’t adopt anything religious into law that implied our government preferred one specific religion over another.

          • richard brooks

            You may feel that I don’t believe in the things I say, but I do. Please don’t call me a liar.

            I think you’ve got a strange test of whether I believe in equality. No I don’t support abortion. I believe in protecting the rights of the unborn child. I don’t approve of gay marriage, but that has nothing to do with whether they are equal to me or not. Gays should be treated equally under existing law. I wouldn’t adopt Islam religious doctrine into US law because we already have a religious basis for our law, and I wouldn’t adopt anything religious into law that implied our government preferred one specific religion over another. <<

            well, i will make the observation that you have made a liar of yourself with your statement.

            i do not support many of the above actions and some that we have not discussed. yet, i would argue that they must be allowed to have true freedom and equality. i am not required to be a participant.

            as you state. we already have a religious bias being forced into our govt. you would resist a different religious bias. tis obvious you have a preference which religion you would force on others.

            freedom and equality are very difficult concepts for most folks.

          • George E

            Richard,

            I have had about all of your abuse I can take. Therefore, I have decided to discontinue any further conversation with you. You are disrespectful, closed-minded, and not especially well informed, but always very opinionated none the less. This just doesn’t make for an intelligent two-way discussion or debate. Count me out from here on.

          • richard brooks

            I have had about all of your abuse I can take. Therefore, I have decided to discontinue any further conversation with you. You are disrespectful, closed-minded, and not especially well informed, but always very opinionated none the less. This just doesn’t make for an intelligent two-way discussion or debate. Count me out from here on. <<

            i had already counted you out. you are not willing to grant anyone an opinion or any rights that do not conform to your ideals or your religious definitions.

            freedom. liberty and equality will never be terms you understand or practice.

            i have had all of the religious abuse i ever want.

            like most of the 'right minded' believers, you flee when you are unable to convert others.

            similar to the gop sheep.

          • George E

            Richard,

            I’ll grant you one last comment. You don’t know me but seem more than willing to characterize me as some sort of extremist close-minded person because I haven’t agreed with you on everything you have said, and probably because you hold such disdain for Christians who have mistreated you in the past that you can’t see past your hatred of them to judge me fairly and objectively. I’m sorry for you and your experiences, but I can’t take any more of your unfounded and disrespectful accusations.

          • richard brooks

            i am quite willing to grant you freedom of religion. but i am not willing to be subjected to your religion or any interpretations of your religion. nor am i willing to allow you, or anyone else, to force anyone to follow your, or any other, particular mythology.

          • George E

            We agree.

          • richard brooks

            We agree. <<

            as they say in mizzery. show me.

          • macgyver1948

            Richard… “in response to George E:
            Are you atheist?
            i am quite willing to grant you freedom of religion. but i am not willing to be subjected to your religion or any interpretations of your religion. nor am i willing to allow you, or anyone else, to force anyone to follow your, or any other, particular mythology.

            Richard… I figured you are an atheist or you defined yourself as a realist. This is a good response you offer George E and I will tell you briefly why I write as I do.

            As a Jew I have my views of God and of our traditions and they are so right for me. Being a follower of The Golden Rule and because of how I feel my bible teaches is right for me I would never impose or force my beliefs on you or George. I would not force the Kosher laws on you, I would not push the 7th day Sabbath on you guys and I would never try to get either you, or any one else, even Christians, to believe in my bible because my bible and the Christian bibles so much contradict one another. I will never allow anyone to push Jesus on me so I wouldn’t try to show them how my bible says we would be in great conflict with God’s Torah, His laws, if we accept Jesus. It is even a mortal sin for us. How could I expect any Christian to believe that? It wouldn’t work and that is why I want “Separation Of Church And State” added to the Constitution – so no one is denied how they choose to believe.

            Also because how many times in history those of my religion were treated as outsiders, deserving of less liberty, or maybe those who murdered those for not believing and being as the power structures demanded. I won’t get into the Hitler things here and now but I do not want these things here for anyone and I see that as probabilities if Religion Specifics take over law. I see the Hitler thing for the Muslims if this happens.

          • richard brooks

            As a Jew I have my views of God and of our traditions and they are so right for me. Being a follower of The Golden Rule and because of how I feel my bible teaches is right for me I would never impose or force my beliefs on you or George. I would not force the Kosher laws on you, I would not push the 7th day Sabbath on you guys and I would never try to get either you, or any one else, even Christians, to believe in my bible because my bible and the Christian bibles so much contradict one another. I will never allow anyone to push Jesus on me so I wouldn’t try to show them how my bible says we would be in great conflict with God’s Torah, His laws, if we accept Jesus. It is even a mortal sin for us. How could I expect any Christian to believe that? It wouldn’t work and that is why I want “Separation Of Church And State” added to the Constitution – so no one is denied how they choose to believe.

            Also because how many times in history those of my religion were treated as outsiders, deserving of less liberty, or maybe those who murdered those for not believing and being as the power structures demanded. I won’t get into the Hitler things here and now but I do not want these things here for anyone and I see that as probabilities if Religion Specifics take over law. I see the Hitler thing for the Muslims if this happens. <<

            the problem george has, and many who follow mythology, is they believe thier particular brand of mythology grants them the right to determine whom may have any rights and what those rights are.

            i would have used mussolini and fascism as an example. tho hitler is a good example as well.

            hitler used religion, and its followers to put him in power and to gain support of his original policy's. many of his supporters never realised, until it was too late, that they were included in his list of undesirables. they were just farther down the list.

            a similar fate awaits george and the other hard line religious believers. they will support someone who promises to rid the land of those george finds undesirable. never telling george that his name is just farther down the list.

          • macgyver1948

            Richard… You mention Hitler in his use of religion to gain followers (I too see that kind of thing happening here) and he used other things to gain power and followers, such as Free Speech. I often write of Hitler that he heavily used Free Speech for that purpose because he and the Nazis knew how effective and powerful it is. Then, after he stole power because he lost the election, one of the first things they did was to abolish Free Speech because they “knew how effective and powerful it is”. The combination of Free Speech and sharing the problems of the Religious majority got Hitler leadership. Some of those same tactics are being used here today as well and with that being so religion specific it can get scary. I have to add under not circumstances can Free Speech be weakened or we lose so much more. With more of the self serving wrong people, or influence, in power we might forget “The Constituti­on is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people; it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government – lest it come to dominate our lives and interests.­”- Patrick Henry -

            “If the freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.” ~President George Washington

            I love quotes by our founders. Many times it shows how much not in alignment leaders of today are trying to fool us about their American loyalties.

            “the problem george has, and many who follow mythology, is they believe thier particular brand of mythology grants them the right to determine whom may have any rights and what those rights are”.

            We shouldn’t single George out, it is running rampant in many Religious belief systems although, to be fair, not all.

          • richard brooks

            “the problem george has, and many who follow mythology, is they believe thier particular brand of mythology grants them the right to determine whom may have any rights and what those rights are”.

            We shouldn’t single George out, it is running rampant in many Religious belief systems although, to be fair, not all. <<

            i did not single george out. 'and many who follow mythology' will cover individuals and other forms of mythology.

            i concur with your assessment of tactics.

          • macgyver1948

            Richard… I just think as I think per my practice and belief in The Golden Rule as best I can….

          • richard brooks

            Richard… I just think as I think per my practice and belief in The Golden Rule as best I can…. <<

            you are free to do anything you wish, as long as you do not force anyone else to participate.

            i have followed that for a fair number of years.

          • George E

            Richard,

            I think macgyver knows that I’m not a hard-liner. I am a conservative Christian, but I do try to be fair to most people who are willing to consider my ideas and treat me with respect.

            I am not saying, nor have I said, that religious leaders haven’t abused their authority and done some bad things over time. Some definitely have. Neither have I said that religions have not been used by some bad people to do bad things. That has been done as well. I am saying that most religious doctrine, whatever the brand, is generally moral and good, and has generally been a good guiding influence on the development of civilization. I think most people believe in a supreme creator, and that’s been a positive thing in their lives. Therefore, I think it should be OK for our government to refer to the creator and establish a set of values, like the ten commandments or something similar, as guiding principles/values on which we should rely when making decisions about right and wrong for our society. Until someone comes up with something better, I just think we ought to keep the ten commandments for this purpose.

          • richard brooks

            I think macgyver knows that I’m not a hard-liner. I am a conservative Christian, but I do try to be fair to most people who are willing to consider my ideas and treat me with respect.

            I am not saying, nor have I said, that religious leaders haven’t abused their authority and done some bad things over time. Some definitely have. Neither have I said that religions have not been used by some bad people to do bad things. That has been done as well. I am saying that most religious doctrine, whatever the brand, is generally moral and good, and has generally been a good guiding influence on the development of civilization. <<

            you want to use your personal definition of 'fair' and 'respect'. you simply ignore any other definition of the terms.

            what form of christianity do you follow that does not teach and support bias, racism, hate and violence.

          • macgyver1948

            Richard… Jihads come in all sorts of sizes, shapes, beliefs, color and languages and cultures according to how that culture wishes to define it for their justifications. Remember the Crusades, a major Holy War really set up for the Church to reclaim land they never had any moral or legal right to. It was their predecessors, the Roman Empire, who invaded, stole the “Holy Land” as they enslaved the inhabitants – that was their thing. A thorny rose by any name can hurt. There have been many smaller Jihads in Europe since then in the name or churches and self righteous people who have that self serving attitude I talk about. When you are so self centered you can justifying any of your actions and offer God as your support, in your mind. I see so much of ignoring the Golden Rule in the practice of scripture for those who cannot allow the rights of others to be who they are. It is not all religious people but history tells of many.

          • richard brooks

            When you are so self centered you can justifying any of your actions and offer God as your support, in your mind. I see so much of ignoring the Golden Rule in the practice of scripture for those who cannot allow the rights of others to be who they are. It is not all religious people but history tells of many. <<

            there are too many who use religion as a shield for their actions. i have often debated that the entire reason for mythology is a justification of action(s).

          • macgyver1948

            George E… I feel these are two different things. I personally want God in wherever people and government (just no where in law) would like. I do feel there seems to be more elimination of God as things are working. See if you agree with this. I do not see speaking of Jesus in public as an infringement on my Jewish beliefs, I have the right to not listen. Likewise I do not see conflict in the mentioning of God where atheists my be. But I do feel one group would be infringing on other groups if they insist on the “not mentioning”. Just don’t listen since no one has the right to force you. I hear so much about Jesus and it doesn’t mean anything to me. I believe atheist have to grow up when it comes to hearing about God, no one will force God into their belief system.

            I see the problem of incorporating religion specific into law more dangerous than to not mention of God. All to often when a religion took control all those who were not of that religion all to often were persecuted and worse. Those who believe in God will hold on to that belief even as negative as our Government is being now and hopefully the Government will come to its senses soon enough. I feel it would be much harder to eliminate religion specific laws, once they are in, then to force people who believe to not believe. In these situations I often remember the position the Pilgrims were in and why they had to leave England. The Church Of England booted out another Christian Church and all who didn’t follow how the new religion dictated were not considered first class citizens and treated like Jews and Pilgrims.

            We, as US citizens, have to stop allowing the removal of free thought and expression in speech but at the same time we cannot force or intimidate our views on those who believe differently. Religion specific infused into our laws will do that “Liberty-killing” for those who do not believe the same religiously or who are atheist.

            I also want silent prayer brought back to schools but with no mention of anything religious specific out loud, before, during or after. This way the kids can respectfully communicate with God however his/her family chooses and not the schools based on law.

          • George E

            I have no problem with not mentioning Jesus or any other religious figure in public documents, including law, public buildings, or the like. That would be more specific than I think necessary. However, I don’t have any problem displaying the Ten Commandments or referring to God and the Creator. These seem appropriately vague enough that almost anyone should be able to accept these references other an atheists. Since they are a very small minority in this society, I don’t think we ought to let them dictate this matter.

          • richard brooks

            I have no problem with not mentioning Jesus or any other religious figure in public documents, including law, public buildings, or the like. That would be more specific than I think necessary. However, I don’t have any problem displaying the Ten Commandments or referring to God and the Creator. These seem appropriately vague enough that almost anyone should be able to accept these references other an atheists. Since they are a very small minority in this society, I don’t think we ought to let them dictate this matter. <<

            you won't have a problem with any other religious slogans, various gods, anti religious material either?

            so much for equality for all.

          • George E

            It might depend on what they are, but generally speaking, I don’t think I would have a problem with most of them, so long as they promoted virtuous, healthy living as well as love and peace among people of all kinds.

          • richard brooks

            It might depend on what they are, but generally speaking, I don’t think I would have a problem with most of them, so long as they promoted virtuous, healthy living as well as love and peace among people of all kinds. <<

            like many who follow a mythology, you are convinced that you have the right to make the determination of what will be allowed.

          • macgyver1948

            George E… I mentioned before Atheists rights also need to be respected, group size shouldn’t matter. The founders felt a group of one is important. And I mentioned we all have the right not to listen to what is said or displayed. No group, large or of one person, should be able to dictate or deny other peoples liberties or beliefs. This is where I agree with what you are saying here. The 10 Commandants doesn’t deny anyone the right to not believe what is in it. To deny what they choose to believe or not believe is like saying we disagree with God and his Gift of Free Will. Free will works both ways, to agree or not to agree, or it doesn’t work at all and we are saying God is wrong.

            Ok, a bit wordy but the point is we have to stop denying others how they believe. The first 2 of The 10 Commandants, with their God specific instructions, should be a choice and not a man made demand. Of the other 8 which do correspond to mans laws will be a choice too but those need to be watched out for before we die. Athirst should have the right to not agree with things such as The 10 Commandments but at the same time they shouldn’t have the right to tell us we can’t display. If they have that right we have the right to tell them they are wrong by not believing and that is not Liberty either.

          • George E

            Macgyver,

            I get the feeling you and I are essentially in agreement.

          • richard brooks

            I also want silent prayer brought back to schools but with no mention of anything religious specific out loud, before, during or after. <<

            you can say a silent prayer when ever or where ever. no is stopping you. are you saying everyone must be silent at the same time?

          • macgyver1948

            Richard… You ask me “are you saying everyone must be silent at the same time?”. LOL. yeah, good luck with that. But maybe there can be a place and time desinated for silance, maybe.

          • George E

            What can possibly be offensive about observing a moment of silence at public events?

          • richard brooks

            What can possibly be offensive about observing a moment of silence at public events?<<

            how can you be offended if i disagree? or fail to follow your practices?

          • macgyver1948

            Richard and George E… No one should be offended when disagreed with. It can be an offense when the attempt to make someone agree is there or, to some degree, even expected. These attempts “to make someone agree is there or, to some degree, even expected” are forms of control and we cannot have that. They defy Liberty and that is why the “only we are right and you have to be wrong if you disagree” BS attitude is so Anti-American too. But we shouldn’t be offended by what people have to say concerning their beliefs unless we have weakness in our own beliefs.

            For example, I do not have any faith in or regard for Jesus (except that he appears to have been a nice and respectful, of-all, man in history), and I have that God given right, but I do not feel offended when I hear his name. I just remember my bible and I know I am right as I choose for me. No one else has to feel this way and I do not get offended if they do not. If I were an atheist I could say the same thing, however I would see my “bible”. This should not be any form of argument in a free and Liberty for-all kind of country and of free thinking and fair minded people, as it is believed of Jesus.

          • richard brooks

            Richard and George E… No one should be offended when disagreed with. It can be an offense when the attempt to make someone agree is there or, to some degree, even expected. <<

            i am not offended by anyone's particular mythology. it is only when some feel i should have to practice or observe their particular mythology.

            it is ironically hypocritical that george demands respect for his mythology, but would refuse the same respect for others.

          • macgyver1948

            Richard… It is repugnant to me whenever anyone “demands respect for his mythology, but would refuse the same respect for others“. It just defies Liberty and respect for all others. I am not so sure George E is doing exactly that but I cannot be sure. I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt until…

            We get that kind of disrespect for other people’s Liberty all to often form those who feel they cannot be wrong, all those who disagree with them have to be wrong. Sounds very Taliban-ish to me to be that Right all the time.

            It is very much “ironically hypocritical” to claim you believe in Liberty as well as side yourself with the Founders but then refuse others their liberty because they have the nerve to disagree with you.

          • richard brooks

            It is very much “ironically hypocritical” to claim you believe in Liberty as well as side yourself with the Founders but then refuse others their liberty because they have the nerve to disagree with you. <<

            i do not 'side' with the founders, per se. the founders claimed all men were created equal. but they meant only certain selected and approved men. i would claim all are created equal and should be treated as such.

            i would allow liberty for all. that personal liberty does equate to infringing on anyone else's liberty.

            which means, you may pray or observe your religion. but that does mean it should interfere with anyone else.

            as an example. i have worked with several who practice islam. the daily prayers are fine. however. when they stop in the middle of a work place, and pray where ever they happen to be, that is infringing on the liberty's of others. coming to my door and trying to convert me is an infringement. i do know where the church is. the ringing of the church bells is another example.

            as are the religious restrictions placed on the entire population. abortion, prostitution, gambling, drugs, alcohol, marriage, etc.

            we can all live in a peaceful and civil society. but it requires equality be given to all.

            i would never interrupt your religious services or practices. why would you allow your services or practices to interrupt what i am doing?

            you want a moment of silence to pray. does that mean i have to observe it as well?

          • macgyver1948

            Richard… I have told you more than once that you do not have to do anything when it comes to observing other people’s silent, or otherwise, prayers or any form of speech making. My answer to that will not change if you ask more often. To listen/observe or to not listen/observe is and should always be up to each of us. If the schools give me, as a student, a room to do my silent or loud whatevers I would not want you to enter unless you wanted. I wouldn’t interfere with whatever you choose to do or try to force you to observe. “Maybe they will change to my ways of feeling if they are forced to listen” just doesn’t work and is just plane wrong. Same answers all the time, just different or more words.

            To me it is like trying to recruit or convert someone to my religion or belief system. I wouldn’t attempt in any way to convert people because I feel it would be insulting and disrespectful to anyone because it is like saying to them “Your ways of believing/worshiping/accepting are no good, they do not work. Come over to us because our ways are the only ways that do work and are right for you”. (sounds like a political thing for many also) Why else would anyone try to convert others if they didn’t think their ways are right and better for you? What would be the point to the attempt other wise?

            I just would not do that and that includes why “i would never interrupt your religious services or practices” either. In general Jewish people do not do the Conversion thing, although we do accept conversion requests but people have to ask and be convincing enough in their attempt, and there are possible historical reasons for that. For me it is that and the personal reasons I mention above. Don’t do it to me and I wont insult you either. More of the Golden Rule thing. Either you respect other people’s rights or you inflict yours on them. Which is the more American and libertarian (not the party) way?

          • George E

            I don’t have a problem with disagreement, but I do have a problem with someone calling me a liar and verbally abusing me in the conversation. Clean it up and we can talk.

          • macgyver1948

            George E…. I apologize if I insulted you or called you a liar. I wasnt thinking I was doing that…

          • richard brooks

            George E…. I apologize if I insulted you or called you a liar. I wasnt thinking I was doing that…<<

            george made a liar out of him self with his posts. he thinks he is being insulted if you disagree with his mythology or perspective. if george had his way, he would eliminate anyone that did not or would not follow his mythology based ideals.

          • George E

            Richard,

            You are nuttier than a bed bug. I’m convinced you have no sense of reality, and certainly no sense of what is required to carry on an adult conversation.

          • George E

            macgyver,

            Thanks, but I’m not upset at you. Richard is the one that called me a liar…..several times, and just won’t back off. He just doesn’t seem to understand you can’t talk to some people (me for instance) like that and have a mature discussion. I understand you and I have our differences, but I think we have a certain respect for each other and try to maintain a sense of civility in our conversations. You’re OK in my book.

          • George E

            I’m offended when someone calls me a liar.

          • richard brooks

            I’m offended when someone calls me a liar<<

            you must offend yourself often

          • George E

            You just won’t quit will you? Stop harassing me or I’m going to ask the website administrator to block you from posting on this site.

          • richard brooks

            You just won’t quit will you? Stop harassing me or I’m going to ask the website administrator to block you from posting on this site. <<

            now we see your definition of freedom and liberty.

            like the average christian conservative, when you are unable to validate your position or refute a position, you whine and cry. demanding that someone silence those who disagree with you.

          • George E

            Richard,

            I refuse to discuss this subject with you any longer because of your behavior in calling me a “liar”, not because we differ on the issue. That’s understood. We just can’t have an intelligent, adult conversation when you are calling me hateful names and attacking my character. If you can’t see that, you can stuff it. If you want to have an intelligent conversation with me, quit attacking my motives and character. That’s all I ask, and I don’t think that’s too much to ask.

          • richard brooks

            Richard… You ask me “are you saying everyone must be silent at the same time?”. LOL. yeah, good luck with that. But maybe there can be a place and time desinated for silance, maybe. <<

            a church or your home would work.

          • macgyver1948

            Richard… You responded with “a church or your home would work” to my way of thinking, to what I hoped was a rhetorical question. I suppose we could say the same of the KKK with “a Klan meeting or ‘their’ home would work” as well. But, and I mean this with an open heart, I am a huge supporter and believer in Free Speech and I have a hard time reconciling at times. Free and civil/peaceful public assembly is important too as a liberty. Oh well, just so it is understood no one can morally or legally be forced/pressured to listen or accept in America and should be for all Mankind…

          • richard brooks

            Richard… You responded with “a church or your home would work” to my way of thinking, to what I hoped was a rhetorical question. I suppose we could say the same of the KKK with “a Klan meeting or ‘their’ home would work” as well. But, and I mean this with an open heart, I am a huge supporter and believer in Free Speech and I have a hard time reconciling at times. Free and civil/peaceful public assembly is important too as a liberty. Oh well, just so it is understood no one can morally or legally be forced/pressured to listen or accept in America and should be for all Mankind… <<

            i agree with your over all assessment.

            as long as no one is forced to participate.

            which would mean no one is forced to observe a moment for silent prayer and no one can stop you from observing your silent prayer.

          • macgyver1948

            Richard… Yep, no one should ever be forced to observe other people’s slant anything but I would like there to be a place for my kid in school to have the choice. If I were to see a Christian in silent anything I will respect but I will pay no attention because that observation alone is intruding. But I just wouldn’t want to. It is not about my observing other people’s silence, it is about my choice and I will not accept any influencing in my choosing. In other words, no law in these matters, one way or another. No religious or political influence (unless I ask for consideration), just how I choose on my own.

          • richard brooks

            Richard… Yep, no one should ever be forced to observe other people’s slant anything but I would like there to be a place for my kid in school to have the choice. If I were to see a Christian in silent anything I will respect but I will pay no attention because that observation alone is intruding. But I just wouldn’t want to. It is not about my observing other people’s silence, it is about my choice and I will not accept any influencing in my choosing. In other words, no law in these matters, one way or another. No religious or political influence (unless I ask for consideration), just how I choose on my own. <<

            i am confused. some one has stopped your child from silent prayer? that is wrong.

          • macgyver1948

            Richard… LOL. I am sorry, some time I write to fast. No, no one has tried to stop my child from silent prayer that I know of. I was doing a what-if thing.

          • richard brooks

            Richard… LOL. I am sorry, some time I write to fast. No, no one has tried to stop my child from silent prayer that I know of. I was doing a what-if thing. <<

            my answer remains the same. that would be wrong.

          • richard brooks

            Because of what I mention above I an very much on favor of putting “Separation Of Church And State” into the Constitution next to “Freedom of Religion”. With what we know from history, even in our country – not only world history, I believe it was a mistake not to. I also believe the Founders didn’t put Christian wording into the Constitution for some of my same reasoning even though most of them were Christian. It is not in the Star Spangled Banner either. <<

            nor was it included in the original pledge of allegiance.

          • macgyver1948

            Richard…. your words “nor was it included in the original pledge of allegiance”.

            Exactly, I just didn’t want to build an extensive list but that is a good place for the point too….. Religious Specific was deliberately left out to preserve Liberty and Freedom for all – NOT only for the chosen with the power or most influence. That ain’t America or at least it was attempted to never be by the founders for all of us.

          • richard brooks

            RIchard,

            I believe most of our laws have their foundation in religious teaching. If we didn’t have that, what would we use to determine morality, ethics, fairness, good, bad, etc? I doubt we could write laws or hold courts of law without these teachings. <<

            really? it was civil law that abolished slavery. brought us women's rights. integrated the schools. stopped the absurd penalty's for adultery and sexual practices. just to mention a few.

            religion was & is the problem. not the lack of it.

          • George E

            Richard,

            But why was it that people felt these things were wrong and needed to be changed? I believe if was the morality that came from their religious training.

          • richard brooks

            Richard,

            But why was it that people felt these things were wrong and needed to be changed? I believe if was the morality that came from their religious training. <<

            that is the problem with a belief system. especially a religious belief system.

            the majority did not believe slavery was right.
            the majority does not support prohibition of prostitution, alcohol, drugs, gambling, etc.

            your belief system has determined right and wrong regardless of what the majority supports.

            you simply believe that you are right. and are willing to attempt to force that on others.

            btw- it is your chrisitian beliefs that support all of the ideals that been changed by civil law. what society deemed was wrong and changed.

          • George E

            Richard,

            Everyone has a belief orientation, regardless where it comes from. If you think “majority rules” is a solid, time-tested belief system, fine. I don’t. Majority opinions can be very fluid as circumstances change. For example, at one time, a majority thought slavery was OK. Even though many were Christians, something had to cause them to change their minds. I believe it was their religious orientation that caused them to eventually come to understand it wasn’t right.

          • richard brooks

            Everyone has a belief orientation, regardless where it comes from. If you think “majority rules” is a solid, time-tested belief system, fine. I don’t. Majority opinions can be very fluid as circumstances change. For example, at one time, a majority thought slavery was OK. Even though many were Christians, something had to cause them to change their minds. I believe it was their religious orientation that caused them to eventually come to understand it wasn’t right. <<

            you mean the religions that taught and still teach slavery? adultery? racism? the religion you believe in.

            there is no evidence that the majority ever agreed with slavery. it was simply the law. which is not the same.

          • macgyver1948

            George E… I was brought up in the Jewish faith with loads of morality and ethics, along with the Golden Rule, and I wouldn’t change a thing with me. But I also believe “morality and ethics, along with the Golden Rule”, without religious influence can be part of a non religious person’s belief system. I know a few atheist who appear to me to have considerable more respect for others, along with their upbringing which included “ morality and ethics, along with the Golden Rule” by their atheistic parents, than some religious (of a church) people.

            We should remember the Founders wanted our laws to be based on morality as they deliberately did not mention any specif religion for great reasons.

          • George E

            I’m not saying that atheists aren’t moral or don’t have moral beliefs. I am saying that even these atheists have gotten their belief system from a religious foundation whether they are aware of it or not.

          • richard brooks

            I’m not saying that atheists aren’t moral or don’t have moral beliefs. I am saying that even these atheists have gotten their belief system from a religious foundation whether they are aware of it or not. <<

            absolutely correct. it is the rejection of your beliefs that bothers you. there are a growing number of the population that wants to remove religion from the public and put it back in the church. where it belongs.

            the percentage of faithful in our population is decreasing every year.

          • Old Henry

            Islam is about the only religion that promotes violence and hate. That is their mantra.

          • richard brooks

            Islam is about the only religion that promotes violence and hate. That is their mantra. <<

            lol. all of the christian versions of religion promote bias, racism, hate and violence. all of them have practiced some form of violence over the century's.

            you live in denial.

          • macgyver1948

            Oh Old Henry…. WOW. The more you speak the more you prove you have no honor and knowledge of what you talk about. The reason it is a religion is because, from their point of view, they worship the same God as Abraham, Issac and Jacob, and only one generation later than Abraham. They may see God a bit differently, which is their human right, and you may not agree, but they do have a legit religion. I do not see how many Christians see God, in their ways especially since there are so many differing denominations, but I accept their right to even Jesus as they see him. See, Jesus is a contradiction to the Jewish faith and how we see God but we accept Christianity as a legit religion for them.

            It is a matter of respect for and belief in “Freedom Of Religion” and if you believed in the Liberties given through the Constitution, and not choose which ones work for you but wont allow for others, you too might be a be in alignment with the Founders. Maybe your bigotry will not allow you to see Liberty for all but you might be more aligned with Satan with how much you bring him up.

            You say “However, Islam is really not a religion, it’s a political movement. Those who worship Islam are sworn to kill any and all who do not.”. How are your views different in concept from what you seem to be saying of all Muslims? Bigotry, hate and ignorance, are all the same even with your different packaging and self righteous ribbons.

          • richard brooks

            You say “However, Islam is really not a religion, it’s a political movement. Those who worship Islam are sworn to kill any and all who do not.”. How are your views different in concept from what you seem to be saying of all Muslims? Bigotry, hate and ignorance, are all the same even with your different packaging and self righteous ribbons.<<

            very well said.

    • George E

      It looks to me like most of the time when politicians go after the rich, they end up hitting the middle-class instead. Recall when they decided to levy a big tax on yachts to get more money out of the rich? What ended up happening was the rich just bought yachts from foreign suppliers, and US yacht builders laid-off many of their employees and some even went out of business, I understand. So, whenever I hear politicians say they want to punish the rich, I grab my wallet.

      • Old Henry

        George, that’s right! Thank you for jogging my memory as I had forgotten about that one.

        Didn’t Kerry – who served in Nam by the way – go off-shore to buy a new yacht after that “tax increas” was enacted? (With his wife’s money.)

        What most of the middle class seems to continually overlook is that the major $ is in the middle class. So, the career crimnals in D.C. go there for the $. It’s like Dillinger when they asked him why he robs banks and he replied becasue that’s where the money is…

    • richard brooks

      the problem with your economic theory is the same problem as the reagan/gop neo socialist policy. you fail to explain how the low wage labor will ever be the customer the business requires. as more americans receive less for their production, a larger portion of the population is no longer financially able to be a customer. the upper end of the pay scale continues to receive more, but fails to purchase enough to over come the loss of the low wage employee.
      business spends more to advertise to a shrinking customer base.
      a higher paid labor base would equate to a larger portion spending that money. thus driving business revenue and profits.
      the second problem is the continual manipulation of the u.s. labor pool with cheap imported immigrant labor. while the gop sheep blame the democrats, most of that has been done by the gop. reagans amnesty, his increase in lottery and little bush granting food stamps to immigrants to help subsidize that low wage labor.
      the solutions are simple. unfortunately, too many of the gop are too simple to grasp how simple it is.

  • chuckb

    you speak about freedom of religion. please explain to me what you mean by freedom of religion and who gives who these freedoms. does islam give freedom of religion, absolutely not. the founders of this country did not mean they wanted religion on the outside of government, if you read your history they held prayer (christian prayer) in the congress and held sunday services there. their mention of religious freedom from referred to the church of england and the catholic church of rome.
    so you want to give all these different religions equal rights, that’s the laugh of the century.
    i can see it now the muslims decide to make their prayers on public streets and tie up traffic for miles, whose religious freedom is that? not mine.

    this country was based on christianity and on several occasions the supreme court has reaffirmed this, however, they grant people people the right to believe as they may, it doesn’t mean that we have to change our culture to appease other religions and this muslim in the white house is making every change he can to counteract this.

    • macgyver1948

      ChuckB… Freedom Of Religion is freedom if the individual has the freedom to decide what he/she wants to believe, or not believe, and how he/she chooses to accept God, or not accept in God. If we decide, based on how ‘our’ church dictates, that is pour choice choice. We do not have Liberty in the religious sense if we are told to believe in ways we do not. The Founders of the United States say this and we all should agree with them if we want and belief in liberty as they do. If not we do not have religious freedom but we do have religious tyrants, something the founders wanted so much to avoid, and religious dictatorship. Ask King George.

      The Constitution of the US gives us those freedoms and religious zealots want to eliminate those freedoms. No religion or denomination can say what is freedom because history shows that will never work for a free society. No religion, or denomination, should have the right to influence government policy in America or we have religious tyranny. History shows that so clearly.

      Islam, as with any denomination of Christianity, does not have the right to designate any degree of religious policy in a free society. If any do it is a form of Jihad no matter what the language or religion. The founders knew this and that is why they did not declare America a Christan or any other kind of religious country. The Founders knew better because they want “Freedom Of Religion” for all of us. The Founders deliberately did not declare America a Christian country, even though most of them were Christan, because they knew that would negate “Freedom Of Religion” for all as history shows so clearly.

      We say our country, religiously speaking, is a Christian/Jewish country but in reality Judaism would have a problem with that. So we in America can not declare America a Christian country, as the Founders did, since it contradicts “Freedom Of Religion” for all. I have known and spoken to many Muslims and they do not see the Muslim faith as many in this country do. The Muslim terrorists do but not the majority of Muslims.

      You are so very wrong when you say the Founders wanted Christan traditions and scriptures for all America, There is no mention of Christianity in the Constitution, the Star Spangled Banner or the Pledge of Allegiance. There are many reasons for this. Some have to do with the terror of King George and some are in the stories of the Pilgrims who eventually came to America because they could not practice their form of Christianity in the Christan, King George style, country of England. The Founders knew this and they wanted “Freedom Of Religion” for all who come here and not any form of religious persecution, as the Pilgrims lived through with other kinds of Christians in England but moistly how they felt King George was about his specific Christan faith, or desired church scripture, plaguing and terrorizing others who did not conform to their church requirements. Many of the Founders were Christian but they knew better for Freedom and Liberty to be exclusive and that meant America cannot be Christian, or any other religion, country.

      You are right when you say other religions “doesn’t mean that we have to change our culture to appease other religions” but it also means you and others, or our government, has the right to change them. As long as any religion does not impose what they believe on us they have the right to be them, as you and Christianity does for themselves. That is what the Founders wanted for Freedom – for us, not what you are saying. That is Liberty when it comes to religion and not what any religion says because if any religion dictates toward others they are violating “Freedom Of Religion” based on our Constitution in America. And if any religion, or denomination, tries to influence any elected official in policy making that church should lose its tax exemption rights per the US Constitution with “Freedom Of Religion”.

      Liberty means equally for all of us (not only how any group(s) see it for themselves so it should be for all, and respecting the rights and beliefs of all religions equally, or it is not freedom/liberty and they do not have the right to impose their wants on others. For example, if any are caught baptizing any dead people who were not baptized because their religion forbids it, as it has been done because the doers of these immoral acts feel their religion says they should, they should be arrested and sent to federal prison for that Constitutional violation. It has been done by Christians.

      If you choose to believe Obama is a Muslim, when he says he is a Christian, then anyone has the right to say you are a Satanist or anything else. Do your own research rather than be programmed to believe what is wanted of you to believe, think for yourself instead of being programmed.

  • chuckb

    i totally disagree with your premise. this nation was founded on christian principles and the laws were incorporated.

    But was America founded on Christian principles? Just read the first words of the Declaration of Independence:

    We hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

    From the beginning, America’s founders accepted the reality that basic rights were inseparable from human beings and they recognized that those inalienable rights were not given by government nor acquired by force, but that life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are the gifts of the Creator.

    In 1844, the Court said, “Christianity is part of our common law.”

    In 1892, the Supreme Court said this: “No purpose of action against religion can be imputed to any legislation, state or national because this is a religious people. This is historically true.”

    In 1930, the U.S. Supreme Court said this: “We are a Christian people, according to our motto.”

    In 1952, the U.S. Supreme Court said, “We are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being.

    The question isn’t – Was America founded on Christian principles? The question is – what world view has given birth to and sustained America? The answer to that question is simple: Christianity.

    you can defend barry soetoro all you want that is your privilege, my contention he is a muslim and he has declared so. read his book, son of my father.

    • richard brooks

      But was America founded on Christian principles? Just read the first words of the Declaration of Independence:

      We hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. <<

      those words were an obvious lie. all men were not treated as equal. none of the women were ever considered equal.

      separation of state and church.

      the treaty of tripoli.

      you quote a handful of men who made presumptuous statements. we, as in all of us, do not follow the same religions. nor does everyone follow any religion. your argument about religion belongs in church. the notion that we are electing the worlds religious leader is the problem.

      christianity is and has been the real problem. i doubt there is any religious run country that you would want to live in.

      what you want, is your religion to be the source of the morals and laws.

      since you demand freedom of religion than you would have to accept islam as the rule for the country if the population demanded it.

      i would not attempt to interfere in your personal beliefs. why are you insisting that i follow your beliefs?

      civil rights can not be determined by some mythology. personal liberty can no longer be determined by a miniscule group of religious followers.

    • Right Brain Thinker

      chuckb again gives us the “talking points” and dubious assertions of the right as he makes an attempt to counter macgyver’s excellent arguments. He ignores the fact that the founding fathers were better described as Deists, and that the Creator referred to in the Declaration was not Christ in their minds but rather a Supreme Being. That’s why the word “Creator” was used rather than “Christian”, because the nation is NOT founded on “Christian” principles (although Christ WOULD approve of some of them).

      chuck then mish-moshes some quotes together that support both his contention (1844,1930) and what I have just said above (1892,1952). Proves nothing much I predict that if anyone bothers to carry this part of the thread farther, we will soon be inundated by a flood of quotations from those suffering from motivated reasoning, confirmation bias, and disconfirmation bias as they throw “evidence” against the wall in hopes that it will stick and “prove” something.

      The reasons the establishment clause is so important is because it keeps folks like chuck from gaining power and imposing their will on the majority. Not that they won’t keep trying. Apparently, religious beliefs trump belief in the Constitution for some. Seems a bit contradictory, though—-how can you consider youself a patriot at the same time you are going against the Constitution?

      • George E

        Right,

        Christians in this country feel offended, and even threatened, by the “assault” on Christianity by leftists, not the least of which is the Obama administration. It’s not clear whether Obama wants to level the playing field regarding religion in this country, or in fact, replace it with the teachings of Islam. Either way, Christians don’t like what’s going on. That’s why you’ll see them make statements that you may feel are threatening. In the end, I don’t believe our founders or Christians today want it to be a one-way street regarding religious teachings and beliefs in this country. Most of us are willing to be inclusive and let everyone practice the beliefs of their choice, provided however, those teaching fall within the broader teachings of Christian teachings, like the “golden rule” for example. That may sound extreme to you, but it is those teachings that formed our early traditions, laws, and civil society in this country. Religions that teach vengeance, polygamy, etc. can’t be tolerated in this society, for example. When you stray outside those teachings you challenge the very foundation of our values as a people, and that can only lead to great consternation and possibly even anarchy. We’d like to avoid that if we can. So, if you want to practice the religion of your choice, or no religion, in this country, it should be compatible with traditional teachings, and even with respect to the Christian faith that gave us these early values. To do otherwise, is an insult to Christians, and to all who hold traditional values dear.

        • richard brooks

          Most of us are willing to be inclusive and let everyone practice the beliefs of their choice, provided however, those teaching fall within the broader teachings of Christian teachings, like the “golden rule” for example. That may sound extreme to you, but it is those teachings that formed our early traditions, laws, and civil society in this country. Religions that teach vengeance, polygamy, etc. can’t be tolerated in this society, for example. When you stray outside those teachings you challenge the very foundation of our values as a people, and that can only lead to great consternation and possibly even anarchy. We’d like to avoid that if we can. So, if you want to practice the religion of your choice, or no religion, in this country, it should be compatible with traditional teachings, and even with respect to the Christian faith that gave us these early values. To do otherwise, is an insult to Christians, and to all who hold traditional values dear. <<

          that is amusing, ironic and complete denial of the christian teaching,

          you would return to hanging for adultery or sex outside of wed lock. (unless ordained of course) burning or hanging witches. slavery.

          those are just a part of your traditional teachings.

          the other side of your argument is to ban all religion. it is a communist entity that thrives thru socialism, and uses hate, bias, intimidation and violence to maintain control.

          you are free to follow your beliefs and not to follow mine. but you want to force your beliefs on everyone else. a fascist out look.

          forcing others to follow your beliefs is not only an insult to the rest of us but robs us of our right to personal freedom, liberty and equality.

          • macgyver1948

            richard brooks… Wow Richard, we agree on this issue. All religions must be equally respected or we will have what is not wanted in our country, as you suggest, the lack of liberty and freedom and equality. No religion should be allowed to dominate in a free society.

            I do not understand how any religious group can feel offended by so-called attacks but offer, at times, unprovoked attacks of their own and not see how much the same it is. Oh well, I guess I will go on wondering about that.

            Liberty can exist only if it is practiced by all for all equally. I very much like what you say with “you are free to follow your beliefs and not to follow mine. but you want to force your beliefs on everyone else. a fascist out look.
            forcing others to follow your beliefs is not only an insult to the rest of us but robs us of our right to personal freedom, liberty and equality”.

            You betcha because it is how it is suppose to be in America per the Founders. They didn’t want any religious specific influence in government for those reasons and hopefully not protracted by individuals to control or influence other individuals , :-))). I agree with you in general with this and I am not speaking to the one you are saying it to, you did that nicely. Thanks for this comment.

    • macgyver1948

      chuckB… I feel you are jumping to major “assumed” leaps here. Maybe because you want to, I cannot be sure, but leaping non the same. We can disagree because we have that “unalienable” right.

      Here goes. You pretty much start with “But was America founded on Christian principles? Just read the first words of the Declaration of Independence:

      We hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

      From the beginning, America’s founders accepted the reality that basic rights were inseparable from human beings and they recognized that those inalienable rights were not given by government nor acquired by force, but that life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are the gifts of the Creator”.

      I want to state I have no problem associating our American beginnings, as found in our history and in what you quote above with God. But no where in these and any other words found in the Constitution do the Founders get religious specific. You seem to be strongly assuming that. How can they be religious specific and also speak about “Liberty and Justice for all” (never mind where that quote specifically comes from, it is the concept that matters) if any one religion gets its practices and scriptural ways as ‘the’ rule(s)? This is so much what the Founders wanted to avoid – any form of religious dominance as it was in Europe and England when one kind of Christianity would persecute other Christian types. Do you remember the Pilgrims and why they had to escape England? Would you want that here? I fear we would with each church type insisting they are right so all others who aren’t them have to be wrong.

      I agree the Founders wanted God’s influence in how we carry on the business of both government and private living but not for one kind of church to dominate. They wanted morality to be the rule of every day and there are so many atheists who conduct their lives with morality so we do not need religion for that.

      The differences even between the many Christian denominations could and have been cause for major disagreements. Who would be right, for example, in those differences, if the Baptist Church insisted they were right and the Southern Baptist Church disagreed? Why is there a need for the different denominations if there is only one God? Considering that all denominations insist their ways are the right ways how would that work? So how would it work if there were disputes between a Christan Church and a non Christian religion, such as Judaism? Whose ways would win out legally? If it comes down to any of the above examples some religious group would lose their religious Freedom and that is what the Founders wanted to avoid. “Liberty and Freedom for all” or we have more religious intolerance and we might as well take “Freedom Of Religion” out of the Constitution and be as it was before in England with only King George’s religion dominating.

      Answer this. How would you feel if it became law that any who hold the Sabbath on Sunday would be shunned and lose their religious rights and respect? Or, Easter could no longer be tolerated? I bet the Founders did not think of it in these terms but they knew the concept of Jihad and it makes no difference what language you use but the insistence of any religion’s beliefs or else on all or any others is still a Jihad. Would you tolerate it if Jihad was imposed on you? We here in American must avoid that at all costs and that is why the Founders do not get religion specific even though most of them were Christian.

      I am Jewish and I mention how unconstitutional it is to force baptism on those of my religion as a good number of the Mormon faith have done on a good number of deceased Jews. Romney says he has participated in these immoral baptism but it has been a long time. That is almost a direct quote from him. If he has he violated the constitutional rights of those he violated and he belongs in jail. Those Mormons, who say they too are Christian, say they do it for Christian reasons. Do you feel this should be tolerated? Where would it end if it is tolerated?

      This disrespecting other religions rights is why we cannot be religion specific and it is so much why I disagree with you. Liberty for all equally or not at all (we cannot have it both ways) and if it is not at all, except for the religion with the power, we no longer have the Constitution with its liberty granting freedoms and America becomes the great hypocrisy. What would we have to brag about and say we are the best country ever? We would be no different than those countries, past and present, who do not have religious freedoms equally for all. We lose our bragging rights and we are saying God is wrong.

      I know I went on and on but there are many like you who do not seem to get the concept of religious freedom equally for all in America. Your quote from above again “We hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”. Creator yes but let’s remember man created religion and God created everything else. What right do we have to say what works for God and who is right about it? The Founders knew it and they knew the problems it causes to be religious specific in law or in the influencing of law.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        mac,

        May I again STRONGLY suggest that you get a copy of Mooney’s book FAST! Go online and Amazon it! TODAY!

        You have expended way too much energy trying to “reason” with chuckb and some others. Liberal-progressive right brain thinkers have some faults too, one being that they often can’t see the futility of trying to reason with unreason and just keep tilting at the windmills a la Don Quixote. That’s what you’re doing. Chuck is NOT LISTENING, and is just using your comments as a springboard for more of the “same” from him.

        Anyone who would say, as he did in his 2:35 message, that “acceptance (of blacks) was FORCED upon this country by civil rights laws” and that he WANTS the nation to divide and wants his “preferred” religion to “dominate” has a serious problem and really can’t be reasoned with. Please stop trying until after you have read the book..

        (and ditch the little smiley faces too—think about why I say that)

        • richard brooks

          but it is so much fun to watch them jump and down.

        • macgyver1948

          Right Brain Thinker… Yeah, I know but I take a break and come on here and I try and that is with not needing to be agreed with but I do not get their thought processes and still be for Liberty for all, or is it just for them and those who agree with them? LOL

          I noticed his “acceptance (of blacks) was FORCED upon this country by civil rights laws” and that he WANTS the nation to divide and wants his “preferred” religion to “dominate”” and I chose to leave it alone because I cannot believe it when I hear those things from those who claim to be of God and for Liberty. Yeah, I repeated that. There have been many times in history people had to get loud to receive their deserved rights. The British could say we “FORCED upon” them our desire for freedom and that would have have happened if our forefathers hadn’t been so loud.

          The claim of Blacks forcing the issue of their rights reminds me of a powerful bigoted opponent of the Civil Rights movement, The John Birch Society. I bet you know what group today evolved from the JBS and retained their same agendas and emotions. Many times in history it took the evolution of law for real justice to happen even against immoral and ignorant acts performed by a church authority. Civil Rights laws were and are so necessary for all of us.

          I will see about making time to get the Mooney’s book. And I really do know there is no rational discussion with those who refuse to allow for others views which do not agree with their own.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Richard,

        I used to think it was fun too. Then I read Mooney’s book and found out that the Republican Brain is really not a laughing matter. They REALLY can’t help themselves in many cases and they ARE allowed to vote. The most deluded among them are now advocating SECESSION, as you will see if you look at some other threads on the Personal Insanity Indigestible site that Bob provides for us out of the goodness of his heart.

        Be amused a bit by the “jumping up and down” but be afraid more. If Romney had won, this “faction” would have been empowered and encouraged to spread their delusions across the land. They may have lost the presidential election but they are alive and well at the state level, where they are working busily to make a mockery of the idea of “representative democracy”.

        (The thought just occurred to me that you might have been talking about the smiling faces “jumpng up and down” rather than the possessors of the Republican Brains. The faces don’t move on my screen—-do they on yours?)

        • richard brooks

          I used to think it was fun too. Then I read Mooney’s book and found out that the Republican Brain is really not a laughing matter. They REALLY can’t help themselves in many cases and they ARE allowed to vote. The most deluded among them are now advocating SECESSION, as you will see if you look at some other threads on the Personal Insanity Indigestible site that Bob provides for us out of the goodness of his heart. <<

          the fools give lip service to secession. but they would all cross to a different state if it ever occurred.

          it is my opinion that we will not solve this problem until we eliminate the cause. i doubt that can be accomplished in a peaceful or logical manner.

          i agree that the average gop supporter is insane and dangerous. tho i do wonder if they are really serious about their supposed beliefs.

          they advocate religion controlling govt, yet they never move to a country that is run in that manner.
          they support lower wages, yet never want their wages lowered.
          they support slavery, indentured servitude and chattel property, as long as they are not one of those being oppressed.

          tis time to change the way this game is being played. we, you & i and similar minds, have been put on the defensive. required to defend liberty, freedom and equality.
          we should be on the offensive. including the restriction of religious teachings of bias, racism, hate, violence, etc.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Richard,
        Don’t let your frustration push you too far “out” towards the left (although there is no “left” that even approaches the intellectual swamp found on the right). You say “I agree that the average gop supporter is insane and dangerous. tho i do wonder if they are really serious about their supposed beliefs”. That is perhaps a bit unkind. It might be better to use the word “deluded” in place of “insane”. What IS insane is when the collective delusions DO become the policies that the right think should govern the country. IMO, the average gop supporter becomes dangerous only when he succumbs to the groupthink of the far right and becomes part of the mob.

        And yes, they ARE all quite serious about their beliefs. Very few of them have enough of a sense of humor to be making this stuff up just to be playing with us (although I admit there may be some, perhaps some even employed by Bob L to stir the pot—-Bob would like an increased hit count on the site to boost his revenues)

        And the right brain thinkers have not been put on the defensive. We have been fighting the good fight and are actually winning right now—O’Bama won, remember. And the right is mostly still in denial about that and not trying to figure out why they lost. Their failed presidential candidate thinks it was because of the “gifts” O’Bama used to “buy” everyone’s votes. LOL We need to keep fighting, consolidate our gains, and push the forces of darkness even farther into the shadows.

        You say “we should be on the offensive. including the restriction of religious teachings of bias, racism, hate, violence, etc” Yes, and we are—there are many organizations doing just that, the one that first comes to mind as focusing on the “big four” you listed is the Southern Poverty Law Center. (SPLC) Check them out on the web—a group worthy of your support.

        • richard brooks

          Don’t let your frustration push you too far “out” towards the left <<

          i simply look at reality. we have too many extremes and not enough moderates. a growing number who seem to favor fascism.

          the solutions are rather simple. but the hard liners will never willingly adopt the solutions. even if their refusal proves to be detrimental to them.

  • chuckb

    macgyver, the fouinding fathers were mostly christian and different denomination of such, however, the difference here is they as christians believe that jesus christ is god incarnate so when they refer to the creator guess what. that’s where the line is drawn and you being jewish probably won’t accept this concept and argue against it

    i do not belong to any organized church and there’s no way i can prove anything about jesus christ. his words are deciphered amongst many different sects and interpreted differently in some, yet, he certainly convinced a lot of people in what he preached and our founding fathers were believers to that fact. freedom of religion can carry a lot of weight, if we give the muslims freedom of their religion and set up sharia law for them in our country, how will that abide with our current laws, i think not, so where is freedom for them?
    up until recent times jews were not accepted in parts of our society and running for president was out of the question , blacks were in the same boat. have you ever asked yourself why? acceptance was forced upon this country by civil rights laws. that in my belief is why our education system has dumbed down the school curriculum and removed christianity from the schools.

    there’s no hate in my heart for any person regarding their race or their religion accept for islam. there are parts of the jewish religion that parallel the muslims and both can be a domineering factor to a free people.
    so you might say for my part, i would prefer to live in a country dominated by my belief. there will come a time in the near future this nation will divide itself and i would prefer that to the way we are going.

    • macgyver1948

      chuckb… I must agree with you on some things since there are “rules” and common sense which may dictate a need for exceptions.

      You say “freedom of religion can carry a lot of weight, if we give the muslims freedom of their religion and set up sharia law for them in our country, how will that abide with our current laws, i think not, so where is freedom for them?”.

      If we have aspects of some versions of a religion which include “killing any who will not become us” then there is a major need for an exception. Safety and security and common sense must be that exception so we can protect ourselves. It is a major right of ours.

      I am a member of an organized religion, I am Jewish. In that I know what it is and can be like to be told “you Jews are wrong because you do not agree with us”. Feel free to substitute any religion for “Jews” in that some-what quote. Throughout history Jews have been told that by other religious, as well as political, groups which include, but not limited to, both Christians and Muslims. This is why I feel so strongly for Freedom Of Religion equally for all in America but to include some needed exceptions as I mentioned above. But never should any religion be told how they will be allowed to practice their customs and acceptances of God, but considering those needed safety exceptions.

      Any domineering factors, as you mention for both Judaism and Muslims, is of exclusive small groups within them respectively and not really reflective of the entire religion. There are extremism sects in many religions who are dangerous, including Christianity, and my hope is the majority of those religions do not agree or practice the domineering or dangerous aspects of their extreme groups. There are some actions I have seen done by some ultra Orthodox Jews in the Middle East I can not and will not accept, those are just not accented my our majority. Any form of Talibanism, if I can use that word for my examples, by any religion is intolerable and should not be allowed here. If it is then “Freedom Of Religion” will slip slide away in America.

      I prefer a “Golden Rule” approach to be practiced by all religions toward all others. Nothing specific but loads of acceptance and respect all around as we would want for ourselves. Maybe if this is the normal practice here, by all who claim to be of God, as well as for moral minded atheists, what you suggest “there will come a time in the near future this nation will divide itself” might not happen here or at least not get violent. Well, I can hope…

  • chuckb

    macgyver, it doesn’t seem possible for islam and any other religion to exist side by side, islam has one goal, rule the world by caliphate. so how can you believe they can live peacefully with any other religion, the golden rule doesn’t apply with them.
    israel has never found true peace with the muslims and you expect them to live in this country without eventually clashing.
    the islamic countries do allow other religions, however, they are under scrutiny and not allowed to proselytize without causing themselves bodily harm.
    if we allow this country to be infested with muslims you can expect trouble down the road.

    a good number of blacks are now accepting islam (nation of islam) and the prisons are turning into recruiting stations for them. so we are breeding a problem there.

    the trouble in the middle east is religion and until one overcomes the other and subjects their religion on the other their will be no peace.
    i stand with israel and i’m afraid this trouble will eventually turn into ww3. maybe the prophets of the bible were right.

  • Right Brain Thinker

    We seem to have gotten a bit far afield of the topic. Let’s leave religion aside for now and get back to the fiscal cliff and the way we’re going to deal with it. Let’s back up to the idea of who is “stealing” from whom via federal income taxes and the questions of income and wealth inequality and tax fairness.

    I was doing a little light reading in the Census Bureau statistics and came upon the following:

    “•Based on the Gini index, income inequality (in the US) increased by 1.6 percent between 2010 and 2011…..”
    “•Income inequality also increased between 2010 and 2011 when measured by shares of aggregate household income received by quintiles. The aggregate share of income declined for the middle and fourth quintiles. The share of aggregate income increased 1.6 percent for the highest quintile and within the highest quintile, the share of aggregate income for the top 5 percent increased 4.9 percent. The changes in the shares of aggregate income for the lowest two quintiles were not statistically significant”.

    In plainer English, the incomes of the folks between the 40th. and 80th. percentiles DECLINED, the incomes of the folks betwen the 80th. percentile and the top INCREASED by 1.6% and the incomes of the folks in the very top 5% INCREASED BY 4.9%. So, the middle class is losing ground and the folks at the very top are moving up nicely. Who can afford to pay a higher tax rate? Seem obvious to me.

    Let’s look at the data available from the CIA in its World Factbook. Under “Country Comparison – Distribution of family income – Gini index” This index measures the degree of inequality in the distribution of family income in a country. If income were distributed with perfect equality, the index would be zero. If income were distributed with perfect inequality, the index would be 100. Below find selected lines from the CIA data chart of 136 countries. The really important information to be gleaned is the rankings of the countries. #1 is the worst and #136 is the best. A lot of small countries have been deleted—many countries in Africa and Asia that we would consider “third world” and “undeveloped” do far better on this measure than the USA, which, as you can see, ranks as the 42nd. worst out of 136. All the countries of Europe also do better. Data are not all from the same year but things don’t change much over spans of just few years with this measure—if anything, the US would rank at least several steps lower today because of the increase in inequality noted in the Census Bureau data.

    Rank and country GINI # Date of information

    18 Mexico 51.7 2008
    27 China 48.0 2009
    42 United States 45.0 2007
    45 Iran 44.5 2006
    52 Russia 42.0 2010
    75 Japan 37.6 2008
    79 India 36.8 2004
    89 Egypt 34.4 2001
    91 United 34.0 2005
    Kingdom
    100 France 32.7 2008
    101 Taiwan 32.6 2000
    103 Canada 32.1 2005
    114 European 30.4 2010 est.
    Union
    124 Germany 27.0 2006
    132 Norway 25.0 2008
    133 Denmark 24.8 2011 est.
    136 Sweden 23.0 2005

    What is the point of all this “conjecture”, as some will likely describe it? The US is hardly better than a third world country because of the upward flow of both income and wealth. Again, who is best able to afford a tax increase based on this data? Seems obvious to me.

    • Right Brain Thinker

      I AM AGAIN POSTING SOMETHING THAT FIRST APPEARED TWO DAYS AGO. IT STILL HAS NOT ELICITED ANY RESPONSE OTHER THAN FROM RICHARD. DO ALL THE JUNK YARD DOGS SENSE THAT THERE IS POISON BURIED IN THIS RED MEAT THAT HAS BEEN THHROWN OUT THERE FOR THEM? THAT IF THEY CHEW ON THIS, THE IRREFUTABILITY OF THE DATA WILL PUT TO DEATH THEIR DELUSIONS AND WRONG IDEAS ABOUT THE SUBJECT? THAT IF THEY RESPOND, THE INADEQUACIES OF THEIR TALKING POINTS WILL BE EXPOSED FOR ALL TO SEE?

      Right Brain Thinker says:
      November 17, 2012 at 9:15 am
      I’m reposting this comment because it hasn’t garnered a single response. Maybe it got missed? I t speaks to many comments folks have made in this thread and I offer it up again as an answer to those who rant about “stealing other people’s money”, “the rich pay more than their fair share of taxes”, “redistribution” and other hugely wrong talking points.

      Right Brain Thinker says:
      November 16, 2012 at 6:06 pm

      KKF enlightens us with the same old broken records—-”stealing from those who earned their money and giving it to those who didn’t”—”take money by force from those who earned it and redistribute it to those who produce nothing”. That’s just not true, anymore than if I said the 1% LITERALLY steal from anyone. Stealing is against the law and the !% are, if anything, law-abiding. They show this by using every legal means possible to maximize their wealth at the expense of the 99%. I only use the “stealing” reference because it seems to be so popular among the singing parrots of the right like you—too bad you don’t really understand what you are saying when YOU use it, never mind when I do.

      Another little “parrot song” titled “….the people at the top pay MORE than their fair share” (do parrots sing?). And “by ANY measure”? BOTH THOSE SONGS ARE WRONG. Too bad you parrots like to cherry pick the data and only look at FEDERAL INCOME TAXES when you say they are paying more than their fair share. To be fair about the question of tax fairness, one must look at ALL taxes paid and compare them to total income to see what the real TAX BURDEN is. Only then can you begin to decide what “fair share” means.

      I’m quite sure I can “do the math” and I will lay out some TRUTH for you. Figures are taken from the Citizens for Tax Justice who got them from the CBO and other government sources. You can find the truth IF you look at primary sources and not at filtered and cherry-picked data from biased websites as you have likely done.

      Compare two cases. (A) makes $4,000,000 a year and may pay on that at the 35% rate if he isn’t a tax avoider like Romney and therefore pays $1,400,000 in federal income tax. (B) makes $40,000 a year and pays $0 in federal income tax. (B) is one of those moochers in the 47% that are getting a free ride according to you. Wow!—how unfair! (A) is out $1.4 mil and (B) is getting a free ride. It’s SO obvious!

      Let’s get back to TOTAL TAX BURDEN as we seek “fairness”. When you factor in federal PAYROLL taxes and all state and local taxes—property, sales, state income, gas, telephone, etc, we find that they fall much more heavily on the 47% than they do on the 1%. The actual figures for TOTAL TAX BURDEN?

      The bottom 20% pay around 17% of their income in combined taxes.

      The top 20% pay around 30% of their income in combined taxes

      …..and GUESS WHAT, the top 1% pay only 29%, slightly LESS than the rest of the top 20%. If anyone should complain about unfairness, it should be the top 19% just under the moochers in the 1%.

      So, (A), even if he pays at the top FEDERAL rate, likely has maybe $2.500,000 left after all taxes. (B), even though he has paid NO federal tax, has $33,200. Now we can talk about “fairness”. If we CUT federal income tax rates, (A) would benefit significantly and (B) would get nothing, since he “doesn’t pay taxes”—-he’s a 47%-er, a moocher that steals etc.. If we raise taxes, the little guys will be hurt more. Every dollar means a lot more to the $40,000 a year guy—the $4,000,000 a year guy probably wouldn’t bend over to pick up a $100 bill. I know which one I’d rather be—I’d gladly pay 50% on $4,000,000 and struggle to survive on the $2,000,000 that’s left.

      So, knock off the idiotic crap about “liberals” and “envy” and look at the TRUTH of the numbers. All the screaming about not raising taxes on “the job creators” and “stealing” is just a smoke screen for the greedy rich to hide behind.. The very top 1/10 of 1% make nearly all of their money by manipulating money anyway, and not by actually producing anything.

      PS I purposely used full numbers, i.e., $4,000,000 rather than $4 million so we can see how big these numbers are. (A) makes 100 times what (B) makes and to me it’s quite striking to see the full numbers laid out.

      Reply
      richard brooks says:
      November 17, 2012 at 9:45 am
      you are using facts. the gop sheep are unwilling to accept them. they simply believe.

      Reply
      Right Brain Thinker says:
      November 17, 2012 at 9:51 am
      Unfortunately, you are 100% correct there. But I AM surprised that the Junk Yard Dogs haven’t come out on this. They love to try to substitute their “facts” for reality.

      richard brooks says:
      November 17, 2012 at 10:10 am
      the current gop supporters believe the gop policy’s will make them the next nouveau rich. they fail to grasp that the policy’s they support are designed to stop that very possibility.
      they are unable to grasp that the low wages, with lower taxes, will still not leave them with any financial means to improve their status.
      they simply blame others for their own failed belief system.
      the gop ‘facts’ have been exposed so often that no one even listens to them any more.

      Reply
      Right Brain Thinker says:
      November 17, 2012 at 10:53 am
      You say “the gop ‘facts’ have been exposed so often that no one even listens to them any more”. I wish that were true. The studies cited by Mooney in The Republican Brain indicate that all too many on the right just double down when they hear the truth. The REAL FACTS challenge their deeply held and mostly wrong BELIEFS, so they cling to them even more. They listen to EACH OTHER with more intensity. Sad but true.

    • richard brooks

      In plainer English, the incomes of the folks between the 40th. and 80th. percentiles DECLINED, the incomes of the folks betwen the 80th. percentile and the top INCREASED by 1.6% and the incomes of the folks in the very top 5% INCREASED BY 4.9%. So, the middle class is losing ground and the folks at the very top are moving up nicely. Who can afford to pay a higher tax rate? Seem obvious to me.
      We seem to have gotten a bit far afield of the topic. Let’s leave religion aside for now and get back to the fiscal cliff and the way we’re going to deal with it.<<

      we could include religion in the tax base. that would help.

      best of luck trying to get the conservative christian to ever understand the simple economics of low wages are the problem.

      none of them seem to understand that a business requires customers. a customer requires disposable income. that requires a wage high enough to leave disposable income.

      what i have noticed about the low wage supporters, is that none of the supporters ever want their wages lowered. they want someone else to take less with the hope that money will go to them.

  • Right Brain Thinker

    Bob must have taken the weekend off so that he could spend some real quality time rolling around in the money in his vault. Does he invite friends in to join him? And only in “gold and silver coins”, no less. A wee bit “snarky” (love that word) and also more proof that Bob doesn’t have the same patriotism as those of us do who trust in the paper money that the government prints. Proof also that he is one of those I spoke of who greedily pile up wealth and DON’T use it to help the nation grow through investing it, but rather use it to satisfy their own greedy urges. Another “let them eat cake” type of statement from Bob. I have copied his whole comment here because it relates to things so far back in the thread that I can’t fit a reply in back there and we may as well start anew. My commments will follow below his. You can tell where he stops talking by looking for the insincere “best wishes” he always uses to close.

    Bob Livingston says:
    November 19, 2012 at 7:51 am

    Dear Right Brain Thinker,

    You write: “Yes you did stop, Bob—on another thread, but you terminated our discussion after I suggested you do so.” You are living in fantasy world. This never happened.

    You write: “LOL I can see you down in the vaults doing a Scrooge McDuck and rolling in your money.:” Gold and silver coins only.

    You write: “And you say “No, low wages, poor or no health benefits, poor working conditions and retaliation do not form a kind of slavery. They are free to seek greener pastures. That’s what rational people do if they find working conditions unbearable”. Isn’t that basically what you said before? Don’t you subscribe to that endlessly repeated and misapplied wing nut quote of Einstein’s about insanity? To paraphrase a bit—”Saying the same thing over and over and expecting it to mean something different is insane”. It is irrational of you to say that those at the bottom of the pile are able to find “greener pastures”. Karolyn understands even if you don’t—back to Karolyn later.” This works both ways.

    You write: “In closing, Bob, reading your comments here could give one the idea that you are an elitist, a member of the greedy 1%, and someone who would say “let them eat cake” about the less fortunate.” What I do for others I do with my own money and without fanfare.

    You write: “Really? Sounds like you are talking out of both sides of your mouth here, Bob. Please explain how you can say one has “the option of improving his intellectual capabilities” if they are not up to “doing certain things” and “thereby improve his condition…” Are you familiar with education and training? Or are those words foreign to you?.

    You write: “And what “choices” do people with serious intellectual or physical handicaps really have anyway?”There are a number of non-profits that train and place those with intellectual and/or physical handicaps in jobs they are capable of performing. You really must get out more.

    You write: “Karolyn, I will apologize to you on Bob’s behalf. I am embarrassed for him.” You are not authorized to speak for me.

    Best wishes,
    Bob

    RBT here again. You may have noticed that 90+% of Bob’s message is merely quoting me with “You write” followed by my words. Then Bob “fires back” with a few words of his own. I have pulled them out and grouped them here for you so that you can see how superior Bob’s intellect is when compared to mine.

    You are living in fantasy world. This never happened.
    Gold and silver coins only.
    This works both ways.
    What I do for others I do with my own money and without fanfare.
    Are you familiar with education and training? Or are those words foreign to you?.
    There are a number of non-profits that train and place those with intellectual and/or physical handicaps in jobs they are capable of performing. You really must get out more.
    You are not authorized to speak for me.

    As I have done on several occasions before, I will AGAIN accuse Bob of “tap dancing” as he again says nothing much of substance as he evades any real debate. Just defensiveness and more snarkiness (love that word), feigned superiority and ignorance of the fact that I am a retired educator and have in fact “gotten out more” and into the world that helps the handicapped. I will also say DIRECTLY to Bob that you yourself either live in a “fantasy world” or YOU ARE A FLAT OUT LIAR when you say “it never happened”. Did too, Bob. And you DID stop after I suggested to you that it was the smart and right brained thing to do—-that you were letting me push your buttons and making you look foolish, just as you are doing here. I will again suggest that you quit before you let your ego cause you to dig yourself a deeper hole.

    In closing, you say “I am not authorized to speak for you”? Is this really you writing all thes “best wishes, Bob” messages? If you have hired some hack to “sound like you” so that you will have more time to roll in your money (gold and silver coins only, of course—none of that for the masses—let them have paper to go along wotjh their cake), you need to fire him. If this really IS you speaking, somebody needs to apologize on you behalf when you say stupid or insulting things—-that is something I
    do for others without fanfare and will be glad to do again for you when appropriate..

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

      Dear Right Brain Thinker,

      You write: “Does he invite friends in to join him?” No. Just family.

      You write: “and also more proof that Bob doesn’t have the same patriotism as those of us do who trust in the paper money that the government prints.” It’s not patriotism to trust in fiat money, it’s foolishness.

      You write: “Proof also that he is one of those I spoke of who greedily pile up wealth and DON’T use it to help the nation grow through investing it, but rather use it to satisfy their own greedy urges.” You have made bold claim here. Please tell me how you know what I invest in and what I don’t.

      You write: “and ignorance of the fact that I am a retired educator.” No I understand your problem.

      You write: ” I will also say DIRECTLY to Bob that you yourself either live in a “fantasy world” or YOU ARE A FLAT OUT LIAR when you say “it never happened”. Did too, Bob. And you DID stop after I suggested to you that it was the smart and right brained thing to do—-that you were letting me push your buttons and making you look foolish, just as you are doing here. I will again suggest that you quit before you let your ego cause you to dig yourself a deeper hole.” Again: This never happened.

      You write: “(gold and silver coins only, of course—none of that for the masses—let them have paper to go along wotjh (sic) their cake)…” I have long encouraged the masses to accumulate gold and silver. If they didn’t heed my advice, that is on them.

      You write: “somebody needs to apologize on you (sic) behalf when you say stupid insulting things…” Resorting to ad hominems now? This is at least the second in this diatribe.

      Here’s a head’s up for you RBT, our Brandon Smith describes you in tomorrow’s lead article. It’s titled, “Statist Thugs And The Rocks Crawl Out From Under.” I suggest you read it. But engage the left side when you do.

      Best wishes,
      Bob

      • Right Brain Thinker

        I will take a page out of Bob’s book and be a bit lazy by just copying his remarks and inserting mine amongst them. The difference being that I will try to say something of substance.. Mine will be in parens and CAPS so that you can pick them out quickly.

        Bob Livingston says:
        November 19, 2012 at 2:24 pm
        Dear Right Brain Thinker,

        You write: “Does he invite friends in to join him?” No. Just family.
        (BOB, IN THIS TIME OF THANKSGIVING, COULD YOU FIND IT IN YOUR HEART TO INVITE SOME OF THE LESS FORTUNATE IN TO ROLL IN YOUR MONEY WITH YOU AND YOUR FAMILY? AND LET THEM TAKE SOUVENIRS? YOU WON’T MISS A FEW $K AND THE NEEDY WILL DEFINITELY SPEND IT AND PUT IT TO WORK) (AND NICE SNARK)

        You write: “and also more proof that Bob doesn’t have the same patriotism as those of us do who trust in the paper money that the government prints.” It’s not patriotism to trust in fiat money, it’s foolishness.
        (SPOKEN LIKE A TRUE PLUTOCRAT, BOB, AND LIKE SOMEONE WHO PUTS HIS OWN SELF-INTEREST ABOVE THE GREATER GOOD OF THE NATION)

        You write: “Proof also that he is one of those I spoke of who greedily pile up wealth and DON’T use it to help the nation grow through investing it, but rather use it to satisfy their own greedy urges.” You have made bold claim here. Please tell me how you know what I invest in and what I don’t.
        (NOT (A) (SIC) “BOLD CLAIM”, BOB. I’M NOT SURE YOU “INVEST” IN MUCH OF ANYTHING OR NOT, BOB. CERTAINLY NOT AS MUCH AS YOU COULD IF YOU HAVE ENOUGH GOLD AND SILVER COINS IN YOUR VAULT TO INVITE “FAMILY” IN TO SWIM IN THE PILE WITH YOU. IT’S NOT AN INVESTMENT UNLESS IT CAUSES SOMETHING TO GROW)

        You write: “and ignorance of the fact that I am a retired educator.” No I understand your problem.
        (NO, I’M SORRY, BUT YOU DON’T, BOB. THE PROBLEM THAT I AND ALL EDUCATORS HAVE IS THAT THE FORCES OF IRRATIONALITY AND CLOSED-MINDEDNESS ARE FAR TOO POWERFUL IN THIS WORLD AND WE MUST SPEND WAY TOO MUCH TIME FIGHTING THEM). (NICE SNARK, THOUGH)

        You write: ” I will also say DIRECTLY to Bob that you yourself either live in a “fantasy world” or YOU ARE A FLAT OUT LIAR when you say “it never happened”. Did too, Bob. And you DID stop after I suggested to you that it was the smart and right brained thing to do—-that you were letting me push your buttons and making you look foolish, just as you are doing here. I will again suggest that you quit before you let your ego cause you to dig yourself a deeper hole.” Again: This never happened.
        (IF YOU ARE STILL LIVING IN A FANTASY WORLD, I OFFER MY CONDOLENCES.
        IF YOU ARE BALDLY STATING IT DIDN’T HAPPEN, YOU ARE A LIAR. PERIOD)

        You write: “(gold and silver coins only, of course—none of that for the masses—let them have paper to go along wIth their cake)…” I have long encouraged the masses to accumulate gold and silver. If they didn’t heed my advice, that is on them.
        (THANK YOU FOR YET AGAIN PROVING MY POINT BY MAKING ANOTHER “LET THEM EAT CAKE” STATEMENT. YOU ONCE AGAIN SHOW THAT YOU REALLY DO CONSIDER YOURSELF A MEMBER OF AN ELITE AND SCORN THE AVERAGE MAN. YOU HAVE “ENCOURAGED THE MASSES” AND THEY ARE AT FAULT BECAUSE THEY FAILED TO “HEED YOUR ADVICE”? LMFAO. WHERE ARE THEY GOING TO GET THE $$$ TO “ACCUMULATE GOLD AND SILVER”? MAYBE YOU SHOULD GET ONE OF YOUR NEWSLETTER SPONSORS TO START ONE FOR THE MASSES ON HOW THEY CAN TURN FOOD STAMPS, INADEQUATE WELFARE PAYMENTS, AND MINIMAL UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS INTO GOLD. AND THEN THEY CAN PUT THAT GOLD IN THEIR BASEMENT SO THEY CAN ROLL IN IT LIKE YOU DO. THAT’S IS PERHAPS A GOOD WEIGHT LOSS PLAN ALSO—BECAUSE THEY WILL STARVE TO DEATH IF THEY TRY TO DO THAT. YOU SOUND AS OUT OF TOUCH WITH THE REALITY OF THE 99% AS ROMNEY DOES—DO YOU MAKE $10,000 BETS AT THE DROP OF A HAT? DO YOU HAVE A CAR ELEVATOR? DO YOU PAY 15% OR LESS ON YOUR INCOME? LORD LOVE A DUCK)

        You write: “somebody needs to apologize on you (sic) behalf when you say stupid OR Insulting things…” Resorting to ad hominems now? This is at least the second in this diatribe.
        (AD HOMINEMS AND DIATRIBES? USING A COUPLE OF MEANINGLESS BIG WORDS TO OBFUSCATE AND DISTRACT? MEANINGLESS RETORT THAT REALLY SAYS NOTHING, AND IT WON’T STOP ME FROM HELPING YOU IN THE FUTURE WHEN YOU NEED ASSISTANCE, AS I’M SURE YOU WILL)

        Here’s a head’s up for you RBT, our Brandon Smith describes you in tomorrow’s lead article. It’s titled, “Statist Thugs And The Rocks Crawl Out From Under.” I suggest you read it. But engage the left side when you do.
        (I CAN’T WAIT TO SEE HOW I CAN BE CONSIDERED A “STATIST THUG” . iF BRANDON WRITES WITH THE SAME ABANDONMENT (OF TRUTH AND RATIONALITY, THAT IS) AS YOU AND SOME OF YOUR OTHER COLUMNISTS DO, IT WILL BE AS EASY TO PICK APART HIS WRITINGS AS IT IS WITH YOURS. CAN’T WAIT. AND i’M NOT CLEAR ON THAT TITLE—-ROCKS CRAWL OUT FROM UNDER WHAT? ACTUALLY, IT SOUND LIKE THE NAME OF A SECOND RATE ROCK BAND RATHER THAN THE TITLE OF AN ARTICLE. AND I THANK YOU FOR THE SUGGESTION AS TO WHAT “SIDE” OF MY BRAIN I SHOULD USE. SINCE MY ANALYSIS OF BRANDON’S WRITINGS WILL BE BASED ON OBJECTIVITY, RATIONALITY, AND OPEN-MINDED ANALYSIS OF WHATEVER FACTS HE MAY PRESENT, I’M AFRAID I MUST USE THE RIGHT SIDE ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY)

        Best wishes,
        Bob
        (BEST WISHES TO YOU TOO, BOB, AND MAY I ONCE AGAIN SUGGEST THAT YOU SHOULD NOT BE ENGAGING ME IN THESE KINDS OF EXCHANGES?—-THAT YOU SHOULD USE YOUR RIGHT BRAIN AND QUIT BEFORE YOU FALL FARTHER BEHIND)
        RBT

    • Bert Cundle Sr.

      In Re. : ” Who can more afford a Tax increese.” Middle Class / Wealthy… Higher income recievers. You think like a palper… [ IF TAXES WERE "FAIR".] “Everyone”Would pay the “same” % of their INCOME! Government Covertly catter to the wealthy…Has always been & Always will be! The Government thinks of the working class as SLAVES!!! That is why they are a little worried about UNEMPLOYMENT!

      • Bert Cundle Sr.

        & The Government has turned the corner, Letting Forigners in to make up the slack! We have a SICK Government!!!

      • Justin Case

        Excuse me, but here in The United States of America, we DO NOT have A CLASS SYSTEM. Stop falling for the political trap! We left Europe because of the Class System.

        • richard brooks

          Excuse me, but here in The United States of America, we DO NOT have A CLASS SYSTEM. Stop falling for the political trap! We left Europe because of the Class System.<<

          lol. now that was funny. or were you serious?

  • sean murry

    i think both sides are full of chicken crap.

  • slickzip

    America needs to fall over the fiscal cliff ,,, IT just might wake people up to what they did by electing a dumb A$$ negro from Kenya to run our country,,, he does not want to help America he wants to destroy America by turning us into a SOCIALIST third world country ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

    • deerinwater

      Well, ~ no need to “accuse” you of being a closet racist while wearing the label so proudly. One of the few honest people to grace the forum. Rather rhetorical to say , you’d vote for Willard because he was white?

    • Bert Cundle Sr.

      While the Rep’s Want to Run us into an impossible Debt, with High Interest, in bogus wars, than try to elect some one that thinks God woll forgive us of our debts, if we pray, & make him Pres. Wate that is a good idea… Tax Christians, Republicians & Churches !!!!

  • shannon853

    yes sir , right to the edge they will fight for what is right( in their opinion) then they save the country as time again they have (actually their steady salary as they care less of the country!)

  • Deerinwater

    Chip says;

    “If I were a conservative legislator in Washington today, what would I do? I’d stick to the promises I made that got me there. I’d insist that our government needs to spend less and tax less, and I’d vote only for legislation that helps move the country in that direction. ”

    Well Chip, this single sided approach is more then likely was the GOP will attempt to do and nothing new.

    If I made 125,000 per year. I might want it as well.

  • MY NAME IS ANGELO SO PLEASE ME ANGELO, THE OTHER NAME IS NOT MINE TO BE USED.THERE.

    WHY CAN’T 3 MILLION PEOPLE HAVE INFLUENCE OVER 565 PEOPLE IN THE WHITE HOUSE? WHERE HAVE ALL THE GOOD MEN GONE, WHO WOULD STAND UP FOR AMERICA AND BE COUNTED AMOUNG THE BRAVE ? LIP SERVICE DOES NOTHING, MARCHING ON THE WHITE HOUSE LIKE MARTIN LUTHER KING AND GLENN BECK MAKES A DIFFERENCE. THE CROWDS SCARE THE PANTS OFF THEM,BECAUSE THE NUMBERS REPRESENT POWER, AND TO THEM IT LOOKS LIKE AN ARMY AFTER THEM AND THEIR TYRANT RULES AND POWER OVER A WEAK KNEED NATION.

    • Bert Cundle Sr.

      Have you ever tried to organize Black & Red Ants?

  • HKaufman

    Not so funny anymore are you GOP supporters. You voted that bunch of Wasted Carbon monoxide commando’s who are just sitting on their FAT under worked,under Educated Pond Scum short pointless Life’s and will not do A Dam thing to change. But keep voting for these individuals, soon reality will hit, and you may be bathing in irragation ditches and living in a box under freeways if you dont wake the hell up and REMOVE THAT infestation of crap called the T-Party. Where are all the Wise A** Rhetorlic that flew around when all the writers were prognosticating a land slide victory for Romney.. 2016 your group is thinking on backing ANOTHER BUSH. LOL ,, GOP should rename and become known as LAME DUCK PARTY.. Common sense when your party takes two A** kicking why go back for the Hat Trick… I would not even air this if ALL THE WRITERS and COMMENTS did not Contain disparaging remarks.. Lincoln,remember him 1865 speach , “A NATION DIVIDED AGAINST ITSELF WILL NOT STAND” Revisit that speech… Live Long and Prosper..

    • deerinwater

      Shhhhhhhhhhhhh! Kaufman. ~ be quit ~ they are looking for someone else to blame. Don’t interfere with an enemy that is destroying itself.

      This sort of self defeating , polarizing behavior that backs the GOP has been most effect as their true colors bleeds through their thin Christianity and American patriot paint.

      Fox and Fox Followers did everything imaginable to paint any media message other then theirs as “Lame Stream Media” while only Fox claimed to offer the real “skinny”.

      If the GOP and their pundits can’t realized they have been systematically lied too by now, they are of little value as a voting block of Americans when it come to offer their notions of leadership as they are willing to believe just about anything and easily lead by Charlatan and meat puppets.

    • Jr Born in Chicago

      Ahh Lincoln, the president who help destroy our Constitution. Hmm he was a Republican freeing the slaves form the Democrats. I just love history. You want to talk about Roosevelt and his stealing the gold from the US Citizens? Or maybe Wilson, who inked in IRS. And that pathetic jester of yours, Derinwater, please drown.

  • SJJolly

    Is it going to be a financial cliff, or a long-forseen speed bump? Something that once crossed, and your car still runs, you resume speed?

  • Deerinwater

    Chip say; “More freedom, not more government, will produce the prosperity we once enjoyed — and can enjoy again. But that’s not what we’re going to get from Washington anytime soon.
    Better batten down the hatches, folks. I’m afraid we’re in for a very rough ride.”

    Well? we are making good progress Chip. Just your omission that tax cuts will stimulate economic prosperity has been a hard 4 year fight.

    As far as an rough ride, ~ I doubt if it’s darken your door to where you are taking on a second job or had to take in family, while many Americans have.

    Most of us are no stranger to hard times at this point and looking forward to the company.

    Cash a few CD’s and come hang out with us poor folks, ~ beans and wieners aren’t so bad if they are cooked right. Learn to car pool and use mass transits. Down sizing is good for everyone. Be “FREE” of the trapping of the “good life” ~the yearly family trip to Aspen, Club house dues, etc. Play on a public course.

  • Bert Cundle Sr.

    Here’s another example that should help bring some perspective to this discussion. It’s been estimated that repairing all the damage caused by Hurricane Sandy will come to something like $50 billion. That’s a staggering amount of money, isn’t it?
    ________________________________________________________________

    WHY IN THE HELL… Are you putting the bill on Federal Expense???????????
    The Insurance Companies are RESPONSIBLE!!! The insurance is Mandatory, in 90% of al the Structures! Homes & Bussinesses! Don’t let them get away with out paying when they collected so long!!!

  • Bert Cundle Sr.

    Better batten down the hatches, folks. I’m afraid we’re in for a very rough ride……..
    _____________________________________________________________

    Well now you have paraled, Mr. Ruts Landslide victory.

  • Bert Cundle Sr.

    Please… Real Libertarians are not like Mr. Wood or Mr Root!!!

  • Terry Bateman

    The expiration of Bush tax cuts and the automatic spending cuts will reduce the federal
    deficit substantially . That, combined with the 3% reduction in the federal deficit as a
    percentage of gross domestic product that has occurred in the last three years is just
    what is needed to keep this country from falling off the DEFICIT cliff into the abyss of hyper inflation and social unrest.

    • Bert Cundle Sr.

      With out Fair Judication of our “REAL DEBTS” We are going to get ripped off again!!!

  • Bert Cundle Sr.

    Breaking from Newsmax.com

    ACLU Challenges Arizona License Ban for Immigrants

    Civil rights groups filed suit on Thursday to challenge an order by Arizona Republican Gov. Jan Brewer blocking illegal immigrants from getting driver’s licenses despite receiving temporary legal status under an Obama administration program.

    The lawsuit, filed on behalf of five immigrants who qualify for deferred deportation status under a new policy by President Barack Obama’s administration, says that the governor’s executive order issued this summer was unconstitutional and should be blocked.

    ——————————————————————————————————————-
    What about these Battle Lines? The State is doing what the Fed. Gov. Should be doing!
    A.C.L.U. Is a weapon of the invaders! (Our Civil Defenders Gone Wrong!)

    • George E

      I don’t understand why the states don’t issue “international” drivers licenses to non-American citizens rather than state drivers licenses. That would give them the right to drive on US highways without giving them a US photo ID card.

      • Bert Cundle Sr.

        BEACUSE THEY NEED TO KNOW THE RULES OF THE VEHICLE CODE ( Should be in English ONLY) With TEST! ( In ENGLISH!)

        • George E

          Wouldn’t that be the same requirement to get a state’s driver’s license?

          • Bert Cundle Sr.

            S h o u l d b e… But not!

      • Bert Cundle Sr.

        This Country is going through the period of the TOWER of BABEL!!!

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.