E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSRepublican governors, who swept to big victories last year, think President Barack Obama faces huge political obstacles. But they're hardly brimming with confidence about the 2012 election.
Meeting this week in Florida, GOP governors and their advisers fret that their party could lose its advantage on the tax-cut issue by appearing too eager to protect the rich. Some also warn Republican candidates not to reflexively dismiss anti-Wall Street sentiment, which might be seeping more deeply into the middle class than they realize.
Publicly, the governors predict Obama will be a one-term president. But few have stuck their necks out by endorsing any of their party's candidates, even with the Iowa caucus five weeks away.
"Independents are leaning our way, but they're not quite there yet," pollster Glen Bolger told the Republican Governors Association during a panel session Wednesday on the 2012 elections. He said he foresees a very close race.
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal said Obama cannot run on his record, mainly because of the nation's high unemployment rate. So Obama will focus on "tearing down the Republican nominee," Jindal said, predicting a much more negative campaign than in 2008.
Jindal, who backs Texas Gov. Rick Perry, is one of the few Republican governors who has endorsed someone. Most of his colleagues seem wary. Their wait-and-see approach lent a somber tone to the Orlando gathering, which bordered Disney World and might have felt festive if the party were coalescing around one strong contender.
They have plenty of reasons to be cautious, GOP pollster Frank Luntz said in the panel discussion chaired by Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour. If next year's campaign is couched as a battle over the middle class, Luntz said, "Democrats will win."
Republicans should say they're fighting for "hard-working taxpayers," said Luntz, who is known for conducting focus groups and advising Republicans on precise words to use and to avoid.
He also warned that most Americans support Obama's bid to raise taxes on the wealthiest households, and he urged Republicans not to get engaged in a debate over "taxing" the rich. Instead, he said, they should talk about the evils of "the government taking money from hard-working Americans," no matter how much they earn.
Luntz added, "I'm so scared by this anti-Wall Street effort." He was referring to the Occupy Wall Street movement, which many GOP candidates have criticized, sometimes in sneering terms. Republicans should defend "free enterprise," he said, a term that's preferable to "capitalism."
And Luntz said he thinks former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, generally seen as the party establishment's favorite candidate, has been hurt by a new Democratic video that mocks his changed positions on abortion, gun rights and other issues. The video cleverly uses humor, he said, which is more palatable to voters sick of partisan squabbles.
That's not to say the governors' gathering was all gloom and worry. In an interview, Barbour, who considered a presidential bid of his own, said Obama faces big problems.
"He's very weak by historical standards," Barbour said, with "low job approvals."
"Voters' view of the direction of the country, the results of his policies, the lack of optimism are all terrible indicators," he said.
Barbour added, however, that Obama will have "a gigantic amount of money, and no primary opposition." Barbour, who endorsed a candidate in the 2000 Republican primary but not in 2008, is staying out of this year's contest.
There was scant sympathy at the governors' gathering for presidential candidate Herman Cain, first damaged by sexual harassment allegations and now accused of having a 13-year affair with an Atlanta woman.
"Initially, I think Iowans were certainly understanding and willing to hear his side," Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad told reporters. "But it's been one thing after another after another after another."
There were few signs of governors jumping on the bandwagon of former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who many party insiders now see as the likeliest alternative to Romney. Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, who chairs the Republican Governors Association, repeated his opinion that a current or former governor is probably best-suited to run for president.
A month or so ago, that comment sounded like an even-handed treatment of Perry and Romney. But Perry has struggled to regain his footing after weak debate performances, and Gingrich, who was never a governor, has moved up in the polls.
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie repeated his full-throated support of Romney, and predicted he will defeat Obama.
A prized endorsement will come soon from Gov. Nikki Haley of South Carolina, whose state holds its primary after Iowa and New Hampshire voters have their say. Haley told reporters she will announce her preference before the Jan. 3 Iowa caucuses. She offered no hints Wednesday, except to say that Romney and Gingrich appear to be the strongest contenders in her state for now.
"We'll endorse the person who should win, not the person that could win," Haley said. "We will endorse the person that will get the country back on track. ... It's all based on policy."
Branstad, who is staying neutral, urged reporters and political activists to stay calm. For "normal people," he said, "it's still early."
Leave a Comment:
That's funny. Delusionally irrational,.. but still funny..
""Republicans should say they're fighting for "hard-working taxpayers," said Luntz, who is known for conducting focus groups and advising Republicans on precise words to use and to avoid.""
It al comes down to the definition of "hard working", or really, how you define work. Most on wall street have never done a hard days work in their lives.
Different perspectives...I think Luntz is correct on the best wording to use, and I think the small government approach favored by some (not all) Republican politicians is better for the poor and middle class than the big government approach favored by nearly all Democratic politicians.
updstate,
What do you define as "hard days work"? If you mean manual labor, you may be right about wall street. But, if you define it as long work hours, I think you are incorrect. I have a friend that was a stock broker on wall street (awhile ago), and he regularly worked 80 to 100 hour weeks. Yes, the pay was great, but I never had any desire to have his job - I'll take moderate pay and a personal life over high pay and no personal life any day.
Ron, having recently become disabled, I can tell you that all I see from Republicans is the sentiment that I really deserve nothing but death.
upstate,
I think you need to look at some other news sources then. I know a number of Republicans (and Democrats), and although the parties differ on their approaches, I've never met a politician that isn't interested in the welfare of the common person. I've never met one that feels any segment of the population deserves "nothing but death".
The winner of the 2012 election is: The one who can word his or her message correctly. People say they care about issues, but they get pulled into semantics and word play. You saw it in this article. Just like how the word compromise is now a "bad" word as will apologizing. Whoever can frame their message in the simplest term will win. It's sad, but mostly true.
Sounds like a school teachers input to me. Give me a break, your buddy, if he only makes one million a year, and works for 12 hours 6 days a week, two weeks off, makes $278 an hour. Hard work my butt.
@Upstate John
No one is stopping you from getting a job on wall Street John. Sounds like you would rather be envious of them and demonize them rather than put in the hard work of 100 hours/week.
Hypocrite
Ron-1861300...you might need to re - read just what the republicans are calling for today..and it has nothing to do with helping the middle class at all. Just who are they protecting and working for...the voters..or the wealthy few and big business that is throwing millions of dollars at each one of these presidental want to be's. Granted,,,the democrates are not doing much but..they are not for taxing the middle class into oblivian..or telling the old and poor..to just die off as is being seen by each republican running for office today..the tea party rules....and the middle class, those on social security..or poor are being left out.
Oh come on Ron, Republicans cheer at the very notion of indigents dying because the have no health insurance.
Poor John, envious of other peoples success. How pathetic.
If the Democrats care about the worker, how come they fight against the single thing that holds the worker back? Give me a break, they have the poor and pathetic vote wrapped up, they want more poor and pathetic people. They are gross!
This is a great example of how BOTH parties design and develop spin. You can debate the merits of the spin all day but personally I am sick and tired of spin.
America needs results not spin, and herein lies the problem. Already as evidence on this very thread we line up, pick a team, its all about winning right. Wrong!!! We fail to realize we are all OR SHOULD BE on the same team.
You can talk about China until you are blue in the face, but one thing China can do very well is take American jobs, just ask the folks in California and many other states that awarded major contracts to the Chinese. How are they able to do this because they wisely or by force (take your pick) don't engage in the foolishness we call politics.
Upstate: I don't know your level of education (you can guess what I speculate), but your comments give you away. The great thing about our country is that everyone (even myself) has/had the opportunity to work hard, get a post-high school education (I have 3 degrees, and studies beyond those), and the opportunity to get a high paying job.
Quit whining. I personally worked a low-paying job (while raising a family) and also went to school full-time. I won't have my student loans paid off until I retire. Every day I am so grateful for the opportunity to have an education - and the ability to make a decent paycheck. Anyone can work hard - and go to school - it isn't unattainable for anyone except the unmotivated and uninspired. Please remember that it is my taxes and others, that allow many to sit home on these chat boards collecting their check and complaining.
Quite frankly, you come across sounding jealous.
Brendan, you know nothing about me. I have been a taxpayer for about 40 years and have worked HARD all of my life. I do not envy the lives , the lifestyle, or the income of the obscenely rich and I was NEVER a 1% wannabee. I prefer to work with my hands as a carpenter or farmer, or to work with my heart as a teacher or musician. I'll leave the working to gloriffy greed to the 1%.
Ron in Seattle,
Good post - a little sad, but true. What we need is a statesman as a president to set a less divisive tone, but I don't see that happening any for 2012. I would love to have another Clinton or Reagan - they may have been full of it, but they had the ability to make people believe in themselves and the country.
It saddens me to read the extremists posts from both the left and the right. Republicans do not want to kill off the poor and middle class, and Democrats do not hate the US or want to enslave the poor and middle class. Those are just extremist talking points.
@Upstate john
Nor do you know the 1% you demonize or hate. They have been a taxpayer all thier life as well, and most 1% have donated more money to charity than you have made in your entire lifetime. Regardless of if you work with your hands or your brain, you have no right to say they do not work hard. You chose your path in life as a lower middle class laborer. Live with it. You have the ability to change your life and or job at any time.
Deal with it john
Actually prof, when I was a certified vocational/special ed teacher (thats a clue for you) I dealt with discipline on a daily basis. I know when people are being abusive to one another and I recognize what the GOP and the wealthy are doing to the rest of Americans.
Brendan, you are correct, I do not know all of the 1%, I know some that believe they should pay more taxes out of fairness, but I know a few more that us their charity as PR. I apologize to the former, not the later. Unfortunately the later seems to be the majority.
If next year's campaign is couched as a battle over the middle class, Luntz said, "Democrats will win."
Republicans should say they're fighting for "hard-working taxpayers," said Luntz,
He urged Republicans not to get engaged in a debate over "taxing" the rich. Instead, he said, they should talk about the evils of "the government taking money from hard-working Americans," no matter how much they earn.
Luntz added, "I'm so scared by this anti-Wall Street effort." He was referring to the Occupy Wall Street movement, which many GOP candidates have criticized, sometimes in sneering terms. Republicans should defend "free enterprise," he said, a term that's preferable to "capitalism."
So using their logic if we are all hard working American tax payers why are some paying 15% on taxes and others are paying 35%? And if free enterprise is working so well why are some hard working Americans going backwards in pay while others are surging forward? And if we are all in on this together why are certain Americans not being bailed out and given huge bonuses like corporations which are now deemed "people"? Points to ponder........
John,
The 1% already pay the greatest share of taxes. What do you consider fair? All of thier income? 75%? 90%? Would you work for 40 cents on your dollar if you knew the other 60% was going to the government? Hell i wouldn't and nor would you.
The argument that the rich have, and what a valid argument it is, is why should i pay more if washington spends like a drunken sailor? Take the debt comittee for example, they were tasked to find cuts. The cuts they were after were cuts in the future schedulued increases in government. Our leaders, both republican and democrat, cannot even take our situation serious enough to find a cut IN THE FUTURE INCREASES OF GOVERNMENT. its not even a real cut john!
I still don't understand how you could think that democrats are the party of the people. Progressive policies only hurt the commonwealth of the nation, any educated free thinking man knows that.
Brendon: You are more than a bit confused. This isn't about taking what's earned by someone else. This is about looking at tax breaks and tax policy which we ALL pay for, for what it really is: corporate welfare. Even you might be hard pressed to make a logical arguement that huge tax breaks for energy companies for instance must continue because they "earned" them...or that the financial industry used those public dollars to actually benefit the public and get the economy moving again...all while Republicans argue basic health care and even social security should be sacrificed to give them more. This is why your side is losing the argument and why the effort to demonize the OWS protests is such a failure...unfortunately for you most people have a sense of fair play and a grownup's idea of just who the winners are and why in the real world. Out here in the real world, folks actually know the difference between hitting that home run through hard work, and getting to home because you were lucky enough to be born on third base.
Total BS...#1.20...more Fox talking points...Can you get an independent thought...don't think so....hold that party line as the republican/tea party ship sinks... The middle class knows who fights for us and who fights against us...
AP, as a conservative, I want to see loopholes and subsidies banned, but that is not where either side is taking us. There is no money for the royalty in D.C. if that is done.
To be immature or naive enough to think that any member of Congress is actually liberal and cares about the little guy is laughable.
Hell, the head of the Democrat Party let a felon steal from the poor so he could get a good deal on a bigger yard.
Look how the left has demonized the true greatest equalizer in the world to where people don't even want to use the term. Capitalism, capitalism, capitalism is the only way to make things fair! Until liberals learn that they are not truly liberal, just socialist.
upstate - So if you have "worked HARD" for 40 years, you should be able to retire now that you are disabled. Your retirement fund should be able to support you. But even if you choose not to retire, your disability should not completely hinder every type of income producing effort. Based on your comments about being able to educate others, you need to do the same for yourself. You need to learn to work smarter, not just harder.
I second your comment Tom....total orwellian BS
John: remember that the first thing Repugs. want to do is eliminate any healthcare for sick people. Best wishes to you in your future health issues.
Gilboagirl, do you know what entity denies more coverage and pays less than any others.
Is it those evil insurance companies or government run insurance? One day you will sit at the adult table, maybe.
@ Ap
Im not for corporate welfare, but to demonize the rich and ask them to pay more that what is currently being paid is insanity. Is it SO WRONG to actually cut government instead of cutting already planned increases? Also the notion that you make that people born into money are not entitled to it or do not work for a living is just showing your jealousy or the common publics jealousy. Class warfare is inherently un-american and dangerous to our nation.
Here is something you cannot deny : The largest expansion of quality of life has happened under capitalism for all walks of life, lower class all the way up to the rich. To think that incomes should move proportionaly up across the income spectrum is nuts, its never been equal.
Your sense of fair play is jealousy and envy. Goodluck to you
@ Gilbogirl
Healthcare is a personal responsibility, not a state or federal governments. Support yourself and stay out of my wallet.
The Repubs can "change" the words, and manipulate the message, but we are awake, and until they change their loyalites from protecting the wealth, and sucking up the bribes, we still know who they are, and what they really stand for. And we will call out your fake wording everytime. The people are just not as ignorant or stupid as they have always believed.
Michelle,
I'm not defending the Republicans, but why do you think the Democrats are different? I realize the Democrats talk about the little guy, but if you look at their actions, they are just as beholden to special interests (corporate and union) as the Republicans.
I like to think back to a conversation I had with our investment adviser in 2008. I asked what he thought the impact would be on financial companies based on each candidate winning (Obama and McCain). He said both parties are basically paid for by the financial industry, so he didn't think the winner mattered. After looking at the last 3 years, I have to agree with his assessment.
brendan: What does fair have to do with taxes? Please explain. Society in order to have an organized government needs such revenue as necessary to carry out the services that society through its elected representatives deems necessary. Society exercises its collective wisdom again through its elected representatives to set such rates and policies so as not to discourage its people from working, innovating and creating wealth (for the common good - not my words, but Teddy Roosevelt's). If as is happening, that all the income and wealth are trending toward fewer and fewer, who and how much we tax is being determined by their own actions. Crying foul by them doesn't change the facts. Democracy and a vibrant capitalism (or free enterprise) do not work if the economy simply creates a bunch of Croesus.
Yes. I would need to in order to survive.
But the wealthy do not pay 40 cents on the dollar.
They pay 16 cents on the dollar, including federal income tax, social security tax, and medicare taxes. Even poor people pay 15.6% on the dollar. It's only the middle class that pays more than 20%.
And when you look at local sales taxes, the poor pay MORE than anyone else, and the wealthy pay the least.
@ Commonsense
No you wouldn't. If you were wealthy you would refuse to work for 40 cents on the dollar. You would move to a more business friendly state or country where you can keep more of your hard earned dollars.
Gee, that sounds alot like what has been happening over the past 30 years, the outsourcing of jobs and dollars to more business friendly enviroments.
And people wonder why we bleed jobs like we do.
Not sure where you get your numbers from but they arent really believable considering investment income is taxed differently than earned income, something you do not specify, and to mix the two in your figures just invalidates them.
@ WM - Aparently since the term "fair share" was coined by democrats it has EVERYTHING to do with taxes. "Deems necessary" you say... Are 3/4 of the government programs today deemed necessary? Hell no.
Government needs to return to its constituation mandate, nothing more. We are become a welfare nation both corporate and publicly, when you have 47% of the general population on some form of proverbial government tit, we have huge problems. We should not be extending unemployment benefits nor providing healthcare to the masses, it just does not work.
We need to cut government like Ron Paul idea, he seems to be the only one taking our debt seriously, and thats on both sides of the isle.
If he proposes to cut defense spending by at least 2/3rds, I may be able to overlook the rest of his other crazy views.
@Brendan - judging from the sheer volume and tone of your posts on a few different stories, I have to assume you are one of the "Hard Working" elite that is so busy busting your butt to earn your keep that you have time for nothing else - like posting long rants on news forums - right?
@Fograt
I work for a fortune 100 company, but i would hardly consider myself elite.
Was there a purpose to your post or just to take a low blow jab at me because you have trouble contesting all my points?
Simmer down now
Not a low blow. I just thought you would be too busy driving this economy to be so engrossed in this conversation. I figured your time would be better spent increasing the bottom line so that your fortune 100 company could trickle down some jobs to the commoners (low life bottom feeders)
For the record, apparently I am in the top 5% according to those stupid charts and I welcome additional taxes (and spending cuts) as a way out of this and believe this is the only way out of this mess.
@ Fograt, my company has made the top 3 most ethical companies for 5 years in a row. that also includes hiring and firing practices, along with how we handle clients. (that should give you insight into what company i work for too)
not every fortune company is about straight bottom line, but also, why run a business unless it is profitable? i don't see anyone opening up business's to lose money or just to employ people to put money in their pocket or give free benefits.
what is your point? fortune 100 or 500 companies don't drive growth, small business's do. nobody has contested that.
so again, what is your point? just to take shots at me or do you have a valid point? ( for the record im in the top 5% also, and i do not welcome additional taxes as additional money does not solve the root problem.)
So brendan-4. If you work for such a successful company, why is it that you have spent the last 4 hours on a Thursday dicking around on the Internet?
That must be some company! Maybe you should quit spewing crap all over everyone who posts something and GET BACK TO WORK YOU LAZY BUFFOON!!!
If President Obama "escapes woes" it will be because the majority of Americans know the GOP got us into this mess in the first place, and continue to block recovery with their voodoo economic hypocrisy -- the latest being that taxes pay for themselves except when it is for the middle class (e.g., payroll taxes). No! Now tax cuts must must be paid for - WTF?
In the meantime I worry about GOP governors "dumbing down" America -- The most recent example of Gov. Kasich of Ohio who doesn't read the news. No wonder low-information voters support GOP/TP leaders like Kasich and Herman Cain--birds of a feather flock together!
Further to that point is the new, even lower approval rating for the Tea Party. Teapublicans can disparage OWS all they want--because they are low-information voters getting misinformation from FOX Noise and Hate Radio--and can cry over continued loss of power to impose their twisted agenda on the rest of the nation, but thank heaven the destructive far-right minority views are being stomped out.
Throw the Teapublican anarchists out. Obama/Biden - 2012!
Until the Republicans come up with a candidate who is not a blithering idiot or Mitt Romney, my vote is for Obama.
Richard a VN veteran and his wife uleda were hard working Americans He a salesman for 30some years she a small business owner and part time school administer .. both republicans .. she became stricken with cancer 1 yr after retirement he also retired ..went thru there life savings and 401k .. she passed away 2 years ago ..leaveing over $ 200,000 in debt to Pharma Hosp Dr etc .. when applied for help were turned down because of there combined SS income ... what a country work hard die broke
Romney is a blithering idiot, he has changed his mind on what he feels on just about every issue to match the office he seeks. I wouldn't trust him any further than I could throw him.
It is not a casual flip to say you will fight for a woman's right to choose to being for the person-hood amendment that would take your rights to contraception away. A law that would make a miscarriage a crime. A law so radical the republicans could not even get it passed in conservative Mississippi.
It's very simple if you listen to the right. If todays rich could just get a little bit more rich everything would be great.
To quote from the news item:
Two things to comment:
This guy, Frank Luntz (as I mentioned in one of my earlier comments), is the Dean of Republican School of Hatred, Fear Mongering, and filthy low-level politics. In Frank's school, the candidates are taught to preach, "Do as What I say, and don't do as What I do."
What a travesty that we have this low level scumbag so meshed into one of the main stream party and dictates its agenda?
Brendan, Brendan, Brendan, when are we going to come to the conclusion that healthcare is a right not a privilege? Come on now. when did healthcare become an industry anywhere but here? Stay out of my wallet for things that I don't owe to the society I live in is a better statement. You know it and I know it.
"Anyone can work hard - and go to school - it isn't unattainable for anyone except the unmotivated and uninspired."
Prof, with three degrees you ought to know better than that.
Commonsense;
I don't know where you get your facts (I strongly suggest you stay away from leftist blogs) and please check out the IRS' site:
http ://www.irs.gov /taxstats/indtaxstats/article/0,,id=133521,00. html (Please remove spaces)
The top 1% pays more taxes than the bottom 95%...I didn't make this up - go to the IRS site.
Also, please remember...just because you repeat it over and over - doesn't make it true.
Prof, please. The top 1% pays more collectively than the bottom 95% -- probably because they own so much more of the wealth.
"The concentration of wealth in different countries varies considerably, with the top 10 per cent in the US holding 70 per cent of the country�s wealth, compared with 61 per cent in France, 56 per cent in the UK, 44 per cent in Germany and 39 per cent in Japan."
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/1206-01.htm
Individually, according to the IRS, they pay less than you or I do. Last year the richest 400 of us paid about 18% of their income in federal income tax. (In 2008, it was 16.6%.) It's easily Googled, and from a reliable source -- unless the IRS is part of the socialist conspiracy.
No shock here. As soon as you point out that Republicans don't care about anyone that's not wealthy, they immediately say it's because you are jealous, envious, lazy or stupid.
The argument has nothing to do with envy. I'm upper-middle class. I am certainly not rich but definitely not poor. It is so clear to me that Republican's don't even care about people like me. They aren't looking out for my best interests at all.
No, this argument is about fair play. I think it's great that people can earn a million dollars a minute. But that doesn't give anyone the right to deem people that make less as unworthy of respect, freedom and liberty - and that's exactly what Republican party politics deprive these people of.
Oppressive taxes for the regular taxpayer, austerity measures that favor the rich and hurt everyone else, tax cuts, tax cuts and more tax cuts for the rich and corporations, disenfranchising lower income and minority voters through the new poll tax "reworded" as voter ID.
Most republicans in congress today are disgusting excuses for Americans. There is no other way to describe them.
This argument is nothing but smoke and mirrors meant to fool the most simple-minded of the electorate.
People like me pay upwards of 30% of my income on taxes while a hedge fund manager pays 15% if that. THAT is the problem. 15% of $10,000,000 may be $1,500,000 in taxes but that doesn't mean the hedge fund manager bears the larger tax burden that someone who makes $50,000 and pays $15,000 in taxes.
Stop defending the rich. Just stop. In terms of taxes, they get off much easier than the average American and that needs to change.
Robert:
Not worth spending my time trying to convince someone who is a disciple of the left. But really, you couldn't figure out how to read the IRS' tables?
For others that may be interested: On the IRS site (posted above) table 5:
Averages for 2008:
Top 1% of federal taxpayers paid an average of 23.27% in taxes.
Top 10% paid an average of 18.71%
Top 25% paid an average of 15.68%
Top 50% paid an average of 13.65%
Try harder next time...
The million dollar earners are only paying more on more than the first million. I doubt the "prof " is making over a million. Those of us with a lot of money pay less on our investments than the hardworking people pay on their labor. It does give us time to sit around debating. You need to love capitalism.
Ron-1861300,
RE: your post #1.3
I am a securities broker (stock/bonds/options/etc. I have been in the business for over 20 years and I will assure you that it is not 'hard' work. I currently work from home, and spend no more than 40 hours per week at my practice. Remember the market is only open 37.5 hours per week. Also, we get several more holidays than average workers, and never have I worked on weekends! When I was working in the office breakfast, lunch, and snacks were provided FREE at least twice per week. It is a "gravy train" compared to most professions. So if your friend tells you they work over 50 hours a week they are either lying or very slow mentally. Remember, it is illegal to do business when the market is closed!
Charles Richmond @ sft2012@gmail. com
Thank you my friend for the inflammatory and discriminatory private email you sent me regarding your bias against people with physical limitations and learning disabilities attending college. Unbelievable that anyone would have that mentality in 2011.
Everyone has their limitations. Some are just more obvious than others...and yours, my friend - is ignorance.
Prof, I'm no longer so sure you have three college degrees. In fact, I won't believe it until I see them posted on the internet -- in their long form -- and have a microscopic analysis done of the embossed stamp. I also want to see those so-called diplomas you claim to have. Furthermore, let me ask why you are HIDING YOUR COLLEGE GRADES, hey? One last thing. You're quite sure you were born in the UNITED STATES and not KENYA?
Hey here's is a IDEA. Instead of playing politics and worrying about keeping your job or getting a more powerful one how about actually doing you job and see what happens. Stop YOUR wasteful spending, YOU take a pay cut, give up YOUR pension and switch it to a 401K. Start paying RENT on the governors mansion or better yet sell it. Reduce YOUR staff. Drive YOURSELF around and ditch the limo. Cut back on YOUR body guards. Veto all pork laden bills that come across YOUR desk. Write a bill eliminating YOUR state senate, it's unnecessary. Cut the salaries of the state legislators and their pensions. Stop building sports stadiums while cutting funds for education(like Mitch Daniels did).
Who really cares what neo con governors wants, they carry water for the rich elites anyway.. The majority of folks have seen what further damage they have perpetrated to the working class since 2010..!
And the D's claim to carry the water for the poor, the whole time keeping their feet on their head and collecting money for their pockets in the name of social justice. It is gross.
Do you ever actually think for yourself? If the R's are for the rich and the D's are for the worker...who is failing at their job?
@livingbarefoot
How exactly do you expect the democrats to be successful at anything when everything they attempt to do is obstructed by republicans? Every attempt Obama and his colleagues have made to get Americans back to work has been unanimously opposed by the right. They don't do this because they oppose the policies (many have previously endorsed the things they have recently voted against), they do it because their #1 goal is to oust president Obama at all costs. Their #1 goal should be the welfare of the American people, but they would rather see the economy suffer to hurt the president's popularity. This behavior is beyond pathetic... in my opinion it should be considered treasonous.
No, the biggest thing hurting our workers is illegals and the D's are the ones that fight the states that try and fight this problem.
Brenden,
Just like the Republicans, the Democrats intentionally attach parts to bills they know will antagonize the base of the other party - that's the main reason nothing gets done in DC. The #1 priority of both parties is the next election.
the gov of wisconsin said the unions are behind his woes and if people were restricted from collectively bargaining there voice would not be as loud or shrill .. allowing the GOP to amass even more power over the lives of Americans
livingbarefoot - what an idiotic post. The biggest thing hurting our workers are the companies taking jobs overseas. And, President Obama proposed giving companies that would bring jobs back a tax break. But, the GOP blocked a vote on that proposal. What a bunch of lying thieves!
What they want is another tax holiday. Before you think it's a good idea, look it up.
Instead of playing their partys game , it would make more sense to get their states finances in order. Most if not all states are in a deep hole money wise . Screw party loyalties and put your stats back into the black .
Of course they are worried. Obama has a Cult like following.
Of course they are worried.
ObamaRepublicans have a small Cult like following.Now it makes sense. It starting to look like one republican governor will be booted out of office before the next presidential election.
Luntz is a visionary ~ and this will be an election focused on "middle class" survival. The GOP will have significant problems reversing themselves to show some form of disingenuous concern for "commoners" after their long favoritism for the wealthy and corporate interests. In no way will this elevate the worthiness of Democrats but they are much more friendly toward the middle class segment (and the poor). I still contend that everyone who receives any form of public assistance, be it extended unemployment benefits or outright welfare, will vote in 2012. They will not vote for the candidates nor party that threatens abolition of those benefits. Despite the effort to focus attention elsewhere, this election is entirely about the "middle class" and Luntz is right ~ Democrats will win it.
Being recently diagnosed with lymphoma, an unwanted disability, I certainly not vote for ANY Republican as they all would just as soon have me die.
upstate,
If we don't get the entitlement costs under control (especially medical), those programs will fail - just like they are starting to do in Europe right now. I don't agree with all of the Republican ideas on entitlements, but at least they are trying to do something. Sticking our heads in the sand is not a valid approach - it may win votes now, but the poor and middle class will take the hit when things crash in another decade or so (the rich won't because they have the means to go elsewhere for care).
As an example, using Obama's projections, Medicare is expected to collect about $3 Trillion in tax revenues over the next 10 years, but pay out $10 Trillion in expenses. That's a $7 Trillion deficit over 10 years - and it's projected to only get worse. That isn't close to being a sustainable situation.
Luntz is an idiot who plays with words. It's people like him who are what is wrong with this country, him and Norquist and the rest of the Right Wing Echo Chamber.
While I also hate spin, to say it's only an issue with the right wing is just falling for left wing spin. Both parties use spin. That's the way politics have always been (for thousands of years), and it's not going to change. The only thing we can do is critically evaluate the spin and reach our own conclusions.
The repugs had better be worried! This do nothing congress will be replaced next year with democrats and Obama will win again!!!
OBAMA 2012
Ron parts of Europe are doing fine. Why is it that we only hear about southern Europe which is having problems. How is Canada doing? Are they having financial woes because of their universal health care...their entitlements? The friggin wealthy 1% need to pay their fair share. Here's a part of an article:
The key to understanding the U.S. economy is to understand that we have two economies, not one. The economy of rich Americans is booming. Salaries are high. Profits are soaring. Luxury brands and upscale restaurants are packed. There is no recession.
The economy of the middle class and poor is in crisis. Poverty and near-poverty are spreading. Unemployment is rampant. Household incomes have been falling sharply. Millions of discouraged workers have dropped out of the labor force entirely. The poor work at minimum wages to provide services for the rich.
Americans are told daily that these low tax rates on the rich are the natural order of things, that the American economy would collapse if the top 1 percent were to pay more to help fund education, job training, infrastructure, and new technologies. This claim is absurd. We should be collecting at least 3 to 4 percentage points of GNP more from the rich and the corporate sector. We could collect these added amounts by raising top tax rates on regular income and capital gains, closing down offshore tax havens, taxing net worth of high-wealth households, taxing financial transactions, and cracking down on evasion.
The big lie against raising taxes on the rich comes in two variants. The most preposterous is that the U.S. simply could not collect more revenues as a share of GDP. According to some foolish assertions, an iron law of revenues puts the maximum federal tax collection at around 18 percent of GDP! Yet European high-income countries, and Canada, collect somewhere between 5 and 15 percent of GDP more in taxes than the U.S. There is no iron law against raising more revenues.
The second variant of the big lie is that the U.S. economy would be ruined if the U.S. fiscal system were more like those in Europe. Each day, Republicans warn us that if we raise taxes we will end up like Europe, that is, in collapse. Democrats, for their part, go silent, not sure what to make of the argument.
Here's what to make of it: it's plain wrong. Europe per se is not in crisis. Southern Europe is in crisis. Northern Europe, by contrast, where the taxes are higher than in Southern Europe, is vastly outperforming the United States.
Jeffrey Sachs
Economist; professor and director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University; Special Advisor to the UN Secretery-General; author, 'The Price of Civilization'
I think it's soooo interesting that we are getting the talking points now of the next 10 plus months. I'm copying parts of this article and throwing 'em out every time we hear the lying Republican candidate say one.
Republicans are wrestling a very real conundrum. The only thing of substance any of them can run on is their dissatisfaction with President Obama. Problem with that though, is, the general populace perception of this group of candidates is of a much higher and more intense negative than these candidates expressive disposition of the President. The republicans will not win the Presidency this time around. Many republican Congress members will likewise be summarily defeated. Too many over ripe mouths fed by stunted brains.
rico, the right hates education and people who have one. I doubt if any righties here will read it through.
Rico,
As always, thanks for the detailed post. As I think you know, I'm an independent and I'm not tied to the extreme positions of either party. There are positions advocated by both parties that I like, and positions I disagree with.
Concerning taxation, I agree changes are needed. I was always opposed to the Bush (now Obama) tax cuts, and I'm still opposed to them. My preference is to end these cuts for the upper 1% now, and phase them out for everyone as certain unemployment rates are reached (or another equivalent formula). I also think most corporate and personal exemptions should be removed from the system because they lead to inequities (some real, some perceived) based on whoever has the most political influence.
My main concern in this country is I think we have become far to addicted to credit. If we want to go with a European style approach and have a much stronger social safety net, that's fine - let's increase everyone's taxes by the 10/20% needed to pay for that size of government. By the way, I don't know the actual % increase needed - but I do know it exceeds the combined salaries of the upper 1%, so taxing them is not nearly enough. Also, I personally think everyone needs to feel the pain - which is why I always advocate across the board tax increases.
What we really need in this country is honest, respectful debates of the issues without the political spin.
upstate - recently diagnosed with lymphoma, an unwanted disability.
Lymphoma is a disease not a disability. But the issue is that NOBODY wants either diseases or disabilities. Annd I'll even stick my neck out and say that no political party wants you to die as a result of your disease or disability. Your political leanings, however, can certainly skew your perception.
It is certainly your prerogative to vote for or against whatever political party you choose for whatever reasons you use to rationalize your choice. But to make the assertion that all republicans want you to die is laughable.
Have fun at your Pity Party.
What's life like being a troll?
You may hold the argument that increasing taxes on the wealthiest 1-2% of this nation will not make a dent in the national debt. I would say to you this is just another Republican talking point. You are correct it won't make a dent, but your assertion is intended to be a distraction from the topic which is...everyone paying their PROPORTIONAL FAIR SHARE. US decades long policies of shrinking government and reducing taxes on the wealthy is a major factor in the income inequalities we see today and the death of the American Dream.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities states that three-quarters of taxpayers pay more in payroll taxes than they do in income taxes.[5] The FICA tax is considered a regressive tax on income (with no standard deduction or personal exemption deduction) and is imposed (for the years 2009, 2010 and 2011) only on the first $106,800 of gross wages, and increasing to $110,100 in 2012. The tax is not imposed on investment income (such as interest and dividends).
IMHO part of reforming entitlement programs must include a balanced approach that addresses fraud, waste, abuse, and eliminating entitlements for those priveldged few that don't need them.
Ron in Seattle,
Just curious...would you also take away entitlement programs from people like me that never made a 6 figure salary, but still managed to save a significant amount of money through the years and grow my portfolio enough to make retirement an option at some point in the future?
If so, what's the point in acting responsibly and saving money all of my life?
(btw, I'm not trying to debate you're opinion...I'm just curious about how you feel on this one - thanks!)
Ron there is intent and there are specifications. When these safety net programs were established the INTENT was to help those most vulnerable in our population regardless of the poor decisions, or circumstances that landed them in their positions.
Now if you have worked hard all your life and have amassed substantial savings that might see you through your golden years, by specification, you are also entitled to benefits you have paid into all your working career. However, by intent a significant portion of those monies should go to those less fortunate, as you have more than enough to meet your needs.
To be clear if you have a specific net worth at retirement (say 2$-3 million) chances are this is not all dreived from the fruits of your primary labor but is a combination of prudent decisions deriving residual income from investments... At some point during this accumulation your income may have exceeded the threshold for contributions (in 2012 that is $110,100).
If you have income exceeding the threshold at retirement (65-67 years of age) IMHO you may not be required to, but should forgo or pay a higher premium for those services (ex: Medicare/Medicaid...) you are more than capable of bearing yourself.
@Thinker(?)
You are so incredibly typical of the GOP/tp. Unfeeling, pompous, self-satisfied, uncaring, uninspired, uneducated, smug, unelectable and on and on. People like you are what's wrong with this country, not what's right. All you can do is spew tp talking points and try your best to put others down. Maybe down to your incredibly low level is what it is. You give scumbags a bad name.
Better not nominate Newt Blingrich then. Ain't no way that sucker with all his baggage beats O
Rico, you're ruining the dialogue. Remember in the Land of the Free, Home of the Brave, nothing in Europe has any value. Those socialist countries are rife with political discontent. All those people "wish they could live here". The heatlhcare system in Europe is not nearly as good as the US ask anybody. Only 10% of Americans have passports. That means everything we know comes from whatever news outlet one views here in the US. This includes standard of living, price of gas, healthcare, housing etc etc. I deduce that "we only hear what we want to hear and fit it into what we think". Rico, great comment. Many thanks.
A lot of us Independent Voters are not on board with Republicans. We are still Observing. And if the Republicans still want to protect the 1%, yes us 99% Occupy Wallstreet Voters will VOTE them OUT in 2012. And these GOP Govenors are ruining their states. NONE of them have any balanced budget. They just adjusted the cost from the Middle Class and elderly to Businesses. And Businesses do not need any more money. They are sitting on TRILLIONS>>>
It is THEIR RIGHT to sit on trillions!!!!
JamesDouglasMorrison,
I respectfully disagree. It is not their right to sit on TRILLIONS and it is a direct violation of their corporate social contracts to ensure there is at least minimum social benefit in every community in which they operate and derive a profit. They would not have the trillions to sit on if we had not provided the infrastructure, laws, managerial expertise, labor, innovation...
They do not have, and would not have the ability to operate with this impunity globally if it weren't for the full force of the laws and protection of these United States. And that my friend is why they do not have the right to sit on trillions of dollars.
I didn't think ANY Republicans had a clue what the citizens want, but it does sound like a few governors in the GOP at least have an bit of understanding of the pulse of American citizens right now. They are worried for the right reasons, at least. Repubs ARE seen as WAY to eager to protect the rich at the expense of the 99%, and the OWS movement has become of deep interest to the middle class (at least to the few that are left in the middle class these days - most of what they think is the middle class have really become the poor).
So they worry and they are RIGHT! At least about that, even if not about much else.
Next time someone tells you that OWS is ineffective, let them know that they've made it so republicans cannot even bring up the word "capitalism" any more.
And you think not using the word that is the greatest equalizer in the world is a good thing?
Luntz and everyone else who fears OWS now are in for a real horror with the warming of spring 2012. What we've seen thus far is only a drop in the bucket.
:) Can't wait Mac!!!!
Wish I could stay and chat but there's work to be done....by a hard working American who has somehow not reached the rarified air that free enterprise promises hard workers.
They can't use it because what we have is obviously not capitalism, at least in any stage most Americans feel warm and fuzzy about. What we have is instead the last couple rounds of a monopoly game, just a few turns short of one player owning all the properties and a reshuffling of cards and game pieces.
Capitalism, which implies that capital is more important than labor, should never be called the greatest equalizer in the world. It is the exact opposite, meaning the more money one has, the more important.
Democracy - one man, one vote, i.e. equal
In a corporate election, the rule is one share, one vote. He who has the most shares gets the most votes. Capitalism is all about the opposite of equality.
The GOP is on the defensive. That's a great sign for Democrats.
The suggestions to tone down the rhetoric, stop defending the rich, and pay heed to the still growing OWS movement are good rational tips, but even if the mainstream party gets it, the Tea Party, far right fringe, and talk radio are not going to tone down their rhetoric enough to make any real difference.
The mainstream GOP knows it will most likely lose the 2012 bid for the White House. That's why the top tier GOP potential candidates all decided to sit this one out and wait for 2016. The current sentiment of the country and the move back to center of the American people combined with voter remorse for the Tea Party candidates elected in 2010 could also cost the GOP some House, Senate, and Governor seats over the next few elections.
I find it ironic that the GOP has actually managed to tarnish their brand the same way they made the word Liberal a bad word. When you play with fire (like the Tea Party and religious right), you can get burned. I wouldn't be surprised if many GOP candidates also running under other party lines on the ballot will more closely identify themselves with them instead of the GOP in their ads to try to wash off some of that stink that is being associated with the GOP by more and more voters.
bull@!$%#, educated people know this is the same tired democrat plan. Vilify the rich(achievers), say they care about the miserable down-trodden(they use them for votes) and scare the elderly. It won't work, we want a strong country, not a weak, apologetic welfare state.
JDM:
Exactly how does letting the (originally intended to be temporary) Bush tax cuts expired on the wealthy or having people earning over a million dollars (who have been doing very well in these times that are so tough for everyone else) pay a little bit more make our country a weak and apologetic welfare state?
The actions of the GOP to protect the top earners at any cost are shrinking our middle class out of existence towards a two class rich and poor nation.
And, you may not have noticed, but in the very beginning of our Constitution it clearly states that to "promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity" are prime responsibilities of our government, so it is not only constitutionally mandated, but the right thing to do. Access to basic health care and providing basic care for those who cannot care for themselves though little or no fault of their own is putting that into action and is what America has stood for as long as I can remember.
The "down-trodden" quote from you is also quite interesting. It sounds like you must not consider the Statue of Liberty very important or a national treasure. Second to the flag, it is probably the symbol most people associate with freedom, liberty, and patriotism.
Mike - Where in the constitution does it say that the government must provide healthcare? The quote in your post refers to the govenment protecting the people, not providing for the people. It is up to the people to provide for each other. The Founding Fathers never intended to establish a welfare state but meant that the government should allow the people to enjoy happiness, good-fortune, prosperity, and well-being - not mandate that everybody have it; and certainly not require those that were enjoying the fruits of their labours to share with those that were less fortunate.
You need to recall the systems of government that the Founding Fathers fought to overthrow. While the Statue of Liberty may be a national icon it was never intended to be a symbol of a welfare system. The "down-trodden" may be welcomed into the U.S. but they certainly are not welcome to the fruits of others simply by being/becoming a citizen. The welcoming of the Statue was meant to come and try your best - not come and collect handouts.
It is a mistake to confuse irrational idealogical inflexible philosophies with strength. Kind of like "Pride comes before you fall flat on your face..."
JamesDouglasMorrison
bull@!$%#, educated people know this is the same tired democrat plan. Vilify the rich(achievers), say they care about the miserable down-trodden(they use them for votes) and scare the elderly. It won't work, we want a strong country, not a weak, apologetic welfare state.
Ron in Seattle - you can keep posting the last paragraph but it still won't make it true.
James Douglas Morrison, if that is really your name that is a shame.
The James Douglas Morrison known to most Americans stood against inequality, and you'd never hear him talk like you do.
"The old get old, and the young get stronger..... may take a week and it may take longer.... they got the guns but, we got the numbers.... gonna win, yeah we're taking over....."
Thinker, the Constitution was an imperfect document. It did not anticipate events in time. However, by adding amendments to the Constitution they did recognize that there had to be a degree of flexibility. Healthcare is in the pursuit of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Civil Rights as an example was never a part of the Constitution nor was Women's right to vote. The old party of Unconsitutional does not deal with the absolute fact that the General Wefare of the Nation kinds follows "healthy, wealthy and wise" wouldn't you say? I would prefer if you'd just come out and state "I don't want to contribute to anyone else's healthcare by my own". At least we'd have something to discuss. The US is the only country that has healthcare as an commodity. We are not patients, we are customers. Furthermore, an ill society is not productive. So, in self interest alone, I would assume you would want healthcare to provide healthy workers. I know I would. So, in conclusion, the Constitution is just fine as long as it is understood that it is imperfect. I don't like paying for public schools. However, it is the right thing to do as an example.
Actually, the healthcare mandate was a Republican idea that plays right into thethinker's argument voiced by may conservatives about making everyone pay their fair share and not have some people getting free care at the expense of the rest who are paying.
The only reason Republicans and conservatives don't like the mandate is because it was passed under Obama. Both Romney and Gingrich as well as several other prominent Republicans in the past have expressed support for exactly this kind of requirement.
The only "repeal" of the Heath Care Act that the GOP really wants is to change the name of who signed it into law and can take credit for it. Otherwise, any overhaul of the healthcare system by the GOP would look very similar to the one we have.
Also, since the donut hole protection of the HCA just went into effect saving seniors a good sum on drug costs due to the government negotiating with drug companies, a lot of seniors who have heard nothing but bad reviews of the HCA from talk radio and Fox will start to now seriously reconsider the merits of it. This is what the right has feared. If and when people start seeing the effects of the HCA, then they'll like what they see and the fear mongering loses its effect.
If next year's campaign is couched as a battle over the middle class, Luntz said, "Democrats will win."
That is the battle and more and more people are starting to understand which party supports the middle class and which party would like to see the middle class destroyed. President Obama will win in 2012.
You are correct, but all this is not some new development. This has been the Republican goal since Ronald Reagan. The problem is that too many people have been sucked into their philosophy via the smokescreens over the years: the gays, the flag, war, abortion, taxes, religion. Republicans have used these tools for years to suck in the gullible and uneducated. The ones at the top knew EXACTLY what they were doing. The rest were so blinded by the smoke that they continually voted against their own best interests.
Barney Frank says it best. When we get bad service from a business, we think: "Who is the boss here"? In the case of our government, the boss is the voter. A working class person can only blame his or her self for putting greedy, self-serving neocon Republicans in office.
The Democrats support the middle class like parents support their children.
"Here's your allowance,"
"But I need more"
"ok, but don't tell your dad"
Obama will not win in 2012. He does not have the ability to run his campaign on his record. The only thing he has is to mudsling vs. the Repub nominee. And the Repubs will remind the U.S. public of Obama's record ad nauseum. Get ready for an ugly battle.
correct, not enough gullible parasites who are content with handouts.
he can run on parts of his record. He can also point to the obstruction that he has faced. In the end, this election will come down to a choice between the GOP candidates' vision and Obama's vision.
Actually Ferg Obama doesn't need to mud sling. The republicans are doing a fine job of it all on their own. Do tell, which candidate will all you teapublicans rush to next week? LOL
Has anybody let him know he has one? Because he certainly hasn't made it evident he has one.
"Focused like a laser" "Shovel ready jobs" need I go on?
The money issue IS the big issue here. Obama is outdistancing his opposition 2 to 3 fold. When the Republicans get their nominee, Obama will be able to hammer the airwaves with ads and get his message out to the people that are undecided. The Republican nominee will not have this luxury. Money wins elections people, and not to forget, Obama has a huge base behind him.
royalstar: The Democrats have a financial lead right now because the Republicans have not chosen a nominee. When their nominee is identified, Republican money will pour into the campaign in very large amounts. Thanks to the Supreme Court's decision on unlimited financial donations to political parties, corporations and the wealthiest Americans will pour vast amounts of money into the Republican campaign.
Royalstar: Unless you ignore the massive money Republicans are receiving from Super PACs and 501(c)(4)s--which is why when Republicans say that Obama will outspend them, they are only talking about money that has to be publicly disclosed. Thanks to Citizens United, however, Republican will massively outspend Democrats through these shadowy groups that do not have to list donors and can bypass campaign finance laws.
As an independent voter...this all just makes me sick on both sides. Too much money in politics and not enough accountability.
The S.C. ruling does let in the outsiders. But Obama ALREADY is outspending All Republicans in the field alltogether. Repubs will have their big donors because of the S.C. but the Dems will also. Obama will outspend them by miles. Just wait and see. I dont especially like it either but its the way it goes.
He has NO GOOD RECORD NOW. He can't hide his history like before. The lame bumper sticker slogan is gone. Zerobama is done!
James, sit back and watch him get reelected.
Considering that the republican votes are diluted by the broad field of players, obama is outspending them combined, and he is still not leading in the polls does not bode well for the campaigner-in-chief.
Thinker:
While you may worship polls and are swayed to and fro like a tumble weed in the wind, the informed electorate will just go get more popcorn to watch this kabookee theater. None of this matters until dust settles and there is a clear choice between candidate A and candiadte B. Right now this is nothing but pure entertainment...popcorn anyone?
Jindal and Perry: two peas in a pod governing states in the intelligence-free South. Dumb and dumber is a moniker that fits them both so well.
You are a bigot!
It is nice to see how many people from the left vote for a bigoted comment.
livingbarefoot - how is that bigoted? Is Mark bigoted against the south? Being uneducated? I didn't realize that either of those were considered a social class that one could be bigoted against. Just because you don't agree with a comment, does not make it bigoted.
They could lose...by APPEARING too eager to protect the rich????? Really? Give me a break.
Jack: The Republican leadership is concerned that their poorly educated rank and file will eventually understand their Party is the political arm of the wealthy and that FOX "News" is their Ministry of Propaganda. Some of the Party's leadership is concerned the rank and file may be beginning to understand that reality, and consequently, some of the leadership believes maybe they ought to disguise their clearly stated goal a bit. After all, maybe just maybe some of the rank and file aren't as stupid as the leadership believes.
How about by ENCOURAGING PEOPLE TO TRY TO GET RICH!? Do you losers just want to settle for the rest of your lives? Is taking the easy way out with your hands out for scraps what you consider a good living?
How about by ENCOURAGING PEOPLE TO TRY TO GET RICH!? Do you losers just want to settle for the rest of your lives? Is taking the easy way out with your hands out for scraps what you consider a good living?
----------------------
OK...then how is the GOP doing this? By cutting taxes on the wealthy and paying off teachers?
Can't wait to hear how loud the belly aching from the poor, uneducated teatards gets when the republicans vote against the payroll tax credit (AGAIN) and it is taken away! I'm willing to have my taxes go up just to give the morons exactly what they asked for. LOL
I agree Sally and hope the President doesn't fall for Lucy's (tea/Pubs) kick the football gimmick again as they tie the payroll tax holiday and an extension of UI benefits to tax relief for the wealthiest 1-2% AGAIN. I would have him say not only NO, but HELL NO!! Let them all expire. Then Congress will have a clean slate to propose relief for the middle class independent of the Bush (now Obama) tax cuts.
None of this matters, polls, what Luntz is saying, ... until America needs to make a clear choice. Republicans think Obama can't runb on his record? Boy are they in for a surprise. The unemployement in America was definitely caused by the financial meltdown in 2007-2008. To somehow convince me that its someone else's fault for not cleaning up a Republican debacle fast enough is INSANE.
These are the games we subscribe to as voters, hook, line, and sinker. America will continue to circle the toilet as long as the electorate continues being the hapless and witless victim.
Who controlled Congress in 2007-2008?
James, the better question is who ran it from 2001-2007, when the policies were put in place for the crash.
JamesDouglasMorrison - A poster child for the word "witless". He thinks all this happened in one year.
@ Jim M
You have to go farther back than that. Policies and legislation don't know term limits. I'm suggesting 1999 and the de-fanging of the Glass-Steagal Act.
The Republican leadership sees its rank and file as a collection of poorly educated, morons who'll follow them no matter what. They play to the lowest common education level to make the argument that their party IS the party of the wealthy, that FOX "News" IS their Ministry of Propaganda, and that the rank and file SHOULD accept and promote their agenda of both federal welfare programs for the wealthiest Americans and anti-labor programs for the working classes.
It is so interesting to read the posts on this website by people who clearly do not know how to write their native language properly showing a very poor educational level, but who support the Republican leadership's agenda completely. Clearly, they do not belong to the wealthy classes since the wealthy have a first rate education and simply are turned off by people who cannot write well. So, the poorly educated rank and file vote against their own self-interest, but what the hell, they live like they do because they enjoy the life of the poorly educated. It's hard for rational people to understand because rational people try to live logically consistent lives. They don't understand people who live one way and vote another. Rational people don't understand street people either who live out of garbage cans and who don't want to live any other way. They probably vote Republican.
Sounds like you apologist blind lemmings.
Escape his woes? As long as there is a GOP controlled Congress his woes will never end.
Well considering, that this is worst sitting congress that there has ever been, and their approval rating is only at 9 percent, in January 2013 congress may have a very different look to it. In the 2010 election, the GOP carried most of the independent voters. This is most likely not going to happen in 2012.
and an OBSTRUCTIONIST DEMOCRAT controlled senate.
JamesDouglasMorrison
and an OBSTRUCTIONIST DEMOCRAT controlled senate--------------
-----------------------
Really? How many times have the GOP used the filibuster since 2009?
Jim
And how many Bills are sitting on Harry's desk??
James m d probably doesn't know what a filibuster is.
The GOP could have beat him if, instead of spewing hate 24 hours a day for three years, instead of obstructing every single ounce of effort the President has tried to make in order to help things, instead of holding the country hostage over debt talks and causing a US downgrade, instead of doing a single thing to help lower the debt even that's their favorite thing to complain about, while blatantly attempting to squash the middle class, all just so they can keep their golfing budding from having to pay taxes at a level that we had during the Clinton era when everything was just fine. Bottom line, they needed to show a willingness to help things and instead, all they have done is show a willingness to hurt.
Most Americans are pretty darn smart. They are not being fooled by the GOP and their tactics. The realization that all the GOP cares about is protecting their jobs and their money. They could care less about the rest of us. Americans would be crazy to let the GOP keep their jobs!
Gosh Mom I hope you're right, but recent history tells us Americans (particularly an unspecified number of white Americans, and wannabe White Americans) are easily swayed by lies, one-liners, and sensationalism, not because of policy disagreements but because of a deep seeded haterd for the President and what he represents.
Yep I said it.
Ron in Seattle....
AMEN! And the majority of Americans are starting to realize this. Based on everything that he has put on the table and offered, the Republicans and their ilk are opposed to it because of one reason. We already know what it is.
ANd what THE IT is, is exactly what Boehner & McConnell stated publicly at the start of the BHO POTUS term...
We MUST oppose, create chaos & do anything within our power to keep BHO from a 2nd term.
Well we have seen & witnessed the great minds at the controls of the "Opposition" & exactly what strata of character they think will be a sure winner against him & one by one we have seen the American public laugh them off the stage, shun them off the stage & seen them screw themselves out of the spotlight.
The Republican Party as we have known it is dead & the living corpse that still claims the mantle is on it's knees without a clue as to what is wrong or how or fix it...... and it is all based on a single failure TO BE TRUTHFUL, HONEST & FOR this country in it's entirety instead of it's present monetary system.
Greed & prevarication are always the downfall of an ignore-ant organization, old rule never learned.
#15 Ruken, right on ! And remember his woes are Middle Class Americas woes. The GOP bears in large part the reason we are where we are. They have done nothing but hurt America since Bush took office. They ar hellbent on gridlock, hurl slander, defamation, and are arrogant, haughty. The Dem's are not a whole lot better. Between the two major parties, they are destroying our freedom as well as our economic wellbeing. GREED..
Four letter words are not permitted on this web. Lucky for both parties...JMJ
As an Independent voter, I have watched the political mess for the past 3 years with disgust. Republicans have already hurt themselves with the obstructionistic tactics in Congress as well as the tactics they've taken at the State level. Democrats are far from being saints or blameless in these battles (like fleeing from WI), but they at least have been talking a good game about trying to protect the middle class. BOTH political parties need to take a step back from the rhetoric and look at the state of our Government. This Presidential election cycle WILL end up being focused on the Middle Class - it already is. As long as the Republicans continue to blockade increasing tax revenue, they can not and will not be believed to be serious about getting the debt under control. As long as they continue to obstruct while passing bills making pizza a vegetable, allowing slaughter of horses for human consumption (in other countries), affirming the motto "In God We Trust" on our coinage ... the voting public will turn away from them in DROVES. ALL of our elected representatives need to work TOGETHER to get us out of this mess that the financial collapse of 2007-2008 put us into. As it stands right now, I think that the Republicans will have a very tough time gaining the White House and keeping seats in other higher office.
The single most issue that hurts our middle class is illegals taking jobs and killing every ones earning potential.
Capitalism is the greatest equalizer in the world when done right. The proper capitalistic way to "stick it to the rich" is make them pay more for their labor and services. How come the D's fight against fixing the number one problem?
They have the poor vote wrapped up, they want more poor people. They are gross!
The single most issue that hurts our middle class is illegals taking jobs and killing every ones earning potential
So do tell genius, just who is it that is hiring all these illegals and allowing them to take the jobs and kill Americans earning potential? ? Or are you suggesting that illegals come here and take over entire companies? Because that would be the ONLY explanation for your insanely stupid reasoning that illegals are "stealing" jobs. Do tell, how does one go about "stealing" a job? I'd like to know so I can steal Bill Gates job.
I want to arrest anyone who hires an illegal. When you take a job illegally, I define it as stealing.
You can come up with a softer liberal friendly term if you like!
Don't be a moron, nobody who does actual research says the illegals have even more than a marginal effect on jobs and wages, the real issue stems from unjustified tax cuts for the rich, waste, offshoring, and too many people fighting over far too few jobs. Add to that the cost of getting a degree and it is no wonder that half of America is within a paycheck of poverty.
LIVINGBAREFOOT..you are either unaware or lying.
Don't try to tell me Jose' is talking the skilled jobs that went offshore for the last 20 years, I'm not as stupid as you....think...ignoring the fact that not many Mexicans are headed for a country that has no damned jobs !
BHO's admin has busted & returned more illegals in 4 years than the GWB admin did in 8
Most States, especially southern GOP/TP controlled states (GA ALA TN FL MS LA) get up to 30% more money back from the federal government than they pay in taxes; yet, they constantly say the government is no good. Maybe the government should give every state an equal amount. I can hear the GOP/TP governors screaming now.
Pulled those stats out of your arse.
Nope, live in one of those staes..it's all true. Denying it barefoot, doesn't make it untrue. Nj gets only about 85% of what they send, a GOP governor there that would like his 15% back.
Still no stats, just your biased word so far. I would imagine that the states with the highest levels of illegals that the left promotes would need the most assistance and would contribute the least.
But that is the fault of Democrats, not Republicans.
well, many states in the south do receive more in federal spending than they pay in taxes by 30% or more, looking at this study from 2007 taxfoundation.org/research/show/266.html
for example, NM, miss, AL, LA, WVA, ND, Ala, SD, KY, Va, MT, Hawaii, Maine, ARK, OK, SC, missouri, and maryland..with tennesse just missing at 27%.
so old vet's arse was pretty accurate. lol.
Stats
No they weren't. His stats had FL and GA at the top and 2007 is pretty old for a current conversation.
GOP governors are part of their own problem. Voters in several states are having serious buyer's remorse, and the extreme unpopularity of some Republican governors in swing states (Walker in Wisconsin, Scott in Florida, Kasich in Ohio) can only benefit Democrats.
With the unemployment rate so high, Obama shouldn't have a prayer of re-election, but the Republican party's lousy slate of candidates, brazen elitism and obstructionism in Congress, and massive overreach on social issues combined with blatantly political attempts to manipulate the electoral process in their favor at the state and local levels are all conspiring to give President Obama hope that the voters won't go for change in the White House in 2012.
Whatever "woes" he escapes, he can't escape being him...that's the worst of his "woes".
Say whatever you want about President Obama, but he WILL be reelected for many reasons, because, among many other reasons, Republicans don't have a viable candidate, and every one of them (except Huntsman) is securely in the pocket of that "don't tax the rich" guy whose name escapes me at the moment.
The American People are not trying to hire any kind of "corporate executive" to take over our lives, reduce our wages, rob us of all of our retirement money, and/or guaranty that we will NOT have affordable health care, which is exactly what Republicans are promising, but the American People reject.
The whole Republican Platform begins with taking our retirement money instead of taxing the Top 1% wealthiest Americans in order to pay for that Lie Called the War in Iraq.
Grover Norquist!
Republicans have put Grover Norquist FIRST, before the American People, and even before their Oath of Office.
Why should WE vote for ANY Republican? We shouldn't, and we won't.
Let Grover Norquist vote for them if he wants to.
Yep,,, They put Grover 1st & still every one of their ideas of writing a conservative budget or tax violates their own pledges to him of "No Taxes" & "No New Taxes" ---- Conservatives still love them
This is probably the first preparation of we are going to lose big time. Have you seen the way any republican is acting these days? Their woes are a lot bigger than Obamas woes! They are ridiculous at every turn!!
Yep, you can see that whenever conservative leaders try to redefine what they are doing as something America wants as this article has pointed out
They keep forgetting two basic facts ---- Their policies screwed up this country & put is in this situation.. They hurt every American Family except for those of the "Inheritance Class"
Their policies today are even more radical & wrong than the last time they had control of the White House
The fools who helped create this mess we are in are now fearing the people will figure it out before election time. For the country's sake I hope we do.
It's so funny how delusional and how loyal they are to Grover Norquist. They understand that what they are doing is unpopular and the majority of Americans see what they are doing is unfair. Yet they keep protecting the rich, and think a change and strong push of rhetoric will help to save them!