Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Tuesday, June 5, 2012 | 2:01 a.m.
The Sun’s May 20 editorial, “Making Things Work,” reminds us that we have a House of Representatives that seems to have expressed an avowed duty to make sure that nothing works, at least, that nothing works until Barack Obama is defeated in November.
The economy plods along, despite the Republican-controlled House; it’s time for the country to pause and reflect on the story of America during the past three years. If the economy were a human being, in 2008 the economy was barely alive, sick with cancer, heart disease, diabetes and kidney failure. Nobody was buying while home equities disappeared overnight and home values continued to go down. Jobs were disappearing to the tune of nearly a million a month. Cars were practically being given away. Car dealerships were falling like flies. Commercial properties were being hollowed out.
It took a year for the Obama administration to succeed in halting the economy’s free fall. Now, in the 3 1/2 years since Obama became president, the economy is adding jobs and is on its way to a slow recovery, but the Republicans and the impatient American public are all screaming that the economy should be like LeBron James right now, running around and dunking the ball.
Reading between the lines, the editorial highlights the fact that the Republican-controlled House is working against the interests of the American people and it is doing this shamelessly for political reasons.
How can you make this stuff up.
Democrat like Reid in the senate will not pass any of the 30 house bills to help the economy
Nothing works because it is piled up on Harry Reid's desk.
Obama closed car dealerships based on political support and not on viability. But hey, it was only taxpayer dollars he was "investing".
Sorry letter writer, you've got it all wrong. It's Obamanomics that is slowing the recovery. Speaking of which, this is the slowest and weakest in US history.
If you know anything about economic cycles, the worse the decline, the better the recovery. Based on how bad you say it was, after 3 plus years of supposed Obamanomics, the USA should be in a super recovery. Not so. Flat as a board.
President Obama is a keynesian, a follower of John Maynard Keynes. Keynesians believe when the private sector stubbles, big Gov't has to tax and spend its way out of the recession. Like the Europeans did and are still doing. Has it worked yet? No. Why? The GDP [Gross Domestic Product, the key measure of economic activity] is two-thirds Consumer Spending. Consumer as in private sector, not Gov't. Keynes is a dinosaur of economics. Remember what happened to dinosaurs? So with Obama. The real question is by the time Obama's gone, will it be too late for the US and the recovery?
Carmine A. DiFazio
You don't even have to read between the lines to see the Republican-controlled House is not working in the interests of the American people. Just read the lines!
The GOP has shamelessly proceeded with an agenda that makes a lot of noise to stake out ideological positions aimed a nothing other than the 2012 elections. If we fall for that, we'll get exactly what we deserve.
This letter is political dung. The Obama administration has loaded this nation with unfathomable debt, a highly unpopular( soon hope to be abolished) Healthcare law and a class and racial divide that breaks all records. Burdensome regulations and an uncertain tax environment choke off recovery, investment and robust job creation. For two full years Obama held all the cards in Congress only to waste them on passing Obamacare and for the next two years held control of the Executive and the Senate and has fiddled away his opportunities to achieve a recovery by implementing failed policies, including a disaterous and failed "green energy" policy that will cost the taxpayers billions of dollars in wasted tax dollars. NO, Obama is a failure and the Leftist control of this nation must end. In state after state Reublican controlled statehouses are are a success( such as Indiana and Ohio), and the liberal states such as California are failing. There is no doubt that a return to total republican control and policies will succeed.
Mr. Weber:
Was President Obama wrong when he told Matt Lauer in Feb 2009 ion a nationally televised interview that Americans wanted accountability and if he [Obama] did not improve the economy in the USA after 3 years, he deserved to be a one term president?
If so [he was wrong], why? If not [wrong], why not? Curious voters like me who are deciding who to vote for in Nov want to know.
Carmine A. DiFazio
Apparently, Lumba skipped school when he should have been in political science classes. Let me set you straight, Cesar: it is the function & the duty of the political party out-of-power to try and defeat the one in power. In other words, the Republicrats are doing just what the Founders wanted - trying to make a first-term prexy a 1- term prexy. Maybe you were asleep when George W. was in office, but that's exactly what the Dumbocrats were trying to do. Better yet, they tried to make hin a no-term prexy by playing games in FL. As for the morass in the pig-sty known as Washington, D.C., the Republicrats are in charge of just the House of Representatives; Dumbocrats control the Senate & the office of the prexy, so why are you letting them skate? They all share in the blame for the mess the USA is in financially and for the whopping debt they've saddled us, our children and their children with. Wake up and fight them all until they understand we are "mad as hell and won't put up with it anymore!"
The D and R supporters that are 'sure' the reason we don't see any action on our most pressing problems is the 'House' or the 'Senate' respectively, should reach down and pull their heads out of their you know whats.
The House, led by John Boehner and an R majority has produced many bills that are not even brought up in the Senate or are defeated with no compromise offered.
The Harry Reid led Senate and the D majority have likewise drafted many bills that are routinely blocked in the House with no compromise offered.
If both our chambers in the legislative branch refuse to bring up bills drafted in the other chamber, use filibusters and other legislative maneuvers to block action and refuse to compromise, what are we to expect other than no action on important issues of the day.
Both Harry Reid and John Boehner should have a rating of negative 50 and so should the members of each chamber. It is beyond rediculous that given the number of unemployed, struggling Americans in this crappy economy, our two chambers in the legislative branch have choosen to 'play chicken' rather than do the peoples business.
Michael
There will be a recovery in spite of the gridlock in Congress and the failed Obama policies. The current issue of the Economist has some eye opening stories about successes in Republican controlled states where things are getting done, and points to the recovery that is underway --even in the real estate markets of Fla and AZ, and of the impending recovery in the Las Vegas RE marke where inventory is sagging and multiple bids are being made on used homes, and new home sales are doing very well.
I would submit the Economy has been terminally ill since Nixon. Taking away public and private monetary expansion and the Economy has not had any real sustainable growth for 40 years. That is why we have these cycles and massive resource dislocations.
The problem is we have an Economy (worldwide) built upon counterfeited money. That is what runs decisions. Once you know this the supposed bottleneck in the US Congress is seen for what it really is. You cannot have fundamental change when the game is about running an economy on toilet paper. We are now at a point where we cannot turn back or risk having the entire bowl flushed.
Virtually every decision that is made of substance is done so with an eye toward the effect on the US Dollar. It is always about the dollar.
All GOPers in Congress should be arrested and charged with treason. Their hatred of President Obama has turned them into domestic terrorists who will destroy the country to stop him from succeeding.
David Horsey - LATIMES
"The open secret of the Republicans in Congress is that they are not going to lift a finger to improve the country's economic situation as long as it might benefit President Obama. For both ideological and purely partisan reasons, Republicans have downsized or completely squashed any economic plan emanating from the White House from the day Obama took office."
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/top...
Standard Democratic delusional tripe.
LastThroes,
Even democrats didn't take Obama's budgets and class warfare tax plan seriously. Obama's budgets didn't get a single democratic vote the last two years and Obama's class warfare tax plan was voted down easily as well. Obama's inexperience with fiscal and economic matters has clearly been on display during the last few years. Bottom-line, Obama is just too far left of center to get enough votes for his left-wing ideas.
Is the glass 1/2 empty of 1/2 full? Maybe it is the Democrats and Obama who are impeeding the recovery by stalling and rejecting and not compromising with the House.
Since teabaggers have taken a liking to the president their party investigated for six years then tried to impeach, here's their favorite Democrat, Bill Clinton, speaking yesterday in New York:
-- Electing Romney would be "calamitous for our country and the world" Clinton said at a reception and private fundraiser. "I don't think it's important to re-elect the president, I think it's essential to re-elect the president." --
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/201...
Comment removed by moderator. Name Calling Na
Krugman continues making sense:
"At these moments someone has to start spending -- and, Krugman argues, it is the government. But we're endlessly being told by the right wing sociopaths that we have to pay off our debts because servicing the interest is ruinous, and the bond markets will destroy us unless we're seen to be tackling the deficit.
"Well, now. We know that advanced economies with stable governments that borrow in their own currency are capable of running up very high levels of debt without crisis. And we know it, actually, best of all from the history of the UK -- which spent much of the 20th century, including the 30s, with debt levels much higher than it has now."
But what about bond markets? Invoked as global bogeymen, we're warned that they punish governments who fail to cut spending -- even if cuts don't reduce the deficit. I've never understood why the markets should care how and when we reduce the deficit, as long as we can pay our way. According to Krugman, they don't.
"That's the interesting thing. The actual verdict of the markets, for countries that have their own currencies, has been that they don't really care at all in terms of what you're doing in short-run policy." Likewise, the danger of being downgraded by a credit rating agency has been wildly overstated. "We saw it in Japan in 2002; they had the downgrade, and nothing happened. Which led us to predict that would happen for the US," whose credit rating was downgraded by one agency last year. "And it was exactly right. Nothing happened."
Obama/Biden 2012 -- It will be OK
krugman still writing for that fishwrapper NYTimes? They don't take a dump unless it's agenda-driven. I suppose pumping another 90 billion for "green energy" stimulus makes economic sense. BWAAAH!
There is something to be said for how the player who is holding the team back the most always claims to be trying the hardest...
I agree with LastThroes, the behavior of the Republicans is treasonous. There are no pragmatists among them. The party has become an angry mob, existing on a steady diet of fictitious oppression and fundamentalist thinking. Whether they are motivated by greed or ideology, I hold conservatives responsible for undermining the strength of this country. Democracy is a marriage and Republicans have become wife beaters.
As a life long Republican myself,I am truly disappointed with what my party has left behind for President Obama to clean up.And if Sen. John McCain would have been elected President,we would still be facing the same problems. Anyone who thinks former President George W. Bush did not leave behind a mess, is not thinking clearly.
Truthy,
The anti-business Obama failed to create an environment for economic growth in the private sector. Obama spent two years on his Obamacare when he should have addressed the top three American concerns which are jobs, the economy and debt/deficit spending. The Obama $861 billion dollar stimulus didn't create the necessary job growth predicted by Obama economists when the stimulus was passed. Below are the projected unemployment numbers given to us by Obama's economists with the stimulus spending applied. The unemployment rate has been above 8% since 2009 and now its 8.2%. What happened? Where did the money go and why did the stimulus not lower our unemployment rate as promised?
Projected Unemployment Rate with Stimulus
2009 Q3 = 7.9%
2010 Q1 = 7.7%
2010 Q3 = 7.5%
2011 Q1 = 7.3%
2011 Q3 = 6.9%
2012 Q1 = 6.5%
2012 Q3 = 6.1%
"Anyone who thinks former President George W. Bush did not leave behind a mess, is not thinking clearly."
Sam, can you explain? "Leave behind a mess" is so vague.
RefNv, Be more than glad to.Let's start with 2 wars unfinished after declaring the Iraq war mission accomplished, a 10 trillion dollar dificit from a surplus,(from Clinton)a free falling economy,and the start of the stimulus program to bail out banks. and lastly the loss of millions of jobs.
Sam,
Bush added $4.8 trillion to our national debt. $1.6 trillion was due to the recession as we collected lower tax revenue during then and $1.8 trillion was due to ever increasing entitlement costs that dems refuse to address. The rest was mostly costs related to the global war on terror. That money was spent to root out Al Qaeda from their training bases in Afghanistan and Iraq after they killed over 3,000 US citizens on 911. Bush could have just cleaned up New York and waited on the next attack on US soil, would you have preferred that Sam?
From 2001 to 2008, Bush maintained between 62%-63% of the population working starting with 139 million in 2001 and 145 million in 2008, a difference of 9 million. Obama? 139 million to 141 million today, a difference of 2 million after nearly 4 years in office. The percent of the population working during Obama's Presidency? It started with 59.3% and has since dropped to 58.5%.
During the recession, the 2001 indicators showed consumer debt was at an all time high at 17% of disposable income, the personal savings rate was near record lows between 2% and 3% and consumers were purchasing less as indicated by GDP growth slowing to 1.09. Based on this information, Bush decided to cut taxes to put more money into consumers hands. The recession lasted just 8 months and GDP started to rise again the following years with a GDP growth rate of 1.8%, 2.5% and 3.59%. Tax receipts started to climb again as well to 17.3% and 18.2% as a percent of GDP two years after the recession. Bush, did the right thing by putting more money into the economy with lower tax rates, it shortened the recession and tax revenue started to climb back to at or above the historic average two years later. Later in his term, the housing bubble was unavoidable as consumers continued to over-extend themselves financially as the personal savings rate dropped again to under 2% while household debt climbed to a record 18% of disposable income in 2006-07. At that point, government couldn't stop the recession and consumers had no other choice but to curb their spending.
Sam, I think the rhetoric doesn't match the facts.
Bob Jack: Please decribe "burdensome regulations" and "uncertain tax environment." Not the Faux News version. Anybody can cry wolf. Try giving us some facts.
The Obama administration stated that the "stimulus" would bring unemployment down below 6% by now (you know... LeBron James type recovery).
Were they?
A) Incompetent
B) Lying
C) Both
How can any presidential candidate suggest that further cutting taxes for the wealthiest will improve the economy? Doing so failed when Reagan was in office, and he was forced to raise taxes. Bush the Elder ran on "no new taxes" and that failed as well. When Bush the Lesser took the position of creating jobs with his tax cuts that failed as well. Clinton raised taxes and we had one of the best modern era economies. Now with the lowest taxes in fifty years, the economy is very slow in growing.
I agree with Mr. Lumba, I believe there are politicians who are intentionally stalling the economy hoping Republicans will regain Congress and the White House. This goes beyond ideology concerning the American people who are held hostage or placed on the back burner.
"The Congressional Budget Office said in a new report that if tax cuts enacted under George W. Bush are allowed to expire as scheduled on Dec. 31, along with some other tax and spending policies, U.S. public debt would shrink significantly, falling to 53 percent of gross docmestic product by 2037 from 73 percent this year."
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/0...
Jeffery:
Your grasp of economics is weak and untrue. You're just quoting a sinking man's words.
Paul Krugman pushed keynesian economics in 2008-2010. And gained recognition for a short-lived "dead cat" bounce. By 2011, it all changed. With European Gov't's going bankrupt and belly up and the USA recovery flat, Krugman's [keynesians] theories/policies lost all credibility. In fact, his name has become "toxic" for use in conjunction with the current economic tsunami worldwide. All believe, as I've said, Keynes and Krugman's theories are now finally dead.
Do your own research and you'll know. Whether you choose to believe is on you, just as it is with Krugman. Sadly, Krugman is guilty of what he accuses others. Holding on to the same failed actions and reactions despite the failings.
Carmine A. DiFazio
Vernos,
The Bush tax cut plan originally passed by Republicans benefited more lower and middle income wage earners including single mothers and the elderly than the rich. Vernos, are you willing to rescind the following tax cuts?
* 46 million married couples received an average tax cut of $1,716.
* 34 million families with children received from an average tax cut of $1,473.
* 6 million single women with children received an average tax cut of $541.
* 13 million elderly taxpayers received an average tax cut of $1,384.
* 23 million small business owners received tax cuts averaging $2,042.
* 3 million moderate-income families saw their income tax burden eliminated entirely.
Also, the Bush tax cuts brought in more tax revenue, not less.
Additionally, CBO predicted last month that a Recession in 2013 would be likely unless Congress acts on fiscal issues which includes the Bush tax cuts. Here is an article quoting the CBO:
"The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) said Tuesday that unless lawmakers act to prevent scheduled tax increases and spending cuts at the end of the year, a recession will likely result in early 2013.
Early next year income taxes are set to go up when the Bush-era tax rates expire. Automatic spending cuts totaling roughly $109 billion triggered by last August's debt-ceiling deal are set to hit. Meanwhile, payments to physicians under Medicare will be slashed.
CBO projects that these and other elements of the so-called "fiscal cliff" will cause the economy to contract as demand dries up.
It projected in a Tuesday report that the gross domestic product (GDP) will contract by 1.3 percent in the first half of 2013 before growing 2.3 percent later in the year. Annualized, GDP would grow just 0.5 percent in 2013.
"Given the pattern of past recessions as identified by the National Bureau of Economic Research, such a contraction in output in the first half of 2013 would probably be judged to be a recession," the report states.
A recession is technically defined as two economic quarters of negative economic growth.
This is the first time CBO has forecast a recession resulting from the fiscal cliff. In January it saw 1.1 percent GDP growth in 2013 if policies are not dealt with."
http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/bu...
Vernos,
I hope that you and many other Americans come to realize two things: One is that cutting taxes on the wealthy and business alone will not bring the economy back. I know you know this because you say it often. But the 2nd thing I don't see you say is that raising taxes on the wealthy and business alone, will also not bring the economy back.
It is going to take a re-written income tax code, a raising of taxes on everyone with an income...rich, poor, business, everybody and a large reduction in the amount of money the Federal government spends.
The balony and half a loaf that both the R's and the D's push is nonesense and it will not work.
Michael
RefNV,You are entitled to your own opinion.
I seriously am concerned about the immediate financial future of our global economy.
Young people in Spain are upset because there seems to be money to bail out Bankia and no money for them. There is concern over civil unrest based on what happens in the near future.
George Soros stated in Italy the other day that the EU has 3 months to install some sort of plan to rescue the Eurozone or it will be to late.
Germany's economy is beginning to shrink according to an article in Der Spiegel today. The DAX, Germany's blue-chip stock index, has fallen 16% in the last 10 days. May's economic data has shown that domestic production has dropped 17% from this time last year and exports are down 13%. Although Jan thru May 2011 was a record year so perhaps some shrinkage is understandable. What, of coarse, is causing worry is Greece and what the elections on June 17th will bring.
France right now is a big unknown. What Hollande proposes in the next few months will be very influential.
If anyone does not think that these potential problems will not spill over onto us in badly mistaken.
Now that said, Soros also predicts a prolonged depression in southern Europe, but northern Europe will continue to do well economically. What he does not touch on is the potential civil unrest as a result of that prolonged depression.
Willie Tanner: I know that CEO of Intel said that for them to build a chip processing facility in the US would cost an additional $1 Billion.
The right wing people that post here are just wrong. They think that the rules for taxes that apply to rich people also apply to working people, but they don't. When working peoples' taxes go up, their pay goes up. When their taxes go down, their pay goes down. It may take a year or two or three to all even out, but it always works this way.
If a wealthy person earns so much money that he doesn't or can't spend it all each year, when his taxes go down his income after taxes goes up. This is largely because there's little or no relationship between what he "needs to live on" and what he's "earning." Somebody living on $1 million per year but earning $5 million after taxes can sock away $4 million in a Swiss bank. If his taxes go up enough to drop his after-tax income to only $3 million per year, he's still living on $1 million per year and socks away only $2 million in the Swiss bank. Although his lifestyle doesn't change, his discretionary income--goes down when his taxes go up and vice versa.
Most working Americans believe that their taxes and income work in the same way--something the right-wing think tanks and media want everyone to believe. So average Americans tend to support tax cuts because they think they'll have more money in the bank as a result, but if their taxes go up, they'll have less money in the bank. It's pretty intuitive, and over the short term, it's true.
But it never plays out that way.
Unlike the rich, most working people spend pretty much all of what they earn--their discretionary income is extremely limited and in many cases zero. Savings rates in the United States among working people typically are small--1 to 5 percent. So the take-home pay that people have after taxes--regardless of what the tax rate may be--is pretty much what they live on.
So, if a worker is earning, for example, a gross salary of $75,000, his 2009 federal income tax would have been about $18,000, leaving him a take-home pay of $57,000. Both he and his employer know that he'll do the job for that $57,000 take-home pay.
So let's take a look at what happens if the government raises income taxes. For our average $75,000-per-year worker, his take home pay might decrease from $57,000 to $52,000. So, in the short run, increased taxes have an immediate negative effect on him.
But here comes the part the conservatives don't like to talk about. Our own history shows that within a short time--usually between 1 and 3 years--that same worker's wages will increase enough to more than compensate for his lost income. Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan called it "wage inflation". It's one reason why as income taxes increasingly hit more and more working people in the United States between the 1950s and 1981, income itself steadily went up, too.
Similarly, when the government enacts a tax cut, workingclass people's taxes go down; but sure enough, over time, their wages also go down so their inflation-adjusted take-home pay remains the same.
Consider all the "tax cuts" working people have gotten over the past 30 years, from Reagan, Clinton, and Bush Jr. In each case, within a year or two working people's wages were the same or lower. On the other hand, when working-class people's taxes went up, during the Truman, Eisenhower, Johnson, and Nixon administrations, their wages went up in the following years, too.
We've seen both happen over the past 80 years, over and over again.
When it comes to the rich, though, it is the "top marginal tax rate" that matters most. That marginal tax rate applies to each bracket, and for 2009 taxes it was as follows:
Annual Income Marginal Tax Rate
Less than $8,350 - 10% --$8,350 to $33,950 - 15% --$33,950 to $82,250 - 25%--$82,250 to $171,550 - 28% - 171,550 to $372,950 - 33% - $372,950 and higher 35%
So what happens if that top marginal tax rate goes up from its current 35 percent to, for example, the 1980 rate of 70 percent? For the more than 120 million American workers who don't earn more than $372,950 annually, it won't mean a thing. But for the tiny handful of millionaires and billionaires who have promoted the Great Tax Con, it will bite hard. And that's why they spend millions to make average working people freak out about increases in the top tax rates.
America had no billionaires in today's money until after the Civil War, with John D. Rockefeller being our first--in and of itself is an important reason to increase the top marginal tax rate and to do so now. High top marginal tax rates--generally well above 60 percent--on rich people actually stabilize the economy, prevent economic bubbles from forming, prevent the subsequent economic crashes, and lead to steady and sustained economic growth as well as steady and sustained wage growth for working people. On the other hand, when top marginal rates drop below 50 percent, the opposite happens. The massive Republican tax cuts of the 1920s (from 73 to 25 percent) led directly to the Roaring Twenties' real estate and stock market bubbles, a temporary boom, and then the crash and Republican Great Depression that started in 1929.
Then, from the 1930s to the 1980s, rates on the very rich went back up into the 70 to 90 percent range. We went 50 years without a crash or major bank failure. It was also during this period that the American worker's wages increased enough to produce the strongest middle class this nation has ever seen.
Then came Reaganomics. Taking his cues from the conservative billionaires who fund right-wing think tanks like the Heritage Foundation, Reagan cut top marginal tax rates on the rich from 74 percent to 38 percent. Predictably, there was an immediate surge in the markets--followed by the worst crash since the Great Depression and the failure of virtually the entire nation's savings-and-loan banking system.
Then came Bush Sr., running on his "no new taxes" pledge, who cut taxes once in office; the nation fell into a severe recession while debt soared and wages for working people fell.
During the Bill Clinton era, he slightly raised taxes on the very rich, but he was followed by Bush Jr., who cut them again, including cutting taxes on unearned income--interest and dividends that people like W, who are born with a trust fund, "earn" as they sit around the pool waiting for the dividend check to arrive in the mail--down to a top rate of 15 percent. The result of this surge in easy money for the wealthy, combined with deregulation in the financial markets, was the "froth" Greenspan worried about that led us straight into the Second Republican Great Depression in 2008.
The math is pretty simple. When the uber-rich are heavily taxed, economies prosper and wages for working people steadily rise. When taxes for the rich are cut, working people suffer and economies turn into casinos.
For decades now the uberrich have relentlessly spent money to make Americans believe that lower taxes are the answer to all of America's problems. They've done this partly through the media they own and partly through funding "think tanks" that legitimize their Great Tax Con.
Many of their followers CONSTANTLY post here.
Richard Mellon Scaife, heir to the Mellon family businesses, is a conservative billionaire who carries the title of publisher of the Tribune-Review, a ridiculously expensive enterprise, given its paltry circulation of 50,000. According to a his ex-wife the paper has lost $20 million to $30 million annually since it began publishing in 1992." If you do the math, you come up with more than $300 million that Scaife has lost on the newspaper.
So why are these guys willing to lose so much money funding conservative media? Why do they bulk-buy every right-wing book that comes out to push it to the top of the bestseller list and then give away the copies to "subscribers" to their Web sites and publications? The answer is pretty straightforward: they do it because it buys them respectability and gets their con job out there. And one of their most important goals is lower taxes--for millionaires and billionaires like themselves. Even though William Kristol's publication, the Weekly Standard, is a money-losing joke (with only 85,000 subscribers), his association with the publication is enough to get him on TV talk shows whenever he wants and even a column with the New York Times for a year.
One way in which the think tanks and the conservative media con the American public is to conflate income taxes for the rich with income taxes for everyone else. And this is the crux of the con job.
"If so [he was wrong], why? If not [wrong], why not? Curious voters like me who are deciding who to vote for in Nov want to know."
Carmine A. DiFazio
++++++++++++++++++
Honesty apparently isn't a strong point, huh? No one believes for a second there is any doubt where your vote will fall.
The liberal polices is screwing America and Americans. When Obama and clan are booted and we remove the liberal regulations and stop their sick agenda, we'll see a recovery start. For anyone to think or say differently, you have no clue about business or what it takes to run a business for profit.
Is neither the libs or dems......is the career politicians that are screwing this country up, giving everything to PACs and lobbysits in a hope to get reelected to the gravy train.....there is only one way to straighten this country out...TERM LIMITS for ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS.......
Carmine said:
"Jeffery:
Your grasp of economics is weak and untrue. You're just quoting a sinking man's words.
Paul Krugman pushed keynesian economics in 2008-2010. All believe, as I've said, Keynes and Krugman's theories are now finally dead.
Do your own research and you'll know."
I say:
My own research shows me you are off your rocker, big time. Your opinion to me is the primary reason to run to other end of the room.
I am genuinely sorry, but your opinions to me are so pro corporation as to be dangerous to people who read your opinions. Your religious opinions are even worse.
God please open this mans eyes.
"Honesty apparently isn't a strong point, huh? No one believes for a second there is any doubt where your vote will fall." Cognastics
For me or President Obama?
Perhaps you would like to answer my questions instead of Jim Weber? Or you lacking the honesty you accuse others of.
Carmine A. DiFazio
The extreme right refuses to compromise, and as a result, little is getting done in Washington.
The House of Rep has NO intention of ever going along with what President Obama is trying to do...
Their main agenda, NO their only agenda, is to see President Obama not win re-election come November...
Despite a 24/7 attempt by the GOP to keep the economy in the crapper, which will hurt Obama's chances of re-election, the economy is slowly improving...
The Republicans have NO CLUE on how to jump start an economy & create jobs. They keep talking about the importance of tax breaks for the rich & corporate America, but that has already been tried and it was a dismal failure...
The George W Bush tax cuts for the rich that started in 2002 did not create jobs & corporate America is paying less in taxes now than at any time since the Eisenhower years.....yet we have 10-12 million Americans out of work or working at jobs that pay very little...
The election of Romney would be a return to the economic beliefs of George W Bush....
It didn't work when George was in office & it won't work now....
VOTE DEMOCRAT!
I repeat what I said earlier....
"The George W Bush tax cuts for the rich that started in 2002 did not create jobs & corporate America is paying less in taxes now than at any time since the Eisenhower years.....yet we have 10-12 million Americans out of work or working at jobs that pay very little...
The election of Romney would be a return to the economic beliefs of George W Bush....
It didn't work when George was in office & it won't work now....
**********************************************
I found it interesting that Clinton also said that the massive budget cuts that the GOP is demanding (not in defense spending however...) should not happen. Clinton says that budget cuts should take place after the economy gets better...
Did you miss that part TA? Apparently!!!
Walker survived his recall challenge by a good margin. That should say something about how people feel.
"I repeat what I said earlier...."
El Lobo
And I'll repeat what boftx posted and what I said here for 5 months. Walker defeats recall. Americans are fed up with greedy unions. Obama was too chicken to stop by in his criss crossing Wisconsin to stand in solidarity with his progressive union dems. Wisconsin will go GOP in Nov 2012, as will Nevada and NC and other swing states. And Obama will be one of his own unemployed statistics come Jan 2013.
Carmine A. DiFazio
"God please open this mans eyes." Jeffery
Woe to those with eyes but do not see and ears but do not hear.
Like you.
I have one thing to say to you: Wisconsin recall. GOP budget policies worked for the last 1 1/2 years [aka GOV'T AUSTERITY] and Dems there who didn't vote for Gov. Walker the first time around did the second. Just like I said they would.
Carmine A. DiFazio
When you Krugman keynesians get fed up of reading bogus dinosaur economics try reading:
"Austrian economists Ludwig von Mises (1881-1972) and Friedrich Hayek (1899-1992) eloquently advocated free markets devoid of state intervention."
Granted they are not as easy to understand as Krugman, but then the truth never is.
Carmine A. DiFazio
Cesar.......Very good letter.
YES, PRESIDENT OBAMA is fixing the republican mess
despite greedy, heartless republicans in the House
blocking and fighting him every step of the way.
The majority of Americans understsnd this and will
vote these republican fools OUT OF THE HOUSE IN
NOVEMBER.
These republican jerks are anti-average American
worker.
VOTE THESE STUPID TEABAGGERS OUT.
TEA....
Some say republicanism is a disease.
Some also say that republicanism is a mental
illness.
Some say.
Carmine.....
POLL TODAY......
Wisconsin voters back President Obama with a
HUGE 11 points over Willard Romney.
And Nevada will also stay BLUE.
We won't let Romney drag us back to that same
bush/cheney stupidity that DESTROYED OUR
ECONOMY.
WE'RE NOT STUPID!!!
"WE'RE NOT STUPID!!!" - teamster
You're right, Wisconsin voted to keep Gov. Walker in office. That would seem to indicate that overall the people there are fed up with public employee unions dictating how tax money is spent.
"Carmine.....
POLL TODAY......
Wisconsin voters back President Obama with a
HUGE 11 points over Willard Romney." Teamster
It was an exit poll. More Dem voters stayed to complete than Rep voters. In fact the initial results were 17 percent ahead. It went down. And will continue as Nov approaches.
Carmine A. DiFazio
"And Nevada will also stay BLUE." Teamster
BUT, will vote for Romney in Nov 2012. Mormons and Catholics, two of the largest voting blocks in Nevada, will vote for Romney.
Starting a war with Catholics in an election year is stupid. Catholics make up 27 percent of the electorate. The half that go to Church will get angry. And the other half that doesn't will too.
Go see a good movie. Forever Glory. Don't mess with Catholics. They do two things well. Vote and fight for religious freedom. Viva Christo Rey.
CarmineD
Carmine:
The Roman Catholic church does not consider Mormons to be Christians. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued a statement in 2001 that declared Mormon baptisms to be invalid Christian baptisms. The statement was written under the papacy of John Paul II and was signed by then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the current pope.
We don't need to start a war between the two of you, The catholics said they aren't Christian http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congre...
RESPONSE TO A 'DUBIUM'
on the validity of baptism conferred by
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,
called Mormons
Question: Wheter the baptism conferred by the community The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, called Mormons in the vernacular, is valid.
Response: Negative.
The Supreme Pontiff John Paul II, in the Audience granted to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect, approved the present Response, decided in the Sessione Ordinaria of this Congregation, and ordered it published.
From the Offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 5 June 2001.
+ Joseph Cardinal RATZINGER
Prefect
+ Tarcisio BERTONE, S.D.B.
Archbishop emeritus of Vercelli
Secretary
Now you have a true Christian in the White house, it would seem every Catholic should be voting for him if they don't want a non Christian in the White House.
Governor Walker should be ashamed being recalled and hauled before voters again. His victory was complex and illuminating. We are getting closer to your haves and have not society that you adore. Beware of that happening. Then the revolution will begin.
I will remind you all of your similar assurances with the trainwreck Sharron Wrong Angle. You are one for two now...
Carmine doesn't get it but I would be surprised if he did...
Contrary to what he believes, Nevada will stay blue in 2012. The Las Vegas area will vote strongly for Obama & the Reno area will go for Obama (by a small margin...) where as the 'cow counties' will support Romney.
It doesn't take a math whiz to add up those totals and see that Nevada will stay in the Obama column...
Many Catholics will not vote for Romney. They don't consider Romney to be a Christian and as a result, will vote for Obama or they will simply not vote at all...
Once you fall off of the "truth bus" which Carmine had done, the road to logic and critical thinking is hard to navigate........
That's why we consistently see dumb stuff coming from Carmine's keyboard....
"That's why we consistently see dumb stuff coming from Carmine's keyboard...." El Lobo
Only when I cut and paste your and Jeffery's commentary to respond to.
CarmineD
Jeffery;
Let me remind you that the two religions that bonded in solidarity against Prop 8 in Califiornia were Catholics and Mormons.
Let me also remind you that Mormons dovetail on the network of Catholic Charities to assist those in need in the US and globally both for financial and humanitarian needs.
Let me also remind you that the most recent Conference for the Common Good in Las Vegas had religious leaders from both the Mormon and Catholic communities and Churches prominently standing shoulder to shoulder.
Your mindset when it comes to Mormons and Catholics and their social and religious justice alliances are as antiquated as your economic views. In short, you are way behind the current religious events curve.
Finally, let me remind you that Mormons and Catholics may not share the same pews on Sundays but they do share the same political views the rest of days.
CarmineD
Jeffery:
You're zero for zero. Nothing risked nothing gained. All you can do is impugn others from the grandstands. You're afraid to get into the fray because you are gravely lacking.
CarmineD
Jeffery, you should be criticizing your hero President Obama for failing to campaign for the losing Dem Barrett and his big union interests. Like you, scared. Took the easy political pose: Do nothing. Now, Obama is supposed to go to Wisconsin and ask the Dems to give him their support in Nov 2012? Talk about stupid. If they do, support Obama, after he left them in the cold yesterday, their not only stupid but ignorant.
CarmineD
Even Bill Clinton is expressing differing opinions than Obama on politics. Having worked for Clinton, I guarantee you he would have been side by side by Barrett, win lose or draw. He had poltical guts. Obama's a political wimp.
CarmineD
In celebration of my 1,000th post a few days ago I thought I would offer up a gift that would have little if any disagreement. Here is a link to a series of photo's taken my yours truly (17 to be precise) at the Red Rock Canyon BLM s few weeks ago.
I have made it an even 48 x 10 inches should anyone want to print it can get a frame that will hold it. It is 26 MB large and I hope you all enjoy one thing on all political sides once every thousand times I post. http://jefffromvegas.smugmug.com/Nature/...
You can get it printed at various places, here is one: http://ezprints.com/Prints/panoramas/def... it would cost $16 plus whatever they charge for shipping.
God Bless all of you.
Hey guys,Didn't any of your mother's caution you to never argue about another person's religion,leave it alone.
Carmine said:
"Let me remind you that the two religions that bonded in solidarity against Prop 8 in Califiornia were Catholics and Mormons.
Let me also remind you that Mormons dovetail on the network of Catholic Charities to assist those in need in the US and globally both for financial and humanitarian needs.
Let me also remind you that the most recent Conference for the Common Good in Las Vegas had religious leaders from both the Mormon and Catholic communities and Churches prominently standing shoulder to shoulder.
Your mindset when it comes to Mormons and Catholics and their social and religious justice alliances are as antiquated as your economic views. In short, you are way behind the current religious events curve.
Finally, let me remind you that Mormons and Catholics may not share the same pews on Sundays but they do share the same political views the rest of days."
I ask:
So you, according to the Pope, Catholic theology, and Catholic law partner with heathens when it is politically expedient for you?
Or do you repudiate the Pope, who you, a few postings ago claimed to be carrier(s) of the Word of God as direct descendants of St Peter?
Just askin.
Sam. I hear you and will consider it dropped on my end. I will respond further to Carmine through a PM. I would do this more often with him but he has sort of rigid rules for responding to PM.
PS. I don't think Mormons are heathens, for the record.
Carmine......
The majority of Wisconsin voters love President
Obama and will vote to re-elect him, as will the
majority of Americans.
Greedy, heartless republicans will not be going
back to the White House.
We're not going back to those crazy republican
years.
We average Americans CAN NOT AFFORD MORE
REPUBLICAN GREED AND STUPIDITY.
You're on the wrong side of life, PERIOD.
FOUR MORE YEARS FOR PRESIDENT OBAMA!!!
And......
WE DEMOCRATS had a big win in Wisconsin yesterday.
WE TOOK BACK CONTROL OF THE STATE SENATE.
WOW!!!!!
Democrat Mark Miller is the new State Senate
Majority Leader.
No more union busting for Walker.
There's a new sheriff in town.
LIVE BETTER/WORK UNION!!!
Greedy, anti-union republicans are a cancer on
our middle class.
Young people better start thinking.
Without a union you will NEVER RETIRE.
You will work until you die.
Former President Clinton and President Obama are at odds on extension of the Bush2 tax cuts. Clinton is saying they should be extended in Jan 2013, and suggests doing so soon. President Obama says the tax cuts should not be extended. Who's right?
Dem Party leaders can't decide?
June is turning out to be a really bad month for Obama. What's next?
CarmineD
Teamster:
I don't doubt that Wisconsins, the badgers, love Obama. They voted for him in 2008.
At issue is why Obama didn't stop and campaign for Tom Barrett, when he criss crossed the State several times. I know why and said it here. Obama and the O team knew that Walker would defeat the recall and prevail. So Obama distanced himself from a political loss. Clinton would never have done that. Take the safe way out.
The issue is NOW, how does Obama come back and ask Wisconsins to vote for him in 2012. And if he has the chutzpah to do it, whether they will.
CarmineD
Carmine said:
"At issue is why Obama didn't stop and campaign for Tom Barrett, when he criss crossed the State several times. I know why and said it here. Obama and the O team knew that Walker would defeat the recall and prevail. So Obama distanced himself from a political loss. Clinton would never have done that. Take the safe way out.
The issue is NOW, how does Obama come back and ask Wisconsins to vote for him in 2012. And if he has the chutzpah to do it, whether they will."
I say:
One can always frame a debate anyway they want to. Obama had access to the best polling and had been documented by folks like Nate Silver (fivethirtyeight.com). Why is it so hard for you to comprehend that if the internals showed Obama coming to Wisconsin was going to be perceived as outsiders coming in -- and Fox and You BOTH would have used his visits as spears in Obama's political heart.
You abhor the man, this is true in nearly every post you make here. You talk about Keynes like he's the devil and you are a prophet.
If you are such a genius and have worked for 6 presidents, why are you sitting here crying "Henny Penny The Sky Is Falling" 20 times a day?
It likely has to do with your poor communication skills along with your unwillingness to compromise.
You are really infantile in many of your declarations, and mean spirited in many others. I have really tried to find a way to get through to your inner happiness, and all I find, every time, is a jackass.
"You are really infantile in many of your declarations, and mean spirited in many others. I have really tried to find a way to get through to your inner happiness, and all I find, every time, is a jackass." Jeffery
You know the saying: Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. You are an excellent example.
CarmineD
"Henny Penny The Sky Is Falling" 20 times a day?"
Jeffery
Exactly. Obama stayed away from Wisconsin Dems and unions when they needed him the most to boast their recall efforts. Why? Because he was chicken little.
CarmineD
Jeffery:
June is turning out to be a really bad month politically for Obama and his team. What's the next shoe to fall? And is it only one? Or more?
CarmineD