NO = These gop-re-baggers Want ALL Of The Credit For Themselves - They Create Problems And Blame Someone Else And Then SPIN And ACT As Though ONLY THEY Have The Solutions !!!! After All; They Have ALL Of The Answers - Dont THEY = Ha Haaa !!!!!!! CREEPS !!

Good evening MD/MI. You are so very right!

Hey Nan - Good Evening To You And Yours !!!! By The Way, I'M Left !!!! Ha haa !!!

OK! So am I!

I Knew That === Just Goofin' !!!! === Hope All Is Well At Your Home !!!!!

Seems that most Republicons are about as shameful, hypocritical and phoney as it gets in our society any more . . .

They will NEVER give our President the honor he is due.

OBAMA / BIDEN / AND A DEMOCRATIC MAJORITY IN 2012 !!

Howdeeee MD/MI and Nanette !

smiling thats why i use Correct now instead of right.

Get this: "The ultra-conservative Koch brothers, the Adelsons, along with other conservative millionaires and billionaires, are pledging $100 million to defeat President Obama."^{1 1"Koch Brothers, Allies Pledge $100 Million At Private Meeting To Beat Obama," The Huffington Post, February 3, 2012 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=270213&id=35398-1482986-RN1g3Ex&t=5}

^{We've already received 4 packets from 4 different repub/tparty organizations. That's big bucks. I really wish it was true that the George Soros fellow was a large contributor. How can we reach voters? What can we do to ensure a win for our President? I can't even get the right font size on this post, for crying out loud. Messed up my whole computer.}

Hey MsT - Ya Alrite ?? Looks Like You Are On Top Of Things !!!!!! Thats Good !!!!

Pilot = Yeah Thats Why I Use { RITE } Rather Than {right} !!!!!!

Howdy and good evening everyone! Pilot that is a good suggestion. Correct instead of right! Now if I can just remember to use it! LOL!

If your right correct you are left. Correct?

Correct! I think! LOL

Hey TM - Ya Doin Alrite Tonight ?? Hope So !!!!!

LOL . . . right . . . you are left !! hehehehe

Hey . . . did you hear that voting Republicon is easier than thinking ? . . . So THAT is why the KKK supports the Republicons ! Got it !

Of course the Repugs can't give President Obama credit for anything, and THEY WILL TRY TO MUCK IT UP. As far as these pea-brains are concerned, that was a challenge.

The chicken poop is running down Boehners leg!

the only credit the rhypocrites would ever give to prez obama , is that he destroyed america !!!! they know no other words !!! just look at the numbers !! buy american - like element electronics , which is the only tv mfg in usa !!!! boner says we could do better ?!?!?!? boner said " day 1 job 1 is jobs !!!!!!!!" maybe if republicons stop filibustering , we could get things done !!!! occupy the vote !! all elections matter !! dems outnumber other parties !!! we should never lose !! cafepressdotcom/the99percentstrong cafepressdotcom/rhypocrit

The chicken poop is running down Boehners leg!

guess then it turns into chicken salad for cantor.

Why would GOP give any credit to president Obama? GOP has being betting vs. the economy since day one in office.

By the way, Mitt Romney admits that the economy is improving, but he also said that president Obama makes it worse? If president Obama's policy make it worse, how does the economy improves. Mitt should tell American the true that GOP make it worse when GOP rejected the president's job bill that create 300K + jobs for American workers, don't you think?

Mitt Romney needs to stop lying about president Obama records, and GOP needs to start focusing their energy on helping American and not obstruction, which is not an idea or policy per se.

@Pilotshark,MD/MI

Yeah... is use correct also, don't want to accuse or be accused of being RIGHT.

Rethuglicans talk about all the jobs bills hung up in the Senate. What they don't say, is that all their JOBS BILLS include FIRING 250,000 Federal Employees. That will shoot the unemployment rate up around the country.

Hey DScully - Hope Your Doin' Alrite Tonight !!!!! Obama 2012 - NOV. !!!!!!

I think Willard Mitt Romney has emotional dyslexia and GOP puppetitus !

@DScully, MD/MI, Nanette, Pilotshark, Thankfulmom, xxxooo, Toybb, Brian, Chuck, earthgril, and all the fabulous liberal, progressive and center left bloggers on here . . . Keep On Posting and irritating the trolls and Fux Noise !!

@TMom

Oops.... I meant I use, not is use.

Anyway.... yes.... correct is left, but right is just wrong.

@Chuck,

GOP is pretending that they care about jobs just like they're pretending that they care about federal deficit.

GOP press to pass Bush tax cut for super rich like Mitt Romney by borrow China $700 billion dollars, so people like Mitt can create jobs for ordinary American. Do you see any jobs from Mitt when he only pay 13.9% tax rate. Right, he put all in his pocket and open 23 oversea accounts.

Mitt should say that when corporation make money, it goes to his pocket and oversea account.

MsT = LMFAO = You Have Got That Rite !!!!! Dont Foget GOMERITIS !!!!!!

@MsT

Which is why most of their candidates seemed to be brainless. Their voters don't want a brain, they just want idiotic right-wing talking points and blather... and they actually cheer when they hear it.

Hi All!

The r/tp's don't want *temporary* jobs so they won't pass Obama's job act.

But, when it comes to a couple thousand *temporary* jobs for Keystone....well that's okay.

Their minions only listen to the Kochroach puppets lies about the economic benefits.....some have personally invested in. They won't listen to the ramifications of why it is just *so damn bad* to let the pipeline go through.

I'm hoping that Obama continues to say "No".

Hey Kathe ! You are certainly on point !

Hey Kathe = All Is Well - I hope !!!! Yep; They Sure Are A Crazed Bunch Of GOMERS !!!! And Did You Hear Yogi-Boner - It Seems That He Has Just Heard That The American People Are Asking About JOBS !!!!! ????????

Good evening kathe!

@MD/MI

Hangin in there. How about you? Will definitely vote straight Demo ticket.

@MsT

Will do! Haven't seen a troll yet tonight.

@DScully, never fear the trolls are here. Just keep reading and you will easily find them.

@DScully

You are correct! The supporters of Ron Paul keep clapping and gafawing when he proclaims that he will repeal the Patriot Act - but the patriot act are the Bush tax cuts. Repeal would mean going back to the Clinton tax rates! But the supporters are so brainless they don't realise what they are applading about.

@kathe

So true.... if this bunch were in the Congress back in the 1920s and 30s, we wouldn't have the highway system or Hoover Dam. What a worthless bunch of @!$%#s in Congress.

@ DScully . . . we think this is a new re-regger on the blog about Ellen and JCP earlier ! ( and you are so correct about why their candidates are brainless ! )

It Aint So

If only Liberals practiced what they preach....

#5.1 - Fri Feb 3, 2012 3:39 PM PST

Hi Ethelouise

We definitely do have to get rid of Bush tax cuts, but I don't think they are part of Patriot Act.

The Patriot Act was passed to extend the President's ability to fight terrorism and involves lots of iffy things like reduced restrictions on law enforcement agencies' ability to search telephone, e-mail communications, medical, financial, and other records; expanded authority to regulate financial transactions, particularly those involving foreign individuals and entities; and broadened the discretion of law enforcement and immigration authorities in detaining and deporting immigrants suspected of terrorism-related acts, etc.

In fact, President Obama just signed a new extension of the Patriot act which gives the government the right to detain US citizens indefinitely. He included a letter with his signing stating that he would never use this ability... but of course that doesn't mean that a future GOP president won't if they get in. It's out-rageous, not good and even violates parts of our Constitutional rights.

: = )

@MsT

Hummm.... didn't see anything about Ellen or JCP. Don't worry... I don't fear trolls, just find them annoying.

to my liberal friends

regarding tonight's question. Most of us give Obama credit for some things. His constitutional duty is to be commander in chief and to be in charge of foreign policy. he has done an excellent job with foreign policy but to be fair i really do not know how much is him and how much is Hillary. She also has been a good Sec of State. On the military front he has been diligent in seeking out bad guys and dropping the dime. As far as the new military that he is building , smaller, swifter I'm not so sure of but again he does have a good Sec of defense. We do not agree with hardly any of his domestic performance as it is headed away from the direction we think is the most productive for job growth altho some of his incentive programs are good like the 100% write off on capital equipment that has had a positive though not huge success and that will lead to more permanent jobs. Keystone from the conservative side is not a job program even though like all building programs some jobs will be created. We view it as a national security issue in case the straight of Hormuz is shut down by crazy Iranians. i know this will not be enough for any of you but that's what we think of his tenure. In an election year not much will be said however we still want to beat him in the election so .

@TC

Well.... I'd say it's probably a combination of President Obama and Secretary Clinton, but his is the final word as Commander-in-Chief.

As for domestic policy and the direction the GOP think is most productive... aww yes.... tax cuts for the rich, deregulation of everything, etc. the same crap we've had in this country for over a decade now ala GW Shrub.

Where are all the jobs and the booming economy that created? We've looked everywhere, but we can't find it. Help us out here... oh yeah, it's over in China, India, Mexico, etc. What about right here in the good ole US of A?

Come on TC... you are smarter than the ordinary Conservative to actually believe this failed trickle down and other Repug crap. Or at least I thought so.

TC- you've spoken my thoughts. I give Obama an A on foreign policy. I applaud the Obama Doctrine (plug them before they harm us). He has migrated through some tricky situations. Hillary has done a good job.

On the economy, though- he has pulled out the tools that solve the economic woes a large percentage of the time. If our root cause was a lack of demand- then stimulating demand and addressing the supply side with the 100% write-offs is good policy. It's good policy anyway. As a note- I do get a kick out of libs when they applaud him for using supply side tools.

That said- the root cause here is the housing imbalance. So long as we have several million more houses on the market than is the norm, they act as an umbrella opened downward holding the entire economy back. This surplus prevents housing prices from increasing- thus keeping many people who are paying their mortgages underwater- and others into foreclosure. These folks can't re-finance because it is bad policy to lend someone more than the item is worth. Government policy allowing this still does not make it good practice. So long as a person is underwater, or even close to the tide mark- it is going to cause them not to spend on consumer items, autos, etc.

Doing a jobs bill and having the economy in some recovery isn't a bad thing, obviously- it just is going to take years and years for millions of houses to be moved off the market- and years and years of tide level people making payments for their mortgage to be on the equity side.

Obama, during his state of the union address- finally touched on one thing that will make a difference. High skill level immigration. Bring in up to 2 or 3 million highly educated, highly skilled immigrants. They will be employed at high salaries, pay Fed, state and local taxes at a high level, buy cars and appliances, be Doctors, scientists, engineers- and entrepreneurs creating jobs. Maybe the next Sun Microsystems, Google- etc. Now- that, if done, will address the root cause. I doubt it will be popular on here, though, because it really doesn't involve Governmental Spending. Once you have this housing bubble alleviated- the economy will pick up solid growth with lots of pent-up consumer demand. Then- at that time- look to do specific, make sense infrastructure improvements as desired.

Hi Friends,

We have Extream GOP and Tea Bager on this form BS. Please give them a short response, stop your bs and take a hike, we have enough.

President Obama has being very clear and persistence on the concept of team work at his State of the Union--such as a great team work when they got Bin Linden. In contract, GOP try to take credit for work that they did not do, and smear negative on media, instead of trying to work with president Obama. Obstruction is GOP purpose to unseat president's Obama.

President Obama policy has increased jobs growth over 22 months consecutively, in contract; we have over 22 months of GOP’S obstruction in Washington, such as rejecting president’s Obama jobs bill that could create 300K plus jobs for American workers. Mitt Romney should tell American peoples the “true” that GOP obstruction’s slow down U.S economy recovery. Mitt needs to stop lying on president Obama record throughout his vetting process.

Yep- If you like what you've got- stay the course. New jobs because of the spending plans, significant housing imbalances causing real issues with significant numbers of middle class people being near water level or underwater or in foreclosure.

The housing crisis was not of Obama's making and involved several things, not the least of which is a saturated market for housing. The boom created overpriced housing that is now underwater. That was the free enterprise system at work. In Chicago, for example, they were building condos next to railroad tracks and pricing them at 400K+. The whole thing was out of control. For thsoe free market enthusiasts, what happens when supply exceeds demand? Did Obama do that?

Taxes are a small part of the equation. Lowering them for the rich will do nothing to spur the economy. People create jobs only when they need jobs to be done. This economy has been brought down on the basis of paper transactions. The suggestion that the overwhelming number of rich people are in the business of running companies and looking for ways to create jobs is a gross myth. Rich people generally look for ways to make money. If they can do that without employees, all the better. Companies are constantll engaging in austerity programs run by consulting firms like McKinsy(sp) and associates. They want to eliminate as much expense as possible and labor is at the top of that list. They are also always looking for ways to automate.

Add to that the fact that jobs have been outsourced with little resistance from republicans or democrats and you begin to see a complex tale of a lack of vision.

In order to correct this problem, we will need a sense of nationalism.

What, you mean the loss of 1.2 million jobs last month. Sure, if you really want us to..

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/record-12-million-people-fall-out-labor-force-one-month-labor-force-participation-rate-tumbles-

Ed will never learn.

Will Republicans ever give President Obama the credit he deserves for the economy?

I think they already have.

Al is right about Obama not making the housing crisis. It was made by lots of people for lots of reasons.

What Obama has failed at is solving that problem. Newsflash- while more jobs is obviously a good thing, unless you're wiling to sit back and be extremely patient- such as years- like even a decade- job creation doesn't solve the situation with housing we have. It will continue to be a drag until solved. Obama is too involved in looking at each tree that he isn't seeing the forest.

Will Republicans ever give President Obama the credit he deserves for the economy?

HELL NO THEY WON'T!!!!

Want to know something else? I have moved past the point on giving less than a damn about IF and WHEN they are going to give President Obama credit for ANYTHING, for the GOP/TP has shown that they will sacrifice EVERYTHING and EVERYONE just to see to it that he fails.

MY JOB is to see to it that he succeeds...and that is by VOTING FOR HIM in 2012!!!!

Rusty

very well conceived and written comment. You obviously have studied economics not politics. There is so much misinformation being handed out like the post of AL which has nothing to do with what you and i wrote. A course in the business cycle ought to be mandatory before bestowing voting privileges on anybody. Presidents do not create market imbalances they are the natural progression of a bubble when the general public begins to use a existing opportunity like using appreciating housing as a ATM machine. Bubbles always burst and depending on the width depth and sector recovery will take more or less time accordingly. The construction industry was the engine for several years fueling the economy just like before it the automobile industry was the engine. You are exactly correct when you stated that something this big will take years. I remember the 60's the country vastly over built apartment building everywhere as financing was readily obtainable. Since there was not a big enough pool of renters many were foreclosed or if operating did so with minimal revenue. This caused a drop in value of apartment buildings. At the same time there was a sharp rise in housing prices and mortgage rates due to inflation. This created the business that i made my first real money in. Conversion of apartments into condos. This destroyed over time the excess apartment inventory and once the total inventory came into line with demand it was the end of the condo business. Too bad there is so little understanding of how things work among the progressives. They naively believe Pres like Bush cause downturns and Pres like obama can reverse them. The business cycle does both in the process of creative destruction. A so called jobs bill can't hurt but it is like we are in a small boat with a 4 foot wide hole in the bottom. A jobs bill is like using a tea cup to bail. It won't hurt a may help a little but until the big hole ( excess housing inventory) is absorbed we are still sinking. there are more negative things to be had by spending on a jobs bill that will have minimal value in relation to the big picture the potential unforeseen consequences are more off setting than the good it will due. It does not have a good cost benefit ratio another metric that those reading here will either not understand or misconstrue.

Thoughtful conservative. Folks on this site have no interest in hearing facts and when you ask them for facts they insult you.

Thoughtful Conservative:

Rusty did mention the housing issue,and many on the right throw that in when supposedly documenting Obama's failures. So, let's not get cute.

al

reading comprehension is a good thing. I gave rusty a big high five for his post. I know of no place in my post that i said he did not mention the house inventory imbalance. he is right on and correct in his analysis of the time it will take so i do not have a clue what you mean. his post and mine both pointed out that it was not Obama's fault. I do not understand your point. Do you think he did cause it and hence al and i both are wrong???Your previous post which i did not mention has some solid economic reality but seems to imply a distrust of the free market. The free market allocates resources better than any other method as it allocates them based on consumer dollar votes. It carries with it a natural tendency to create anomalies over time that the business cycle from time to time correct. The alternative is a command economy with bureaucrats making allocation choices and picking winners and losers. Sorry thats what I really do not trust. And if you saw me you would realize I am cute. Rusty's mention of Obama's failure to fix the housing issue is the flaw in his post It is beyond the reach of any President it will take the market to gradually absorb the surplus as you noted which caused the price downturn. That is evidenced by the Phillips curve.

Please be a little more detailed in your criticism of my original post because I see no conflict. Politically the right blames Obama for not fixing something that is out of his control and Obama acts as though policy will fix things and he can't use policy due to obstructionism. Both are economically untrue but they (right and left) both know that .

Al- I would be interested in hearing your plan to fix things. Others that I've been discussing this with have said education improvements, infrastructure bills, more regulations and tax hikes. Education is good- but a long term fix. Temporary jobs from infrastructure will work to solve a short term downturn. I'm not for sure what school one goes to to study regulation increases and tax hikes are a way out of a serious downturn- but there are many believers in that concept. Would be curious to hear a constructive plan from you.

Hi TC!

As you can see, this site gets *a lot* of these types of posts (a polite one) daily and it just adds discourse from the "right" (many from trolls) to a Liberal blog. It seems to be about the only "ammunition" they have. I hope that you get my post and think about it for future topics. Speak to them as you do us so that garbage arguments would be more the exception than the norm. <s>

Steve-2081387

Of course we will give him credit for the economy, thats why we will be voting against him.

• #5.22 - Sat Feb 4, 2012 8:40 AM PST

I consider you to be my mentor on the economics discussion. Hope you keep up with your patience.

I will be asking about some of the "tea cup" remedies that impact some decisions about resolving the debt and deficit that don't drive the economy. Some seem to serve only the grossly rich and does nothing to help the Nation as a whole or the economy. These seem more like a tanker load of obstructive "remedies" BS in addressing how we fix the debt and deficit. These were not organic, but manmade.

This is a chart which shows that TC is correct that Presidents don't have control over the economy.

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2011/09/04/opinion/04reich-graphic.html?ref=sunday

If you read it based on you bias about Obama....Ford and Reagan were responsible for the economic slumps during their terms.

Anybody notice that the Depression and Recession were coincidental with outrageous profits for the wealthy and that it was their actions that caused both downfalls? Those that work in the economy for *only* their best interests create crashes that the rest of us must pay for. Sweet. <sarc>

This time, I don't believe that they need or deserve tax cuts, but must be held responsible for their unscrupulous business practices. Pay our Treasury back and them some with a fair tax system so we can *start* to get out of this debt and defecit quagmire in maybe around 10 years! There's no quick fix for this folks.

KATHE

thanks for your good advice if I forget in the future I won't mind the occasional reminder. I'm a little confused by Al's objection it did not seem to make much sense to me his original post had some good stuff in it and i did not fault him for it. Oh well

some on my side confuse economics with objectivism which is a philosophy. When i see it i call them on it. I learned about objectivism when i read my second book ever the Fountain Head. the first was God and Man at Yale by William F Buckley. both were philosophical in nature not economic. Objecitvism as a philosophy can be meaningful for a single individual to live by it is not a economic reality for a government policy. in economics we call the it "the Fallacy of Composition. "Here is a simple explanation by economist Randall Wray that describes it better than i do. Some make this mistake on the Right and the left ignore the necessity of investment spending by investors.

SUMMARY: One of the most important concepts to be taught in economics is the notion of the fallacy of composition: what might be true for individuals is probably not true for society as a whole. The most common example is the paradox of thrift: while an individual can save more by reducing spending (on consumption), society can save more only by spending more (for example, on investment). Another useful and very topical example involves the federal government’s budget deficit. Politicians and the media often argue that the government must balance its books, just like a household. If a household were to continually spend more than its income, it would eventually face insolvency; it is thus claimed that government is in a similar situation. However, careful examination of macroeconomic relations will show that this analogy is incorrect, and that it would lead to improper budgetary policy. This example can drive home the fallacy of composition.

One of the most important concepts we teach in economics, and most importantly in macroeconomics, is the notion of the fallacy of composition.

Students and others who haven’t been exposed to macroeconomics naturally extrapolate from their own individual situation to society and the economy as a whole.

This often leads to the problem of the fallacy of composition. Of course, that isn’t just restricted to economics. While a few people could exit the doors of a crowded movie theatre, all of us could not.

The macroeconomics example of the fallacy of composition most often used is the paradox of thrift. Any individual can increase her saving by reducing her spending—on consumption goods. So long as her decision does not affect her income—and there is no reason to assume that it would—she ends up with less consumption and more saving. (note good for her only)

The example I always use involves Mary who usually eats a hamburger at Macdonald’s every day. She decides to forego one hamburger per week, to accumulate savings. Of course, so long as she sticks to her plan, she will add to her savings (and financial wealth) every week.

The question is this: what if everyone did the same thing as Mary—would the reduction of the consumption of hamburgers raise aggregate (national) saving (and financial wealth)?

The answer is that it will not. Why not? Because Macdonald’s will not sell as many hamburgers, it will begin to lay-off workers and reduce its orders for bread, meat, catsup, pickles, and so on.

All those workers who lose their jobs will have lower incomes, and will have to reduce their own saving. You can use the notion of the multiplier to show that this process comes to a stop when the lower saving by all those who lost their jobs equals the higher saving of all those who cut their hamburger consumption. At the aggregate level, there is no accumulation of savings (financial wealth).

Of course that is a simple and even silly example. But the underlying explanation is that when we look at the individual’s increase of saving, we can safely ignore any macro effects because they are so small that they have only an infinitely small impact on the economy as a whole.

But if everyone tries to increase saving, we cannot ignore the effects of lower spending on the economy as a whole. That is the point that has to be driven home.

We can then again return to the notion of the multiplier, and show that the way to increase aggregate saving is by increasing spending, specifically, nonconsumption spending—spending on investment, , or spending by foreigners on our exports.

kathe steve

the national anthem is being sung so this is short. The REAL reason that workers got better pay until the 70's had nothing to do with business practices or bad or good managers. It was due only to one thing and one thing only it was the rapid and Deep increase in worker productivity during that period. When output per work goes up business do not lose by giving wage increases. A manufacturing economy during that time and the productivity were the reason. Starting about 75 the manufacturing economy gradually changed to a construction economy. It is very hard for increases in productivity to occur in that and the also building up of the service economy. a plumber can run only so much pipe ,electricians We are transitioning from a service economy to a high tech economy and to ever get pay increase it will require the obtaining of such skill by the labor force. When American workers stop waiting for a job to come back that is not coming back and start training for the next big thing this will turn around like a fighter jet. The Pres know this and is talking about it on the stump. kickoff gotta go.

Cynical and I were talking about this the other day.

I feel that when the last big things came, they immediately left for the Far East. The next "big" thing came using the hardware and required very few jobs (i.e. Facebook, Twitter, My Space, Google, etc.)

What is the next big thing? How can a person prepare other than a solid foundation in the basics and having instilled in them a never ending hunger for knowledge through out life in elem/high school? How do we prevent the next big thing from going overseas?

We still have many people who love working with their hands and are being thrown out in the cold because of the outsourcing. It appears that there is a plan to rid the Country of non-citizens so that out of work citizens get to pick produce, manicure yards and/or risk being bilked by a "right to work" hard a$$. BTW, RTW is killing State budgets and the corporations that take advantage of a State's "good will" to lower or terminate taxes usually end up packing up and leaving the Country anyway since they were able to save enough to do it.

Not everyone wants to be a millionare or even close to that. Just good wages for a good day's work, raise a family and good schools, have a dog, picket fence......you know. Why is it concidered an "accomodation" to put these people to work and not the norm anymore? Overseas! is the mantra of the "job creators". I believe a lot of the wealthy have lost their humanity for one more buck they really don't *need*.

You speak of business cycles. Why does it seem that depression and recession, at it's root, is just about plain old irresponsibility and greed? These are human factors that I think the economic literature neglects to address or even acknowledge.

I don't know how to explain these massive unstoppable forces of history in a manner that doesn't sound cold. the truth is time marches on. there are billions of people on the earth and some of them are always trying to invent something new, a new process, a new product, a new technology and it is going to be adopted and change our life. Someone may be happy as a clam putting a door on a car in a production line and would like to do that without change for 40 years at a high rate of pay and then retire with a pension. Unfortunately forces beyond his or her control is going to change that job or eliminate it for something else. None of this is fair. My best friend is on his death bed with oral cancer and a lot of jerks I know are fine. To me this is unfair. It is human to look for someone to blame when the only thing to blame is that time moves on and pulls change with it. I find it useless to attach a value to a fact of life. On the economic front we are just going to have to live with change and that means that most of us are going to have to make learning a lifelong endeavor. It might mean having a job we don't like or prefer but are capable of doing. There is a thing in economic thought that is called Psychic Income. That is the difference in pay between doing a job you like instead of one that pays more but you don't like. the dollar difference is made up in Psychic income. People do not like change but I'm 70 and have a friend who HATES cell phones and refuses to learn the basic computer skills to open E-mail It is not that he is incapable of learning it is just that he doesn't like the way people seem to interact with their electronics. The world is not going to slow down or change because he is uncomfortable with new. I had another friend that was in the newspaper business. Up until the late 60s after an article was written it was converted into lead type and that is what printed the paper. It was quite a skill to know how to be a typesetter It paid really well and was kind of a prized job. It just does not exist anymore. It wasn't antibody's fault , no evil businessman sat up night trying how to figure out how to screw this guy. Time and technology just passed him by. For most of human history the majority of the population anywhere worked the farms which barely put out enough food to feed those on the farms. A little was left over to sell to the cities but about 90% of people right up to the industrial revolution were farmers. Famine was common. Many of our current residents came here from Ireland when the potato famine meant move or die. The only reason there is an America is that some Italians and Spanish wanted to find a quicker way to get to the east where they bought spices to make food taste better, Trade caused the need for transportation to evolve not bad men although some got rich from trade. There is a world of difference from a Bernie Madeoff who intentionally stole hard earned money from people and a business man who figures out how to make something using technology faster and better and sells it for a high price. Sooner or later others will see what he is doing, get in the business , do a better job , and put him out of business. This creative destruction is what moves us through time.

the fact is that equality of opportunity is the most we can hope for not equality of outcome. I just watched the Superbowl. The MVP got a free corvette the winners got $250,000 more than the losers. IS that FAIR? No but it is real. Think of how much productivity is being lost crying about how unfair life is and how mistreated we are all and how much of a victim we all are. If that effort was spent learning a new trade instead of looking for the boogy man it would greatly add to recovery. During my work career from time to time screw ups would occur causing a problem. The first thing everybody usually does is blame the problem on someone else or or start a witch hunt. Since i was usually the manager i would stop all such behavior. If the house is on fire knowing who left the stove on is a waste of time. Putting the fire out should be the point . I never fixed a problem in my life by assigning blame it is a useless endeavor. Just fix the problem and get on with it. If you can't find a job doing what you love or are trained to do then find one you don't love or retrain yourself. You have an economic obligation to yourself and sociiety to be productive and earn a living. I am afraid that some among us want a free ride rather that doing what i have recommended. i have had three totally separate and geographically different careers. one i just hated but was pretty good at it. If you really want to move forward the just do it. Do not wait on the government to do it for you it may be a long wait

By the way my use of the word YOU here is generic and is not aimed at anyone in particular and the same with the sentiment of the article,

Thanks, TC.

I agree, but I don't think that creative destruction means a new product replaces an old product and.....and.....and then send the jobs associated with making that product overseas. At least it sure didn't before.

The best answer for me then is encourage others and pray.

BTW, your Stupor Bowl analogy sucked (that's not even "real" world <s>), but the house fire one was great! LOL!

Thoughtful Conservative:

I was responding to this comment that you made:

" There is so much misinformation being handed out like the post of AL which has nothing to do with what you and i wrote"

Rusty/Thoughtful Conservative:

• As Gordon Gekko said in the movie Wall Street-" The point is, ladies and gentleman, that greed, for lack of a better word, is good. Greed is right, greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed, in all of its forms; greed for life, for money, for love, knowledge has marked the upward surge of mankind." The free market system, often driven by greed, has created much of the progress that we all enjoy. There is no question about that. So, I am not against the free market system.
• What I am for is an objective review of the free market system and its impact on society as a whole. The reality is that the free market system has not been equally available to everyone. It is a capitalist system and as such results in winners and losers. In order to be a capitalist, one has to have access to capital. Clearly, everyone does not have access to capital. So the suggestion that successful participation in all elements of capitalism is driven by some system of mertocracy simply isn't true.
• One of the central problems with capitalism is that the value of labor and capital do not even approach equivalency. Why is this important? After all, capitalists are the ones taking the risk and the free market will determine whether they succeed or fail. Right? But, what about the person that only has labor to offer? When that labor disappears, or empoloyees do not have the ability to maximize their return on it, fullparticipation in the free market is diminished.
• The other problem with capitalism is the fact that it does not require a sense of nationalism. In the 50's and 60's for example, teh US was facing far less competition and automation was in its early stages. Jobs were plentiful. High school graduates could find jobs relatively easily. Today, college graduates have a difficult time finding employment. What has happened. Corporations want maximum profit-that is why they are in business to return value to the shareholder. Understood. But that also means more automation and the moving of jobs to venues where labor is less expensive.
• So, today, a recent study showed that virtually one half of americans would be considereed in poverty. when you couple that with the fact that the lions share of the wealth in this country has moved to the top with substantially less moving to the middle and the bottom, we have an economic problem.
• Now, because of this, the government then needs to figure out how to deal with the poverty that exists. The free market system will not deal with that poverty. The only way to deal with it is to depend on the philanthropy of the rich, and to tax those making enormous amounts of money and provide government programs to the poor.
• The government, POTUS, or the Congress can only control the way that we deal with poverty as a result. They have little or no control over how the capitalism system works beyond taxation and some rudimentary regulations.

What would I do?

• Call together a meeting of the top union leaders and companies to discuss a plan to bring jobs back to america. This is going to require a tremendous sense of nationalism that may fly in the face of the free market system and union demands, but something has to be done. Absent that, we are subject to an ever increasing number of people who will be seeking government programs to survive.
• Call together a meeting of top university officials and corporate leaders to discuss how to lower the costs of education and to provide the types of education that will be meaningful for the future of this country. People are spending enormous amoounts of money on degrees that are essentially worthless, or have the value that a high school diploma had twenty or more years ago. With that would go a recalibration on the concept of work. Many of us feel that we must find our passion and that is the field that we should pursue. A noble objective for sure, but the world is different. My dadm for example, eas a bus driver for the majority of his working life. I guaranteee you that he did not grow up wanting to be a bus driver. He did it because it was a good paying job that allowed him to support his family. People need to understand that they may need to learn to do something that will put food on their tables as opposed to a song in their hearts. I am not suggesting that folks should not pursue their dreams, but if they do, and those dreams do not result in a regular paycheck, then they should not complain. This idea that we should love our work and have a deep passion about it is a wonderful and utopian idea, but it may not be relevant in some cases.
• Call together every cabinet member and proceed on a serious austerity program in every single department. Go over the budget line by line and cut unnecessary programs. Call for a joint meeting of meeting of congressional leaders and discuss the elimination of pork barrel projects for their states. I would also discuss the elimination of lobbyists-this is another example of the free market system not being free and providing access to the the few.
• Develop less paternalistic relationships with our allies and let them pull their own weight. If you want US troops in your country, pay for them or we leave-period. We have a sophisticated weaponry system that is superior to any in the world . The maintenance and utilization of that should be our priority with far less involvement in situations requiring boots on the ground.
• I would then ask for state, county and municipal governments to follow the federal lead and do the same.

That is where I would start and go from there.

AL

first I share your goals. However your post in the first part is an example of what i meant about lack of knowledge.I will respond to those items that are against economic knowledge. Your opinions are you own and unless they are based on a false premise I won't deal t\with them as you are entitled to your opinion just not your own facts. IT is true that at birth there is an unequal distribution of liquid capital. However that is only one kind of capital. entrepreneurial ability is also capital and if people have that they will soon have liquid capita. Most of the country's great fortunes have come from humble circumstances. Education is also capital just not liquid (money and credit ) capital. You seem to want equal outcomes and that is where we part company. I would argue that in any form of economic system there are not equal outcomes. In socialist or communist countries bureaucrats and party leaders live better than workers there has never in the history of the world where that has not been true.

Your second item is absolutely on point. We are in an economic transition like the industrial revolution. It means that jobs are evolving faster than our education I believe that the answer is community colleges that have the expertise to teach hi tech skills. Unfortunately there just are not many jobs for the population with minimal skills that today well system. There has been a false premise that started in the 60's with liberals insisting that everybody get a college education. The reason that college is so expensive is that the demand has outstripped the supply and the easy access to massive student loans made to young people that have no money go because it was the thing to do.. I was the first in my family to get a university degree but i encouraged my boys to learn a trade. My dad was a stone mason. What you propose is actually being done community colleges everywhere are meeting with business in the area to provide the necessary training.Both Bush and Obama supported this effort

Your third issue is just not true labor is capital. Just not liquid capital. The labor theory of value is the basic flaw in Marxist theory.. That theory suggest that the value of a product is that amount of labor used to produce. it. Therefore a computer chip that has the same amount of labor in its production that is involved in flipping a McDonald hamburger should sell for the same price. What is in fact the determiner of price is the interaction of supply and demand. It is the only pure allocator of resources as it insures that products will be produced in quantities and price demanded

The market is and always has been global. America exists because Spanish were looking for a cheap way to get spices for food. We were doing business with Germany during both world wars. Nationalism is not an economic system. It however a powerful force and just because you are using a skillet made in China does not mean you are not an American. Since supply is is created by demand Buy American campaigns will in fact help American business and create jobs.

Number four needs no comment it is perfect as is.

Number five is pretty much true of the Central Government. But most of the good work is done locally. I live near Joplin and can tell you with first hand experience that the fed's response was minor compared to what individual action produced. Church s came from Georgia my old college sent two bus loads of student to pick up debris.

the second half of your post are your remedies. That part is opinion and i respect totally your right to voice it . By the way I completely agree with the last three of your solutions. Clearly you have given this much thought. I try not to be and ideologue here but to give basic economic theory when i See it . I think that much of our differences are based on a misreading or misunderstanding of how things actually work. You seem to have a good grasp on much of it

Al- thank you for your thoughtful response. We'd all be better off with thinking occurring and just the usual blather that exists.

Just as TC stated- I think your last 3 items are on the mark as well. The one on cost of college- I don't know this for sure, but I would suspect that a large part of a University's budget is made up of professor's salaries, benefits, pensions, etc, plus lots of clerical, staff- same expenses. I understand Obama threatened to pull the plug on ones that couldn't contain costs- but with my experience on the business side- a huge and growing cost is most likely pension funding- what Corporate terms legacy costs. Corporate entities have pretty much addressed these issues- mostly through elimination of defined benefit plans. About the only place these plans are still thriving are governmental (including education). I'm not from Wisconsin, and haven't really studied the issues there, but suspect a major point of contention has been containment of benefits and pension costs.

On bring work to America- I say to, and not back, because many jobs start in Foreign countries. There are a lot of market forces that imply if you want to sell in Asia, you'd better build in Asia. Not doing so only allows others to take the market of billions of people. However- there is tremendous heat in doing just what you suggest. I read of a Company in the last week that made the decision to shutter a foreign plan and bring the work to Indiana. The Unions in the foreign country are currently protesting that company's ability to sell in that country. Reality shows it isn't so easy to dictate to the markets you sell into to.

Just as TC stated- I think your last 3 items are on the mark as well. The one on cost of college- I don't know this for sure, but I would suspect that a large part of a University's budget is made up of professor's salaries, benefits, pensions, etc, plus lots of clerical, staff- same expenses. I understand Obama threatened to pull the plug on ones that couldn't contain costs- but with my experience on the business side- a huge and growing cost is most likely pension funding- what Corporate terms legacy costs. Corporate entities have pretty much addressed these issues- mostly through elimination of defined benefit plans. About the only place these plans are still thriving are governmental (including education). I'm not from Wisconsin, and haven't really studied the issues there, but suspect a major point of contention has been containment of benefits and pension costs.

The costs of benefits and pensions is very high. My company, like a lot of others, used to provide a pension plan. I t stopped about ten years ago and moved to a cash balance plan. All new employees and those with less than ten years of service were put in the new plan. Cafeteria style benefits began many years ago with a variety of options and costs. Each year more of the costs were absorbed by employees. The costs of these programs is staggering. I believe tht Obama's healthcare package will ultimately move us towards lower costs by enhancing competition in the marketplace.

On bring work to America- I say to, and not back, because many jobs start in Foreign countries. There are a lot of market forces that imply if you want to sell in Asia, you'd better build in Asia. Not doing so only allows others to take the market of billions of people. However- there is tremendous heat in doing just what you suggest. I read of a Company in the last week that made the decision to shutter a foreign plan and bring the work to Indiana. The Unions in the foreign country are currently protesting that company's ability to sell in that country. Reality shows it isn't so easy to dictate to the markets you sell into to.

This is clearly a difficult problem. The free market system may resolve it, but we could end up being losers.

Hey Mitt!!!! You know you @!$%#ed up don't ya!!! (Menace to Society Quote)OBAMA 2012!!! Teabaggin CLOWNS!!!!

FeedTheUSA: Oh no Raygun did it! lol

@xxx ooo and Pilotshark

LOL... you 2 work great as a double act.

FYI: southwest airlines / careers has job open in Dallas, Rhode Island and Maryland and they'll be flying to Atlanta starting Feb 12th, so they will probably be hiring there as well. Check their website.

Democrats only please...

long beach Larry

very articulate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think the American people need to give the Republican party a strong message in 2012. I believe we need a two party system but the Republicans have acted so childish and turn so far right, they only belong to the extreme right which is a direction the majority of Americans do not want either. They need to be weakened so much that they learn a powerful message. Maybe they will return to the reasonable and respectable party they use to be. If they win big again, they will crush the American social safety nets like the far right want.

GENEVIEVEVA

you want to send a big message in 2012 i understand. But tell me why when the Republicans sent a big message in 2010 progressives did not get it and continued their patterns like it did not happen. Tell me why we should listen if there is a dem victory in 2012 when dems did not acknowledge the 2010 landslide?

Do I need to talk about needing a super majority to get anything passed that would make a difference? That rule happened during the Bush years and needs to be taken out of congress. So much is broken and should be fixed in congress alone. Your comment is meant to take this completely off topic and I am not going there.

gene = Ignore The Ignorant Ones !!!!!! For They Are NOT Intelligent Enuff To See Beyond Their LONG Pointed Noses !!!!!!! GOMERS They Are !!!!!

genevieveva

I don't blame you for not engaging my comment which was on subjuct that you brought up. Bush had nothing to do with senate rules they were passed by the Senate which make it's rules.

In 1975, the Democratic Senate majority, having achieved a net gain of four seats in the 1974 Senate elections to a strength of 61 (with an additional Independent caucusing with them for a total of 62), reduced the necessary supermajority to three-fifths (60 out of 100).^[9] However, as a compromise to those who were against the revision, the new rule also changed the requirement for determining the number of votes needed for a cloture motion's passage from those Senators "present and voting" to those Senators "duly chosen and sworn".

first I share your goals. However your post in the first part is an example of what i meant about lack of knowledge.I will respond to those items that are against economic knowledge. Your opinions are you own and unless they are based on a false premise I won't deal t\with them as you are entitled to your opinion just not your own facts. IT is true that at birth there is an unequal distribution of liquid capital. However that is only one kind of capital. entrepreneurial ability is also capital and if people have that they will soon have liquid capita. Most of the country's great fortunes have come from humble circumstances. Education is also capital just not liquid (money and credit ) capital. You seem to want equal outcomes and that is where we part company. I would argue that in any form of economic system there are not equal outcomes. In socialist or communist countries bureaucrats and party leaders live better than workers there has never in the history of the world where that has not been true.

No. I am not sugesting equal outcomes, I am suggesting equal access. Yes, those with entrepreneurial skills are often able to overcome an innitial lack of capital. But, most people are not entrepreneurial. I would agree with you that in most economic system there are no equal outcomes. That can be because of a variety of factors like skill, knowledge, intelligence, ambition ad infintem. Understood. Everyone is not going to succeed. But, in a great country like america, one of our goals should be to have those numbers at the absolute minimum. However, I think that we would be remiss if we did not acknowledge that the history of our country includes gross examples of certain people being locked out of the economic system for an overwhelming portion of the history of this country. That is why I think that it is imperative that we do whatever we can to improve everyone's opportunities, and hopefully that will improve outcomes.

Your second item is absolutely on point. We are in an economic transition like the industrial revolution. It means that jobs are evolving faster than our education I believe that the answer is community colleges that have the expertise to teach hi tech skills. Unfortunately there just are not many jobs for the population with minimal skills that today well system. There has been a false premise that started in the 60's with liberals insisting that everybody get a college education. The reason that college is so expensive is that the demand has outstripped the supply and the easy access to massive student loans made to young people that have no money go because it was the thing to do.. I was the first in my family to get a university degree but i encouraged my boys to learn a trade. My dad was a stone mason. What you propose is actually being done community colleges everywhere are meeting with business in the area to provide the necessary training.Both Bush and Obama supported this effort

Well, here again, I am not sure that it was just liberals suggesting that everyone get a college education. I know that the black community in those days was always told that they simply were not qualified for certain positions because of a lack of education, even when that was not true. Once the Civil Rights Act of 1964 went into effect, blacks started to attend majority universities in higher numbers across the country in hopes of maximizing their potential in parts of a labor market that had been denied them in the past. Add to that the fact that statistics still show that those with college degrees earn substantially more on on average than those without them, and also enjoy much lower unemeployment rates, then logic would dictate that a degree is absolutely necessary. Admittedly, a part of the problem is the proliferation of degrees. As a student of economics I am sure you understand the implications of supply and demand. But, that being said, we certainly do not want to undereducate our populace, we just need to direct them towards more fruitful paths.

I think that as we move forward, there will have to be discussions among the educational leaders in society about the distinction between knowledge for the sake of knowledge and knowledge for the sake of utility. In my opinion, all of the broad liberal education ought to occur at the high school level, with college much more focused and directed toward a future career. For example, someone who wants to be a lawyer could start taking law courses in undergrad with the idea that Law School might then only require two years instead of three. That is just an example, but we really need to think out of the box. By the way, I agree on the junior colleges. The enrollment in junior and community colleges is off the charts for a variety of reasons, but they are stepping up to the plate.

Your third issue is just not true labor is capital. Just not liquid capital. The labor theory of value is the basic flaw in Marxist theory.. That theory suggest that the value of a product is that amount of labor used to produce. it. Therefore a computer chip that has the same amount of labor in its production that is involved in flipping a McDonald hamburger should sell for the same price. What is in fact the determiner of price is the interaction of supply and demand. It is the only pure allocator of resources as it insures that products will be produced in quantities and price demanded

Actually, Marx's Surplus Value Theory suggests that when workers produce products, the market value of those products when sold far exceeds the cost of their labor and the raw materials. This means that the worker participates only fractionally in the profit after sale. So, if Bob Jones makes $100 a day, and he makes ten items a day that will be sold for $100 each, the surplus value is the difference between the thousand dollars that the company will make in the marketplace minus the workers $100 and the cost of materials. Return on capital and return on labor are significantly different in that model.

Now, I recognize that companies provide more than salaries and have expenses beyond labor and raw materials, but, unless there is a collective bargaining agreement, labor does not have the value that capital has. Here is the difference in my mind. Employees are fungible and replaceable. Capital is not. In other words, my labor is valued only if someone with capital values it. Capital has intrinsic value and does not require the value of workers for it to have value. Built in inequality. Now, that may just be the way that it is. But, it certainly does not suggest equaltiy in an economic system. It is kind of like height being an advantage in basketball. A 7 footer has to be less exceptional than soemone who is 5-11. I am just suggesting that we understand the system for what it is. Money begets money.

The market is and always has been global. America exists because Spanish were looking for a cheap way to get spices for food. We were doing business with Germany during both world wars. Nationalism is not an economic system. It however a powerful force and just because you are using a skillet made in China does not mean you are not an American. Since supply is is created by demand Buy American campaigns will in fact help American business and create jobs.

No question. Clearly,many american companies enjoy significant profits from sales in foreign countries. So, this is a tricky one. But, the loss of manufacturing has been significant here and essentially turned our country into a service industry of consumers.

Number four needs no comment it is perfect as is.

Number five is pretty much true of the Central Government. But most of the good work is done locally. I live near Joplin and can tell you with first hand experience that the fed's response was minor compared to what individual action produced. Church s came from Georgia my old college sent two bus loads of student to pick up debris.

I think that you are correct in terms of disaster relief. Although some efforts do require the expertise of the fed as well as their massive resources. But, americans do repsond to tragedies and provide a significant amount of help. I was referring more to the day to day problems of people stuck in poverty. That number is increasing. Couple that with an ever growing number of baby boomer retirees and teh majority of our people will not be producing anything.

the second half of your post are your remedies. That part is opinion and i respect totally your right to voice it . By the way I completely agree with the last three of your solutions. Clearly you have given this much thought. I try not to be and ideologue here but to give basic economic theory when i See it . I think that much of our differences are based on a misreading or misunderstanding of how things actually work. You seem to have a good grasp on much of it

I think that I have a good grasp on all of it, we just have come to different conclusions on some things. I guess the original point for me was that the POTUS had nothing to do with the collapseof the housing market anymore than the POTUS at the time had anything to do with the collapse of the dot coms. But, we all put a tremendous amount of emphasis on the POTUS almost as if he is king. He isn't. He has clearly definied powers and limitations. He certainly can use the bully pulpit to get americans behind his efforts, but a lot of what happens in the economy is beyond his control. Having said that, I think that Obama's efforts with the stimulus did stop the bloodletting that occurred at the end of the Bush administration and actually started to move the needle back in the right direction.

your last paragraph. You seem to understand the limited power of the Prez in these matters. i wonder why so many think otherwise. Are people so uneducated as to the various roles of gov or is it just hype???? The stimulus bill helped but it would have helped more if there were really shovel ready projects. Never the less an injection of funds into the economy does and did have stimulative effect.

Regarding the surplus value theory it completely ignores the value of utility. I believe that only untrained labor is fungible. What is not is hi tech trained labor and that is what is holding us back. I lived in Germany and the social imperative for a young German was not to go to college to learn about 15th century rug making but to learn solid and up to date mechanical skills. i would argue that such skill are not fungible and in the market place have a solid utilitarian value without union help. Programs aimed at educating towards an economically desired skill is the best road out of poverty there is. Investment in human capital by business is probably more valuable than investment in plant and equipment or at least as valuable.

your last paragraph. You seem to understand the limited power of the Prez in these matters. i wonder why so many think otherwise. Are people so uneducated as to the various roles of gov or is it just hype????

The POTUS is certainly a lightening rod for issues as he is also th eleader of his particular party. But, that has nothing to do with absolute power. What is always fascinating to me ie how much emphasis is placed on the POTUS coming up with proposals for law. That is clearly the purview of the legislative branch, but many ignore that inconvenient fact when they are stating their opposition to a particular president.Don't get me wrong, I think the POTUS ought to lead. But, we really need to be more clear on how much absolute authority he actually has. The Constitution was constructed in that way for a reason. We just get all caught up in the hype of the campaigns and personalites.

The stimulus bill helped but it would have helped more if there were really shovel ready projects. Never the less an injection of funds into the economy does and did have stimulative effect.

Agreed.

Regarding the surplus value theory it completely ignores the value of utility. I believe that only untrained labor is fungible. What is not is hi tech trained labor and that is what is holding us back. I lived in Germany and the social imperative for a young German was not to go to college to learn about 15th century rug making but to learn solid and up to date mechanical skills. i would argue that such skill are not fungible and in the market place have a solid utilitarian value without union help. Programs aimed at educating towards an economically desired skill is the best road out of poverty there is. Investment in human capital by business is probably more valuable than investment in plant and equipment or at least as valuable.

I agree with your point on skilled labor and should have made that distinction. Investment in human capital by business is greater than total dollars spent than it is for any other aspect of the business. No question. But, I was referencing an individual's value of their labor as opposed to an individual's value of their capital. The reality is that the value of labor, like everything else, is determined by supply and demand. Capital, less so, but certainly inflation can decrease its value as well.

It nice to debate with someone who has actual ideas based on an understanding of the way things work. thanks for making me think.

Good discussion.

I think they are cutting their own throats.

Yes, they are Dibblers.

U R Spot On. And I think they brought their own knives. Sharp & Ready. Every time thy speaker inna mica, Ouch!

A lot of that going around these days Thankful . . . cutting off their noses to spite their faces . . . pretty ignorant !

Hey Phyllis ! Good to see you here !

Hey ladies, Phyllis, and MsT......can't trust them except for one thing. Bomb Obama with insults. That is all they know.

Indeed Thankful . . . Indeed . . .and the most incredible thing is that President Obama and the First Lady Michelle stay above the scummy fray of Republicon ignorance and weak minded comments with such grace and dignity ! I love them both and their beautiful family !

I love them too MsT. Grace returned to the White House when they moved in!

Slowest form of suicide... Analogous to young teens cutting themselves because they need to feel SOMETHING...

Bush and Cheney made the rope...and if you give someone enough rope.....

Good evening David!

What a GREAT way to put that Nanette !

Amazing Grace returned to the White House when the Obama family moved in !!

@Thankful Mom

Yes you are correct! They are cutting each others throats with Citizens United money - they did this to themselves just like the 22nd admendent. This demonstrates the lack of thought that goes into each manipulation.

@Phyllis

Where are you been, haven't seen you for weeks, maybe months. Welcome back and good to see you again.

Bon soir, Nanette... Been busy elsewhere, but back now...

It's been a tough night... Went deep into emotional territory with post#19 under the Million Moms vs. Ellen story...

Wait until you see what I have planned for Feb. 14th... Poetry is the language of romance, after all...

Hmmm...

Just went to check, and somehow the post went to #20. Go figure...

.

So, I decided 2 stay away until I paid my dues but, I' Back 4 Sweet revenge! Hello!!!

Hello, Phyllis...

Trolls love to make people get angry and lose their tempers. They figure the rules don't apply to them, because they could care less if they get banned,,, They think they can always re-register with a new name, while those who take this blog seriously have too much integrity...

If you find yourself getting angry at a troll, just sit back, take a few deep breaths, click on the little exclamation mark at the end of one of their posts, and put that troll on 'ignore'... Trolls have the right to say what they want to, but you have the right not to listen...

Nothing bugs them more than being 'ignored'...

I wish he would Sen-3132419 But he is doesn't like to blow his horn, he is well mannered and a gentlemen. He will let us do it for him!

Dear GOP Politicians,

Do you know where are the jobs? It in Mitt Romney's pocket and his Swiss Bank Account.

When you borrow China $700 billion dollars to pay for super rich tax cut like Mitt Romney, you should come up with your own answer, because it's not working as you claimed it would.

Please come up with reality ideas to help American people, not obstruction.

That's it too, xxx!

Obama won't....he's a gentleman with class....and still the r/tp's say he brags.

When OBL got off'd, Faux kept saying he was running victory laps....nothing could be farther from the truth. He said the Seals did it....our men in uniform....that's humility for a job well done that he was in command of. That's what great Generals do to. <s>

This economy will get even better under Obama. The wealthy don't need tax cuts.....they need to pay their fair share and let's get some infrastructer fixed too. Let's try to expedite this recovery!

@Sen and xxx ooo and kathe

President Obama did mention a number of his accomplishments during the State of the Union, of course not taking the credit personally for himself but giving it to the Seal team and to GM, etc. But of course, he was a primary player in all of those decisions. He's just so modest and lacking in boisterousness.

But as an aside note.... don't you think Arizona needs to get off it's butt and start recall petitions for that WITCH in the Governor's office? WHAT A HAG!

@tamjo

yeah... when will they kiss his feet? Of course, when this is all over, they will be kissing his @ss.

By the way, I gave you a "no value" rating.

"Ignorance is an evil weed, which Republicans may cultivate among their dupes, but which no democracy can afford among its citizens."

Lord William Beveridge

for the record here is Obama on the night we got OBL in his speech to the country

And so shortly after taking office, I directed Leon Panetta, the director of the CIA, to make the killing or capture of bin Laden the top priority of our war against al Qaeda, even as we continued our broader efforts to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat his network.

Then, last August, after years of painstaking work by our intelligence community, I was briefed on a possible lead to bin Laden. It was far from certain, and it took many months to run this thread to ground. I met repeatedly with my national security team as we developed more information about the possibility that we had located bin Laden hiding within a compound deep inside of Pakistan. And finally, last week, I determined that we had enough intelligence to take action, and authorized an operation to get Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice.

Today, at my direction, the United States launched a targeted operation against that compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. A small team of Americans carried out the operation with extraordinary courage and capability. No Americans were harmed. They took care to avoid civilian casualties. After a firefight, they killed Osama bin Laden and took custody of his body.

For over two decades, bin Laden has been al Qaeda's leader and symbol, and has continued to plot attacks against our country and our friends and allies. The death of bin Laden marks the most significant achievement to date in our nation's effort to defeat al Qaeda.

Yet his death does not mark the end of our effort. There's no doubt that al Qaeda will continue to pursue attacks against us. We must -- and we will -- remain vigilant at home and abroad.

As we do, we must also reaffirm that the United States is not -- and never will be -- at war with Islam. I've made clear, just as President Bush did shortly after 9/11, that our war is not against Islam. Bin Laden was not a Muslim leader; he was a mass murderer of Muslims. Indeed, al Qaeda has slaughtered scores of Muslims in many countries, including our own. So his demise should be welcomed by all who believe in peace and human dignity.

Over the years, I've repeatedly made clear that we would take action within Pakistan if we knew where bin Laden was. That is what we've done. But it's important to note that our counterterrorism cooperation with Pakistan helped lead us to bin Laden and the compound where he was hiding. Indeed, bin Laden had declared war against Pakistan as well, and ordered attacks against the Pakistani people.

Tonight, I called President Zardari, and my team has also spoken with their Pakistani counterparts. They agree that this is a good and historic day for both of our nations. And going forward, it is essential that Pakistan continue to join us in the fight against al Qaeda and its affiliates.

You mean Hag Brewer!

Maybe if the traitor teabaggers had helped him he would be saying 'we' but they were content to be the party of 'no' and now they're paying the price for it. As they should be.

And if I took a drink every time BoneHead said 'We will create jobs in the house' I'd be a raging alcoholic. And with no jobs.

john in tex

may be boehner is using we in hope he will get some dem help otherwise he would have used the word I. Just following your own logic.

A record of number of filibusters proves you wrong once again. How many times was the President criticized for trying to compromise with the traitor teabaggers in which he got nothing in return? And how many jobs has BoneHead created with all those promises? Like I said, you reap what you sow, welcome to last place this november teabaggers.

wanna bet $10,000.00 ? lol

Show me the money

Hi TC!

I <wink> just don't make the same connection you do about Obama taking credit. It's a report to the American people, nothing more.

Not like he jumped on a carrier to make a big deal about OBL's demise....which hadn't happened.

Obama has *many* time to make a point of deflecting his part and give credit to the Intelligence and Military that did the ground work and carried out the mission's purpose.

Gee....even my Dad clapped and said "Great job, Mr. President!" He's a Conservative and can't stand what our President does otherwise, but sees the humility in Obama about that victory for our Country under our Commander and Chief.

We all should be grateful for the Navy Seal Team 6. My Dad having been in the Navy as corpman with the Marines in Korea especially feel pride in that too, as Obama does.

I was devastated when we lost one of these brave, selfless members of Seal Team 6 when that plane was shot down over Africa(?) and there were no survivors.

This Seal gave his all and we should neve forget those Patriots that have that kind of love for Country.

"No one really knows why they are alive until they know what they'd die for." - Martin Luther King Jr.

tamjo:

Are you are multiple re-reg HDRK reincarnated for the 9th or 10th time?

BTW, the poll questions are just an opening to start the conversation. You should know that by now.

Kathe

Obama has a habit of using the I word to excess. No big deal but i was responding to someone who was gushing over all the praise for the seal team that he gave. the text of his speech does not bear that out. Somewhere tonight i mentioned several of his high points this was among them I don't credit him with the kill i credit him for not stopping it., He took a sizable political risk if he did nothing no one would have known and he had a 50 50 chance of failure which everybody would have known to his detriment. it was gutsy call for him politically. There is no doubt that he likes to use I a lot but it is not particular negative just shows he thinks a lot of himself as i am sure most politicians do.

tamjo,

your post 5.9-

lets talk about who is annointed-

W. bush was annointed president by the supreme court in 2000, and took away voter rights in dade country florida.

reagan is DEAD, yet i have never seen such hero-worship directed at anyone from any party. and he grew the size of gov't, he raised taxes at least 11 times to try to stop the impending deficits after his huge tax cuts, and he left the biggest deficit in history when he left office, just as W. bush did.

why do you all worship him so much when he DID NOT FULFILL the things he ran on to get into office? HE RAISED TAXES MANY TIMES. Barack Obama HAS NOT RAISED TAXES.

are you like eric cantor who cannot face the truth about his hero?

thoughtful conservative,

your post 5.8-

lets talk about who took credit for bin laden's death.

after President Obama announced that bin laden was dead, i have never seen so many repubs in su8ch a hurry to give credit to W. bush. this is just a short list of the people who came forward (MOSTLY ON FUX NEWS) to insist that W. bush was REALLY the one who took out bin laden.

donald rumsfeld-condi rice-dick cheeeeney-karl rove-andy card-dana perino. even the guy who was responsible for funding the taliban in the first place, ronald reagan, was given credit on fox news for the killing of bin laden.

if we are going to talk about 'CHEST THUMPING', i think we all need to go back to may 1, 2003, 3 months after W. bush invaded iraq, when he landed in a JET on the aircraft carrier, the uss Abraham Lincoln, with the huge MISSION ACCOMPLISHED sign (made by the white house). as we know, the iraqi war was FAR FROM OVER-at the time W. bush pulled this publicity STUNT, less than 150 people had been killed, and about 550 wounded.

he was thumping his chest over WHAT?

i understand it bothers you all that Barack Obama made the decision to get bin laden. he ramped up the hunt for bin laden immediately after he took office. ask yourself why it bothers you that Obama got bin laden and W. bush didn't.

the truth is, as we know, that W. bush himself said, "i am not that worried about bin laden. he is just one person in the war on terror. the soldiers at the tora bora mountains in afghanistan were pissed off when W. bush pulled them out of afghanistan to start the war in iraq. they had bin laden in their sites, and were basically told by W. bush, "we want saddam hussein instead for making a threat against my daddy".

Barack Obama ramped up the hunt for bin laden, because W. bush FAILED. now you all are pissed because he takes some credit for it.

compare the chest thumping of W. bush to President Obama.

the republicans are jealous of Obama's accomplishments in regard to defense, though that doesn't stop them from calling him an appeaser every chance they get. and where do you all get the "leading from behind"?

as Obama himself said, "ask bin laden (and all the others) if i am an appeaser".

Of course we will give him credit for the economy, thats why we will be voting against him.

@Steve, that is good, because the economy is getting better each month, and the stock market is up. So yes, I suppose you should vote against that, kind of Republican logic. If it is getting better, vote against it! People really don't need these jobs!

@XXX-000 5.1 & DScully 5.5 : I agree with you. Yes Arizona should start a recall.

Cat got your tongue?

Just in awe of Obama!

And Newt is taking credit for both Ronnie's accomplishments and Bill's accomplishments.

Of course Newt complains about the "nasty politics" and seems unaware that WAS HIS ACCOMPLISHMENT. He was the inventor and prime instructor in Nasty politics 101 and learn to speak like Newt.

Nasty Newt the Brute! Worked for Raygun the fruit!

He claims that if HE was in charge, they would be better. HE IS in charge of the HOUSE. Oh wait he is just the speaker. Hensarling and the TEA PARTY ROOKIES are in charge.

@Chuck

Believe it or not George W. Bush thought the same thing when he ran in 2000, that he could do a better job.

I guess that's why he destroyed the economy.

@feraltwinkie

Wait a minute... I thought Bonehead is in charge.... of the House.

WHERE ARE THE JOB MR BONEHEAD?

@Chuck and Ethelouise

Exactly!

This is and endless discussion. They stated out right what their agenda is. Why would they suddenly do an about face. Not going to happen.

@TMom

You got that one right...er, left? I mean correct!

Right => Right => Right = Left

Right on! Oh I me off!

@Linda

Oh I missed Martin's show... have to watch online. I love his phraseology.

Whose brain though? Abby Somebody? Abby Normal?

don't think that would even work, phyllis. there would have to be dem. brain donors. ha!

I'll keep mine.

Me too.

I am using mine, thanks.

Well, send them 2 Kansas. Let them join Dorothy, the Tin Man, the Lion & the ScareCrow. Maybe the Wizard of Oz can Wash their Brain. That should give them a couple sense that will last long enough 2 keep them from Mucking Up the PayRoll Tax Bill.

That is why he is bogging down the STOCK act. He doesn't want to have to disclose his investments.

Interesting. Is this factual? I wouldn't be surprised. I think that is the whole crux of the matter.

Boehner says "we can do better if the president would work with us..." HuH? The President bent over backwards to work with the cruds and they did nothing but say NO. Now the President is doing it on his own. WE Don't need repubs. They are obsolete!

@Nancebelle

What Bonehead meant of course was....

'We can do better (at stuffing our bank accounts), if the President would work with us.'

You have to understand the GOP code to interpret what they really mean... they speak in talking points which needs to be decoded.

I hope Cantor and Boehner lose THEIR jobs this year.

Ed needs to get something a little more expressive than just 'Yes' or "no'.

I like your definition of GOP.

@Xena

Yes... it's LONG OVER DUE for Bonehead and Can'tor to loose their jobs. I just wish we could deny them any nice government pension, since they don't mind cutting ordinary government workers' jobs, health benefits, pensions.

Highest level *to date*.....they never cease to amaze.

The r/tp's just need to get out of the way and let a *man* do his work.....and shut the hell up!

vote the republicans out of office in November vote them out

Sorry--too late for Bonehead. Repubs are obsolete! President does it on his own! Don't need any repubs. They have to GO!

@TMom

I have to agree with Bonehead. Yes... we could do better.... IF THE CONGRESS WASN'T FULL OF @!$%# REPUGS AND TEAPUGS!

NEWT IS IRRELEVANT!