Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

DEBT: Democrats taking country the wrong way

Letter by Craig Chilton, Bonney Lake on June 15, 2010 at 11:13 am with 110 Comments »
June 21, 2010 9:05 am

In 2004, Sen. Patty Murray campaigned on a slogan of “change.” She told us the country was headed in the wrong direction. In 2008, President Obama also used “change” in his campaign.

Their change ended up being massive spending, increased national debt and more big government. The national debt just passed the $13 trillion mark and has risen $2.4 trillion under Obama, an average of $4.9 billion per day. That’s almost three times the daily average of $1.7 billion under the Bush administration (Washington Times, 6-2).

Americans now believe by 60-65 percent that the country is headed in the wrong direction. Big-spending liberals like Sens. Murray, Reid, Durbin and Schumer along with Speaker Pelosi are taking us down a path that is unsustainable according to Fed Chairman Ben Bernake. I think it is time to show all of them the door before we end up bankrupt like Greece.

Leave a comment Comments → 110
  1. Roncella says:

    Right On Craig !!!!!

    Now President Obama wants another 50 million stimulus for cities !!! He still has not spent all the money from the other stimulus bills he received and now he wants more ????

    Craig, the way to start to correct all this spending, is to educate your friends and family and get them registered to Vote and help them anyway you can to change the direction the extreme left Radical Liberal/Progressives are taking America, as fast as they can…….

  2. FreeAmerica says:

    I’m with Roncella, educate voters.

    I told my son ( Iraq Veteran) that while I can’t fight on the front line I will never give up the fight for America.

  3. Sumner401 says:

    Yes lets educate the voters, only lets make sure they know the truth.
    75% of our current federal debt is due to republican spending, republican wars and republican tax cuts for the rich.
    Why would anyone armed with the truth vote for more republicans?

  4. Roncella says:

    Sum401, Your apparently not aware that your Hero President Obama has spent more and faster than all the Presidents from George Washington to George Bush.

    He’s asking for another 50 million for cities now, and he has not spent all the stimulus money from the other bills he forced through the Congress, before allowing the Congressmen to even read the bills.

  5. newscrap says:

    But Roncella, those tax cuts for the wealthy and the two wars WERE started under your hero, Shrub. They are still hurting our economy. The economy world wide is hurting, but somehow everything is Obama’s fault? I am no Obama fan, but come on, stop trying to be so simpistic and making everything the Democrats fault. Don’t you think there is enough blame for both parties?

  6. Sumner401 says:

    Roncella, the truth evades you, no surprise considering where you get your information.
    President Obama has NOT spent more as you falsely claim.
    Please if you care for your country you will make an honest effort to really educate yourself, and for you that means not, repeat NOT using the same biased source you have been blindly without question accepting as gospel.
    Please, the truth is right in front of you, all you have to do is look at it, which I know you won’t.

    But do me this one favor, research your lie and then retract it.

  7. madmike272 says:

    Ok sumner, you keep living in your utopia until obummer bankrupts this country. Come November, you will receive a rude awakening.

  8. Sumner401 says:

    madmike:
    Was their debt before 01/20/09, yes or no?
    What percentage of the current debt is carry over from the previous admin.?

  9. BigSwingingRichard says:

    Correction: Obama wants 50 BILLION, not 50 million to send to the states who are unable to control spending too. FYI

  10. Sumner401 says:

    Or they can’t keep up with the unfunded mandates handed down by the bush admin, along with being hit hard by falling revenues due the deregulation caused bush recession.
    It’s all in how you say it.
    That 50 billion can come out of the unspent stimulus money that seems to have you all up in arms.

  11. Obama needs to know if a tree falls in the woods will anyone care…..What an idiot…

  12. Sumner401 says:

    That doesn’t even make sense.

  13. Roncella says: “Craig, the way to start to correct all this spending, is to educate your friends and family and get them registered to Vote and help them anyway you can to change the direction the extreme left Radical Liberal/Progressives are taking America, as fast as they can.”

    And Craig, while your educating your family and friends, educate them about what happened with the Republicans in control, to include running the economy into the ground, started two wars costing trillions without funding them, cutting funding for veterans programs, legitimizing deficit spending and torture, deregulating or failing to enforce regulation of wall street, oil companies etc.

    The right wingers continue pointing their filthy fingers at others, but when it comes their turn.., Run for cover!

  14. Bravo sumner401 I rather see Obama spend the money in this country than the unjust war of Iraq

  15. C’mon Sumner, you aren’t that ignorant. What Reagan did was:
    Bust the unions deathold on everything
    Massive tax cuts to encourage spending and growth. That was the ticket. You must be thinking of the great depression, and “a chicken in every pot” type of government spending with the “new deal” that held this country down for many, many years. Obama and Reagan are diametrically opposed in their views. Government is not the solution, it is the problem. Reagan saved this nation, Obama is quickly destroying it. I have yet to have a single friend that voted for him say they are proud of their vote. Many successful, hard-working, contributing to this countries greatness people were sucked into his hype. I begged everyone of them before the election to study Obamas positions, the esteem he has placed on the principles of Marxism. His charisma won him the election. He had less experience doing anything than Sarah Palin, but somehow got a huge pass from the media on his utter lack of experience………The only good thing about his presidency is that it has awakened the sleeping emotions of Americans. Our very existence as a free, capitalist nation is being threatened. That is the silver lining of this puppet for a president. LMAO-Is it today or tomorrow he is now going to meet with the CEO of BP? “Make no mistake” & “Let me be clear”. Other than those catch phrases, he’s got nothing. Even his gesturing when he speaks now is completely forced and practiced. Probably has a mike in his ear with Rahm Emanuel telling him how to gesture….”lift your left hand a little like you are shaking hands with the camera-I said your left not my left” “okay, now the right, but not so high”

  16. Those who paint the gloomy picture of this country as being the fault of either GOP or Dems is just being emotional. Messes, mistakes and mayhem abound.

    That said, it was THIS president who promised he would be different. The UK Telegraph reports this morning that adoring British fans have now seen the light shone of this fellow. Support for him in the UK is seriously damaged.

    So much for him winning the hearts of “the world” which, imo, was a lousy and dangerous goal in the first place.

  17. Forgive the inexcusable grammar in my earlier post?

  18. Roncella says:

    T-Mell, Great Post, But when your trying to enlighten the likes of Sum401 and some other “head in the sand” liberals who post here its almost an impossible mission to accomplish..??!!

    Sum401, President Ronald Reagan was a great President. He helped Americans re-gain hope and confidence after Carter took the Country down. He established America as the World leader when he played the soviets like a fiddle.

    Sum401, Many are already predicting that Your Hero President Obama will go down in History as the worse president in the History of America, he is actually making Carter look good.

  19. donjames says:

    Sumner401 wrote:
    “75% of our current federal debt is due to republican spending, republican wars and republican tax cuts for the rich.”

    Bad enough that you continue to spew this crap, crafty, but then you go on to say
    “… the truth evades you, no surprise considering where you get your information.”
    “But do me this one favor, research your lie and then retract it.”
    “What percentage of the current debt is carry over from the previous admin.?
    Be honest now, it’s going to hurt and it will require you to admit to your errors.”

    Okay, genius, I’ll play. But first perhaps you could cite your sources. Or not.

    Playing your game, we could start by stating that over 50% of the Bush Administration’s debt was carried over from the Clinton Administration.

    When Bush was sworn in on January 20, 2001, the national debt was $5,727,776,738,304.64.
    When Bush left office on January 20, 2009, the national debt was $10,626,877,048,913.08.
    The growth in the national debt during his eight years in office: $4,899,100,310,608.44.

    Currently, it’s at $12,139,171,775,200.64………..an increase of $1,512,294,726,287.56 in less than one year.

    And don’t forget that spending is controlled by Congress, not the President. The largest increases in debt during Bush’s Presidency were the last two, when the Democrats controlled Congress.

    Year – Gross Debt in Billions – as % of GDP:
    2001 – 5,769.9 – 57.4

    2002 – 6,198.4 – 59.7

    2003 – 6,760.0 – 62.6

    2004 – 7,354.7 – 63.9

    2005 – 7,905.3 – 64.6

    2006 – 8,451.4 – 65.0

    2007 – 8,950.7 – 65.6

    2008 – 9,985.8 – 70.2

    By Contrast here are the projected debts:

    2009 (est.) – 12,867.5 – 90.4

    2010 (est.) – 14,456.3 – 98.1

    Insanely high.

    Please, Sumner, if you want to avoid (constantly) proving your ignorance, try choosing a subject where (non)supporting data are more obscure and harder to find.

    HTH

  20. The economy didn’t head south until after PLOsi and Reid took over the purse strings… even a multi-moniker poster could figure that out…

  21. hansgruber says:

    Good point T-Mell, all of my friends who voted for Obama are now saying they really make a mistake.

    jimm-good point, just look how much Congress has borrowed since Jan 2007
    Jan 4, 2007 $8.67 Trillion in Debt
    June 14, 2010 $13.043 Trillion in Debt

    $4.373 Trillion in 41 months! ($106 Billion a month)

    $2.417 Trillion in the last 17 months ($142 Billion a month/4.73 Billion a day)

    And Sumner401 says we haven’t spent enough?

  22. Sumner401 says:

    Facts always seem to elude those on the right.
    Your hero reagan was the biggest spender we had up until bush2.
    Neither cut taxes as they and you claim, look it up.
    They spent like drunken sailors because they both knew spending improves their buddies bottom line and if done right, they way reagan did it and the way Obama is trying to do, it improves the economy.
    The failure bush just redistributed the wealth to his oil buddies and it did nothing to help the nation.

    There are none so blind as those that refuse to see.

  23. Sumner401 says:

    “Reagan saved this nation”

    No he didn’t, he outspent every President before him.
    He ruined this nation, we have been on a down hill slide every since he took office.
    Conservatism is dangerous to the nation, it has in fact ruined it.
    History and the facts that you all refuse to see proves it.
    I would point it out but you all would just deny it, even though in your hearts you know it to be true.

  24. Roncella says:

    Sum401, Did you take a min and read the Post by Donjames 8:44am ????

    Where do you come up with your ideas and beliefs Sum401 ?? Are you listening to Bill Mahr, Keith Olbermann, Wolf Blitzer, the Ladies of the View, Jon Stewart, Soros, who are you listening to to get the mixed up crazy ideas you have ?????

  25. klthompson says:

    For all of you lefties the history of the US does not begin with 1960. If I remember correctly, since I was here, the Democrats got us in WW II, the Korean “police” action, Vietnam, and sundry other world problems. With very few exceptions the Congress of the US has been controlled by Democrats since 1932. They are the ones who actually appropriate the money. When we have a president dumb enough to ask for the moon the Dems provide. We now have a president who is well acquainted with Marxian doctrine and is totally lacking in common sense. Ask the Russians how well following Karl Marx turned out!

  26. Sumner401 says:

    “the US has been controlled by Democrats since 1932.”

    Thats very true, the reason is because the great depression (it was in all the papers) came about because of republican mismanagement of the nation, we managed to correct that, and prosper as a nation until, the 1980’s when conservatism began to take over. In 1996 Congress was given to the republicans again and in less than 10 years they once again drove the nation off the economic cliff and into a depression.

    The only hope we have to learn from these expensive lessens once and for all and never allow the conservatives/republicans to hold power again.
    To do so is just too dangerous and expensive.

    History, you can’t change the facts.

  27. Sumner401 says:

    “Did you take a min and read the Post by Donjames 8:44am ????”

    Yes I did, and a wonderful regurgitation of the GOP talking points that have no basis in reality or fact.
    And no I do not watch any news/opinion shows, they are worthless.
    I suggest you all turn them off, it will open your eyes.

  28. Sumner401 says:

    “When we have a president dumb enough to ask for the moon the Dems provide.”

    You mean like two wars on the credit card, and not on the budget until the Democrat enters office and starts telling the truth about spending?
    Or do you mean a 1 trillion dollar hand out to big pharma, on the credit card?
    Then again it could be the 10 trillion dollar tax cut for the rich, again on the credit card?
    Now, which of that spending from the dumb President (the worst in history without question) came from the Democrats?

  29. Don James:

    Thanks for the research.

    Using your figures on the national debt when GWB entered and left office, GWB increased the national debt by 86% over eight years, which averages 9.3% per year.

    Once again, using your figures on the national debt of: “Currently, it’s at $12,139,171,775,200.64………..an increase of $1,512,294,726,287.56 in less than one year.” However, if those figures are current, Obama has been in office for 1.5 years. Using 1.5 years and the increase you cited, Obama is on pace to increase the national debt by 9.46% per year.

    If your stats and my math is correct, it seems like that difference is splitting hairs to me, especially when much of Obama’s spending is directed at correcting a collapsing economy, something GWB did not have to contend with.

  30. Civics class 101, The pres. does not originate legislation, that would be 535+100 that agree at conference committee level, who have never been all from the same ‘party’….401…congress is the mutual entity that gives us nice sounding unfunded mandates that make the individual states have to jump hoops to stand in line for so-called “Federal” dollars of which congress was supposed to fix the value of…but sub-contracted that responsibility to the Non-federal Non-reserve circa 1913. A bill may be either signed, vetoed or sent back to committee by the pres. If the bill is signed by the pres. it can be overturned at several levels by the judicial branch, you see, 401, there are 3 distinct branches, not just a person or a party, and a good source for #’s is the CBO or GAO,and that,..401…stands for the congressional budget office and general accounting office as opposed to the daily kos, or the huff according to ‘ed’…

  31. klthompson says:

    If I were a Republican I could probably find a way to be offended. Since I am not a Republican I can concentrate on the historical roots of the current problems. Marxism was a bad idea in 1849 and remains so. Anyone who takes the time to read the “Manifesto of the Communist Party” cannot escape the parallels of current events.

  32. Two wars? Afg. is our response to Twin Towers. Iraq is due to the 2 dozen or so U.N. violations that the U.N. was too limp to enforce with anything other than non-binding resolutions and other meaningless WORDS. I personally do not care for the way these wars are being prosecuted (the inexperienced politicians vs. generals and admirals with knowledge of actual combat ) but when YOU,401, stop driving your personal vehicle and learn the actual functions of all 3 branches of government and understand that being “rich” does not mean someone who makes one dollar more than you and that money or “poverty” does not guarantee nor prohibit character then the discussion may approach a more appropriate altitude, thanks…

  33. Sumner401 says:

    “much of Obama’s spending is directed at correcting a collapsing economy, something GWB did not have to contend with.”

    Not only that but much of the debit attributed to President Obama is in fact from the failed bush administration, he kept much of his war spending off the books, it is now on the books.
    It’s the transparency thing the right keeps complaining about.
    Once again, ‘facts, you can’t change them’.

  34. donjames says:

    cirrus, the point of my post was not to defend any deficit spending.

    Considering that the national debt has increased under every Congress and President since JFK in 1962, an argument could at least be made for bipartisanship on this issue. Trouble is, democrats have pretty much completely controlled Congress during that period, including control of both houses for 19 consecutive years (out of 40, total) and 30.5 of 48 years. By comparison, Republicans controlled both houses for a total of 8 years (never more than 6 consecutive, once), and one house for 8 years – hardly dominating. As for the presidency, Republicans now have less than a seven year advantage in that category over the last 48 years.

    As deplorable as an 86% increase in eight years is, it does not compare to a nearly 50% increase in two years. And how do you extrapolate a 9.46 average from what has, so far, been closer to 22% per year?

  35. Sumner401 says:

    Bringing ‘fuzzy math’ to new heights and tossing in the standard personal attack proving you have nothing.
    You are correct that Congress signs the checks but they do it at the behest of the President, so you ‘logic’ is as twisted as your facts.

    Face the facts, the conservatives have done more spending and more damage to the nation than the Democrats have.
    In ore ways than spending.
    Deregulation has brought us to our knees yet you people still think it works.

  36. LuckyCharm says:

    lars, what we know now is that Iraq hid its non-WMD capability because of fear of Iran. It wanted to project a much more powerful image than it actually possessed. If the Bush administration had had the cunning, the tact, the diplomacy to actually sit down with Saddam and gain his trust, it just MIGHT have averted the loss of thousands of American lives.

    I will never forgive Bush for this. Some of my own friends died and were wounded over there, needlessly. Cowboy diplomacy has no place in our modern world.

  37. donjames said:

    “And how do you extrapolate a 9.46 average from what has, so far, been closer to 22% per year?” (Per cent increase in national debt under Obama on a yearly basis)

    I used your figures of a $10,626,877,048,913. national debt when Bush left office to what you stated the national debt is now, nearly 18 months later. Your figures were $12,139,171,775,200. for the present national debt. This increase of $1,512,294,726,287 over the 18 months of Obama comes out to circa 9.4% per year.

    I’m also interested in where you get 22%.

    However, some bad news.., The national debt is now over 13 trillion.http://www.usdebtclock.org/ Scary to watch.

  38. donjames says:

    “I’m also interested in where you get 22%.”

    Simple.

    National debt 2008 (last full year in office for Bush) = $9,985.8T – national debt for 2009 = $12,867.5T, for a year-over-year increase of approximately 29%. From $12,867.5T, the projected debt for 2010 is $14,456.3T, which is a year-over-year increase of approximately 12.5%, and a two year average of 20.5%. – far higher than, in fact double the year-over-year average of any Bush budget.

    And yes, my math was a bit off… though not nearly as much as yours, and the “current” deficit numbers I cited are actually a couple of months old (which is why I was off on the current 2010 total).

    hth

  39. Sumner401 says:

    Conservatism is what has damaged this country,
    The right owns 75% of our debit and they know it.
    The republicans are the biggest spenders.
    The republicans can only blame others.
    All of those are facts that can not be refuted.

  40. Sumner401 says:

    “national debt for 2009 = $12,867.5T, for a year-over-year increase of approximately 29%.”

    The year 2009 is under the bush admin budget, it’s called a ‘fiscal year’.

    Not only that but a large percentage of the debt, TARP (bush program) and the auto company loans are in fact loans that either have been or will be paid back.
    Nice try though, playing with numbers until you get the result you want is kind of challenging for you I would think, considering your level of intelligence.
    (if you guys get to call me stupid, I can do it too)

  41. hansgruber says:

    “75% of our current federal debt is due to republican spending, republican wars and republican tax cuts for the rich.” & “Facts always seem to elude those on the right.”

    Funny how the last 31 Congress are made up:

    Democrat controlling both houses 20 sessions
    Repubs controlling both house 6 sessions
    Split control both houses 5 sessions.

    Facts are tough to argue with considering Congress passes the budgets.

  42. hansgruber says:

    “Facts always seem to elude those on the right”
    “75% of our current federal debt is due to republican spending, republican wars and republican tax cuts for the rich.”

    Of the past 31 Congress sessions: (Since the end of WWII)

    Dem controlled both houses 20 sessions (That 40 years)
    GOP controlled both houses 6 sessions (Thats 12 years)
    Split control of both houses 5 sessions (Thats 10 years)

    Congress controls spending.

    Can;t argue with the facts can you Sumner401?

  43. So many “economists” here of the so-called conservative bent don’t have the slightest idea what they are talking about. And for those who make the claim that the democrats were in power for two years, they conveniently overlook the 60 vote filibuster that the Repubs had in the Senate. Any spending that got through the congress did so with the approval of the repubs in the Senate.
    The deficit is still not large enough to require an immediate halt to additional spending and the economy is still not strong enough to call for a tighter monetary policy.
    Fiscal restrain will be required in the future, not now, not yet.

  44. Sumner401 says:

    Your little point has already been discussed and refuted hans, but at least your trying.
    As pointed out Congress does control spending but they do it at the behest and request of the President.

    The point remains true, 75% of our debt belongs to the republicans.

  45. Sumner401 says:

    Well when proven wrong, publicly, the right sure gets nasty with the name calling don’t they? LOL!
    donjames, if you don’t know how the system works, don’t call others ‘troll’ it doesn’t make you look smarter or make your mistaken ideas better.
    Heres are couple of facts for you don,
    Fiscal year, it doesn’t end when you think it does, your 2009 numbers are in fact bushs budget, sorry.
    TARP, yeah that one belongs to bush as well.
    As has been stated time and again, you can’t change the facts, even when you want to.

  46. donjames says:

    Okay, Summy, just for you we’ll wave our magic wand and make the federal deficit only apply to a fiscal year…. ROTFLMFAO!!!

  47. LuckyCharm says:

    I haven’t really been following this particular discussion, but seeing the last few posts, I think there is a misunderstanding between the words “deficit” and “debt.” If I start out with $1000 and spend $1010 this month, I have a monthly deficit of $10. I also have a debt of $10. If next month I again take in $1000 and again spend $1010, my deficit — the amount I’m spending above my means — hasn’t changed, but my debt has just doubled. I can stay at the same rate of deficit, or even decrease it, but unless I convert it to a surplus by spending less than I take in, my debt will increase every month.

    Obama has made some changes in accounting procedures that make his numbers look worse than they would have been under previous practices. For one thing, he isn’t funding the wars through “emergency supplementals,” which aren’t accounted for in the budget. Bush’s deficit numbers were also skewed by not assuming the AMT would be inflation-indexed, understating Medicare reimbursement costs, and omitting disaster relief expenditures. So on balance, it can look like Obama’s growing the deficit and debt, when the difference is in large part, if not wholly, due to more honest accounting practices. What Bush did was akin to drawing up a modest family budget but failing to calculate the 50% of your income that you blow at the casino every month. Eventually that’s gonna come back around to bite ya, although Bush/Cheney managed to slide out just as the house of cards was coming down.

  48. ummmm…….you do know that the partisan Party cheerleaders – both Dem and Repub – are just distracting us from the reality that both are just wings of the Property Party who are going to keep doing the same things while claiming that they aren’t as bad as the other guys…….don’t you?

  49. I have been comparing Obama to W. I’m starting to think that a more apt comparison may be Obama and Reagan. Both are charismatic, both aren’t/weren’t what they seem. The difference, of course, is that Reagan was blessed with a Teflon coating…….

  50. I cannot engage in the economy discussion, won’t pretend to understand it all, but I did find myself as I read through all of these posts wondering if and when SOMEONE would point out that it’s congress we must look to, and we know that Bush had to contend with Nancy and Harry who seem to love spending money.

    Most average Americans would happily leave all the debate on the curb if SOMEONE would just do SOMEthing to stop the movement in this direction.

    I don’t think voters realized that the “change” they were going to get was an increase in spending.

  51. hansgruber says:

    “The point remains true, 75% of our debt belongs to the republicans”-Sumner401

    Yet the DEM controlled both houses during 6 years of Reagan, Bush 41 the first 2 years of Clinton. The GOP reigned in the spending on the last 6 years of Clinton. Bush 43 was very Bi-Partisan except the last 2 years, under DEM control of both houses Obama Congress has shown no Bi-Partisanship and increased the national debt 19.4% in just 17 months.

    DEM controlled (both houses) Congress is responsible for 66% of the national debt since 1981. Look it up, it’s not that hard.

    Sorry Sumner, your claim doesn’t hold water. Your claim is just another lib canard.

  52. Sumner401 says:

    Hans it does hold water and your ‘dems control congress’ is simply the GOP strawman.
    You know as well as anyone that far more goes into a budget than one party of Congress, why can’t you admit to that?
    You know as well as anyone that the right has, through sheer screaming and tantrums have controlled the policys of this nation for nearly 30 years.
    You know as well as anyone that 75% of our current debt is owned by the republicans, they spent the money on the wars and the drug bills and DOD and the tax cuts……..and many other things they passed, NONE of which has been paid for, just passed without a thought, they OWN the debt.
    You know it and everyone else does to.
    Denying it doesn’t change it.
    To do anything other than admit it and try to work to change it (the first step is admitting to your problem) is showing a disconnect with reality.

    And bush was a great many things, but bi-partisan isn’t anywhere on the list!
    (My god man, how can you even say something like that!?)

  53. LuckyCharm says:

    sozo, you remind me of the typical tea partier — they don’t really understand the issues or how politics works, they can’t articulate precisely what they’re mad about, they only know that something’s wrong and it scares them and they want SOMEBODY to take action NOW. I say that all that anger doesn’t help anything and doesn’t contribute to solutions. Don’t get mad, get informed.

  54. How do you know what teapartiers think?

  55. yabetchya says:

    Sumner401 says:
    June 16, 2010 at 10:58 am
    History, you can’t change the facts.

    You rewrite history everyday , especially if it dosn’t coinside with your way of thinking. You are one crafty Tman,

  56. Hi all,

    Just a note from your friendly comment moderator: Pushing the “Flag comment” button multiple times in rapid succession does not get your complaint any special consideration. In fact, it only serves to frustrate the moderator which inevitably colors the way she adjudicates your appeal.

    Carry on.

    Kim Bradford

  57. Here’s a big difference between you and me Lucky. I know quite a lot about a lot of things, but when I do NOT, I am not ashamed to say so. It’s the result of old age, the “diminished ego” — as you grow up and relinquish your need to be in charge.

    The level at which folks here have been talking about economics is helpful for me, but I’m not going to pretend to be able to jump in with the big boys and debate any of it.

    As for me seeing things on a broader scale, that my dear may in fact be a gift. I can see where a train is headed a long way off, whereas I think this vision eludes you much of the time.

    Finally, how DO you know what tea-partiers think?

  58. LuckyCharm says:

    Very easy, sozo and jim — they put it all over the Web! Go to any of their websites and see if you can find even one solution to any of the problems facing our country:

    http://taxdayteaparty.com/
    http://www.teapartypatriots.org/Default.aspx
    http://teapartypatriots.ning.com/
    http://www.sanantonioteaparty.us/

    It’s all about “We’re angry and we’re not gonna take it anymore! Down with health care! Down with taxes! Down with illegals and czars and George Soros and so on and so on!” Not a single reasonable policy proposal.

    But I guess you only find that kind of info through research, not simply accepting your own inner sense of foreboding, fueled by the frantic cries of the vocal, low-information minority, as a “big-picture” view.

  59. Roncella says:

    Its Great that so many Americans are awaking to the damage that the liberal democrats have done and are doing to U.S.A. Now that we have a Radical extreme leftest President in Obama to help them move all the socialistic programs along even faster.

    Here comes the Tea Party Folks who I believe will put a stop to this leftest movement in November.

    The Democrats including the President have attacked the Tea Party Movement and called them names and accused them of being racists among other things, they are not guilty of. This is because they can see an uprising coming in November and need to dis-credit the Tea Party Folks and movement right up to the mid-term elections in November.

    Any Enlightened Democrats and Indepentents who are tired of seeing this leftest movement need to get registered and Vote in November.

  60. LuckyCharm says:

    They discredit themselves, Ron. Can you name us one real solution to any problem facing our country that can be seriously considered?

  61. Sumner401 says:

    “a Radical extreme leftest President in Obama”

    Really? Just how has he been ‘radical’? How has he even been a ‘leftist’ (whatever that is)?

    It’s talk like that that will keep the Democrats in office, which judging by the poll numbers and the results of the primarys, is becoming reality.
    Nice to see that the American voter is able to see through the slimy used teabags and vote for the best interest of the nation and not just the GOBP.

  62. LuckyCharm says:

    Ron, if the TP is dead-set against Big Government with all its taxation and debt, why aren’t they calling for the abolition of Medicare and Social Security, which together with the defense budget represent our three greatest national expenditures in roughly equal proportions? Get rid of those, and we could start realizing a budget surplus tomorrow.

    Instead they rail against “benefits for illegals” and such, which are so miniscule in the grand scheme of things, nobody but them even talks about it. It’s simply a case of straining out gnats while swallowing camels. When the TP starts calling for Medicare and SS to be abolished, then I’ll start taking it seriously. Until it does, it’s just a bunch of loonies running around mad as heck but they don’t really know what about.

  63. Since I am not a Tea Party Person, whatever that is exactly, I can’t say what solutions they propose, but I heard intelligent discourse every day on Bret Baier’s show where all sorts of alternatives are discussed regard the economy, the oil spill, health care, Israel…all the major issues.

    Don’t pretend to be interested in discourse LC, not when it’s easier to discredit one faction of the many people challenging this administration.

  64. “Its Great that so many Americans are awaking to the damage that the liberal democrats have done and are doing to U.S.A.”

    Evidently the American people are awake enough to notice that the most damage comes from the conservative Republicans.

    According to the latest gallup poll, 43% of those polled have a favorable opinion of the Democratic party, and 36% have a favorable opinion of the Republican party. Obama’s latest approval rating is 46%, and that’s not bad considering he’s bucking the right-wing media.

  65. LuckyCharm says:

    sozo, is Brett Baier a TP’er? That was the question here.

  66. hansgruber says:

    “And bush was a great many things, but bi-partisan isn’t anywhere on the list!
    (My god man, how can you even say something like that!?)”-Sumner401

    Compared to Obama? Sumner401 check out the facts! Prove me wrong!

  67. hansgruber says:

    Overall, 42% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president’s performance. That too reflects a three-point drop since the speech.

    Fifty-seven percent (57%) now disapprove

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

  68. villager98 says:

    Didn’t anybody notice the errors in this letter? The first fiscal year for which Pres. Obama presented a budget is this year and it isn’t yet over. The years 2002 – 2009 were budget years for the Bush admin. with five of those years during Republican control of both houses of congress. During the eight years of Bush the federal debt grew by $6.4 trillion. The deficits reported came to about $4 trillion but that included social security surpluses of more than $2 trillion. By the way, about $5 trillion of the national debt is owed to the social security and medicare trust funds. The Republicans controlled congress for twelve years and a Republican president for six of those years – ten years if Clinton’s second term unannounced conversion is included.

  69. iamjimbo says:

    …so, it wasn’t a Clinton surplus???

  70. Sumner401 says:

    Villager,
    I did explain that to donjames, he called me an idiot for pointing out how wrong he was.
    I know, it’s what they do but still…..

  71. donjames says:

    jim,
    Throw out critical thinking for a moment and it becomes easy to mix budgets with the federal deficit. Thus nearly half of the deficit these fiscal experts, here, happily attribute to Bush was, in fact, carried over from Clinton, and beyond. And I am still laughing at how they think national debt increases are not measured annually, but are somehow tied to a fiscal year. (Note to experts; kindly research the following terms before further comment: (1) National Debt, and; (2) Federal Budget Deficit).

    But the biggest problem with their theory is the fact they are ignoring major factors which added over a Trillion Dollars to the national debt in 2009; little things like TARP II, the 0bama Stimulus Bill, the Omnibus Spending Bill, etc. (Hey spending experts, these are not budgetary items from the ’09 annual budget!)

    Now for 2010, we have 0bamacare and, possibly Stimulus II. And the 0bama budget for 2011 already proposes estimated deficit spending in excess of 1.27T – before the coming massive upward adjustments in estimated deficit spending and the corresponding increases to national debt caused by realistic evaluation of the impact of 0bamacare.

    Again, this should never be taken as a D vs R thing. This is our future, folks, and our kids future. This insanity must stop.

  72. hansgruber says:

    Sumner401 says:
    June 20, 2010 at 8:51 am
    “Hans, two things,
    You can’t be serious when you say bush was bi-partisan, name one thing he did or said that was bi-partisan.”

    Each of the following major laws was enacted on a bipartisan vote:

    •The 2001 tax cuts;
    •the No Child Left Behind Act in 2001-2;
    •the 2002 extension of Trade Promotion Authority;
    •the 2003 medicare law;
    •the 2005 energy law focused on electricity;
    •the 2006 pension reform law;
    •the 2007 energy law focused on fuel;
    •the 2008 stimulus law;
    •the 2008 housing reform law; and
    •the 2008 TARP law.

    You should read this one Sumner401, you could actually learn something,
    http://keithhennessey.com/2010/02/23/bipartisan-successes/

  73. hansgruber says:

    I agree with DonJames
    “This is our future, folks, and our kids future. This insanity must stop. ”

    Since 1791 to 1980, the national debt went from $75 Million to $997 Billion.

    Since 1981, the nation debt has gone from $1 Trillion to $13 Trillion.

    The borrowing and spend has to stop, I don’t care which party you belong to, STOP borrowing and spend only what you bring in and pay down the debt!

  74. Roncella says:

    hansgruber, President Obama and most of the Democrats and some Republicans in the Congress have been spending like there is an unlimited source of money to spend on anything they want to.

    President Obama has been living very high on the taxpayers since becoming President. His personal parties at the Whitehouse every wed. with top name stars and entertainers, his weekly golf outings, his flying here and there and everywhere to help elect or re-elect dems throughout the Country. HIs ObamaCare Bill will cost trillions dollars more. His stimulus bills, on and on.

    The only way to shop all this spending is for folks to register and vote out the big spenders from both parties this November.

  75. Sumner401 says:

    LOL!!!
    You have gone and done it Hans!
    Too funny! You really do think bush was bi-partisan don’t you!

    Keep making things up and patting each other on the back because that of course makes your misinformation true!

    donjames, please get an education, do us all a favor.

    roncella, check the polls, the incumbents are winning, Harry Reid will win his race.

  76. Sumner401 says:

    About Keith Hennesy,
    “I served as the senior White House economic advisor to President George W. Bush”.

    Hans, really? bi-partisan? LOL!!

  77. LuckyCharm says:

    Okay, I give — let’s just stop all gov’t spending. Say goodbye to your Medicare and SS benefits, Ron. Tell the troops no paycheck next month — better try to buy a plane ticket home if they can. Shut down the WH and Congress and let ‘em all go back where they came from. Meat packers will be elated — no more USDA! Careful, all you meat-eaters, from now on — you won’t have anyone to complain to when your meat is rotten or poisoned. Same with drugs — bring on the snake-oil salesmen! It’ll be good for animals, though, since no one will have any reason to do testing. Wonder how long the interstates will last with no maintenance, though? Time to plant a garden, I guess, since we won’t be trucking goods all over the country for long. And border security? Hey, AZ has shown us we can leave all that up to the states, so let them deal with it. Same with BP — gonna have to give them back their $20B, and maybe they’ll be able to pay dividends to their shareholders now, which will make the British retirees happier. Vets who’ve returned unable to work? Hey, there’s one thing you still know how to do and that’s how to use a gun — I’m sure you’ll find some way to get by….

    This is the vision our Founders dreamed of, surely. Imagine the peace and prosperity if only the gov’t never spent any money!

  78. hansgruber says:

    Sumber401 asked-
    “name one thing he did or said that was bi-partisan.”

    I gave him 10 major bills

    Including these bills that Obama himself voted for:

    •the 2005 energy law focused on electricity;
    •the 2006 pension reform law;
    •the 2007 energy law focused on fuel;; and
    •the 2008 TARP law.

    Sumner replies:”Keep making things up””
    but cannot bring forth any facts to support his position.

    I provide facts and Sumner, well?

  79. hansgruber says:

    Poor Lucky has just thrown in the towel.

    I just checked, Lucky, you can get a one way from Seattle to Paris for $897 leaving July 4th!

    Oh, and don’t forget your passport, it’s just like travelling to Arizona you know.

  80. Sumner401 says:

    Hans, what you did was make a partisan statement, then attempted to back it up with a very partisan blog from a political hack from the the bush admin!
    Come on, you know better than that!

    Look hans, I can’t blame you for seeking out some ego stroking justifications to make your beliefs more…..palatable, everyone does it to a certain degree.
    Seeking out media out lets that tell you what you WANT to hear is a new thing these days and I think somewhat troubling, but thats my opinion.

    But, when you and even donjames both agree that this is an important issue, doesn’t it bother you even a little bit that you and your fellows only seek out the information tailored to and in most cases feeding your bias?
    Don’t you think that leaves you at a disadvantage and could be very dangerous to the nation? Shouldn’t you be seeking out the truth, not just the ‘truth’ you want to hear but the real truth?
    I guess I don’t understand how or why people, on both sides of the aisle, only read and listen to those sources that tell them what they want to hear.
    Even you have to admit that your foolish bi-partisan statement is made worse by linking to a partisan hack as back up. How can you not laugh at that and recognize how really dumb it was?
    So my question is why do you do it?

  81. Roncella says:

    Sum401, Your other hero Reid has a great chance to win, he has over 17million dollars to spend on his re-election. It would be interesting to find out where all that money came from.

    He has enough money to flood the T.V. and all the cable channels 24 hours a day from now, to right up to the November elections.

    HIs campaign is using haft truths and lies against his running mate. But I guess when you can’t run on your record, you turn to what ever you need to in order to win.

    hansgruber is calling your bluff Sum401, your not looking to good, admit it your wrong and he has the facts to prove you wrong.

  82. hansgruber says:

    Here is more info for Sumner401:

    Nevada Survey of 500 Likely Voters
    June 9, 2010

    Election 2010: Nevada Senate

    Sharron Angle (R)
    50%

    Harry Reid (D)
    39%

    Some other candidate
    5%

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2010/election_2010_senate_elections/nevada/election_2010_nevada_senate

  83. hansgruber says:

    I’m still waiting Sumner401. Please provide the facts to prove the following bills were not passed with bi-partisanship

    Each of the following major laws was enacted on a bipartisan vote:

    •The 2001 tax cuts;
    •the No Child Left Behind Act in 2001-2;
    •the 2002 extension of Trade Promotion Authority;
    •the 2003 medicare law;
    •the 2005 energy law focused on electricity;
    •the 2006 pension reform law;
    •the 2007 energy law focused on fuel;
    •the 2008 stimulus law;
    •the 2008 housing reform law; and
    •the 2008 TARP law.

    How about this, let’s look at Obama’s bi-partisanship record:

    Now we turn to the three big domestic policy issues of President Obama’s tenure so far.

    We begin with the February 2009 stimulus.
    Other than three Senate Republicans, the bill was passed and became law on party line votes. There were no negotiations with Congressional Republicans.
    ________________________________________
    Cap-and-trade is next, but only in the House.

    Eight House Republicans voted for the bill, providing Speaker Pelosi with her winning margin. A significant block of Democrats voted no.
    ________________________________________
    We end with the health care bills of which no senate GOP support and one GOP house vote.

    Once again you can see straight partisanship

    Sumner401, I think you have Bush confused with Obama on non Bi-Partisanship.

    Still waiting for your facts

    PS-name calling and whining are not facts.

  84. hansgruber says:

    Here are the bills. You can use the link to see who voted and how partisan or bi-partisan the votes were. No political, pundit, newsy or hack can change this no matter what they say. Judge for yourself:

    The question was from Sumner401:

    “You can’t be serious when you say bush was bi-partisan, name one thing he did or said that was bi-partisan.”

    Here are the facts:

    The 2001 tax cuts;
    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h107-1836
    •the No Child Left Behind Act in 2001:
    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h107-1
    •the 2002 extension of Trade Promotion Authority;
    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h107-3009
    •the 2003 medicare law;
    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2003-459
    •the 2005 energy law focused on electricity;
    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h109-6
    •the 2006 pension reform law;
    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h109-4
    •the 2007 energy law focused on fuel;
    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-6
    •the 2008 stimulus law;
    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-5140
    •the 2008 housing reform law:
    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-3221; and
    •the 2008 TARP law.
    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-1424

  85. hansgruber says:

    Lets see just President Obama did so far when it comes to bi-patrisanship on Major bills:

    American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
    AKA: The Obama Stimulus of 2009

    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-1

    Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
    AKA: Healthcare Reform/Obamacare

    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-3590

    American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009
    AKA Cap & Trade

    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-2454

  86. Sumner401 says:

    Hans, just so you know, a bill that may or may not be bi-partisan, doesn’t make bush bi-partisan, no matter how many of your buddies show up to call me names and clap you on the back.
    it just doesn’t make it so.
    Sorry, but your statement is still ridiculous to the point of being laughable.

    75% of the debt belongs to the republicans, deal with.
    And Harry Reid (who knew he was my hero? I know I didn’t) is going to win, because the republicans choice is a nut bag.

  87. Sumner401 says:

    I did notice a couple of things you have pointed out though hans,
    You have backed up my point about the republicans being huge spenders, just look at the debt your list of bills you are crowing about has racked up!
    And you have also proven that Democrats are far more likely to work with the republicans than the right is to work with the Democrats.
    Make the republicans look like what they are, spoiled little brats having tantrums on the floor!

    You scored some points for that at least hans.

  88. hansgruber says:

    Still waiting for some facts Sum41.

  89. LuckyCharm says:

    hans, why are you so obsessed with labels? D’s can be just as deep in the pockets of corrupt corporate interests as R’s can — worse, almost, since they try to hide behind the D label. So what’s your point?

    By the way, Nixon supported universal health care. Both chambers of Congress overwhelmingly passed — in a bipartisan fashion, of course — cap and trade in 1990 to curb acid rain. And did the Republicans propose any solution whatsoever to the financial crisis? NO. Therefore, I guess Obama took my advice: “You are never going to please everybody, and some people won’t be pleased no matter what you do. Therefore, go and do what WE elected you to do, and to hell with them!”

  90. Aha, I knew LC was a closet advisor to the Prez…in her dreams anyway.

  91. LuckyCharm says:

    If people are going to be demanding I answer for what he does, I might as well take credit for advising him on it, shouldn’t I?

    Amazing how righties here expect me to explain everything from celebrities’ political actions/nonactions to media biases to Reid and Pelosi’s machinations. At least if I’m going to have to explain something, let it be something I agree with, okay?

  92. Sumner401 says:

    Hans I could say the same thing, waiting for your facts.
    But we both kow you will never provide them.
    You can not back up your opinion that bush, bush of all people is bi-partisan.
    we both know that.
    But you did demonstrate how much of the debt belong to the republicans.
    Add the 1 trillion plus for the wars and there is your 75%.

    Speaking of bushs wars, where is Osama Bin Landin and what about those WMD’S??
    How do you partisans keep defending these people?

  93. The “demand” placed on you LC rises out of your insistence on playing the expert.

  94. Roncella says:

    Sum401, You cannot seem to comprehend the facts that have been provided to you by Hunsgruber. You have not been able to back up your statements with facts.

    If I where you I would end the debate before you look more foolish, admit your wrong and Huns is right.

  95. hansgruber says:

    “Hans I could say the same thing, waiting for your facts.
    But we both kow you will never provide them.
    You can not back up your opinion that bush, bush of all people is bi-partisan.
    we both know that.”

    For the fourth time Sum41:

    Here are the facts:

    The 2001 tax cuts;
    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h107-1836
    •the No Child Left Behind Act in 2001:
    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h107-1
    •the 2002 extension of Trade Promotion Authority;
    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h107-3009
    •the 2003 medicare law;
    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2003-459
    •the 2005 energy law focused on electricity;
    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h109-6
    •the 2006 pension reform law;
    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h109-4
    •the 2007 energy law focused on fuel;
    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-6
    •the 2008 stimulus law;
    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-5140
    •the 2008 housing reform law:
    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-3221; and
    •the 2008 TARP law.
    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-1424

    As for Ms Lucky, the discussion w/ Sum41 was:
    “You can’t be serious when you say bush was bi-partisan, name one thing he did or said that was bi-partisan.”

    I provided 10, then I proved three examples of what bi-partisanship is not:

    Lets see just President Obama did so far when it comes to bi-patrisanship on Major bills:

    American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
    AKA: The Obama Stimulus of 2009

    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-1

    Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
    AKA: Healthcare Reform/Obamacare

    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-3590

    American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009
    AKA Cap & Trade

    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-2454

    Still waiting for those facts Sum41

  96. hansgruber says:

    Actually what I said was:

    “Bush 43 was very Bi-Partisan except the last 2 years, under DEM control of both houses”

    Sum41 reponded ”
    “And bush was a great many things, but bi-partisan isn’t anywhere on the list!
    (My god man, how can you even say something like that!?)”

    I reponded :

    “Compared to Obama? Sumner401 check out the facts! Prove me wrong!”

    See the above entry. Still waiting Sum41.

    .

  97. LuckyCharm says:

    Bipartisanship has become sorely overrated. Here’s what it would sound like if the Dems and Repubs were spouses:

    D: “Honey, the toilet’s plugged. I’m going to put some Drano in it.”
    R: “No, you can’t — that stuff’s toxic!”
    D: “Fine, then I’ll plunge it.”
    R: “No, you’ll make a mess!”
    D: “So I’ll snake it.”
    R: “No, you might break something!”
    D: “Allright, I’ll call a plumber.”
    R: “No, we can’t afford it!”
    D: “Well, what do you want me to do — put an outhouse in the backyard?”
    R: “You are not putting an outhouse in our yard!”
    D: “Then what’s your solution?”
    R: (silence)
    D: “Okay, I guess we just can’t use the bathroom anymore.”
    R: “Why are you telling me what I can and can’t do?”

    At some point, someone’s got to be the grown-up and just fix the danged problem, right? And if the other party wails that “you never listen to MY solutions,” maybe they ought to take a good look at what they’ve offered. So far the most strident anti-Obama voices here have offered even one credible, workable solution for our most pressing challenges — only criticism. Pitiful.

  98. LuckyCharm says:

    Oops, that should have been “So far none ofthe most strident anti-Obama voices…”

    I think my meaning was conveyed nonetheless, I hope….

  99. Roncella says:

    LCharm, quick question, did you not read the post provided by hansgruber(10:10 am), or do you just prefer to just ignore his posts ????

  100. Sumner401 says:

    “Bush 43 was very Bi-Partisan except the last 2 years, under DEM control of both houses”

    It’s still ridiculous, even more so the second time around!
    Still waiting for you to back it up. LOL!!

  101. Sumner401 says:

    Lucky you have nailed the republican partys agenda of NO!
    it is what they do, they spend and spend and when removed form power they whine and cry and block as much as they can, then scream that the evil Democrats are ‘the do nothing party’ and cry about how ineffective Govt is, then they spend and spend.
    Hans is here bragging about how much they spend and some how trying to convince someone how bi-partisan the worst President in history, bush was.

    You have to laugh at it.

  102. LuckyCharm says:

    Ron, I read it, and I’m saying it’s irrelevant. Republicans have only one driving aim right now — not to govern, not to improve conditions for all Americans, only to make Obama fail. They are bound and determined to make sure, to the best of their ability, that he can’t accomplish anything at all, at the same time whining that he’s “not doing anything.”

    I say we tried bipartisanship, it didn’t work, and it’s time to forget about it and get back to working for the American people. Go ahead and RAM it down our throats, please, just put our country back on a healthy track!

  103. Roncella says:

    LCharm, You can say its irrelevant all you want but its facts and facts are facts.

    You of all people with your many leftest sources for backing up your comments should at least try and debate the Facts and not just dismiss them out of hand.

    As far as the Republicans being the party of No, thats exactly what they should be, as we have two major parties with different views on what direction American should be going in.

    What on earth do you think has caused the Huge Tea Party Movement. Its the
    direction that our Radical President Obama wants to take America. Obama seems to want a leftest socialistic form of government, more like your beloved France.

  104. hansgruber says:

    (Sigh)….well I see Sumner401 still has provided not facts, just his opinion, not a worthy adversary at all.
    in fact you are very much like Ms. Lucky, who when faced with facts merely waves her hand thinking she is a Jedi Knight as says that it is irrelevant then after slamming to GOP as a party of no, goes on to say
    “I say we tried bipartisanship, it didn’t work, and it’s time to forget about it and get back to working for the American people. Go ahead and RAM it down our throats, please, just put our country back on a healthy track!”

    As Barney Frank said “Trying to have a conversation with you would be like arguing with a dining room table.”
    I was really hoping you could back up your point with facts.

  105. LuckyCharm says:

    hans, what “facts” do you want? I am stating an opinion. I am saying that, while the right is all of a sudden desperately worried about bipartisanship, I personally couldn’t care less for it. We delivered control of both chambers and the WH to Dems in 2008, and rather than acting like they were in charge, which they were, they spent precious days, weeks, and months kowtowing to Repubs. I’m saying “enough.” I don’t even care how many pieces of legislation the President signs with no Republican support — I hope he does every single one of them that way from now until 2016, just to show the country what a bunch of ineffective, whiny, petty, smallminded twits they are.

  106. LuckyCharm says:

    So Ron, referring back to my analogy, if we want two different directions for the country, I guess the Repubs are the party of “let the sewage flood the house as long as the other guy doesn’t score a win.” Right?

    Besides, which direction do they want to take the country? If they had come up with even one reasonable solution to ANY problem facing us, we might start to get an idea. But they don’t even have that. Their platform is, “Whatever Obama doesn’t want.”

    And, for such a “huge” movement, as of February this year according to a CBS poll, most Americans hadn’t even heard of it. It’s only huge in your mind and Glenn Beck’s, I guess.

  107. Roncella says:

    LCharm, You are in for a rude awakening come November if you don’t believe the Tea Party Movement is not huge movement. I hope all the liberal/democrats feel just as you do.

    I am surprised to read that you actually listen to Glen Beck, you do realize his show is on Fox Cable T.V. Right ?

  108. LuckyCharm says:

    Ron, you still haven’t been able to state which “direction” the Repubs are seeking for our country, or what their answer is to unemployment, environmental safety, the wars in the Middle East, tensions in Iran, health care inequality, the national debt, or anything else. Care to enlighten us?

  109. Roncella says:

    LCharm, Most Conservatives want a President who loves America and is proud of America and Americans and all they have accomplished.

    We want only as much Government in our lifes, that we absolutely need, no more. We Want a strong Military and vibrant economy.

    What we have right now is a President who apoligizes to Communist leaders, Socialist Leaders, about how arrogant and wrong America has been in the past, as he bows before them.

    As far as having all the answers for you to solve unemployment , envioronmental safety, the Wars, Iran, on and on your asking the wrong person.

    You need to e-mail President Obama, he had the answers to all your problems loaded in one of his many tele-prompters he used as he campaigned for the Presidency. He made it sound so easy. You remember don’t you LCharm, his great speaking skills, that had some in the Lame Stream Media feeling tingles running up and down their legs.

  110. LuckyCharm says:

    Yes, it’s obvious I’m asking the wrong person for answers if I’m asking a Republican. They have no answers for anything, only “Down with Obama.” That is not the kind of party I want leading MY country, thank you. I’ll take someone who not only preaches but practices respect over someone who knows only hatred and pettiness.

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0