Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

ELECTION: Obama campaign is blowing smoke

Letter by Craig Chilton, Bonney Lake on Aug. 9, 2012 at 10:42 am with 147 Comments »
August 9, 2012 12:47 pm

Since the economy has been in the doldrums with 8.3 percent unemployment, millions underemployed and millions more who have given up looking for work, it appears President Obama has given up touting his job creation. Instead, he and the Democrats have decided to attack Mitt Romney’s business record.

They accused Romney of outsourcing while at Bain Capital. FactCheck.org found no evidence to support the claim.

They accused Romney of managing Bain after he left to run the Olympics based on Securities and Exchange Commission filings. The Washington Post fact checker found no evidence to back up these claims, saying the “Obama campaign is blowing smoke here.”

By all accounts, Romney had a highly successful business career and created thousands of jobs. Does anybody honestly believe Obama knows how to create jobs better than Romney?

Now Obama is saying Romney’s tax plan will increase taxes on the middle class. This is based on a study by the Tax Policy Center. This study is pure conjecture. Romney has not yet released all the details of his plan, so any analysis at this point is based on assumptions, not facts.

Which party has wanted to raise taxes in Washington state for years and fought to eliminate the voter-approved initiative requiring a two-thirds legislative majority to raise taxes? Not Republicans.

Obama’s tax plan is to raise taxes on the top income earners. Will raising taxes on employers create jobs?

I think we all know the answer.

Leave a comment Comments → 147
  1. Frankenchrist says:

    Romney’s entire economic plan is this: tax cuts for the rich; tax hikes for the other 99%.

    If you loved eight years of George W. Bush’s economic glory you’ll love a Romney administration.

  2. sumyungboi says:

    Craig, several columns have been written regarding Obama’s campaign tactics. He _never_ runs on his record. And he always tries to stay clean while allowing his campaign to do the dirtywork, in particular, David Axelrod.

    In his campaign for US senate, Obama was behind in the primaries, until just a few weeks before the vote, when The Chicago Tribune leaked dirt about his opponents divorce, records that were “sealed”. The Obama campaign wouldn’t let up about his opponents supposed violence against women, (both his opponent and his wife said it was a minor, one time incident when he kicked her shin to stop her from kicking him) and Obama won the nomination. In the general election, The Chicago Tribune again focused on the personal records of Obama’s opponent, who was ahead in the polls, and a judge un-sealed the custody records to reveal that the republican opponent had wanted his wife to swing with him in Paris. He (Obama’s opponent, Jack Ryan) and his wife had made public their divorce records, but how do you suppose The Tribune knew to go for the separation papers? Obama pulled ahead and won.

    Just where could The Chicago Tribune get the tips that they got? Perhaps from David Axelrod, Obama’s campaign strategist and former employee of The Tribune? And how would Axelrod, or The Tribune, even know what were in those “sealed” records, that they should go after them?

    During his presidential campaign, what did we learn about Obama? Hope and Change? Whatever that means. My dog could’ve beaten McCain, but his fidelity was brought into question nonetheless with a front page story in the official propaganda wing of the Obama campaign, the NYT, regarding an affair with a fundraiser, which was completely debunked, but hey, it got out there. Oh, and did I mention that Palins retarded kid was actually her grandchild, and child of Bristol Palin? There was something about Palin and her old man having a falling out, too, I remember, more crap just totally made up, but it, too, got out there for the weak minded to ponder.

    Bottom line, Obama is a scum. He’s never run an honest campaign, and never will. His class warfare strategy is unspeakably low, but I wouldn’t expect any more from him. He’s a charlatan, and history will remember him with disdain.

  3. Hey Frankie, at no point during the Bush Administration was unemployment above 8%. During the last three years of Obama’s administration unemployment has never been BELOW 8%. I suppose “economic glory” is a function of how one views it. Blinders are an absolute necessity if one is to view Obamanomics as the key to economic recovery.

  4. SwordofPerseus says:

    Oldcroc and sumdumbboy horse blinders make moving through life hazardous. I am no big fan of Obama yet anyone who believes that this plastic tool, Willard Romney, would do better is either ignorant, gullible or stupid.:/

  5. sumyungboi says:

    oldoc, frankenchrist is a kid that says the same thing in every thread. He’s as predictable as the sun setting, and thinks that if he’s provocative, adults will talk to him. Did you catch the screamer about tax hikes for the 99%? Kinda tough when 50% don’t pay taxes at all. :)

  6. MrCarleone says:

    • Another stunningly ignorant letter from Craig Chilton !

  7. We breathlessly await a stunninghly cogent letter from Mr Carleone.

  8. SwordofPissant, anyone who thinks that even a complete economic imbecil could not do better than Obama is either ignorant, gullible or stupid. I’ve got my money on ignorant and gullible and stupid…..a progressive/liberal politcal trifecta.

  9. beerBoy says:

    by all accounts?
    http://www.rightwingnews.com/election-2012/mitt-romney-did-he-create-100-thousand-jobs-or-kill-7-thousand/

    Romney claims to have created a net of 100,000 jobs. But records have yet to be released and therefore this claim is impossible to verify. If anything, it would seem that the opposite is true.

    In his book, The Buyout of America: How Private Equity Will Cause the Next Great Credit Crisis, Josh Kosman lays out the history of Bain Capital (and other private equity firms) have of “purchasing” companies through leveraged buyouts, gutting thse companies (lay offs, slashing R&D budgets) for profits (ie through dividend payouts and selling the company off). Often times these companies are unable to sustain themselves for much longer because the PE firm’s focus was on short term profits (which often comes at the expense of long term health).
    http://www.mittromneyjobcreation.com/

  10. beerBoy says:

    Here’s The Real Problem With Mitt Romney’s Economic Plan: ‘Rich People’ Don’t Create The Jobs

    Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/mitt-romney-economic-plan-jobs-2012-8#ixzz235fBZSbN

  11. LeePHill says:

    “oldoc says:
    Aug. 9, 2012 at 2:32 pm Hey Frankie, at no point during the Bush Administration was unemployment above 8%.”

    ABSOLUTELY!!!

    When the Bush Administration started in January of 2001, unemployment was at 4.2%. By January 2009, when Obama took over, unemployment was at 7.8%. During the Bush Administration, unemployment increased 86%!

    Obama took over, and the rate of unemployment was 7.8%. Today it is 8.2%. Since Obama took office, unemployment has increased 5%.

    Why do conservatives think everyone is as ignorant as they are with statistics?

  12. LeePHill says:

    oldoc says:
    Aug. 9, 2012 at 3:06 pm SwordofPissant”

    Now, what was it that oldoc was saying about “civility” on the other thread?????? Oh yeah, it was this….

    “oldoc says:
    Aug. 9, 2012 at 2:23 pm Frankie doesn’t hold anything back. I’m sure comments like Frankie’s are certain to inspire a polite discourse. A wise man once told me that if you can’t be civil at least be vague.”

  13. Olddoc, while your statement was technically true, unemployment was 7.8% in January of 2009, and 8.3% in February of 2009.

    Obama wasn’t inaugurated until 1/20/2009.

    Further more, Unemployment increased from 4.7% to 7.8% in the final 2 years of GW’s Term.

    Perhaps your number wasn’t nearly as impressive at first glance.

  14. Thanks Larry and Krumm for pointing out the dem Congress’s effect on the economy.

    Bb- everyday you get more partisan. You cherry pick sources, but fact checking sources have proven Romney as solid, ethical businessman.

  15. BigSwingingRichard says:

    Obama lies, the economy dies.

  16. Frankenchrist says:

    oldcrock,

    Tell me one economic success of Bushy McChimp. (Besides spending over $3 trillion nation building in Iraq and Afghanistan.) Was it taking Bill Clinton’s $250 billion surplus and magically changing it into a $9 trillion deficit?

    I can’t wait to hear your answer.

  17. CT7…heh…same old thing the the Conservatives. Anytime something good happens under a Conservative President it is the Conservative President who gets credit, If it is bad, then it must be a Democrat’s fault.

    Vice versa if the President happens to be a Democrat.

  18. LeePHill wrote oldoc says:
    Aug. 9, 2012 at 3:06 pm SwordofPissant”

    Now, what was it that oldoc was saying about “civility” on the other thread?????? Oh yeah, it was this….

    “oldoc says:
    Aug. 9, 2012 at 2:23 pm Frankie doesn’t hold anything back. I’m sure comments like Frankie’s are certain to inspire a polite discourse. A wise man once told me that if you can’t be civil at least be vague.”
    ______________________________________________________________

    LeeP….look up the definition of pissant, then get back to me. It was probably too vague for you.

  19. LeePHill says:

    “CT7 says:
    Aug. 9, 2012 at 3:49 pm Thanks Larry and Krumm for pointing out the dem Congress’s effect on the economy.”

    And that effect was…the country was slipping down the drain…Obama plugged the drain. Thank you, Mr. President

    “BigSwingingRichard says:
    Aug. 9, 2012 at 4:05 pm Obama lies, the economy dies.”

    Take a 2nd grade math class, Dick, then you’ll be able to see how Obama kept the Bush Skid from continuing.

    Don’t conservatives take math classes in school? Between CT7 and Dick, I’m not sure which one is making the bigger fool of himself.

    CT7…while taking the math course, try english as well. Then you’ll understand “cherry picking”, “rhetoric”, etc.

  20. LeePHill says:

    oldoc…..I’m sure you were complimenting Sword…….

    I love how, when confronted with their hypocrisy, the cons try to wiggle their way out, hoping that we are as ignorant as they….

    “A pissant, also seen as piss-ant has its origin is with pismire, a 14th-century word for ant. The term is also used as an insulting noun, and a pejorative adjective.”

  21. Krumm….wasn’t talking about impressive numbers. Just commenting on Frankie’s use of the term “economic glory”.

  22. LP is a sort of a gas, isn’t it? Pissant=small, insignificant. Obviously way too vague for you. Does Swordofpissant need your help or are you just unoccupied at the moment?

  23. Bb, nice to see Hill arguing for you. Cute. Too bad he wrong, 100% of the time.

    Mound, tell us another sweet family story.

    Krumm, credit and blame are due when the person or group actually are responsible. One can argue that the president is always responsible (except for BHO in the left’s eyes). Any leader willing takes responsibity. “The buck stops here”. Bush did not spend 8 years for Clinton handing him a recession. He acted. He did not blame Clinton for 9/11. He acted. Leadership.

    In the case of the meltdown, blame can go around. But Bush addressed the precursors and was shut down by the left. Fact. Barney and company.

    Pelosi and Harry could be the worst pols in our Nation’s history. If Romney can pull the Nation together with a republican senate, we might make it out OK.

  24. beerBoy says:

    CT7 – I have no control (or interest) over what other folks post.

    I don’t know how to make this more clear:
    Obama bad, Romney worse.

    I will not vote for Obama but I am a realist. I know that it is bad or worse. I would prefer bad over worse.

  25. sumyungboi says:

    bb: ” I have no control (or interest) over what other folks post”

    Then you have no business responding to others’ comments.

  26. LeePHill says:

    oldoc……you were being uncivil. You know it. I know it. Everyone with more than a 3rd grade education knows it.

    You will, however, fool CT7

  27. LeePHill says:

    “CT7 says:
    Aug. 9, 2012 at 5:25 pm Bb, nice to see Hill arguing for you. Cute. Too bad he wrong, 100% of the time.”

    CT7 said something intelligent. Wait…I’m wrong 100% of the time.

    Me wrong, in CT7speak.

    It’s really HILARIOUS to see CT7 make a typo when trying to insult someone by saying they are wrong 100% of the time.

    Is it possible to be wrong 101%, CT?

  28. You can tell another poster to stay in his lane.

    Now, the danger of 4 more years of BHO- 8+% unemployment indefinitely. 60, 70% of America on food stamps? More then 1/2 not paying taxes and getting checks.

    There are no positives to another BHO term. None.

  29. LeePHill says:

    I see CT7 hasn’t run out of baseless assertions.

    Oh geeez….I used a big word again. Actually, two….

  30. LeePHill says:

    “There are no positives to another BHO term. None.”

    There are two positives….

    One – Romney won’t be president. “ANYONE BUT ROMNEY”

    Two – It will make your shorts creep up your southern anatomy.

    You’d better get ready. Today’s CNN numbers are not going to make you feel so good…..

  31. aislander says:

    oldoc: “Pismire” is a more delicate way of putting it, if you are concerned about LH’s delicate sensibilities. I’ve used the word in reference to one of his previous incarnations, so I am simpatico in that regard…

  32. LeePHill wrote: oldoc……you were being uncivil. You know it. I know it. Everyone with more than a 3rd grade education knows it.

    You will, however, fool CT7
    __________________________________________________________

    Uncivil? No! Sagacious? Yes. Look it up LP, under S…might have more than a single meaning. Pick the one that suits you. Incidentally, thanks for including me in your group that passed third grade.

  33. menopaws says:

    So, when is Mr. Wonderful going to release the details of his tax plan….or his housing plans, or his foreign policy plans (bombing Iran doesn’t count–I HEARD him say that–on camera) The invisible man is really good at tagging and criticizing the President and his primary opponents….Master of the sound bite…. But, I don’t vote for sound bites—he has “yet to release his tax plan”………..Be sure to alert us when that happens…….A man without defined policy is not ready to be President……..And, his policies do appear to change a lot….So, I’ll stick with Obama—he has made some mistakes, but most of us admire him for trying and for putting up with some really ugly attacks from Republicans, who appear to believe that they don’t need to keep their word on the deficit agreement………. They too signed off on that agreement–it’s all Obama’s fault, as is everything else, right?……..Taking personal responsibility for failures appears to be a problem for your party, doesn’t it???How that search for WMD’s going in Iraq????

  34. sumyungboi says:

    menopaws: “So, when is Mr. Wonderful going to release the details of his tax plan….or his housing plans, or his foreign policy plans”

    I know! We’ve been waiting since 2008, but all we heard was “hope and change”, and it went downhill from there.

  35. Go to Mitt Romney’s website. There is a very detailed plan.

    Now, what is BHOs plan? Raise taxes on the rich. Great, that solves one week of spending. BHO has not plan, had no plan. Instead of tackling the biggest problem the country faced in 09 we got Obamacare and 3 years of excuses. Why didn’t he fix the tax code then?

  36. LeePHill says:

    I don’t know which to laugh at the hardest…oldoc, or his cheerleader.

    It’s tough, doc, when you get caught in your own crap. Keep squirmin’.

    Oh, and CT7….I’d share more about my son, but you need to live your own life, not a fantasy, vicariously through others. Go get an education and become something. It’s worth it.

    “Romney’s website”….well now….THERE is a fine place to find “rhetoric”, “talking points”, “cherry picking” and “partisan”.

    Oh…and by the way……

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/08/fox-poll-obama-romney-131598.html

    OUCH!!!

  37. LeePHill says:

    It appears that….increasingly…..Obama is picking a GREAT TIME for talking about tax codes and such.

    If only the Republicans could select a candidate who so closely reflects what the majority of Americans are seeking…..

    http://www.sfbg.com/politics/2011/03/09/more-80-percent-americans-want-tax-rich

  38. LeePHill says:

    “thanks for including me in your group that passed third grade.”

    I’m trying to give you that credit and you keep trying to prove me wrong.

  39. bobcat1a says:

    Wow oldoc, eight ad hominems in one short comment. You must be SO proud.

  40. bobcat1a says:

    CT7, you said “Now, what is BHOs plan? Raise taxes on the rich.”

    So, you prefer the Romney plan of RAISING taxes on everyone EXCEPT THE RICH and giving the rich a huge new tax CUT. Explain how that is a winning plan. Please don’t deny that is his plan since it is mathematically proven.

  41. SwordofPerseus says:

    Oldcroc- Sticks and stones mate, cheers. I still think you have your cranium in an anatomically impossible maneuver when it comes to choosing a candidate that will best serve the needs of this nation.

    Conc. – OMG! You’re still suffering under the illusion that you have a clue. Here is a hint;Willard is an empty suit, and if he could I think he would resign at this point, but he is in too deep. He knows he is well over his head and most of the higher ups in the RNC know it as well. “You will not sing that put Jack a$$!”

  42. SwordofPerseus says:

    “You will not sink that put…”

  43. Sumy – what we learned while Obama has been POTUS is that conservatives are willing see our destroy our country.

    Sarah Palin’s youngest child, Trig, was born with downs syndrome.

    And you suffer from chronic foot in mouth syndrome.

    Oldoc,
    The economy crashed WHILE Bush was in office.

    In Oct, Sept, and Nov 2008 – the US lose 1.2 million jobs, which was twice as many as we lost from in the previous 9 months.

    From April 2008 thru December 2008 US unemployment went from 5.0 to 7.3 percent.

    http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet

    So much for your 6% claim.

    Intelligent people Congress and the Republicans in Congress for our current economic problems.

    CT7 – does solid and ethical include hiding funds in overseas accounts to avoid paying US Taxes?

    Oldoc – looked up that definition and is said see Oldoc.

  44. I asked what BHOs plan was and I got a bunch of whining. 50% pay nothing. Yes, their rates need to go up.

    The “rich” are not big enough to pay for our entitlement spending and national defense on their own. Buck up

  45. And where is BHOs plan? You suckers let him distract you from what is important.

  46. menopaws says:

    Wow!!!!!!! old doc, sumy, and CT7, how does it feel to have people gang up on you and beat you over the head with facts, logic and intelligence??? Anyone who votes for a man who has SO LITTLE FAITH in American banks that he stashes his family wealth overseas and yet wants to be President ,is an idiot……so, go stand in line for your ID badge…….the rest of us know that he isn’t in charge–he’s an empty suit for the Koch Brothers and the Neo-cons. He will stand where he is told to stand, say what he is told to say……..Hate Obama if you must—he makes his own calls and HIS money is in American banks……..Romney must be afraid of them–but doesn’t want them regulated either……..Must make all f you soooo proud to live the fantasy life……….The rest of us intend to vote for the guy who is trying to fix the mess your other dream President left behind….By the way, it is fascinating that Bush NEVER put the war costs on the books……..Obama does the honest thing and includes those costs in the deficit and the Republicans nail him for the exploding deficit…………So, in your world, honesty is NOT the best policy…….right????? Idiots…..

  47. LeePHill says:

    “CT7 says:
    Aug. 10, 2012 at 5:39 am And where is BHOs plan?”

    It’s amazing how the President talks about it everyday and the cons feign ignorance.

    Well, maybe “feign” is the wrong word….

  48. Obama is little more than a street corner hustler who got lucky with a cool gig which he has skated through to this point!

    That being said, the economy wont get fixed by Obama, Romney, or anyone else. The economy is cyclical, it always has been, always will be. Just as it dipped (which by the way was not the “greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression” as Obama loves to throw around), it is slowly beginning to rise again.

    It amazes me to think that the general public actually believes that one elected politician can “fix” something as complex as the economy! But then that same stupid public fell for Obama’s hooey hook, line, and sinker didn’t they!

    You ask me, the biggest economic success story will be when Obama opens up a used car lot on the South Side!

  49. LeePHill says:

    Oh….so the economy is just fine?

    Let the rightees know so that they’ll quit blaming Obama.

  50. sumyungboi says:

    menopaws: “sumy, and CT7, how does it feel to have people gang up on you and beat you over the head with facts, logic and intelligence?”

    How long do I have to wait?

    In my initial response to this letter, I laid out my summery quite clearly, and with facts. Let’s take a look at some of leftists initial responses.

    frankenchrist: “Romney’s entire economic plan is this: tax cuts for the rich; tax hikes for the other 99%.”

    Obviously a very deep thinker.

    leephill: “Craig Chilton is blowing smoke…..again.”

    Complete with a link to someone else’s opinion. Lee pretty much relies on other people to do mold his opinion, hence, links to people he believes are smarter than he.

    swordofperseus: “anyone who believes that this plastic tool, Willard Romney, would do better is either ignorant, gullible or stupid”

    Yes, another well thought out initial response.

    mcarleone: “Another stunningly ignorant letter from Craig Chilton”

    And another stunningly intelligent response, backed up with facts. Wait. Not.

    beerboy simply copied and pasted someone else’s opinion, and offered nothing in the way of commentary.

    Yeah, you lefties are the most, man. With all the logic and reason and intelligence backing up your social and economic philosophies, it’s just one of the mysteries of life as to why everyone can’t see the light as you do. :)

  51. Well, maybe Romney is telling the truth for a change. He claims on his website that his economic plan will add about 12 million new jobs to the economy during his first term.

    Economists predict that, under current conditions, the economy will add about 12 million jobs between 2012 and 2016. So, I guess Romney is saying he will add nothing more than Obama.

    http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/07/romneys-job-growth-promises/

  52. Sumy – how long do you have to wait – at least till you actually start using facts, logic, and intelligence.

    We lefties also have history on our side. Just look what Bush’s compassionate conservatism accomplished in just 8 years.

    To see the light one must first open their eyes,
    Then they have to clear the mind of preconceptions,
    Finally, they have to open their mind.

  53. I read Mitts web site and there are no details, just hyperboil.

  54. aislander says:

    tuds: You DO know the difference between “net” and “gross,” right?” The Bamster has been counting only the jobs added without subtracting the jobs lost.

    That is the ONLY way we could have “created” all those jobs and yet have a higher rate of unemployment and fewer people working.

    If an evil corporation kept its books the way the regime counts jobs, its executives would be in prison.

  55. LeePHill says:

    leephill: “Craig Chilton is blowing smoke…..again.”
    Complete with a link to someone else’s opinion. Lee pretty much relies on other people to do mold his opinion, hence, links to people he believes are smarter than he.”

    Sumyungboi…..why don’t you at least provide a modicum amount of honesty in your posts? My “chilton is blowing smoke” comment was followed by a link that demonstrates that everything he submits in his letter is false – especially in reference to his tax plan.

    Of course, your technique is 100% conservative yack, much the same as Chilton, therefore you will parrot.

    You have a real challenge with factual presentation, don’t you?

  56. menopaws says:

    Sumy—All you and CT7 and oldoc can do is pick on the messengers……..the message is way beyond your abilities……..Name calling, stupid and mean……..should we all pitch in and buy the T-shirts for you??? Lots of ugly–no fresh ideas to put out there……..At least we argue issues—all you can do is slander (look it up) …..shooting the messenger doesn’t validate you…..Just makes you look weak and stupid. Deal with that—it’s not worth anyones time trying to reason with those who aren’t interested in knowledge or facts……You will have to wait a long time, Sumy—-it’s all over your head and you don’t have the capacity to learn…….Now scurry back under your rock–that I figure you hear a lot and do understand…..

  57. LeePHill says:

    Theo….exactly.

    When the Republicans submit hyperbole, CT7 calls that gospel. When the Democrats submit facts, CT7 calls that “partisan”.

  58. LeePHill says:

    “FactCheck.org found no evidence that Romney was at Bain during outsourcing”

    Here is how the Right operates.

    The above statement is true. FactCheck, did, in fact claim there was no evidence. Which triggered several detailed follow ups by other media questioning exactly when did Romney depart from Bain. Over a month later, there is so much contractictory information that Romeny’s campaign would rather talk about tax returns.

    Here’s a take on what took place AFTER factcheck said “no evidence”:

    http://www.mediaite.com/online/factcheck-alert-boston-globe-reports-mitt-romney-was-at-bain-until-2002/

    Funny how Chilton left all of that out….

  59. For someone do foul mouthed and angry you really pretend to be thin skinned.

    This is about ideas and solutions, not the messenger. You have to demonize those that disagree with your views. Get over yourself.

  60. just hyperboil.

    I rather enjoy that misspelling for hyperbole – hyper-boil works well.

  61. aislander, you do know the difference between net private job gain and net public job loss, don’t you?

    I certainly agree with this para from the link I gave:

    “Perhaps the more important corollary, though, is that there’s a huge margin of error in what Mr. Romney is promising, too. And that’s true for just about any economic forecast you hear from any politician (or pundit or journalist for that matter)”.

    I really don’t think there’s that much difference in the candidates, two corporate shill lawyers, and you have to look at what is best for our nation in terms of balance of power – the transfer of the power from the middle right to the extreme far-right if Romney wins.

    The main difference in the candidates is that the right is against the one that is half-black and half-liar, and the left is against the one that is 100% flip-flopper and 75%-liar.

  62. Menopaws wrote: Wow!!!!!!! old doc, sumy, and CT7, how does it feel to have people gang up on you and beat you over the head with facts, logic and intelligence???
    ____________________________________

    SwordofPiaaant wrote:Oldcroc- Sticks and stones mate, cheers. I still think you have your cranium in an anatomically impossible maneuver when it comes to choosing a candidate that will best serve the needs of this nation.
    _____________________________________________________

    LeePHill wrote: It’s tough, doc, when you get caught in your own crap. Keep squirmin’.
    _____________________________________________________

    Bobcat1a wrote: eight ad hominems in one short comment. You must be SO proud.
    _____________________________________________________

    Menopaws, I will let you know when I feel the least bit threatened by a group whose combined IQ reaches cretin level.

    SwordofPissant, obviously you have allowed your posterior to do your thinkingregarding the 2012 election,however, that is probably preferable to the use of the opposing end.

    LeePHill, even tougher mate when one must wade through the mire of
    liberal musings to discover even a single cogent point.

    Bobcat1a, ah, you noticed that I bested SwordofPissant’s previous
    record of six. We conservatives are a competitive bunch.

  63. sumyungboi says:

    You guys crack me up. I pointed out, in your own words, how leftists’ initial reaction to this letter offered nothing but angry insults, and it’s like it just bounces off of your spinal cords back to your fingers where you type up more leftist bs without ever thinking about it. You guys repeat what someone who you think is cool wants you to repeat, and never really think things through on your own.

    tuddo, do you really trust Obama with the economy, like you say? Done a stellar job so far, hasn’t he? And he has certainly proven himself trustworthy, Gitmo, unemployment below 8%, post-partisan, transparent. Yeah.

    menopaws, you never seem to have anything to say on topic, but sure have a ton-o-fun insulting people. I did find this from you: “How that search for WMD’s going in Iraq?” Why don’t you ask the British firm contracted by the Iraqi government to help destroy what’s left of the chemical weapons there?

  64. aislander says:

    In this case, tuds, jobs are jobs. I do know that nonmilitary employment by the federal government is up, even though lower levels of government have reduced the number of employees. Seems the feds are sucking up all THAT oxygen, huh?

    You just can’t say we’ve gained jobs when unemployment is up and the number of employed people is down.

    We DO need many more private-sector jobs than this regime will allow the private sector to create, since public-sector jobs are a drain on the economy, while the private sector creates actual wealth–upon which governments depend for their actual existence…

  65. sumyungboi, I trust a centrist approach with a reasonable tax policy over the Ryan approach of complete takeover by the government by an oligarchy comprised of corporations, financial institutions and CEO’s.

    I trust a moderate approach to tax reform and domestic programs over the Romney plan to increase middle class taxes so the rich can consolidate even more of the wealth of this country with the destruction of necessary safety net programs.

    I trust a separation of church and state approach over the far-right dismantling of that concept and institution of religiously-driven social policies that do not respect the rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

  66. sumyungboi, as I’ve pointed out elsewhere, one can only comment on opinion pieces by saying “I agree” or I disagree” and offering another opinion.

    The facts in this letter include one major statement: “Romney has not yet released all the details of his plan so any analysis at this point is based on assumptions, not facts”.

    So, since Romney has not provided the assumptions needed to determine the validiety of his plan, and probably will not, before the election, economists have looked at the highest probable assumptions they can demonstrate. The realistic assumptions using current data and history show his plan to be detrimental to the middle class and highly beneficial to the top earners.

    If Romney could provide a realistic scenario where lowering taxes on the top earners would result in lower taxes for the middle class, an increase of jobs in the private sector sufficient to overcome the huge losses in the public sector that is envisioned by the ideology of the far right, then I would be one to support it.

    We know from history that lowering taxes on the wealthy does not create jobs or imporve the economy, it just makes the deficit worse. Reagan, Clinton and others proved that raising taxes on the wealthy does not caused any job loss or economic slowdown

    Unfortunately for Romney, no realistic assumptions in the world supports his outcomes of the plan he has outlined so far.

  67. sumyungboi says:

    tuddo, I remember when you used to pretend to be a moderate. But you’ve included all of the whacko left dog whistles. Even your hatred of religion came out, something not discussed here til now, something you’re subconsciously compelled to associate with your philosophical enemies for the purpose of feeling more comfortable in your hate.

  68. Tuds, it would easier to argue we are worse off as a govt and society by distancing govt from faith then the reverse.

  69. aislander says:

    Hey tuds: google the words “economists disagree…”

    Citing the OPINION of any economist can be offset by citing the opinion of a different economist.

    I’m not sure why you guys wish to turn the economy over to the unsuccessful, while demonizing those who succeed.

    That has to be recipe for failure for the country…

  70. sumyungboi, please refer to your “nothing but angry insults” comment for my reaction to your latest.

    I do not hate religion, far from it. I am very religious, and believe strongly in my religion. However, I don’t think I have a right to impose my personal religious beliefs on a nation.

    For example, Jesus spoke strongly against divorce and said no man should grant such a thing. So my first act in a theocracy would be to ban divorce.

    I do not want people that I believe twist the Word of God to fit their own political beliefs and personal fears and hatreds to control our government. People like Michelle Bachmann gaining even more power makes me nervous. (I dont think that is just a leftist concern, I think it includes many of us moderates and independents.)

    Real conservatives should be outraged at the attack on individual liberty, freedom and decision-making about health issues and personal planning, such the attacks on the use of contraceptives. However, they need the money and support of the religious far-right, especially churches who want to impose their own beliefs on others who, even if religious, see no religious conflict.

    Lucky for all of us we don’t live in a theocracy (yet) and secular law says people can divorce and we can’t kill humans as a sacrifice to God, only as a sacrifice to nation-building in the Middle East and people can make their own choices about legal health care procedures.

  71. I’m not sure why you guys wish to turn the economy over to the unsuccessful, while demonizing those who succeed.

    I’m not sure why you guys want to return to the disastrous policies that created this crisis in the first place while demonizing the policies that have had some (but not nearly enough) improvement.

    I see nothing in what Mitt has put forward that demonstrates that he is going to put forward anything other than trickle-down-upon-the-middle-class of the past.

  72. aislander, here is a group of economists that I think make a strong case for their point:

    http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3490

    “The President and Congress could make major progress toward stabilizing the debt for the coming decade by letting all of the Bush tax cuts expire on schedule at the end of 2012. That would just be a first (although a substantial) step. To keep the debt stable over the longer run, when the fiscal impacts of an aging population and rising health care costs will continue to mount, policymakers will need to take large additional steps on both the expenditure and revenue sides of the budget.”

  73. I forgot to add the leading quote:

    “But, the fact remains: the economic downturn, President Bush’s tax cuts and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq explain virtually the entire deficit over the next ten years.”

  74. aislander says:

    beerBoy: I wish to return to the “disastrous policies” that made the US economy the largest in the world over a hundred years ago, BEFORE the rest of the world was on its knees, as it was after WWII. That post-war situation was the one thing that made our increasingly strictured economy work.

    We’re now reaping the bitter fruit of decades of progressive policies. We need to regain our economic freedom if we’re again to be a beacon to the world.

    A free economy is an expansive economy. “Trickle-down” is when we depend on scraps from government…

    What “improvement,” by the way?

  75. Hey, the war in Iraq is over. First call. The war in Afghanistan is wrapping up also. So what is the next excuse. Tax rates. Great, raise taxes before the economy is stabilized.

  76. aislander says:

    So…tuds…we have a cost for the wars of $100 billion per year over the last decades. That TOTALS a fraction of the Obama deficit for ONE YEAR.

    Now give me the ACTUAL (not “projected,” not “estimated”) reduction in revenues caused by the tax rates of the last decade-plus…

    Now add up the two figures, and you won’t even be in the same universe as the Obama deficits.

    As for the economic downturn, what has Obama done to create growth? WHAT growth?

  77. menopaws says:

    Okay all you mental giants…Your candidate is running SEVEN points behind, nationwide. running 18 points behind with minorities, almost 30 points behind with women……..Only blue collar white males adore Mr. Romney—the same crowd that he helped get laid off or outsourced at Bain…..Seems a lot of people just believe that, mistakes and differences aside, President Obama is a genuine man…..not a carefully manufactured empty suit………And, they are sick of all the mean……..Get a clue–what you do on this blog is what is driving voters away from the Republican party……..Name-calling, mean, ugly language—-it isn’t PRESIDENTIAL…….People are sick of the low rent trashy behavior of your political party…….Believe it or not—good manners matter……Ideas matter…….Your behavior is the real reason those numbers keep going down for your party……..People don’t like the behavior you seem to believe is your right…….It’s ignorant and offensive……Done trying to explain the obvious……Learn to behave in a civilized way or face the reality that what you have to say doesn’t matter……HOW you say it counts for a lot….Not knowing that is just sad.

  78. aislander says:

    That, menopaws, was one hell of good satire.

    I mean it had to be because you CANNOT be serious (to quote John McEnroe)…

  79. CT7, the payment for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan haven’t even begun yet. We’re barely paying off the interest on the money Bush borrowed to fight them.

    aislander, you didn’t even review the article, did you? They explain their figures quite well.

    If you just give him 6 months, which is usual (although I would give it 12, since Republicans immediately started a stall and deny tactic which delayed implementation of Obama’s policies) the economy started growing instead of declining like it had the last two years of Bush.

    As predicted, the economy has slowed again because of lack of middle-class jobs, reduction in government investment into the economy, and lack of investment by those who gained all the wealth during the “trickle-down” years we’ve suffered under the wrong economic approach.

    We tried to take care of making government smaller and keeping taxes low (right-wing demands) instead of fixing the economy (left-wing demands). And predictably, to those of us who think history shows that demand-side works and supply-side doesn’t, the supply-side economy dictated by conservatives and implemented by default by Obama, has failed once again to help the economy.

    The rich are holding on to their money, not investing in the USA, and yet the Romney/Ryan theory is to give them an even bigger percentage of the wealth so they can continue to not invest it in job-creation activities in our country?

    We now know once again that trickle down doesn’t work. How much longer do we have to put up with it?

  80. aislander says:

    As long as reductions in the rate of budget increase are characterized as “cuts,” government will NEVER become “smaller.”

    We haven’t even tried the methods you slander for a very long time…

  81. sumyungboi says:

    tuddo, when you start citing religious teachings, you’ve lost the debate.

    However, I have no problem with values having stemmed from religion, and I do have a problem with leftist whackos forever whining about right wingers pushing theocracy when that couldn’t be farther from the truth, while at the same time cheering on the demonization of those whose political philosophy they don’t agree with. I don’t see conservatives pushing for a state religion, but I do see leftists using the power of government to force private (free?) citizens to do things that they don’t want to do.

    In any case, you’re just a typical leftist, you have a big problem with people’s values if they just happen to also believe in god, but don’t seem to have that same problem with people who don’t. Personally, If I were forced to have to trust someone, I’d much rather trust a guy who’s been taught that stealing is bad, you shouldn’t lie, and doing your neighbors wife is a no-no, as opposed to the guy who’s lazy and wants free money, and is so enthralled with guys playing with each others junk that he shows up at the parade to share the pride. No thanks.

  82. So aislander wants to return to the policies that led to the Great Depression rather than the policies that led to the Great Recession…..hardly an improvement.

    So….just which of the Progressive Era policies are you wanting to get rid of? 40 hour work weeks? Child Labor Laws? Safety regulations in the workplace? Or just letting women vote?

  83. LeePHill says:

    “sumyungboi says:
    Aug. 10, 2012 at 1:48 pm tuddo, when you start citing religious teachings, you’ve lost the debate.”

    :::makes note of this for next discussion on gay marriage or abortion::

  84. aislander says:

    Wow, beerBoy! That must be a record for the most straw men in a short two paragraphs!

    There is a business cycle, no doubt about it, but I wish to avoid the policies that turned a deep depression (although certainly not the deepest in US history) into the most prolonged depression in US history. Those same types of policies have turned the current unpleasantness into the most prolonged recession in US history.

    Liberalism seems to be about instituting laws of men that seek to repeal laws of nature. And that never works…

  85. sumyungboi says:

    lee: “makes note of this for next discussion on gay marriage or abortion”

    Have at it. I’m not a religious person, and I don’t care to hear other conservatives use that as their point of reason, either. My reasons for opposing both are grounded in logic, not religion.

  86. Since you have not specified which Progressive Era reforms you find repugnant I am left to guess. Except for the snarky comment about women’s suffrage, everything I listed were Progressive Era reforms in the workplace….how is that straw? It seems to me that, without being willing to specify which reforms you wish to get rid of, YOU are the one who is using the Progressive Movement as a strawman.

    Liberalism seems to be about instituting laws of men that seek to repeal laws of nature.

    Ah yes….social Darwinism.

    One of the “laws of nature” is that fathers eat their young, mothers practice infanticide. There are no nations.

  87. aislander says:

    I’m not speaking of “social Darwinism,” beer–which is a progressive-era term to describe those opposed to the progressives’ enthusiasm for eugenics–I’m referring to efforts to defeat the business cycle, or to mandate that an eight-passenger 4X4 get 40 MPG, or that placating evil tyrants will avoid war.

    I would have one-tenth of ALL federal regs sunset each year for ten years. Any worthy regs could be reimposed, but with only a ten-year lifespan and then they would need to be reviewed and reauthorized. I would simplify the tax system so that a third of a trillion dollars annually is no longer wasted complying with our Byzantine tax laws.

    Most of all, I would make certain that any “entitlements” pass the budget test to avoid situations such as we are now encountering with Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, and public-sector pensions and health care. Those things are now mathematically unsustainable.

  88. sumyungboi says:

    bb, guess who got the trains running, industry churning, and instilled a national pride in Germany back in the 1930’s. If your movement starts out as a bunch of hateful peckerheads, you’re not going anywhere.

  89. sumyungboi, first you said I hated religion, and then, because I said I believed in separation of church and state and would not impose my own religious beliefs on others you said I “cited religion”.

    I will wait for some “logic” to come out from you, especially the next gay marraige discussion, but I won’t hold my breath. I am not sure you know what the word means.

  90. aislander, the programs we have now are unsustainable if you add in the military spending Republicans want to continue, add in the debt service due to the Bush era and base revenue on the Bush tax cuts.

    Add in the economic woes due to Republican policies and conservative trickle-down theory, and you have an unsustainable direction.

    Move to demand side economics, invest in America instead of Afghanistan’s roads and infrastructure, get people working again, reward investors for investing in business instead of tax shelters in other countries, build up instead of tearing down the middle class, and you’ll have a healthy economy where we can afford to have safety net programs.

    Why do consdervatives have such a defeatist attitude about what America can achieve? Because they know when they are in charge, the country will go down hill.

  91. sumyungboi says:

    tuddo: “sumyungboi, first you said I hated religion, and then, because I said I believed in separation of church and state and would not impose my own religious beliefs on others you said I “cited religion”.”

    Don’t make me laugh, tuddo, leftists cite religion all the time. It’s called Alinsky #4.

  92. LeePHill says:

    I’m enjoying watching sumyungboi get hung up on the pickets while jumping the fence.

    It’s so much fun to see them caught in their hypocrisy.

  93. aislander says:

    We don’t have a “defeatist idea of what America can achieve,” tuds; we have a triumphal idea of what individuals can achieve…

  94. syb – Mussolini got the trains to run on time. The other things are Hitler.

    What’s your point? That efficiency, effectiveness and patriotism are bad things?

  95. Invest in America. Interesting. Thanks to our socialist programs, the investment vs payment to individuals flipped in the 1970’s.

    http://m.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/06/spending-vs-investing-sometimes-theres-a-difference/240846/

    BHO had a chance with the stimulus to invest. Instead only 10% went to infrastructure with long term economic growth effects.

  96. “SwordofPissant, anyone who thinks that even a complete economic imbecil could not do better than Obama is either ignorant, gullible or stupid.

    Ahem. Message – messenger. Ring any bells?

  97. CT7,

    “credit and blame are due when the person or group actually are responsible”

    So, you were lying when you credited Bush for TARP, weren’t you? After all, it was the Democratic-controlled Congress who passed it.

  98. “Why didn’t he fix the tax code then?”

    241 Republican filibusters since Obama was inaugurated. Do ya think that just might have something to do with it? http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/reference/cloture_motions/clotureCounts.htm

  99. “the ONLY way we could have “created” all those jobs and yet have a higher rate of unemployment and fewer people working.”

    Number of jobs when Obama was sworn in: 132,837,000
    Number of jobs in July: 133,245,000
    That’s a net gain of 408,000 jobs.

    Now, let’s compare this administration with the preceding one, over exactly the same time period.

    Number of jobs when Bush was sworn in: 132,529,000
    Number of jobs in July 2004: 131,488,000
    That’s a net loss of 1.04 million jobs.

    http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet

    Obama’s done more job creating than Bush did in the same length of time.

    Facts. They trump wrong-wing lies every time.

  100. ““social Darwinism,” beer–which is a progressive-era term to describe those opposed to the progressives’ enthusiasm for eugenics”

    Here’s a clue for you. When you make crap like this up, you should at least TRY to make it hard to debunk. The term “social Darwinism” originated in Europe in the 1860’s.

  101. SwordofPerseus wrote: Oldcroc and sumdumbboy horse blinders make moving through life hazardous.I am no big fan of Obama yet anyone who believes that this plastic tool, Willard Romney, would do better is either ignorant, gullible or stupid.:/
    ________________________________________________________

    I responded: SwordofPissant, anyone who thinks that even a complete economic imbecil could not do better than Obama is either ignorant, gullible or stupid. I’ve got my money on ignorant and gullible and stupid…..a progressive/liberal politcal trifecta.
    ________________________________________________________
    Ehill chipped in: Ahem. Message – messenger. Ring any bells?
    ________________________________________________________

    Ahem. Cliche – ehill. Sound familiar?

  102. Ehill, less people are working as a % of population. Fact.

    Since he was sworn in right at the bottom, you are bragging about 400,000 jobs after $5trill was spent?

    He got Obamacare rammed through, can give amnesty to illegals, allow gays in the military, but could not simplify the tax code? Bottom line is he does not care, or action would have preceded his last two years of rhetoric and class warfare.

  103. sumyungboi says:

    ehill: ““Why didn’t he fix the tax code then?”
    241 Republican filibusters since Obama was inaugurated. Do ya think that just might have something to do with it?”

    No, he said fix the tax code, not give lazy people more of my stuff. And I wonder just how many House bills never saw the light of day in the Senate? Senate dems are traitors to America, and should be treated as such.

  104. TARP was run by the Treasury. All congress did was make it smaller. Nice try. You fail again.

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troubled_Asset_Relief_Program#_

  105. Ehill wrote: the ONLY way we could have “created” all those jobs and yet have a higher rate of unemployment and fewer people working.”

    Number of jobs when Obama was sworn in: 132,837,000
    Number of jobs in July: 133,245,000
    That’s a net gain of 408,000 jobs.

    Now, let’s compare this administration with the preceding one, over exactly the same time period.

    Number of jobs when Bush was sworn in: 132,529,000
    Number of jobs in July 2004: 131,488,000
    That’s a net loss of 1.04 million jobs.

    http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet

    Obama’s done more job creating than Bush did in the same length of time.

    Facts. They trump wrong-wing lies every time.
    ______________________________________________________

    Couple of things ehill needs to explain.

    1. The Obama administration claims to have created 4,000,000 jobs. If, according to the BLS, there has been a net gain of 408,000 jobs since Obama took office, THERE MUST HAVE BEEN A LOSS OF SOME
    3,592,000 JOBS DURING THE SAME PERIOD????? DIDN’T ANYONE NOTICE???

    2. The unemployment rate in January 2009 was 7.6%, today it stands at 8.3%. Each 1% equals approximately 1.5 million unemployed citizens. In other words there are approximatedly 3.5 million more people unemployed today than there were in January 2009. IF THERE ARE 408,000 MORE JOBS TODAY THAN IN JANUARY 2009, WHY IS IT THESE 3.5 MILLION UNEMPLOYED CITIZENS CAN’T FIND THEM??????

  106. LeePHill says:

    “not give lazy people more of my stuff.”

    Start with the oil companies. Quit giving them “your stuff” when they have demonstrated they are perfectly capable of generating their own. Next, move on to the Koch Bros. collective business interests….

    Oh…wait…I forgot….they are “job creators”, so we need to hand things to them

  107. “Ahem. Cliche – ehill. Sound familiar?”

    Mangling peoples’ monikers in an insulting way and claiming that they’re stupid indeed a cliche from a conservative. And it sounds quite familiar coming from you.

    “ignorant and gullible and stupid…..a progressive/liberal politcal trifecta.”

    As I said, when you know you don’t have the intellectual horsepower to discuss an issue like an adult, insult the messenger. Thanks for yet more proof.

  108. “Since he was sworn in right at the bottom, you are bragging about 400,000 jobs after $5trill was spent?

    “The bottom” in term of unemployment didn’t happen until February 2010. That’s because, as I’ve said several times, unemployment always trails.

    # jobs February 2010: 129,244,000
    # jobs in July: 133,245,000
    http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost

    A net gain of 4 million jobs.

  109. “Senate dems are traitors to America, and should be treated as such.

    Ahhh. Were you the one who screamed that they wanted to hang Senator Murray at that TP rally?

  110. sumyungboi says:

    lee: “Start with the oil companies. Quit giving them “your stuff””

    I know you’re young, and it’s easy for you to vomit out your Turk Army rhetoric, but educate yourself before proclaiming yourself a fool.

    First, I’m not “giving” oil companies anything, outside of what I pay for retail products. Learn the difference between “subsidy” and “deduction”. A subsidy is a payout a company gets from the government if the owners have donated to the Obama campaign and want to get rich quick in return while having no concern for the company itself or the employees. A corporate tax deduction allows a company to pay less in taxes for doing various things deemed good for society / America.

    Oil companies are allowed less deductions as a percentage than most companies.

  111. “TARP was run by the Treasury. All congress did was make it smaller.

    Correction: TARP was run by the treasury after it passed Congress, thanks to the Democrats.

    But I do find it interesting that you agree with Paul Krugman that TARP should have been bigger. Maybe there’s hope for you yet.

  112. sumyungboi says:

    ehill: “Ahhh. Were you the one who screamed that they wanted to hang Senator Murray at that TP rally?”

    Every now and then, it’s good to take a walk down memory lane.

    http://www.ringospictures.com/index.php?page=20090816

  113. Which one is you?

  114. Oh, and by the way. Nice use of the “but mommy, all the other kids are doing it” excuse. What are you, eight?

  115. aislander says:

    Thanks, syb. Pictures speak louder than lefties and their apologists…

  116. “Pictures speak louder than lefties and their apologists…

    Then you should enjoy these: http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/gary-bauer-outraged-incivility-wisconsin-protests

  117. sumyungboi says:

    ehill, why don’t you go get that $100k reward from Breitbart com when you come up with evidence of conservatives spitting and yelling racial slurs at congressional democrats just prior to passing obamacare. The dems said it happened, and with cameras all over the place, I’m sure you can do it. Those democrats wouldn’t lie, would they? :)

  118. ehill wrote: “Ahem. Cliche – ehill. Sound familiar?”

    Mangling peoples’ monikers in an insulting way and claiming that they’re stupid indeed a cliche from a conservative. And it sounds quite familiar coming from you.

    “ignorant and gullible and stupid…..a progressive/liberal politcal trifecta.”

    As I said, when you know you don’t have the intellectual horsepower to discuss an issue like an adult, insult the messenger. Thanks for yet more proof.
    ____________________________________________________

    Before you start pointing fingers at “moniker mangling” you’d best check your fellow travelers. They are also quite adept at the insult game and the very first to complain when someone returns the favor.

    You say a lot of things ehill, most of which can be attributed to the Debbie Wasserman Schultz truth machine. You would not know honest debate if it bit you in the rear so don’t bother me with your incessant use of cliche and whining when it is pointed out. Or, as you often say….”Mr. Pot meet….” Crappo!

  119. CT7 wrote: “Since he was sworn in right at the bottom, you are bragging about 400,000 jobs after $5trill was spent?
    ________________________________________________________

    Ehill responded: “The bottom” in term of unemployment didn’t happen until February 2010. That’s because, as I’ve said several times, unemployment always trails.

    # jobs February 2010: 129,244,000
    # jobs in July: 133,245,000
    http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost

    A net gain of 4 million jobs.
    _____________________________________________________________

    Earlier ehill wrote:
    Number of jobs when Obama was sworn in: 132,837,000
    Number of jobs in July: 133,245,000
    That’s a net gain of 408,000 jobs.

    Now, let’s compare this administration with the preceding one, over exactly the same time period.

    Number of jobs when Bush was sworn in: 132,529,000
    Number of jobs in July 2004: 131,488,000
    That’s a net loss of 1.04 million jobs.

    Obama’s done more job creating than Bush did in the same length of time.

    Facts. They trump wrong-wing lies every time.
    __________________________________________________________
    Couple of things ehill still needs to explain.

    1. The Obama administration claims to have created 4,000,000 jobs. If, according to the BLS and ehill, there has been a net gain of 408,000 jobs since Obama took office, THERE MUST HAVE BEEN A LOSS OF SOME 3,592,000 JOBS DURING THE SAME PERIOD????? DIDN’T ANYONE NOTICE???

    2. The unemployment rate in January 2009 was 7.6%, today it stands at 8.3%. Each 1% equals approximately 1.5 million unemployed citizens. In other words there are approximatedly 3.5 million more people unemployed today than there were in January 2009. IF THERE ARE 408,000 MORE JOBS TODAY THAN IN JANUARY 2009, WHY IS IT 12 MILLION UNEMPLOYED CITIZENS CAN’T FIND THEM??????

    Obama administration “facts” don’t always seem to add up. I can’t call them lies, just creative mathmatics. If the administration wishes to take credit for job creation it must also acknowledge the role of its policies in job loss. Probably not an adult summation in ehill’s eyes but 12 million unemployed Americans might be in agreement.

  120. “Before you start pointing fingers at “moniker mangling” you’d best check your fellow travelers.”

    First you denied using insults and now you’re using the “Waaah! All the other kids are doing it! Waaah!” excuse? Wow, and you accuse me of not knowing honest debate? LOL – that’s pretty funny.

    “you would not know honest debate if it bit you in the rear

    Message – messenger. Sound familiar? If you’re tired of hearing it, then maybe you should stop insulting the messenger when you can’t refute the message.

    “Obama administration “facts” don’t always seem to add up. I can’t call them lies, just creative mathmatics.”

    In other words, when you don’t like the message (the irrefutable fact that the Obama administration has created more jobs than the Bush administration over the same length of time), attack the messenger. But hey, since you claim to like “honest debate”, why don’t you show some evidence that the Bureau of Labor Statistics has somehow used “creative mathematics”, because those are the number I posted. Got any facts? Now’s the time to show them

    “If the administration wishes to take credit for job creation it must also acknowledge the role of its policies in job loss”

    LOL – Mitt Romney recently said that it takes up to a year for a new president’s economic policies to have an effect. Was he wrong?

  121. “ehill, why don’t you go get that $100k reward from Breitbart com when you come up with evidence of conservatives spitting and yelling racial slurs at congressional democrats just prior to passing obamacare.”

    Deflection.

  122. aislander says:

    So…why are there fewer people working now than when the Bamster took office?

    “Sound familiar?” Of course it sounds familiar–your posts are no more than a melange of cliches…

  123. Gents, he is simply trying to annoy.

  124. “So…why are there fewer people working now than when the Bamster took office?”

    There aren’t.

  125. “From what, moron? You wanting me to hang Patti Murray? You are truly and amateur, ehill.”

    Nice strawman.

  126. “Before you start pointing fingers at “moniker mangling” you’d best check your fellow travelers.”

    First you denied using insults and now you’re using the “Waaah! All the other kids are doing it! Waaah!” excuse? Wow, and you accuse me of not knowing honest debate? LOL – that’s pretty funny.

    “you would not know honest debate if it bit you in the rear

    Message – messenger. Sound familiar? If you’re tired of hearing it, then maybe you should stop insulting the messenger when you can’t refute the message.

    “Obama administration “facts” don’t always seem to add up. I can’t call them lies, just creative mathmatics.”

    In other words, when you don’t like the message (the irrefutable fact that the Obama administration has created more jobs than the Bush administration over the same length of time), attack the messenger. But hey, since you claim to like “honest debate”, why don’t you show some evidence that the Bureau of Labor Statistics has somehow used “creative mathematics”, because those are the number I posted. Got any facts? Now’s the time to show them

    “If the administration wishes to take credit for job creation it must also acknowledge the role of its policies in job loss”

    LOL – Mitt Romney recently said that it takes up to a year for a new president’s economic policies to have an effect. Was he wrong?
    _______________________________________________________________________

    Ehill apparently prefers his own interpretation of the facts rather than how they actually apply to the total situation.

    1. SwordofPerseus was the first to engage in “moniker mangling”, I admit to following suit. Pissant is defined as a noun meaning insignificant……ehill maintains I meant something sinister. I don’t know. Is that attacking the messenger?

    2. Ehill, your concept of debate is extracting a CBO or BLS figure, applying it to a vaguely related fact and then drawing a conclusion that fails to account for the correlated catastrophic economic result. One can employ virtually the same statistics provided by ehill and arrive at a vastly different conclusion.

    3. Ehill constantly confuses a refutation of the message with an attack on the messenger. Some liberals are notoriously thin skinned and if one fails to swoon in response to their message it is viewed as a personal attack. Ehill appears to fall into this category.

    4. Requesting ehill to comment is akin to whistling into the wind. His response is the sound of crickets. For example, he has twice been asked to comment on questions that involve some of the same statistics that he has used:

    A. The Obama administration claims to have created 4,000,000 jobs. If, according to the BLS and ehill, there has been a net gain of 408,000 jobs since Obama took office, THERE MUST HAVE BEEN A LOSS OF SOME 3,592,000 JOBS DURING THE SAME PERIOD????? DIDN’T ANYONE NOTICE???

    B. The unemployment rate in January 2009 was 7.6%, today it stands at 8.3%. Each 1% equals approximately 1.5 million unemployed citizens. In other words there are approximatedly 3.5 million more people unemployed today than there were in January 2009. IF THERE ARE 408,000 MORE JOBS TODAY THAN IN JANUARY 2009, WHY IS IT 12 MILLION UNEMPLOYED CITIZENS CAN’T FIND THEM??????

    Obama administration “facts” don’t always seem to add up. I can’t call them lies, just creative mathmatics. If the administration wishes to take credit for job creation it must also acknowledge the role of its policies in job loss. Obama’s weak response has consistently been that the recovery is not as strong as he had hoped……really??

  127. “SwordofPerseus was the first to engage in “moniker mangling”, I admit to following suit.”

    I quit letting my kid get away with the “but they started it” excuse when he was eight. How old are you? If it’s more than eight, here’s a piece of advice: grow up. Put on your big boy pants and quit trying to blame others for your actions.

    “your concept of debate is extracting a CBO or BLS figure…”

    Yep, it’s called rational discourse. You ought to try it yourself sometime.

    “Ehill constantly confuses a refutation of the message with an attack on the messenger”

    Ahhh, you mean “refutations” like these:

    o “ignorant and gullible and stupid…..a progressive/liberal politcal trifecta.”

    o “You would not know honest debate if it bit you in the rear”

    o “Requesting ehill to comment is akin to whistling into the wind. His response is the sound of crickets.”

    o “Obama administration “facts” don’t always seem to add up. I can’t call them lies, just creative mathmatics.”

    Perhaps you can point out exactly how those were refutations of messages, and not attacks on the messenger. I’ll wait.

  128. ”The Obama administration claims to have created 4,000,000 jobs. If, according to the BLS and ehill, there has been a net gain of 408,000 jobs since Obama took office, THERE MUST HAVE BEEN A LOSS OF SOME 3,592,000 JOBS DURING THE SAME PERIOD????? DIDN’T ANYONE NOTICE???”

    Don’t be idiotic. Of course people noticed. Here, for you edification, are the job losses by month:

    Month … # working … Loss
    Jan-08 … 138,023,000
    Feb-08 … 137,939,000 … 84,000
    Mar-08 … 137,844,000 … 95,000
    Apr-08 … 137,636,000 …208,000
    May-08 … 137,446,000 …190,000
    Jun-08 … 137,248,000 …198,000
    Jul-08 … 137,038,000 …210,000
    Aug-08 … 136,764,000 …274,000
    Sep-08 … 136,332,000 …432,000
    Oct-08 … 135,843,000 …489,000 – Bush administration TARP proposal passes, endorsed by both candidates
    Nov-08 … 135,040,000 …803,000 – Presidential election
    Dec-08 … 134,379,000 …661,000
    Jan-09 … 133,561,000 …818,000 – Obama inaugurated Jan 20
    Feb-09 … 132,837,000 …724,000 – Stimulus package goes into effect
    Mar-09 … 132,038,000 …799,000
    Apr-09 … 131,346,000 …692,000
    May-09 … 130,985,000 …361,000
    Jun-09 … 130,503,000 …482,000
    Jul-09 … 130,164,000 …339,000
    Aug-09 … 129,963,000 …201,000
    Sep-09 … 129,734,000 …229,000
    Oct-09 … 129,532,000 …202,000
    Nov-09 … 129,490,000 … 42,000
    Dec-09 … 129,319,000 …171,000
    Jan-10 … 129,279,000 … 40,000
    Feb-10 … 129,244,000 … 35,000
    Mar-10 … 129,443,000 199,000 gain
    Jul-12 … 133,245,000 4,001,000 gain

  129. “IF THERE ARE 408,000 MORE JOBS TODAY THAN IN JANUARY 2009, WHY IS IT 12 MILLION UNEMPLOYED CITIZENS CAN’T FIND THEM??????”

    There aren’t 408,000 more open jobs. There are 408,000 more working people.

  130. took14theteam says:

    I think AJ needs to start an archive on ehill. Then when ehill gets on his holier than thou rants about “Message – Messenger” he can be reminded that he is the biggest hypocrite of all….

    LMAO

  131. “No, there are 3.42 million job openings.”

    Tell that to olddoc. I didn’t mention job openings.

  132. I wrote: SwordofPerseus was the first to engage in “moniker mangling”, I admit to following suit. Pissant is defined as a noun meaning insignificant……ehill maintains I meant something sinister. I don’t know. Is that attacking the messenger?
    __________________________________________________

    Ehill retorted: I quit letting my kid get away with the “but they started it” excuse when he was eight. How old are you? If it’s more than eight, here’s a piece of advice: grow up. Put on your big boy pants and quit trying to blame others for your actions.
    __________________________________________________

    My reply is: Ehill uses only that part of any quote which best suits his agenda. I do not recall you calling out SOP for “moniker mangling”….did I miss something or do all librals get a free pass? Do Democrats have on their “big boy pants” when they whine that Bush did it too? Obama is quite adept at the blame game….does he also have a pair of “big boy pants”?

  133. I wrote: Ehill, your concept of debate is extracting a CBO or BLS figure, applying it to a vaguely related fact and then drawing a conclusion that fails to account for the correlated catastrophic economic result. One can employ virtually the same statistics provided by ehill and arrive at a vastly different conclusion.
    ____________________________________________________

    Ehill replied: Yep, it’s called rational discourse. You ought to try it yourself sometime.
    ____________________________________________________

    My reply is: I’ll agree that you can call it discourse, however, it becomes a bit irrational whenever context and/or completeness is omitted with the sole intent of furthering an agenda.

  134. I wrote: “Ehill constantly confuses a refutation of the message with an attack on the messenger”. Some liberals are notoriously thin skinned and if one fails to swoon in response to their message it is viewed as a personal attack. Ehill appears to fall into this category.
    _____________________________________________________________________

    Ehill wrote: Ahhh, you mean “refutations” like these:

    o “ignorant and gullible and stupid…..a progressive/liberal politcal trifecta.”

    o “You would not know honest debate if it bit you in the rear”

    o “Requesting ehill to comment is akin to whistling into the wind. His response is the sound of crickets.”

    o “Obama administration “facts” don’t always seem to add up. I can’t call them lies, just creative mathmatics.”

    Perhaps you can point out exactly how those were refutations of messages, and not attacks on the messenger. I’ll wait.
    _________________________________________________

    I respond: No crickets here buddy boy. Hope I didn’t keep you waiting.

    o Another quote taken out of context from an earlier discussion with SOP in which her use of ‘ignorant, gullible and stupid’ was used ironically.

    o Another quote taken out of context in reply to another of baseless ehill assertion.

    o Well blow me down……you finally answered a question!!!

    o. Ehill has yet to figure out that ideologues (he is a great example), politicians and political parties constantly use only that part of a storyline that supports the position favoring their adgenda.

  135. I wrote: ”The Obama administration claims to have created 4,000,000 jobs. If, according to the BLS and ehill, there has been a net gain of 408,000 jobs since Obama took office, THERE MUST HAVE BEEN A LOSS OF SOME 3,592,000 JOBS DURING THE SAME PERIOD????? DIDN’T ANYONE NOTICE???”
    _______________________________________________

    Ehill replied: There aren’t 408,000 more open jobs. There are 408,000 more working people.
    _______________________________________________

    I now say: Apparently ehill doesn’t remember what he opined on Aug 11 at 3:38 AM when he wrote:

    “Number of jobs when Obama was sworn in: 132,837,000
    Number of jobs in July: 133,245,000
    That’s a net gain of 408,000 jobs.”

    Sounds like you said jobs not working people, but what the hell do I know!! Maybe you came home late after a few too many.

  136. CT7 wrote: “No, there are 3.42 million job openings.”
    _______________________________________________________

    Ehill replied: Tell that to olddoc. I didn’t mention job openings.
    _______________________________________________________

    Duly noted…..only about four unemployed citizens for each opening. Sounds like the ‘slower than we had hoped’ recovery mentioned by President Obama. Hope and Change…..you bet!

    OK ehill, my last words on the subject. I realize that you ladies like to have the last word….so have at it. I’m done.

  137. “I do not recall you calling out SOP for “moniker mangling”….did I miss something or do all librals get a free pass?

    SoP wasn’t the one using the “but mommmy, they started it” excuse. That was you, remember? And you’re still trying to excuse your own actions by blaming SoP. Whatever happened to the conservative mantra of taking responsibilities for one’s actions?

    “it becomes a bit irrational whenever context and/or completeness is omitted”

    Nice (and undocumented, I might add) job of trying to move the goalposts. Failed, but nice.

    “Another quote taken out of context from an earlier discussion with SOP in which her use of ‘ignorant, gullible and stupid’ was used ironically.”

    Another use of the “but mommy, they started it” excuse.

    “Another quote taken out of context in reply to another of baseless ehill assertion”

    Yet another use of “but mommy, they started it”.

    ” I realize that you ladies like to have the last word”

    Another insult. How unexpected.

    “Maybe you came home late after a few too many.”

    Another insult. Ho hum. Guess that’s your version of reasoned discourse.

  138. took14theteam says:

    Now that was an “off topic” comment if i have ever seen one.

    I would have thought the “other” Hill would have schooled you on that kind of behavior.

    But we all know you two are do as I say, not as I do types….

  139. It is funny to watch the Hills use previous admin’s behavior, on an issue they find wrong or misguided, as an excuse for this admin. Then, that crap above this comment.

    Hypocrite.

  140. “Now that was an “off topic” comment if i have ever seen one.”

    Wow. When you can’t refute the message, mischaracterize it as being “off-topic”. How refreshing.

  141. “Hypocrite”

    Projection.

  142. LeePHill says:

    Uh…doc….you’ll have to check with LF/CT but I do believe you are wallpapering

  143. LeePHill says:

    “took14theteam says:
    Aug. 12, 2012 at 5:37 pm Now that was an “off topic” comment if i have ever seen one.”

    Sayeth the queen of off topic….

  144. falkoja6 says:

    For those who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy that everything is “Bush’s Fault”, think about this:
    January 3rd, 2007 was the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress.
    At the time:
    The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77
    The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5%
    The Unemployment rate was 4.6%

*
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