Welcome!
|
||
Logout|My Dashboard

The Bridge on the River Potomac? - Daily Inter Lake: Columns

Login to DailyInterLake.com

Subscribers Click Here

Non Subscribers Click Here

The Bridge on the River Potomac?

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Saturday, November 10, 2012 7:00 pm | Updated: 12:35 pm, Thu Apr 17, 2014.

In the wake of Tuesday’s election, we are hearing lots of talk about bipartisanship and statesmanship, with the unstated premise that statesmanship and bipartisanship are automatically the same thing.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Subscription Required

An online service is needed to view this article in its entirety. You need an online service to view this article in its entirety.

Have an online subscription?

Login Now

Need an online subscription?

Subscribe

Login

Choose an online service.

    Current print subscribers

      You must login to view the full content on this page.

      Thank you for reading 5 free articles on our site. You can come back at the end of your 30-day period for another 5 free articles, or you can purchase a subscription and continue to enjoy valuable local news and information. If you need help, please contact our office at 406-755-7000 . You need an online service to view this article in its entirety.

      Have an online subscription?

      Login Now

      Need an online subscription?

      Subscribe

      Login

      Choose an online service.

        Current print subscribers

          Welcome to the discussion.

          237 comments:

          • Rick Spencer posted at 10:51 am on Sun, Nov 18, 2012.

            Rick Spencer Posts: 405

            Rob: That may be the problem, merely an awareness of the vision the Progressives are selling. Actually, I have always believed that most Democrats do not understand the vision they are voting for as it is the exact model outlined by Hannah Arendt in The Origins of Totalitarianism that led to WWII. I think that you might like it. RLS

             
          • Rob123 posted at 8:51 am on Sun, Nov 18, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            Rick Spencer posted at 6:16 am ....

            I don't have their 'vision', merely an awareness of their existence. But nice try. [wink]

             
          • Rick Spencer posted at 6:16 am on Sun, Nov 18, 2012.

            Rick Spencer Posts: 405

            Rob: Yes! Those are exactly the Democrats I am speaking about. Thanks for bringing it to our attention as they form the core of the party and they vote! You may have their vision, but I do not. RLS

             
          • Rob123 posted at 12:12 am on Sun, Nov 18, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            Rick Spencer posted at 7:53 pm on Sat, Nov 17, 2012.
            " Now, that wraps up the situation of the country. So, you ask me why I call it the moron vote? What would you call it?" RLS

            The Wild and Wonderful Whites of West Virginia Trailer
            http://www.imdb.com/video/screenplay/vi745801497/

             
          • Rick Spencer posted at 7:53 pm on Sat, Nov 17, 2012.

            Rick Spencer Posts: 405

            I agree with HTC, without the nanny state they have nothing, actually less than nothing. They will end up like the communists, the socialists, and the fascists; a history of failure where the citizens who put their fate and faith in their hands are the big losers. That is the history of the world with such political parties; abject failure. A country cannot exist fiscally when less than half are paying taxes, where there are more takers than givers, where the public school system is in ruin, where political correctness rules, where over 50% of GDP is controlled by the government creating a directed economy, and where a majority of their voters are morons. The moron vote may win the elections, but it destroys the country.

            I want you to imagine that you are living as follows: you have a family and get a paycheck but your job is tenuous, you have expenses that demand you borrow $.40 cents of every dollar you spend, that you have future expenses that are 14 times your earning capacity, that your pay is stalled and inflation is in the cards, and, that you double down with more debt. Now, that wraps up the situation of the country. So, you ask me why I call it the moron vote? What would you call it? RLS

             
          • bill39 posted at 6:12 pm on Sat, Nov 17, 2012.

            bill39 Posts: 1051

            267 billion more than it was Sept 4th when it hit 16 trillion.

             
          • bill39 posted at 6:07 pm on Sat, Nov 17, 2012.

            bill39 Posts: 1051

            Our national debt is ALREADY over sixteen and a quarter trillion.

             
          • Rob123 posted at 6:07 pm on Sat, Nov 17, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            HighTechCowboy posted at 5:57 pm on Sat, Nov 17, 2012.

            You little reactionary twit of an attack dog.....I posted it with a statement to read some of the posted comments for a taste of Americana, and you flyy right into a rage. And you wonder why Republicans can't win, or even get a fair hearing.

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 5:57 pm on Sat, Nov 17, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Rob123 posted at 5:25 pm on Sat, Nov 17, 2012

            No doubt your employees are paid better and you provide them with health insurance as well?

            You're the consummate hypocrite, constantly raging against big boxes (your competition) while you fail to practice what you preach.

            You're a stuck record endlessly repeating an indefensible message.

            Meanwhile, the store manager in your post should be more concerned as to what effect ObamaCare is going to have on her employment, come 2014. Many employers in low margin businesses like that of Walmart are planning to cut back employee hours to under 30 hours per week so as not to have to meet ObamaCare's unaffordable requirements.

            If she thinks her life sux now, I wonder how she'll feel when she's being paid 25% less.

            No doubt she's intellectually challenged as well and probably voted to reelect Obama.

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 5:49 pm on Sat, Nov 17, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Rob123: If you two weren't so ideologically rigid and intellectually challenged....And your side won't touch your Tax Write Offs! Lets dig our heels in and sink the ship, because we have Principles! Gawd.......

            HTC: Obviously you're the one who's intellectually challenged. There is nothing economically nor Constitutionally sound about the massive nanny state which the Democrats have built. Their 'principles' behind its creation are unAmerican and have brought us to the brink of economic ruin.

            The fiscal conservatives, however, have both economics AND the constitution on their side when they insist that we have a spending problem and not a revenue problem. Hauser's Law also makes clear that we can raise tax rates all we want, but we'll only cause the economy to contract as a result. A bigger piece of a smaller pie is all you'll get. I'd rather have a smaller piece of a much bigger pie, which is what you get when marginal tax rates are lowered. Every time that's been done, we've seen a significant increase in tax revenues and the percentage of all income taxes paid by the so-called rich has always increased as well.

            To all but the most intellectually challenged, it's patently clear: If you want to 'soak' the rich, lower your marginal tax rates.

             
          • Rob123 posted at 5:25 pm on Sat, Nov 17, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=531674360193885&set=a.206138056080852.56660.205876559440335&type=1&theater

            And read down some of the comments on this little jewel.....interesting slice of Americana.......

             
          • Rob123 posted at 5:19 pm on Sat, Nov 17, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            kohana: [Quoting Erik Rush]

            HTC: Truer words were never spoken.

            If you two weren't so ideologically rigid and intellectually challenged, you would pick up and read some actual Left Wing Pundits and see how they cut up the Obama Presidency even more than you two. Yes, he is to the Left of you two. But to call him a Marxist-Socialist-Communist pig merely means you watch Fox News a lot, and read Republican propaganda while drinking your kool-aid.
            *********************************************************
            "HTC: They won't touch those (entitlements) because without their nanny state, they cease to exist as a viable national party."

            And your side won't touch your Tax Write Offs! Lets dig our heels in and sink the ship, because we have Principles! Gawd.......

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 4:57 pm on Sat, Nov 17, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            kohana: [Quoting Erik Rush] "Now, Americans who made an effort to educate themselves as to the origins, nature, and designs of this President are asking themselves if half of the electorate are really that intellectually compromised, so unaware of the dynamics of the last four years they appear to be. It is painfully obvious at this point that those who don’t have a handle on Barack Obama being a committed Marxist are either dangerously deluded or stupid; there’s no middle ground here."

            HTC: Truer words were never spoken.

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 4:40 pm on Sat, Nov 17, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Rob123: That's not true. In fact, you just lied! Shame on you.

            HTC: Technically, you're correct; however, the spending cuts they're willing to discuss are so minute and not in the areas where deep cuts absoutely MUST be made; namely, entitlement spending.

            They won't touch those because without their nanny state, they cease to exist as a viable national party.

            It really is that simple.

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 4:36 pm on Sat, Nov 17, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Rob123: I agree, it sucs, but at least get real and explain it as it will be in the real world, not in your convoluted little pixie world of 'poor us rich guys!'.

            HTC: I guess anything more complicated than a ma-and-pa business in a small rural town is too much for you to handle?

            Medical devices, like most high-tech industy, is a GLOBAL market, not a regional or national market; therefore, our U.S.-located businesses have to compete with international companies, most of whom not only have a lower tax and regulatory burden but also don't have a new excise tax like this to deal with.

            While you may think it's as simple as their just passing this along in a higher cost for their product, things like this end up pricing them OUT of the market instead.

            But even if they faced only a national market with no foreign competition, most of their devices are used in elective surgeries not covered by insurance of any kind. The elective procedure healthcare market has taken a BIG hit under Obama which has seen many of the wealthy lose an incredible amount of their net worth and now Obama wants to tax them even more. That's certain to only further injure the elective procedure marketplace.

            Before you go spouting off about "poor rich guys", you'd be well-served to spend a bit more time doing your homework.

             
          • JBSTONE posted at 4:23 pm on Sat, Nov 17, 2012.

            JBSTONE Posts: 4558

            kohana posted at 2:45 pm on Sat, Nov 17, 2012.

            Good One.................[thumbup]

             
          • kohana posted at 2:45 pm on Sat, Nov 17, 2012.

            kohana Posts: 2109

            http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/print-friendly/51130

            Now it Gets Ugly

            By Erik Rush Saturday, November 17, 2012

            Americans are confused. I realize that’s probably the understatement of the year, but I am referring not to the apparent insensibility of those who continue to support President Barack Obama, but to the perplexed state of those who are attempting to make sense out of the election outcome itself, as well as events that have taken place since. In short, it is mind-boggling that the man was re-elected considering the shape America is in, and his being the most dismal record of any President in American history.

            The craven but successful ploy on the part of the administration to defer addressing the issue of Benghazigate until after the election is evident, unless one is a consumer of the establishment press (mainstream media). The American public is being encouraged to focus upon the romantic dalliances of fallen CIA Director General David Petraeus with a predatory publicity hound, and obscure emails between an ugly Middle Eastern-American socialite, the publicity hound, and another general. This, I suppose, would be in lieu of focusing upon the effluvia of lies being fire-hosed from the mouths of President Obama and his administration vis-à-vis the events of September 11, 2012, in Benghazi, Libya.

            These deceptions have been so blatant and so outlandish that I can only describe them as surreal. At House and Senate intelligence committee hearings this week, intelligence officials ostensibly tried to explain their deportment on September 11 as regards the reported pleas for aid leading up to and through the attack on the consulate in Benghazi. Meanwhile – with help in distraction from the press – the administration continues to purvey contradicting accounts of whether or not aid was requested by slain Ambassador Christopher Stevens and CIA operatives, while at the same time attempting to clarify that very matter.

            During a recent press conference, Obama was unable to answer a correspondent’s question addressing whether he had attempted to render aid to the beleaguered personnel in Benghazi on September 11. His obfuscation would have been taken as the mutterings of a mental defective were it any other individual. Obama’s faux chivalry in his defense of UN Ambassador Susan Rice, who blanketed the media with the fairy tale tying the Benghazi attack and other Middle East uprisings to an anti-Islam video, was rife with petulance, comical challenges, and self-contradiction. One can almost hear the scrambling of feet as White House and intelligence operatives scurry to prepare their CYA briefs.

            Now, Americans who made an effort to educate themselves as to the origins, nature, and designs of this President are asking themselves if half of the electorate are really that intellectually compromised, so unaware of the dynamics of the last four years they appear to be. It is painfully obvious at this point that those who don’t have a handle on Barack Obama being a committed Marxist are either dangerously deluded or stupid; there’s no middle ground here.

            Obama’s intention has always been to raze America to the ground (in the operative sense), and supplant our system with the Marxist paradigm. This has become exponentially more apparent only days after his re-election, yet, not an eyebrow is raised when he casually addresses the press using rhetoric right out of Marx’s The Communist Manifesto and Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. Now he claims to have a mandate to raise taxes to the tune of over $1 trillion to fund a cyclopean government that is already about to collapse in on itself.

            And what of the election, our bewildered non-Obama voters wonder. Did the President steal it? A Chicago voting machine technician now claims he observed that machines he was called to service were not counting votes for GOP nominee Mitt Romney. This is an error he claims never occurred when someone voted for Obama. The anecdotal evidence of voter fraud and election machine malfunctions is boundless, and at this writing, there are still congressional races that remain undecided.

            Let us presume for a moment that Obama did steal the election via voter and technical fraud. Let’s also consider the possibility that he doesn’t care who knows. He’s not going to leave the smoking gun and body to be found, just some bloody drag marks. This way, engaged, patriotic Americans will be certain of his crime, but the uninformed and the deluded will not.

            Let’s consider further who Obama is – that committed Marxist who wishes to replace our representative republic with a Marxist collective. What have such people done with their political enemies in the past? Typically, they kill or imprison them – and large numbers are of no moment. If Obama has been intent upon orchestrating a scenario whereby government intercession to suppress civil unrest will become “necessary,” then anything to engender tension and strife domestically is a win for him. This he has already done economically and through class warfare.

            Thus, I believe that this president would find mass demonstrations by factions enraged over a stolen election simply delicious.

            In case you haven’t noticed, the US is also moving into another round of mass layoffs, due to companies’ attempts to balance their books in the wake of the looming Obamacare implementation. Hostess, the 80-year-old maker Twinkies, Ding Dongs and Wonder Bread, just announced it will close its doors and lay off 18,500 workers. Many Obama crony corporations held back their announcements of layoffs until after the election. These layoffs are being framed by the left as evil corporations’ “revenge” for Obama’s re-election, which I am sure is calculated to further enflame public sentiments.

            So let them riot – the Tea Party, the Occupy movement, the New Black Panther Party, white supremacists, the Girl Scouts – all of them! With the press running interference, and only a quarter or so of Americans cognizant of who he really is and what he’s doing, Obama will only have to kill say, ten or twenty million Americans to force the capitulation of the rest. By the standard of Marxists past, that’s not too terrible a price.

             
          • Rob123 posted at 10:15 am on Sat, Nov 17, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            bill39: "Since the democrats are not talking about ANY cutting of spending........hence..........."

            That's not true. In fact, you just lied! Shame on you. [sad]

            [beam]

             
          • JBSTONE posted at 9:16 am on Sat, Nov 17, 2012.

            JBSTONE Posts: 4558

            jennydoe posted at 8:00 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.
            I don't think any of us could enjoy our stupidity as much as you enjoy yours mooseberryinn.

            ....hahaha............look who's talking............[beam]

             
          • bill39 posted at 9:04 am on Sat, Nov 17, 2012.

            bill39 Posts: 1051

            fish: Obama won because his policies reflect a comprehension of the definition of insanity.

            ignoramus

            fish: I am not naive enough to not realize that its not that simple but I don't understand how people can be so confident that somehow raising revenues in order to pay for our mess is a guaranteed bad idea.

            Since the democrats are not talking about ANY cutting of spending........hence...........
            You dont have a clue how much taxes would have to be raised just to pay the intrest on our debt.

             
          • bill39 posted at 8:53 am on Sat, Nov 17, 2012.

            bill39 Posts: 1051

            HTC: But if it's comedy you seek, look no further than the nearest mirror, for it is you, sir, who is the joke here.

            Well said.

             
          • mooseberryinn posted at 8:38 am on Sat, Nov 17, 2012.

            mooseberryinn Posts: 2686

            Jennie - is that the most intelligent thing you have to say? Never mind. I really don't care if it is, but it does prove a point.

             
          • Rob123 posted at 8:11 am on Sat, Nov 17, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            HighTechCowboy posted at 7:57 am on Sat, Nov 17, 2012.

            How many CEO's/CFO's do you know who would take that Excise Tax on their whiget and actually eat it, instead of passing it along as a 'hidden tax'?
            I agree, it sucs, but at least get real and explain it as it will be in the real world, not in your convoluted little pixie world of 'poor us rich guys!'.

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 7:57 am on Sat, Nov 17, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            While fish may live in a utopian fish tank, the rest of us are going to have to deal with these continuing impacts from ObamaCare (see article below). It is important to note that the 2.3% excise tax that ObamaCare imposes on medical device manufacturers is a tax imposed on REVENUE, unlike the income tax which is only imposed upon profits after expenses. It is even imposed regardless of whether you had a profit or a loss. When you consider that this industry as a whole has a profit margin of 5-6%, this is effectively as much as a 46% tax on profits! And they still have to pay income taxes as well!

            Guess what that's going to do to job creation and R&D in that industry!

            Medical giant Stryker cuts 1,170 jobs, citing ObamaCare
            By Perry Chiaramonte
            November 16, 2012

            Medical supply giant Stryker is the latest company to announce job cuts in anticipation of coming costs associated with ObamaCare, even though the man who inherited a fortune from the company's founder is a fan.

            The company will cut 1,170 jobs, or five percent of its worldwide workforce, despite the fact that the founder's grandson was one of the largest contributors to President Obama’s re-election campaign. Medical tech scion Jon Stryker, whose net worth is currently estimated at $1.2 billion, contributed $2 million to the Priorities USA Action super PAC and has given $66,000 in contributions to Obama and the Democratic Party. Stryker does not run the company.

            A "medical device excise tax" included in the mandate imposes a 2.3 percent levy on medical device manufacturers and suppliers, which critics say will raise prices on everything from pacemakers to prosthetics to stents. Companies will be required to pay the tax regardless if they have a profit or loss for the year. The tax is estimated to cost the medical device industry $20 billion.

            House Republicans tried to have the tax repealed, drafting a bill called the Protect Medical Innovation Act, but the Democrat-controlled Senate has blocked the measure.

            “The targeted reductions and other restructuring activities are being initiated to provide efficiencies and realign resources in advance of the new Medical Device Excise Tax scheduled to begin in 2013, as well as to allow for continued investment in strategic areas and drive growth despite the ongoing challenging economic environment and market slowdown in elective procedures,” Stryker spokeswoman Yin Becker told FoxNews.com. “The reductions and restructuring activities are expected to be substantially complete by the end of 2012.”

            Executives for Stryker have placed the blame squarely on the coming tax ever since it gained more steam in Washington.

            "Here we are, one of the greatest industries in the country, and we're staring down on Jan. 1, 2013 and the addition of a 2.3 percent excise tax, while meanwhile on the other side all the discussion in Washington is about creating jobs," Stryker President and CEO Stephen McMillian said during a national conference of medical device manufacturers in Washington, D.C. last September.

            Positions within the company were eliminated altogether after the announcement and have since contracted out many of their current roster of employees to keep costs down, an employee with Stryker, who spoke to FoxNews.com under the condition of anonymity, said.

            “They really trimmed the fat with the last layoffs in 2009 and the year after which is probably why we are finally on budget for the first time since 1999,” the employee added.

            Jon Stryker has been active in politics before the recent election; he contributing millions to help Democratic candidates in his home state of Michigan. He also has given nearly $250 million of his personal wealth to groups supporting gay rights and the conservation of apes, which led to a newly found species being named after him. In 2010, the discovered Myanmar Snub-nosed monkey was named Rhinopithecus strykeri by the research teams that were funded by Stryker’s Arcus Foundation.

            The Associated Press contributed to this story.

            http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/16/medical-supply-giant-stryker-corp-makes-pre-emptive-strike-against-pending/#ixzz2CUYBwdSn

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 7:50 am on Sat, Nov 17, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            fish: I'm talking about countries like Norway and Sweden...

            HTC: You can add Norway and Sweden to the long list of things you know nothing about.

            Sweden and Norway both began embracing free markets, privatization, voucherization, deregulation and a substantial lowering of taxes on business quite some time ago. The U.S. progressive's image of those two countries as paragons of progressive utopia simply doesn't exist outside of their 'minds'.

            In fact, if you read the article below, you'll realize that the U.S. is already far to the left of Sweden in far too many areas and ways.

            The myth of Swedish socialism:

            http://reason.com/blog/2012/06/08/sweden-not-a-socialist-standard-bearer-a

             
          • Pete posted at 7:25 am on Sat, Nov 17, 2012.

            Pete Posts: 3152

            The progressive end game.

            http://www.ijreview.com/2012/11/22449-judge-judy-makes-incredible-entitlement-argument-send-this-tape-to-congress/

             
          • Rob123 posted at 5:55 am on Sat, Nov 17, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            http://www.governing.com/gov-data/economy-finance/state-debt-per-capita-figures.html
            or
            http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/02/usa-states-debt-idUSL1E8L25XO20121002
            and
            http://bber.unm.edu/econ/us-pci.htm
            or
            http://www.census.gov/statab/ranks/rank29.html
            BUT! not all Wise Guys have become Politicians!
            http://www.bloomberg.com/video/ipad-heist-at-jfk-airport-a-la-goodfellas-rDQpjJ6ERAS8kj3J4rCycg.html

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 10:37 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            fish: There is that theory that Obama won because all the poor people want free stuff. So why are all the poorest states GOP strongholds and all the wealthy, affluent states blue? Seriously, look up "per capita income by state" and it will show that it is almost exactly in line with partisanship. Poor, uneducated populations are 100% more likely to vote republican than those areas with a high earning, highly educated work force.

            HTC: I guess you're not as "highly educated" as you think you are because, if you were, you'd already know that those blue states have higher per-capita debt levels than most of the red states, have been rapidly losing businesses and the rich and their per-capita incomes are highly inflated due to the high cost of living in their states. In other words, most of them are on their way down into the crap hole.

            I used to live in one of those blue states - California - and I knew countless high tech workers with handsome six-figure incomes living in 1500 sq. ft., 50-year old homes on 6000 sq. ft. lots which they paid over a million dollars for in so-called "good school districts" whose test scores are easily beaten by virtually every school district in Montana. The picture only looks good to people like you because of your ignorance of the details.

            Conversely, the southeast is attracting manufacturing and other industries away from the northern blue states and is enjoying job creation rates and a rising middle class the likes of which the north hasn't seen in a VERY long time.

            But just keep telling yourself how brilliant the blue states are so that you can maintain the illusion that you like to pretend is reality.

             
          • kohana posted at 9:30 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            kohana Posts: 2109

            R.S. I wish I had been in your class when I was younger. However, you and HTC have taught me so much about economics, and I thank you both. I've had the right ideas, but having it clarified is good!

             
          • fish posted at 9:28 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            fish Posts: 130

            How many times are you going to cut and paste that rant Richard? And why are you posting here if you are from Delaware? BTW: that piece is an English teachers worst nightmare and it is way to vague. If you really know the answer to America's problems why don't you try to be a little more eloquent about solutions and a little less condescending about the obvious.

            No, I am not speaking of Greece, France, etc.... I'm talking about countries like Norway and Sweden. these countries have high taxes, socialized medicine, free college and everything else is peachy; education, health, birth rates, income disparity, crime, cost of living and so on.

            Other than being rational and practical, I must give you a hand for at least "sounding" patriotic. Even if all of your ideas are terrible, at least you have a knack for making them sound honorable.

            [smile]

             
          • Rick Spencer posted at 8:27 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            Rick Spencer Posts: 405

            Fish: You wrote: "...there are plenty of country's that have higher taxes than we do and are in much better shape. Most of them even have free health care and free secondary education. But I guess we can continue to be the only industrialized country in the world that won't take care of the less fortunate and then blame THEM for all of our problems. Very convenient for anyone that is just too selfish to think of others before themselves."

            I assume that you are speaking of Greece, France, Portugal, Spain, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, etc....? I would like to know of those countries that have higher taxes and in better shape. It appears to me they are in worse fiscal shape and that we are just a few years behind them. It is clear that their citizens have less economic freedoms and less individual freedoms, and, that is what the Progressive want to emulate. Below is my answer to those who think that our constrained view of government is selfish. It is the unconstrained view of the Progressives/socialists/Democrats that is selfish, and that is what you are suggesting for the country. Please tell me where the following explanations are incorrect. They are from a recent discussion I had with someone with your ideas of fairness as well. Thanks, RLS

            Our welfare state is mathematically impossible, and during the 20th century it fostered a true Dreamtime by fooling the masses. However, the past sophistry used by Progressives in order to amass political power by persuading the victims that they are being robbed for their own benefit finally seems to be failing as the populace begins to assess the true burden of government taxation, spending, and debt. The myth of a democratic socialist society funded by capitalism is finished, here and abroad.

            It is now clear that we have put our progeny at risk with the ’New Deal’ and ‘Great Society’ policies that have pursued reckless and abstract ideas of ‘social justice’ through the false promise of a “permanence of plenty”. Social justice of the type that has been pursued is an “empty formula”. It is the risk of a lesser life for those seeking personal and economic freedom; it lessens the possibility for one to be all that he can be; it constrains the path for one to pursue his own happiness; and, it forces all to live with unconstrained federal power touching every part of their personal lives. It truly is ‘The Road To Serfdom’.

            The unique origins of American Exceptionalism do not support these present efforts to degrade the individual and put him under the care of the state. Those who lack faith in American Exceptionalism lack faith in the fundamental principals of our Country: Liberty and Individualism. In the end, when all is said and done, the salvation of the people is tied directly to patriotism, free market commerce, and the Constitution. It becomes our choice to repudiate these false promises of Utopia or become the offending generation that bankrupts the country through selfishness. RLS

             
          • jennydoe posted at 8:00 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            jennydoe Posts: 2198

            I don't think any of us could enjoy our stupidity as much as you enjoy yours mooseberryinn.
            Speaking of monikers, yours sounds like poop.

             
          • mooseberryinn posted at 7:40 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            mooseberryinn Posts: 2686

            1. It is Comrade Obama that is blaming everyon else. 2. The "blue" states are the ones that are going bankrupt - Ca. Il. N.Y. etc. etc. 3. obama care is an anchor sinking many businesses, and/or stopping hiring. It also will serve to decrease hourly wages as the employer must pay about 2/hr just hire anyone. The people who are against raising taxes are the folks who realize the gov't has already wasted every cent they will ever pay, no matter how much they pay. 4. The folks who don't want to pay more taxes also realize that money is being given away to tens of thousands of lazy people who don't 'feel" like working. 5. Ya might want to rethink your use of the word "free". If you work for nearly half a year to pay for that "free" then it doesn't look quite so free. 6. Thinking of others - survey says conservatives are far more generous to charities than liberals. 7. I know this will fall on unteachable eyes, but oh well. enjoy your stupidity.

             
          • Bronco posted at 7:38 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            Bronco Posts: 4328

            Obama now wants us to believe he's not responsible for the Leonid meteor shower due tonight. Nice try but we know who's behind it!
            2 missing and four badly burned in Gulf platform fire. Faux News states that the CIA was responsible for the disaster. CIA sources reveal that Obama gave the order.
            As many as 17 illegal aliens crossed the border under cover of a storm in Texas last night. Obama is in charge of the weather in that area.
            My brother missed a shot at a huge buck this morning. He says if Romney had won the election he would have gotten it, claiming that he was stressed and shocked over the outcome of the election so his usual focus was off.
            My other brother said he was almost run off the road yesterday as he was merging into freeway traffic. He claims, "That maniac had a Obama sticker on his bumper. Daggum liberals! Think they own the road." He also complained about higher auto parts pricing and said his driver-side mirror has been too costly to replace since he broke it on the day of the election.
            ------------------
            Our amazement at what Obama can achieve is overwhelming. He//, even gGod don't get that much done in a year.

             
          • fish posted at 7:16 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            fish Posts: 130

            Rick: Clinton raised taxes and not only did it create a surplus but the economy grew. I am not naive enough to not realize that its not that simple but I don't understand how people can be so confident that somehow raising revenues in order to pay for our mess is a guaranteed bad idea. My impression is anyone who is 100% against raising taxes is simply greedy and selfish and will go to the ends of the Earth to find reasons to justify that position. Or maybe they are part of that whole new American Ideal that every problem is always somebody else's fault and therefore somebody else is responsible for cleaning it up. I don't know whats worse; someone who feels "entitled" to benefits or someone who feels "entitled" to not have to chip in to fix things.

            BTW: there are plenty of country's that have higher taxes than we do and are in much better shape. Most of them even have free health care and free secondary education. But I guess we can continue to be the only industrialized country in the world that won't take care of the less fortunate and then blame THEM for all of our problems. Very convenient for anyone that is just too selfish to think of others before themselves.

             
          • kohana posted at 7:00 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            kohana Posts: 2109

            http://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/2011/08/10/english-riots-moral-relativism-gun-control-and-the-welfare-state/

            English Riots, Moral Relativism, Gun Control, and the Welfare State

            August 10, 2011 by Dan Mitchell

            I wrote earlier this year about the connection between a morally corrupt welfare state and the riots in the United Kingdom.

            But what’s happening now is not just some left-wing punks engaging in political street theater. Instead, the U.K. is dealing with a bigger problem of societal decay caused in part by a government’s failure to fulfill one of its few legitimate functions – protection of property.

            To make matters worse, the political class has disarmed law-abiding people, thus exacerbating the risks. These two photos are a pretty good summary of what this means. On the left, we have Korean entrepreneurs using guns to defend themselves from murdering thugs during the 1992 LA riots. On the right, we have Turkish entrepreneurs reduced to using their fists (and some hidden knives, I hope) to protect themselves in London.

            Read the rest:

            http://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/2011/08/10/english-riots-moral-relativism-gun-control-and-the-welfare-state/

             
          • Rick Spencer posted at 6:37 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            Rick Spencer Posts: 405

            HTC: Milton Friedman always predicted the EURO would fail because of exactly the problem they are having. He indicated 10-15 years before its breakup. Friedman is off a bit but the breakup seems to be on track unless they can defy mathematics, finance, and debt. So, I will stick with him, and there is a big chance it will seriously hurt our economy and destroy Germany. After all, Germany is holding the debt from all of the takers, and if they fail, so goes Germany. They cannot escape a failure of the Euro so they are doing everything possible to hold it together.

            Fish: Paying higher taxes is never good for any country nor any person for that matter if it is promoting the false promise of a utopia as do the Progressives. Economic freedom and individual freedoms are linked. When you take from one, you take from the other. That is the basis of our Constitution, a constrained government that promotes personal responsibility to obtain individual and economic freedom. The history of the world is the history of failures by just what you are advocating, higher taxes leading to citizen revolts, leading to the demise of the country. Out citizens cannot tax, inflate, or grow our way out of the $200T of unfunded liabilities that are now estimated to raise by another $50T with the advent of the unaffordable Affordable Care Act. Surely, you have a better idea than paying more taxes to create a better resolution for the problems we face. Forget free ice cream, and think personal responsibility. We have a very difficult period ahead to save the fiscal viability of the country, one that takes adults and believers in patriotism, free markets, and the Constitution. What else can save us? RLS

             
          • jennydoe posted at 6:36 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            jennydoe Posts: 2198

            kohana posted at 9:28 am on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.
            ------------
            that is one preposterous statement, all it is missing is the acorn dude.

             
          • jennydoe posted at 6:32 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            jennydoe Posts: 2198

            fish, you know President Obama enticed me with a gift. The gift of not having Mittens as president.[beam]

             
          • jennydoe posted at 6:27 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            jennydoe Posts: 2198

            HTIC: This is how they say "Thank you" in the Arab world
            --------
            While any thing such as that is horrible, what is it the Iraq people supposed to be Thankful to us for?
            For destroying our economy as well as their own? For making sure our soliders get a touch of DU poisoning? For purple fingers? For your existence? what.

             
          • jennydoe posted at 6:21 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            jennydoe Posts: 2198

            HTIC: So, Hostess was done in and nearly 20,000 people have lost their jobs, thanks to the sponge-cake-headed twinkies on the left.
            --------------
            Oh eat Rob's shorts, and my bra! hey that feels great!


            ...while headlines have been quick to blame unions for the downfall of the company there’s actually more to the story: While the company was filing for bankruptcy, for the second time, earlier this year, it actually tripled its CEO’s pay, and increased other executives’ compensation by as much as 80 percent.

            At the time, creditors warned that the decision signaled an attempt to “sidestep” bankruptcy rules, potentially as a means for trying to keep the executive at a failing company. The Confectionery, Tobacco Workers & Grain Millers International Union pointed this out in their written reaction to the news that the business is closing:

            BCTGM members are well aware that as the company was preparing to file for bankruptcy earlier this year, the then CEO of Hostess was awarded a 300 percent raise (from approximately $750,000 to $2,550,000) and at least nine other top executives of the company received massive pay raises. One such executive received a pay increase from $500,000 to $900,000 and another received one taking his salary from $375,000 to $656,256.

            Certainly, the company agreed to an out-sized pension debt, but the decision to pay executives more while scorning employee contracts during a bankruptcy reflects a lack of good managerial judgement.

            It also follows a trend of rising CEO pay in times of economic difficulty. At the manufacturing company Caterpillar, for example, they froze workers’ pay while boosting their CEO’s pay to $17 million. And at Citigroup, CEO Vikram Pandit received $6.7 million for crashing his company, walking off with $260 million after the business lost 88 percent of its value.

            http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/11/16/1203151/why-unions-dont-shoulder-the-blame-for-hostesss-downfall/

            Me: do you see anything peculiar here?

             
          • fish posted at 5:58 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            fish Posts: 130

            I am willing to pay higher taxes because I think it would be good for the country. I won't fire anybody because higher income taxes only effect me as an individual; not my businesses profit margin. I am excited for Obamacare because finally my competitors will have to take care of their employees as much as I have this whole time. I think that anybody that works full time should get that advantage. Maybe, if more companies offered full benefits, all those choosing to be unemployed would get off the couch.

             
          • fish posted at 5:38 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            fish Posts: 130

            There is that theory that Obama won because all the poor people want free stuff. So why are all the poorest states GOP strongholds and all the wealthy, affluent states blue? Seriously, look up "per capita income by state" and it will show that it is almost exactly in line with partisanship. Poor, uneducated populations are 100% more likely to vote republican than those areas with a high earning, highly educated work force.

             
          • fish posted at 5:28 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            fish Posts: 130

            Four more years!

            Ahhhhhh.... it feels so good to watch everyone on Fox News aliby for why they lost and didn't even see it coming. Obviously, Obama only won because of poor blacks and latinos who are looking for handouts. Oh, and single women who are just sluts looking for free birth control and unlimited abortions. Right?

            It also feels good to drop by the Interlake and read posts from cranky old guys like HTC and JBStone persisting that anyone who voted dem is not only morally bankrupt but they are also so stupid and ignorant that they shouldn't even get up in the morning.

            I voted for Obama so it probably shocks the hell out of all you crazy righties that by definition, I am also a job creator. I go to church. I am involved in the community. I volunteer. I am very good at my job. I have a nice family. My wealth lands me in the top 40% range. I am a stock holder. I have a graduate degree. I read alot.

            Obama won because his policies reflect a comprehension of the definition of insanity. The GOP thinks that if we just continue favoring the same people that we have for the last 30 years, all of a sudden its finally going to work for everybody; not just a few. No thanks.

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 4:43 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            "Society in every state is a blessing, but government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one." -- Thomas Paine

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 2:55 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            This is how they say "Thank you" in the Arab world:

            Liberated Iraq calls on Arab states to use oil as 'weapon' against U.S.

            http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/11/16/liberated-iraq-calls-on-arab-states-to-use-oil-as-weapon-against-us/#ixzz2CQQ4hhWt

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 2:48 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            ThomasPaine posted at 1:42 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012

            HTC: Interesting that you've chosen the moniker of a Founder and Patriot who you clearly know nothing about. Have you read Paine's "Common Sense"? If so, you clearly failed to understand even one paragraph of it.

            If you knew anything about federal spending, you'd also know how ridiculous your claim is that the the amount of our tax dollars ending up in the pockets of our politicians should be a greater concern than the far larger amount being redistributed by the nanny state.

            And if you think that "obstructionist behavior got us into this mess", you are profoundly ignorant of our political history, for there is no way that gridlock could have built the massive nanny state which now threatens to destroy us with its over $200T in unfunded liabilities. It is decades of compromise with the left that created this mess and more compromise is the last thing we need now.

            But if it's comedy you seek, look no further than the nearest mirror, for it is you, sir, who is the joke here.

             
          • ThomasPaine posted at 1:42 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            ThomasPaine Posts: 3

            Well done Fuhrer Miele! We the people will all be MUCH better off with four more years of partisan gridlock. While you gleefully cheer the obstructionist behavior that got us into this mess, the politicians that you worship are living it up in Washington DC, laughing all the way to the bank. Our congressmen and women are adept at one thing, stuffing their pockets with loot as we bicker about trivial nonsense. Go ahead and vote them out of office, they will happily return to DC as a lobbyist (prostitute) and line their pockets with even more riches. The redistribution of wealth that should concern us is the amount of our hard earned dollars that end up in the pockets of our elected officials (red and blue, they are all crooks). To characterize Republicans as "prisoners of war" is offensive and at the same time laughable. With every editorial you write, you prove what a biased conservative rag the Interfake really is. This is not a news source, but it makes for great entertainment. I've stopped reading the Onion when I am looking for some comedy, now I just read your propaganda and these comments. Highly entertaining! Bravo!

             
          • Rob123 posted at 1:04 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            HTC: So, you gladly celebrate that you're in the greedy, redistribute-the-wealth, socialist majority?

            Oh, how about you eat my shorts, you little Randian pinhead with anger issues?

            Hey! This is fun! Keep up the good work.

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 12:48 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Half Your Paycheck to Government in 2013
            by Gerri Willis
            November 16, 2012

            The president is convinced Americans need to pay more in taxes. Here's what he said yesterday.

            “I think everybody out there understood that was an important debate and the majority of voters agreed with me. By the way, more voters agreed with me on this issue than voted for me! So we've got a clear majority of the American people who recognize if we're gonna be serious about deficit reduction we gotta do it in a balanced way."

            But let me tell you, come January 1, you're probably not going to be happy with the amount of taxes you're paying. That's because it's not just Federal taxes that you pay.

            A middle class taxpayer pays 25% percent of their income in Federal Income Tax. Sounds, ok?

            Then there is the Federal Social Security and Medicare payroll tax of 13.3%. You pick up 5.65% while you're employer pays 7.65%. Add them up and that's 38.3% of middle class family incomes going to Uncle Sam. But we aren't done, not by a long shot.

            According to the Tax Foundation, the average state's income tax rate on the middle class is 4.82%. Of course, some states have it and some don't, but we're taking an average here.

            Now the total: 43.12% of middle class income to taxes.

            Oh, and I almost forgot, unless congress makes a move, Federal Income taxes go to 28% for middle income folks next year as the Bush tax cuts expire.

            Neither party has said they want that to happen, but in Washington, well, you never know.

            Also the payroll tax for those folks will go to 15.3% from 13.3%percent.

            Did I mention state, property, corporate, and excise taxes? No?

            All told, next year, total taxes will go to almost 50% for the middle class; the very group that the president says he wants to protect. That means 50 cents out of every dollar earned has to go to the government. Half of everything will go to an entity that didn't earn that money, and shouldn't be entitled to all that dough.

            Unbelievable. You think most Americans agree that's fair?

            I don't think so.

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 12:42 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Rob123: 57% Favor Tax Hike On Those Who Make Over $250,000.....Cool! I'm in the Majority!

            HTC: So, you gladly celebrate that you're in the greedy, redistribute-the-wealth, socialist majority?

            Well, at least you're honest about it.


             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 12:40 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Rick Spencer posted at 12:23 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012

            Thanks for your input, Dr. Spencer.

            Do you see the EU going down before that and taking us with them? In other words, do you think it probable that what's happening in Europe will bring us all down before our own fiscal recklessness finally does?

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 12:36 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            JBSTONE: Hostess Brands closing for good

            HTC: So, Hostess was done in and nearly 20,000 people have lost their jobs, thanks to the sponge-cake-headed twinkies on the left.

            And with four more years of Obama ahead, the storm clouds continue to gather over our economy.

             
          • Rick Spencer posted at 12:23 pm on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            Rick Spencer Posts: 405

            HTC: When my students first began their research into this problem about 20 years ago, they were predicting about 2035 before fiscal chaos would set in. But, with the present situation of increased deficit spending with no end in sight, most states struggling with the same, and the tipping point of more takers than givers, I would shave 10 years from that early estimate putting it about 2025, or a decade from now. I had once thought it would not happen in my lifetime, but now I am not so certain. And, there is no way for the vast majority of citizens to protect themselves from such a devastating disaster. Just no way. RLS

             
          • Rob123 posted at 11:45 am on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com/render?llr=zmzggocab&v=001iXIUy3Vz-XzU8tHkLHMIF6tz_F7CaiLSyeWcb7veTyJbdVqsXfTUnSSfbCnmeGEoL1w7dzfXkWPj9MXVNk6hTT8bLsf1v6poizaQ6xo4QYjTHPt2yZ9TGLQIixJVV6yWJ06VbXailNxlcwpSnJHpJg%3D%3D

            57% Favor Tax Hike On Those Who Make Over $250,000
            Most voters favor raising taxes on those who earn more than $250,000 a year but recognize that that won't be enough to balance the federal budget. Read More

            Cool! I'm in the Majority!

             
          • JBSTONE posted at 11:19 am on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            JBSTONE Posts: 4558

            Obama will fix it, don't worry...........!!!

            Hostess Brands closing for good
            By Chris Isidore and James O'Toole @CNNMoney November 16, 2012: 1:12 PM ET


            Email Print

            NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Hostess Brands -- the maker of such iconic baked goods as Twinkies, Drake's Devil Dogs and Wonder Bread -- announced Friday that it is asking a federal bankruptcy court for permission to close its operations, blaming a strike by bakers protesting a new contract imposed on them.

            The closing will result in Hostess' nearly 18,500 workers losing their jobs as the company shuts 33 bakeries and 565 distribution centers nationwide, as well as 570 outlet stores. The Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International Union represents around 5,000 Hostess employees.

            http://money.cnn.com/2012/11/16/news/companies/hostess-closing/index.html?source=cnn_bin

             
          • Rob123 posted at 10:49 am on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            Justitia......If you really, really want to become a Deficit Hawk, you are in good company here.

            However, if the scale of it all becomes too large to even attempt to comprehend, and you become suspicious a little about the underlying motives of those who keep pounding away at this Black and White 'Still Shot'.........Think of waking up at 2 in the morning after a bad dream, in which a Banker is at the front door. Being 1 year into a 30 year mortgage, you are shocked that he is holding papers demanding 'Full Payment' by noon, or else. As you sit on the bed, getting your thoughts back together and wondering where that angst filled bad dream came from, you feel a little twinge of sorrow for people who walk around all day with that thought running through their head. Yet, you also seriously consider downsizing from the McMansion on 20 acres to something a little more sustainable, just in case.

            Of course, such thinking will create an uproar among the serious Deficit Hawks, as they scream at Entitlements but don't say boo about Generals flying around in their own private jet, and private helicopters, with limo service and enough time on their hands to write 20,000 pages of emails to a Hot Chick from the Officers Club, while in a War Zone.

            Something funny is going on here?

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 9:59 am on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Our defiant and uncompromising president
            By Douglas E. Schoen
            November 16, 2012

            This week's press conference was more of the same President Obama whom we saw on the campaign trail this year. He was resolute and even defiant. And though there was more conciliation at times than we are normally used to hearing from the president, he was ultimately espousing the same attitude towards resolving our fiscal challenges that we have heard all along.

            The president’s tone and focus on cutting taxes for middle class Americans indicated that he was more interested in preserving his agenda than resolving our mounting fiscal challenges. Indeed, the president is well aware of the Republican stance and he did not show any willingness to compromise on rates via revenue. His speech did little to assuage fears that we are on the precipice of heading over the fiscal cliff.

            The president was resolute in his economic posture and, considering this, his purported willingness to compromise seemed rhetorical at best.

            The financial markets heard the same message I did – more of the same. As a consequence, the markets demonstrated rational pessimism towards a president who does not seem to recognize the severity of our fiscal situation. We are facing financial Armageddon and the same policy positions simply will not do. The market closed down some 200 points having been down only 60 points before the president began.

            On Libya, President Obama called attacks on Ambassador Susan Rice “outrageous.” His spirited defense of Rice included making it very clear that when she went on the Sunday shows and said the attack on the Benghazi consulate was in response to the film trailer and not an act of terror she was speaking for the White House.

            To be sure, the president’s defense of Ambassador Rice could be a prelude to her being elevated to Secretary of State after Hillary Clinton’s imminent departure from the post.

            The president clearly believes that the Republicans will fold and offer more compromises than they have yet to offer. And he may very well be right about this. But the fact that he might, and I emphasize the word might, does not bring us any closer to a resolution as to how we can resolve our outstanding controversies with the debt, deficit and the overall fiscal crisis we face.

            Considering all the talk of bipartisanship and compromise over the past week, the president’s press conference is surely disappointing.


            Douglas E. Schoen has served as a pollster for President Bill Clinton and is currently working with New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. He has more than 30 years experience as a pollster and political consultant. He is also a Fox News contributor and co-host of "Fox News Insiders" Sundays on Fox News Channel and Mondays at 10:30 am ET on FoxNews.com Live. He is the author of ten books including,“Hopelessly Divided: The New Crisis in American Politics and What it Means for 2012 and Beyond” (Rowman and Littlefield 2012). Follow Doug on Twitter @DouglasESchoen.

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 9:55 am on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            who new posted at 12:10 am on Fri, Nov 16, 2012 [thumbup][thumbup]

            Justitia posted at 8:39 am on Fri, Nov 16, 2012 [thumbup][thumbup]

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 9:50 am on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Justitia: Is my understanding correct or am I missing something?

            HTC: You are correct. Medicare began calling in its IOUs in 2009; Social Security began doing so in 2010. Honoring those obligations does indeed require more federal borrowing (or printing of money) and will cause hour deficits to grow quickly as more of the 80 million babyboomers retire and go on Medicare.

            As Rick Spencer pointed out, Social Security and Medicare by themselves represent $100T in unfunded liabilities. BTW, I don't know if you're already aware of this, but Rick Spencer is a retired economist and knows what he's talking about.

            Many Republicans such as Paul Ryan have proposed plans to try to save SS and Medicare by privatizing them, which is our only hope for a sustainable solultion. The Democrats, however, insist that the plans are basically sound and that the GOP simply hate old people. Obviously, there's no way we can come up with that $100T, so the Dems are obviously either seriously math-challenged or liars.

            After this last election, when many Americans clearly voted for the nanny state, I'm not sure that we can expect the GOP to again attempt serious entitlement reform; after all, doing so would seem to be political suicide.

            So where does that leave us?

            What I think is most likely is that we'll continue to run up our debt in the service of those SS and Medicare obligations while also reducing benefits, moving out even further the eligibility age, and raising payroll taxes. Eventually, those on Medicare will find it extremely hard to find a doctor (40% already won't take Medicare or Medicaid patients) and will find themselves paying much more for their healthcare.

            Eventually our debt and its service burden will make borrowing more money impossible and printing money ("quantitative easing") will trigger runaway inflation. The effects that will have on the economy will be dire.

            I personally think this will happen before this decade is over, very possibly during Obama's next and last term.

            Perhaps Rick Spencer has a prediction of his own on the timing?

             
          • kohana posted at 9:31 am on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            kohana Posts: 2109

            A fun read for any conservative, some of the comments are hilarious.

            http://ricochet.com/main-feed/Gather-Ye-Twinkies-While-Ye-May#comments

            Gather Ye Twinkies While Ye May

            By Percival
            Hostess Brands, makers of confections the nutritional benefits of which are best left uncontemplated, filed for bankruptcy back in January. The court imposed a new contract on the company, and some of the workers are not happy. So, what does a union do when the membership is unhappy? They strike.

            http://www.kwch.com/business/kwch-hostess-ceo-gives-striking-workers-thursday-deadline-20121114,0,2860295.story

            The company doesn't have any room to maneuver. The court didn't recommend, the court didn't suggest, the court imposed. The company announced that they would liquidate if the strike didn't end yesterday by 4:00 PM CST. The company has said that an announcement will be made today.

            The strikers aren't cutting off their noses to spite their faces; they are cutting off their heads to spite someone else's face.

            Twinkies might be getting scarce in the very near future.


             
          • kohana posted at 9:28 am on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            kohana Posts: 2109


            Justitia posted at 8:24 am on Fri, Nov 16, 2012

            Your understanding is correct, and your post at 8:39 is excellent. Obama won the election by fraud, with voting machines rigged, and whole counties voting thousands for the O and not a single vote for Romney, or having 144% of the population show up to vote for the O. The census of 2010 show there couldn't possibly be as many voters living where massive voting took place for the O. Romney isn't demanding a recount or a re-vote in the seriously questioned areas. Lack of voter I.D., same day registration and bus load of people being brought in from outside areas. However, most progressives on this blog don't seem to have a problem with these facts, or deny they even exist.

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 9:24 am on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Another sad and painful reality that our progressive friends simply deny does not exist:

            Rancher Kevin Kester works dawn to dusk, drives a 12-year-old pick-up truck and earns less than a typical bureaucrat in Washington D.C., yet the federal government considers him rich enough to pay the estate tax -- also known as the "death tax."

            And with that tax set to soar at the beginning of 2013 without some kind of intervention from Congress, farmers and ranchers like Kester are waiting anxiously.

            "There is no way financially my kids can pay what the IRS is going to demand from them nine months after death and keep this ranch intact for their generation and future generations," said Kester, of the Bear Valley Ranch in Central California.

            Two decades ago, Kester paid the IRS $2 million when he inherited a 22,000-acre cattle ranch from his grandfather. Come January, the tax burden on his children will be more than $13 million.

            For supporters of a high estate tax, which is imposed on somebody's estate after death, Kester is the kind of person they rarely mention. He doesn't own a mansion. He's not the CEO of a multi-national. But because of his line of work, he owns a lot of property that would be subject to a lot of tax.

            "Our number one goal is to repeal the estate tax, to get rid of it, not have it for every generation, when I die and my kids die and so on," he told Fox News. "For everyone to have to re-purchase the ranch or farm over and over for each generation, that's inherently unjust. So what we're doing is asking our politicians to understand that and repeal the estate tax."

            That, however, is unlikely. Currently, the federal government taxes estates worth $5 million dollars and up at 35 percent. When the Bush-era tax rates expire in January, rates increase to 55 percent on estates of $1 million or more. While some Republicans want to eliminate the death tax entirely, President Obama has proposed a 45 percent rate on estates of $3.5 million and up.

            "The idea behind the estate tax is to prevent the very wealthy among us from accumulating vast fortunes that they can pass along to the next generation," said Patrick Lester, director of Federal Fiscal Policy with the progressive think tank -- OMB Watch. "The poster child for the estate tax is Paris Hilton -- the celebrity and hotel heiress. That's who this is targeted at, not ordinary Americans."

            But according to the American Farm Bureau, up to 97 percent of American farms and ranches will be subject to an estate tax where the exemption is set at $1 million. At that rate, the federal government will pocket $40 billion in 2013 and up to $86 million in 2021. That contrasts with just $12 billion this year.

            Many Democrats argue the tax promotes equality among classes, especially in capital gains -- or stocks passed from one generation to another. Since stocks are only taxed when they are sold, the government can't profit from long-term investments without the estate tax.

            "Very large portions of very wealthy estates are tied up in stocks and they have never been taxed," said Lester. "The estate tax is one of the ways we make sure the wealthy pay a little bit more as an overall share of their wealth and income compared to low-income individuals."

            Many Republicans argue the opposite. Because the estate tax falls on assets, they say it hampers investment by reducing incentives to save and invest. A pending estate tax could become a disincentive to invest in an otherwise viable business, forcing older people to liquidate or shift resources out of an ongoing business and into a trust or tax-free investment.

            "We're not millionaires in the terms of making a million dollars a year," said Kester who lives in a modest home and whose family -- not outsiders or a corporation -- runs his ranch. "I have a half-a-million dollars in soil."

            Kester can't spend it, without selling land. But by selling the land, each year the ranch would become less viable.

            The estate tax dates back to 1916 when then-President Woodrow Wilson imposed the tax of 1 to 10 percent on the wealthy because World War I reduced federal government revenues. Under Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the tax rose to 77 percent, as Congress tried to prevent wealth from becoming concentrated among a few powerful and super-rich families.

            Ironically, many nations historically more concerned with class and wealth -- namely Russia and China -- have since abandoned their estate taxes.

            http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/16/ranchers-farmers-brace-for-death-tax-impact/#ixzz2CP4fdom9

             
          • Justitia posted at 8:39 am on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            Justitia Posts: 6

            who new posted at 12:10 am on Fri, Nov 16, 2012

            To me, people in this country who want a Christian theocracy are just as dangerous as those who wish to impose their socialist beliefs upon the rest of us. Both groups seem willing to compromise our Constitution for their particular cause while always claiming that document protects them from the other sides agenda. I may be wrong, but I suspect that most of us are in the middle somewhere.

            I am still struggling to understand how Obama won reelection. His agenda seems to me to be clearly socialist in nature and involves considerable redistribution of wealth. He is responsible for one-third of the national debt. He has also created very few jobs and it seems that most people are like me and have seen a drop in their household income.

            How could anyone vote for four more years of that? I just don't understand. I was so certain that America would vote for change again but that didn't happen.

            I don't know if a third party would be viable but I often wish that we had an alternative. I often wish that we didn't have political parties at all. It seems to me that our two parties have us locked into a slow death spiral economically and there doesn't seem to be any way to pull out of it.

            It gets so frustrating for me at times.

             
          • Justitia posted at 8:24 am on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            Justitia Posts: 6

            Rick Spencer posted at 8:11 pm on Thu, Nov 15, 2012

            Thank you for the links, Rick. I definitely have more reading to do now.

            I frequently hear people talk about Social Security and Medicare being bankrupt while many others talk about it begin currently solvent because of their "trust funds." I even hear many Republicans refer to these trust funds. But my research suggests that these trust funds aren't real because they contain what are essentially IOUs from the government because the contributions were already spent on other things.

            If I'm understanding this correctly, that means that these "trust funds" require the government to borrow even more money to honor those IOUs. With the boomers just starting to retire, it would seem that this borrowing to cover these IOUs is going to increase tremendously.

            Is my understanding correct or am I missing something?

             
          • Rob123 posted at 5:20 am on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324556304578119543707859654.html?KEYWORDS=pepper+and+salt+cartoons

             
          • Rob123 posted at 3:40 am on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            HTC: "Did you get a flu shot?"

            Not yet.....although this little 48 hour flu bug seems to have run it's course? Assuming no relapse; Now I will have to call my brother-in-law and tell him I am going to the Grizz game, and need my ticket back? Since the ticket is for a Skybox filled with Grizz fans, and he is one of those rabid MSU-Engineering Degree-Bobcats, I might be saving his life? Especially with a bar in the Skybox?

            Not sure of the science, but I usually get my flu shot in the 2nd half of November, so my immune system is all geared up for the Jan-Feb onslaught of the Big Flu Bug....

             
          • Rob123 posted at 3:25 am on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            who new: "Unfortunately, the Republican Party goal of fiscal responsibility is being hindered by a significant group of people who are associated with the socially conservative movement."

            i COULDN'T AGREE MORE! Great post......

             
          • who new posted at 12:10 am on Fri, Nov 16, 2012.

            who new Posts: 367

            Justitia: “I mean that I favor liberty and freedom for everyone which includes allowing gays to marry, decriminalizing drugs, abortion (with reasonable limits), etc.”

            I think that with the results of a number of state’s elections and in national polls, your opinion is rapidly becoming the majority. What is important is that we are free to believe whatever we want and pass laws that reflect our views. But therein is the problem for those of us who believe in fiscal conservatism.

            There is no question the Democratic Party offers few solutions for our fiscal problems other than raising taxes, which inevitably leads to more spending. So we are left with the Republican Party or some alternative party that never has generated much interest historically. Unfortunately, the Republican Party goal of fiscal responsibility is being hindered by a significant group of people who are associated with the socially conservative movement.

            I read this today by Robert Jeffress in the Washington Post-

            “My message to fellow evangelical Christians is this: We must differentiate between biblical absolutes and political preferences. We must never compromise on the former, but we must be willing to bend on the latter if we want to see our moral agenda enacted. Breaking a pledge to Grover Norquist and embracing higher taxes for even higher cuts in expenditures is not tantamount to denouncing Christ. Acknowledging the need for governmental health-care reform does not necessarily pave the way for the rule of the Antichrist.”

            “I have a proposal for all Republicans. Instead of nominating a candidate who is mute or malleable on social issues but intransigent on political issues, let’s try the reverse. Let’s find a candidate who has a history of consistently and courageously embracing the social views of the majority of the Republican Party, as well as many Democrats and independent voters: that life in the womb should be protected and that marriage is for a man and a woman. But let’s also nominate a candidate who realizes that compromise with the other party is necessary if we are to restore our country’s fiscal integrity, protect our environment and provide the quality health care Americans deserve.”

            I think his message is clear; fiscal responsibility is fine provided our social agenda is not compromised. But obviously, these social absolutes are becoming more and more contrary to public opinion.

            What this means for the future I do not know. It will be interesting to see how the Republican Party will respond and if alternative parties are viable.

             
          • JBSTONE posted at 10:30 pm on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            JBSTONE Posts: 4558

            Rob123 posted at 4:27 pm on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            I've got the flu

            ~~~~~~~~~~

            Get better........!!!

            [by the way, now you know how I've felt for the last six months]

             
          • bocephus posted at 8:58 pm on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            bocephus Posts: 25

            Alan Simpson, of Bowles-Simpson, recently observed:

            "If you can't learn to compromise on an issue without compromising yourself, you should never be in the legislature," said Simpson.

            Amen.

            Any real student of the Constitutional Convention understands that compromise was essential to the creation of this republic. It was essential to its early survival. It has been essential to its growth and prosperity. And it will be essential to solving the fiscal cliff and the other daunting problems we face.

            "Do not imagine that building a bridge between Republicans and Democrats in these perilous times is good for the country."

            I don't think I've ever read a more irresponsible statement.

             
          • Pete posted at 8:37 pm on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            Pete Posts: 3152

            Bronco posted at 6:06 pm on Thu, Nov 15, 2012

            Exposing your faults and shortcomings would be redundant...I couldn't possibly improve upon your work.

             
          • Rick Spencer posted at 8:11 pm on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            Rick Spencer Posts: 405

            Hi Justitia: I noted you were beginning to study unfunded liabilities which I consider the most dangerous component of our fiscal policy. I have been studying that issue for about 25 years and I now have little hope that they will ever be addressed in an adult way before they explode our into our economy and bring us to our knees. Here is an excerpt from a paper I wrote some years back and constantly update, and I think it will get you started on the track to understanding the danger we face with this enormous hidden fiscal situation that is transferring our debt to our progeny and their wealth to us. I think that you will be appalled once you begin to understand its full future impact upon our social and financial systems. Think about the living standards and chaos of Russians citizens immediately after the downfall of communism for those who had put their faith and fate in those who bear false promises of a utopia. Theirs will be like a kindergarten party compared to our situation as we will fall from a much higher standard. Think of Putin as a benign leader compared to what will arise here. It is the history of the world and I am afraid that we cannot escape it.

            "Unfunded Liabilities: The Folly of the Progressive Hope for Mankind, to Live Without Working!

            Solving the Problem of Unfunded Liabilities

            The Legacy of Unfunded Liabilities
            As the premise for this short analysis of unfunded liabilities accrued to the U.S., I shall use the figures put forth by President Fisher of the Dallas Federal Reserve during an interview with the Wall Street Journal, and that proffered by Professor Kotlikoff in a recent IMF financial journal.
            President Fisher’s Dallas office estimated the net present value of the unfunded liabilities for Medicare and Social Security alone to be in excess of $99 trillion or about seven times our current GDP. Fisher lamented that our political leaders have “dug a very deep hole” for the country.
            But, as bad as the DFR report is, that is considered good news as a recent 2010 IMF journal put forth Professor Kotlikoff’s estimate of all U.S. unfunded liabilities for all of our Federal promises, to not include the States or public unions, as reaching a total of $200T or about fourteen times our current GDP. Professor Kotlikoff notes, “that we should get real … as the U.S. is bankrupt”! The consequences of the IMF’s fiscal fix, a doubling of federal taxes in perpetuity, would be appalling – and possibly worse than appalling. The welfare state is mathematically impossible, and during the 20th century it has fostered a true Dreamtime by fooling the masses."..............

            Here are a couple of links to get you started:

            WSJ article: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124303024230548323.html

            IMF Journal: http://www.thedailybell.com/1481/The-US200-Trillion-Debt-Which-Cannot-Be-Named.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+wwwthedailybellcom+%28Appenzeller+Business+Press++-%3F+www.TheDailyBell.com%29

            Good luck in your endeavors as few understand unfunded liabilities and no one wants to discuss them. RLS

             
          • Bronco posted at 6:11 pm on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            Bronco Posts: 4328


            HTC: And who appointed you our judge? If you think your opinion of us means a rat azz to us, you'd better think again.
            ------------
            First, you are by far the most judgmental person in the room...ever.
            Second, if my opinion doesn't mean squat, why do you spend spend so much time cutting me down?

            Oh, oh...I'm thinking again.

             
          • Bronco posted at 6:06 pm on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            Bronco Posts: 4328

            Pete: Generally the idea of placing my "wants" above the "needs" of others. Maybe materialism is a better word? Or greed? Of course we then get into the definitions of "want" and "need"...and unlike progressives, I don't reduce those to merely monetary terms.

            Bronco: "Dude, you all have so many 'wants' that you place over the 'needs' of others right now it's frickin' laughable."...And Pete, consider your 'want's over others 'don't need' also.

            Pete: Listen you little troll...Crawl back under the rusty truck you came out from before I swat your ego and make you cry.
            ----------------------------
            Yeah. You 'want' to, Pete. But, again, consider your 'wants' over others 'don't need'. Or just prove that "unlike progressives, I don't reduce those to merely monetary terms." Like you did when you exposed Rob's private life to the room. When that other poster had HTC's name and offered to post it, no one supported that. You seem to find a certain glee in investigating people and exposing their faults or shortcomings. What's up with that? Bored? Come to Hawaii and I'll show you some excitement. Work on your tan first.
            Oh, and by the way, a 'troll' is a supernatural being in Norse mythology and Scandinavian folklore. I'm flattered that you remember I'm Swedish.

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 5:14 pm on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            I wish you a speedy recovery, Rob. Did you get a flu shot? I'd just like to know whether they got the wrong mix again this year....

             
          • Rob123 posted at 4:27 pm on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            I've got the flu, so later. Just had to get my 2 cents in, but back to bed. No energy. And free tickets to the Grizz game on Saturday......I'll probably miss it, and stay home alone. Punishment for voting for Romney?
            [sad]

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 4:16 pm on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Rob123: Wasn't the Market strangely high just before the election, which you discounted as meaningless?

            HTC: You're dead wrong. I didn't discount it as "meaningless". What I said was that it didn't mean that the economy was on the mend; only that many expected a Romney win because they couldn't imagine a country stupid enough to reelect Obama.

            Now that it's fallen by over 1000 points, they're expressing their concern for the future, given the actual election outcome.

            Rob123: The message is all screwed up. I'm not even sure Rubio can save it, but he's out front and trying.

            HTC: So, what do think their message was in this election cycle and what do you think it should be in the next?

             
          • Rob123 posted at 4:09 pm on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            HighTechCowboy posted at 2:41 pm on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            Wasn't the Market strangely high just before the election, which you discounted as meaningless? There is certainly a correction going on, especially in the High Flying Tech Stocks, with Apple and Google having an undue influence both on the Upside and now on the Downside.

            A lot of nervous nillies, for sure. What's new? Outside of a White Male Republican pulling in the most White Votes of any Republican since a long, long time, and still losing? Demographics, IMHO. And too listen to Romney today, and Ryan yesterday........gee guys, You Didn't Make the Varsity Team, and you're blaming the coach! Incredible. Ya just might want to look at your politics. I mean, if ya can't even win the Highly Educated, Highly Motivated, Highly Paid Asian-Americans, who should be securely in the Republican-Economic Dream, you just might want to look at what is being said. The message is all screwed up. I'm not even sure Rubio can save it, but he's out front and trying. Will the dinosaurs listen, or move to the Right like John McCain?

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 4:09 pm on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901


            President Obama's silly, sexist defense of Susan Rice
            by Kirsten Powers, Democratic Strategist
            November 15, 2012

            Wednesday, President Obama bizarrely cast the U.N. Ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, as some delicate flower the boys should stop picking on for her dissembling claims on five Sunday talk shows following the killing of 4 Americans in Benghazi. But, there is no damsel in distress and Obama's paternalistic bravado in defense of a top administration official is going to come back to haunt him.

            "If Sen. McCain and Sen. Graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me," Obama intoned to the stenographers worshipping at his feet. The media had gathered for a rare "press conference" where Fox News' Ed Henry and ABC's Jake Tapper are usually the only ones who ever seem to ask a question that elicits anything other than filibustering presidential pabulum. (One "journalist" actually congratulated the president on his win and gushed about how she has never seen him lose an election.) Group hug!

            Obviously caught up in his own silly yarn about meanie Senators and helpless U.N. Ambassadors, the President complained, "When they go after the U.N. ambassador apparently because they think she's an easy target, then they've got a problem with me."

            Imagine George Bush saying that people criticized John Bolton because he was an "easy target." He wouldn't.

            It's absurd and chauvinistic for Obama to talk about the woman he thinks should be Secretary of State of the United States as if she needs the big strong man to come to her defense because a couple of Senators are criticizing her.

            It's absurd and chauvinistic for Obama to talk about the woman he thinks should be Secretary of State of the United States as if she needs the big strong man to come to her defense because a couple of Senators are criticizing her.

            Believe it or not, Rice isn't the first potential Cabinet nominee to be opposed by members of Congress up on the Hill. Obama also left out the inconvenient detail that there is another senator who has Rice in the crosshairs: Sen. Kelly Ayotte. But perhaps a female Senator holding Rice accountable didn't sound menacing enough in the era of the "War on Women."

            But it gets much worse.

            As the president expressed outrage over the atrocity of members of Congress holding administration officials accountable, he said, "I'm happy to have that discussion with them. But for them to go after the U.N. ambassador? Who had nothing to do with Benghazi?"

            Feast on those words for a second: The U.N. Ambassador had "nothing to do with Benghazi." At this point, the White House press corps should have flown into a frenzy, demanding to know why a person who had nothing to do with Benghazi was put on five Sunday talk shows as...the face of Benghazi!

            This was an issue that had people scratching their heads the day of the Rice interviews, and plenty of questions were asked as to where Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was, and why Rice was put out instead. The administration at the time acted as though there was nothing remarkable about it, even though there clearly was.

            But now we know -- straight from the lips of the president of the United States -- that they sent out a person who knew "nothing" about Benghazi to explain an atrocious attack against the United States that killed a U.S. ambassador and three other Americans serving their country abroad.

            No temper tantrum from the White House on the insult of being questioned about a terror attack against the U.S. abroad would be complete without their perennial favorite: the straw man.

            The conceit of Obama's argument is that people are picking on a helpless girl -- a lowly U.N. ambassador -- because they are afraid of the big bad president.

            Oh, please.

            President Obama, incredibly, claimed that he was "happy to have the discussion" about Benghazi.

            Really?

            Because every time anyone asks the president about Benghazi he claims he can't say anything because there is an investigation going on. The State Department actually said at one point that they would no longer take questions on the issue from reporters.

            Senator Graham's response to the president's revelations and accusations at the press conference was exactly right: He said, "Mr. President, don't think for one minute I don't hold you ultimately responsible for Benghazi."

            The president says he is ready to talk about this? Great. We are all ears.

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 3:56 pm on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            The Amateur President
            by Edward Klein
            November 15, 2012

            In the wake of Barack Obama’s victory at the polls, I’ve received a torrent of emails from liberal friends asking me how I can possibly stand by my characterization of the president as an amateur. After all, they say, Obama ran a masterful election campaign—conclusive proof that he’s a pro, not an amateur.

            As usual, my liberal friends are conflating two different Obamas—the campaigner and the president—and in doing so, they are missing an important point. Obama has a political sense, but he lacks an executive sense. He is a happy warrior on the campaign trail, doing and saying whatever it takes to get elected, including lying shamelessly about his opponent. But when he leaves the hustings for the Oval Office, he becomes a different person, one who derives no joy from the cut and thrust of day-to-day politics and is inept in the arts of management and governance.

            This explains the bullying, divisiveness, and extreme partisanship that have typified the operation of the White House since Obama took office. And it explains why, given Obama’s arrogance, his sense of superiority, and his air of haughtiness, his second term is likely to be a retread of his first. Tom Daschle, the former Democratic Senate majority leader and Obama confidant, put it best when he said: “Don’t expect a personality transplant with Obama.”

            Coming off an ugly, divisive campaign, America is likely to get not just four more years of Obama, but four worse years. Obama won the election with fewer votes than in 2008. By any measure, it was a status quo election, and yet Obama is now facing a slew of problems that would test the mettle of a far more able chief executive—everything from the debacle in Benghazi and the Petraeus sex scandal to the fiscal cliff and the possibility of a double-dip recession.

            What’s more, Obama is entering these dangerous times at the very moment when the team that put him in charge is breaking up. In the coming weeks, key members of his inner circle, including chief strategist David Axelrod, senior adviser David Plouffe and campaign manager Jim Messina, are all departing for the private sector. The only member of his consiglieri who will be back for a second term is Valerie Jarrett, a hard left-winger who is hardly known for her political perspicacity and the quality of her advice.

            Because of Obama’s detached and impersonal leadership style, no one in Congress fears him, and the Republicans who control the House are unlikely to roll over and do his bidding. However, if Obama digs in his heels, refuses to compromise and work with the Republicans, goes over the head of Congress and takes his case to the public through a kind of permanent campaign, and then, after all that, fails to get his agenda through Congress, this country is headed for a very dismal next four years.

            “Mr. Obama would be well advised to consider the history of these second terms,” historian John Steele Gordon wrote in the Wall Street Journal. “Its message is to beware of interpreting reelection as an invitation to overreach.”

            That, however, is exactly what I expect Obama to do. Indeed, the president met this week with 11 leaders of liberal and labor groups and raised the possibility of a barnstorming tour. According to Neera Tanden, president of the far-left Center for American Progress, Obama discussed “going around the country to communicate to people what the choice is here. He feels very strongly that it will be a continuation of what the election was all about.” And Lee Saunders, the president of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, said the coming months would amount to “another campaign.”

            All of this sounds very much like a continuation of the methods Obama used during his first term when the administration circumvented Congress by waiving existing laws, creating super agencies, and setting up federal programs that were not authorized by Congress.

            “We can now see before us a persistent pattern of disregard for the powers of the legislative branch in favor of administrative decision-making without—and often in spite of—congressional action,” wrote Matthew Spalding of the Heritage Foundation. “This violates the spirit—and potentially the letter—of the Constitution’s separation of the legislative and executive powers of Congress and the President.” Or as the Wall Street Journal put it: “When Congress won’t do what [Obama] wants, he ignores it and acts anyway.”

            That’s what’s in store for America for four worse years.

            Edward Klein is the former editor in chief of The New York Times Magazine. His latest book is "The Amateur: Barack Obama in the White House." (Regnery 2012)

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 2:41 pm on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            We're now learning that the deficit took a huge jump in October, as did unemployment which jumped to its highest level in 18 months, and business after business is announcing layoffs and work-week reductions in order to avoid the Unaffordable Care Act which we are now stuck with in the short term. The market also continues to voice it's disapproval of what lies ahead.

            Even as the CBO warns of many more job losses if taxes are increased on the 'rich', the delusional Obama thinks he has some kind of mandate to do exactly that.

            Welcome to BizarroLand, otherwise known as ProgressiveLand, where this is what they call a 'recovery.'

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 2:36 pm on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            kohana posted at 1:25 pm on Thu, Nov 15, 2012

            While the Democrats have generally been really bad at economics, they're astoundingly good at slogans and marketing. That's one reason why I find it so comical when they complain about "materialism" and people being 'forced' to buy stuff because of clever marketing.

            Without clever marketing combined with buying votes with other people's money, there'd be no Democratic Party today!

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 2:08 pm on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Bronco posted at 10:28 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012

            The fact that the author thinks FDR was one of our greatest presidents shows how clueless he is on economics and business. FDR, with help from the Federal Reserve, succeeded in taking a 2 year recession and turning it into a 17 year depression.

            If you were to invest in some education in economics and learned to do your own thinking, you wouldn't be constantly quoting others who are as clueless on such matters as you are.

            For the rest of us, it's like watching a bunch of fools high-five each other over their shared ignorance.

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 2:04 pm on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Bronco: Dude, you all have so many 'wants' that you place over the 'needs' of others right now it's frickin' laughable.

            HTC: And who appointed you our judge? If you think your opinion of us means a rat azz to us, you'd better think again.

             
          • kohana posted at 1:25 pm on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            kohana Posts: 2109

            This is the kind of garbage I’ve had to put up with this past year, and am now getting it in double doses almost daily from my friends as “rub it in your face” so there! This person’s mother baby-sat me as an infant, so can't tell them to get lost. They cannot face the reality of what the O is and how he is destroying this country.

            http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-zingale/democrats-campaign-songs_b_2102151.html

             
          • mooseberryinn posted at 11:23 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            mooseberryinn Posts: 2686

            Pete - nicely said. (and funny). One more thing that makes America vulnerable to Comrade?king?huckster Obama is that our culture for nearly a century or more has valued "fair play", and Integrity. Unfortunately, with the advent of Obama and the democrats cooperative trashing of integrity, that is not true anymore. A moral American citizen might be swayed toward "the dark side" simply because he/she would not suspect a communist such as Obama capable of such treachery. Well - we'll see if anyone learns anything by 2016.

             
          • JBSTONE posted at 11:22 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            JBSTONE Posts: 4558

            mooseberryinn posted at 10:24 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012

            ..........oh, I'd say he's fixed things pretty good...........I just hope we can undo it before disaster strikes.....[sad]

             
          • Pete posted at 10:59 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            Pete Posts: 3152

            Bronco posted at 10:31 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012

            "Dude, you all have so many 'wants' that you place over the 'needs' of others right now it's frickin' laughable."

            Listen you little troll...you don't have an iota of knowledge about my priorities other than what you filter through your post-modernist bifocals so quit pretending you do. This isn't one of your "book tours" where your delusions of self-importance become everyone elses reality. Crawl back under the rusty truck you came out from before I swat your ego and make you cry.

             
          • mooseberryinn posted at 10:46 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            mooseberryinn Posts: 2686

            Bronco - Not wisdom. It's called "believing the huckster". If you noted Comrade Obama's victory speech, he spoke of nearly all the things his regime has worked to crush. "energy independence"? Yup, could be- - we will achieve "independence", but not have any power with coal, natural gas and oil supplies crippled via EPA regulations (not voted for), Inflation will greatly limit food availability - this is a very effective weapon to use against the people as they have to spend a great deal of time and effort, (and dollars) to feed themselves and family. Green energy - (pie in the sky) - tax dollars will go there to create the illusion of beneficial progress. Oops - running out of time here - remember - communists usually mis-direct the "collective" (us) by skillful and unabashed lies, and Comrade Obama has the benefit of a cooperative easily steered media.

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 10:40 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Pretty cool - The Radioactive Orchestra:

            http://www.foxnews.com/science/2012/11/14/radioactive-isotopes-used-to-create-live-music/?intcmp=features

             
          • Pete posted at 10:39 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            Pete Posts: 3152

            HighTechCowboy posted at 10:27 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012

            Absolutely.

             
          • Bronco posted at 10:33 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            Bronco Posts: 4328

            And Pete, consider your 'want's over others 'don't need' also.

             
          • Bronco posted at 10:31 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            Bronco Posts: 4328

            Pete: Generally the idea of placing my "wants" above the "needs" of others. Maybe materialism is a better word? Or greed? Of course we then get into the definitions of "want" and "need"...and unlike progressives, I don't reduce those to merely monetary terms.
            -------------------------
            Dude, you all have so many 'wants' that you place over the 'needs' of others right now it's frickin' laughable.

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 10:31 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Bronco: Well, form your opposing article, I learned that you believe your grandchildren are dumb.
            From my article, that we are genetically disposed to control our population by mass murder in the name of politics or religion.

            HTC: Well, I'd hoped that maybe we had found a subject that we could discuss, free from partisan bickering and snide remarks. Clearly my hope, like that I had in the intelligence of the American electorate going into this month's election, was totally unfounded and naively optimistic.

            Equally clear is the fact that you failed to understand either article.

             
          • Bronco posted at 10:28 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            Bronco Posts: 4328

            HTC: America chose the fool over the successful businessman. Once (again) the electorate has gone mad, what can you do?
            ------------------------
            Bronco: Well, you applaud the electorate for their wisdom...

            OUTSIDE THE BELTWAY

            Do Businessmen Make Good Presidents?

            One of the central tenants of Mitt Romney’s campaign for the Presidency, both now and four years ago, is the idea that his experience as a businessman gives him unique insights into economic issues that he’d be able to put into action as President for the benefit of the entire country. He’s not the first person to make that argument, of course, his father made similar arguments when he ran for President in 1968, as did Ross Perot in 1992 and 1996, and Herman Cain this past year. Additionally, the American public, and the media, has often been fascinated with the allure of the businessman coming in from the outside and “fixing Washington.” In the past, men such as Lee Iaccoca and Donald Trump has seen their names mentioned as potential Presidential candidate, and of course Trump milked that for all it was worth just last year.
            The question, though, is whether any of these assumptions that people have about the ability of businessmen, or anyone from outside the political system of that matter, to function at the top of the political ladder are true. Bloomberg’s David Lynch argues, quite convincingly, that they aren’t:
            Since 1900, few former businessmen have made it to the Oval Office. The most prominent was the nation’s 31st president, Herbert Hoover, whose handling of the economy during the Great Depression cemented his reputation as a failure.
            “Our greatest presidents, like Lincoln and FDR, were career politicians,” says Bruce Miroff, an expert on the presidency at the State University of New York in Albany.
            The presidency’s unique requirements mean that everyone who holds the office needs some on-the-job training, something Romney has done before. Still, the White House would bring unfamiliar constraints. There’s no equivalent in the corporate world to the separation of powers that often thwarts a president’s will. And the job demands political savvy more than managerial excellence.
            “Our entire system of government is meant to preclude models and skills used in the corporate world, which may be why presidents with business experience are not our most successful presidents,” says Barbara Perry, a senior fellow at the University of Virginia’s Miller Center.
            Coming from a profit-centered environment where they enjoy unrivaled authority, executives often stumble amid politics’ fungible goals and multiple power centers, says Mickey Edwards, who served eight terms as a Republican congressman from Oklahoma. And compared with the iron logic of a balance sheet, the politician’s ability to read the public mood — an essential skill for governing — is amorphous.
            “You have to like politics,” says former U.S. Representative William Frenzel, 83, a Minnesota Republican, who spent 20 years in Congress after a 16-year business career. “You can’t object to glad-handing. You can’t object to taking some abuse from people you have no reason to take abuse from.”
            The late Richard Neustadt, author of the classic study “Presidential Power and the Modern Presidents,” rejected the analogy of the president as an all-powerful CEO, writing: “Presidential power is the power to persuade.”
            George W. Bush was the first president with a master’s in business administration. His father, George H.W. Bush, made a fortune in oil before entering politics. In their pre-Oval Office days, Jimmy Carter ran a peanut farm and warehouse and Hoover was a wealthy mining executive and financier.
            As Lynch goes on to point out, of those four, only George W. Bush was re-elected, and that happened in the middle of two wars and the still omnipresent wake of the worst terrorist attack in American history.
            Perhaps the most important point that Lynch makes is that, contrary to the way people seem to frequently put it, the Presidency is not like being a Chief Executive Officer. Not only does the analogy end up being an incomplete description of presicsely what a President’s duties and role in the Federal Government actually are, but it deliberately ignores the significant differences between the two roles. When a corporate CEO makes a decision, he can reasonably expect that what he decides will be what actually happens, and if it doesn’t then he’s going to fire someone. To some extent, the CEO is restrained by the Board of Directors, which does ultimately have the power to remove him or her, but for the most part what the CEO says goes. No such luck for a President. Even with the way that Presidential powers have expanded in recent years, there is still much that an American President cannot do without the agreement of other branches of government. Often this means having to negotiate with a Congress controlled in whole or in part by the opposing party, but sometimes a President must also deal with opposing factions in his own party. Just ask Barack Obama about that one.
            Another issue goes to the entire idea of the outsider President. The President is, above all, a politician and being a successful President means being able to successfully work ones way through the Washington political scene. This doesn’t mean that the President needs to be a Washington insider, of course. Some of our best President — Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton are two that come to mind — were not part of the Washington scene when they became President, but they had political skills learned from the time they were Governors that they were able to use to great effect in Washington. Of course, being a Governor doesn’t always lead to success in Washington, as Jimmy Carter could testify. For the most part, though, the kind of political skills one tends to learn as a Governor is a prerequisite for being a good President. Businessmen don’t learn those kinds of skills, and they’d have a steep learning curve transitioning from the business world to the Oval Office.
            None of this is to say that Romney’s business history isn’t relevant, or that it wouldn’t arguably help him as President. Lynch’s article goes on to relate several anecdotes from people who have worked with Romney in the business world, and during his time as Governor, that seem to suggest that he does indeed have the kind of skills one needs to be President. However, to some extent, if that’s the case it will largely be in spite of his business experience, not because of it.

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 10:27 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Pete: Generally the idea of placing my "wants" above the "needs" of others. Maybe materialism is a better word? Or greed?

            HTC: Thanks for the clarification. After substituting "materialism" for "rampant consumerism" in your original statement, then I fully agree with it. Based upon my study of economics, "consumerism" is a more neutral term and a healthy level of consumerism is necessary for a healthy, growing economy.

             
          • mooseberryinn posted at 10:24 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            mooseberryinn Posts: 2686

            Bill39, Justi, HTC, Pete - One problem that is not well publicized, or even acknowledged, is that Comrade/King Obama does not have a problem with fiscal disaster. You see, his worshipers still believe he campaigned to be President because he wanted to fix things. Not so - he is about destroying America and making it a Communist country. Control is the operative word here. With a greatly inflating dollar, shrinking food supply, very high fuel cost, high unemployment, and virtual control of medical treatment (or not) under the Obama/Democare, (which is going to rapidly balloon out of control, and become expensive chaos), and - the real winning stroke - control of the media, Comrade Obama is already a virtual dictator. He can lie with impunity knowing that most of the folks will remain ignorant of the truth. At least until the breadlines, gas-lines, welfare check lines etc. Electric rates skyrocket (to use obama's term). Ya see, it's too late, America is now a communist country

             
          • Pete posted at 10:14 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            Pete Posts: 3152

            HighTechCowboy posted at 8:14 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012

            "I think I generally agree with your statement; but, to be sure, would you briefly explain your use of the phrase "rampant consumerism?""

            Sure. Generally the idea of placing my "wants" above the "needs" of others. Maybe materialism is a better word? Or greed? Of course we then get into the definitions of "want" and "need"...and unlike progressives, I don't reduce those to merely monetary terms.

             
          • Bronco posted at 10:12 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            Bronco Posts: 4328

            HTC: So, what did you take away from that article?
            ------------------------
            Well, form your opposing article, I learned that you believe your grandchildren are dumb.
            From my article, that we are genetically disposed to control our population by mass murder in the name of politics or religion.

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 9:40 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Justitia: It seems to me that most of our politicians are not serious about addressing this major threat and that makes me despair sometimes. Are their no leaders left who will do what is right for this country rather than what is best for their reelection?

            HTC: It seems that real leaders are very difficult to find these days and there are at least a few reasons that are easy to identify.

            On the Democratic side of the aisle, where their power and base has been built over decades by buying votes with other peoples money via the welfare state and other mandated benefits, to "do the right thing for this country" would mean simultaneously dismantling the Democratic Party. Ain't gonna' happen.

            On the Republican side, virtue is partially the problem, for good men don't want to rule their fellow countrymen. They also don't want to subject their family and friends to the gross character attacks that will always come from the malicious liberal media. Just look at how the MSM treated the Obamas versus the Romneys. Who would want to subject their families to such viciousness?

            But there is also the electorate itself; after all, politicians can't elect themselves. This year, in the face of incredible economic challenges, we were given a choice between a Marxist fool who knows nothing about economics and has never built anything, least of all a business, and a successful businessman who has built successful companies as well as turned around failing businesses and who also inherited red ink as Governor of MA and left office with a surplus.

            Should have been a no-brainer; but, America chose the fool over the successful businessman.

            Once the electorate has gone mad, what can you do?

             
          • Pete posted at 9:34 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            Pete Posts: 3152

            Rob123 posted at 7:43 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012

            I see you're still on that steady diet of willful ignorance in the hopes that it gives you plausible deniabilitly when it hits the fan. Good luck with that.

             
          • bill39 posted at 9:13 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            bill39 Posts: 1051

            Justitia posted at 8:25 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012. How can we stand by and pretend that those liabilities won't crush our childrens opportunities and hopes for their own futures?

            Apparently it is easy for liberals. Many knew it was coming many decades ago.

             
          • Justitia posted at 8:25 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            Justitia Posts: 6

            who new posted at 11:51 pm on Wed, Nov 14, 2012

            Thank you for your very informative reply. I consider myself to be fiscally conservative and socially liberal. By "socially liberal", I don't mean that I support what some call the "redistribution of wealth." I mean that I favor liberty and freedom for everyone which includes allowing gays to marry, decriminalizing drugs, abortion (with reasonable limits), etc.

            I have only recently begun to look at "unfunded liabilities" since I have been hearing that term quite often during the past few years. It seems that those liabilities are enormous. How can we stand by and pretend that those liabilities won't crush our childrens opportunities and hopes for their own futures?

            It seems to me that most of our politicians are not serious about addressing this major threat and that makes me despair sometimes. Are their no leaders left who will do what is right for this country rather than what is best for their reelection?

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 8:14 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Pete: You won't find me defending rampant consumerism any more than I defend those who blatantly promote coveting the success of others. I find both distasteful. The problem is the government doesn't let either of the groups you describe live with the consequences of their choices.

            HTC: I think I generally agree with your statement; but, to be sure, would you briefly explain your use of the phrase "rampant consumerism?"

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 8:10 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Bronco posted at 10:31 pm on Wed, Nov 14, 2012

            So, what did you take away from that article?

             
          • Rob123 posted at 7:43 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            Pete: "Did you enjoy Barry's presser?"

            Not sure I follow your meaning of 'presser'. Having a shop to work on my equipment, my initial take on your use of 'presser' was: "Would Obama like to stick Mitch McDonald's head in a Presser, like in "The Fly"? Not really......, but a little. Of course, the feeling is mutual, and one can only hope they both don't end up in their respective corners, heels dug into the ground.

            Of course, other meanings could be used......Did he feel pumped up, with a mandate, at his press conference yesterday? Yes. As well he should. Of course, growing up in Kenya with Donald Trump, we certainly don't want a huge tribal fight full of egotism and control for control's sake?

             
          • Pete posted at 7:08 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            Pete Posts: 3152

            Rob123 posted at 5:31 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012

            You won't find me defending rampant consumerism any more than I defend those who blatantly promote coveting the success of others. I find both distasteful. The problem is the government doesn't let either of the groups you describe live with the consequences of their choices.

            But lets not change the subject huh? Did you enjoy Barry's presser? He might have "washed that gray right out of his hair" but he sure demonstrated shades of Nixon...no?

             
          • Rob123 posted at 5:31 am on Thu, Nov 15, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            Pete: " Oh, what a tangled web we weave...when first we practice to deceive.”

            I wonder who old Uncle Walter had in mind? I know I would bet a little wager on the target. But, nothing like a great parable to cut across socio-economic lines. Take this fiscal cliff thing, and apply the above parable, and some folks with 3 Bentley's in their drive-way will lower their eyes and sell one of them in order to raise cash for their new income tax bracket. THE HORROR!
            While other's on the dreaded government dole will be forced to actually seek and accept low level, monotonousness jobs that are no where close to what their Mom and Dad had in mind for them. THE HORROR!

             
          • who new posted at 11:51 pm on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            who new Posts: 367

            Justitia: “What concerns me, though, is the incredible debt that we're racking up which will fall to our children to pay off. If the generations making our political choices were the same ones that would pay for their mistakes, that would be fair. What we're doing isn't fair to our children and it hurts me to hear them talk despairingly about their future prospects because they know that they are the generation who will be most harmed by our deficit spending.”

            Having children myself, I share your concern for the prospects of our future generations. Even more of a concern than the continued growth of the federal debt is the so-called state and federal unfunded liabilities. Montana alone has fallen nearly 4 billion dollars short of its obligations.

            http://www.pewstates.org/research/state-fact-sheets/montana-widening-gap-update-85899399345

            The federal unfunded liabilities are almost unfathomable. I have seen estimates approaching 200 trillion dollars.

            Of the folks who post here, I may be one of the most fiscally conservative. I would dramatically slash federal spending of all types, including welfare, foreign aid, defense, incentives to individuals and businesses, and the like. I believe Social Security is an unsustainable Ponzi scheme, and the best course of action is to liquidate the entire program by allocating it’s remaining assets to current recipients as fairly as possible. I see no need for Medicare, and Medicaid should be the state’s responsibility.

            Being a proponent of personal liberty and the associated obligation of being personally responsible drives my philosophy of government. Therefore, I believe government at all levels should provide for the needy very sparingly and charity should be the responsibility of individuals acting collectively when needed.

            I posted the link to the David Frum article because I am concerned with the mood many of us are conveying. You and I probably both shared a deep disappointment when Romney lost to Obama. Romney would have made an excellent president and I was extremely hopeful of the direction of our nation with his election.

            While I empathize with those who believe we have fallen into the abyss, this election has increased my resolve to educate others of what the true function of government should be. And the first group I’m starting with is my children.

             
          • Bronco posted at 10:31 pm on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            Bronco Posts: 4328

            http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=how-we-know-humans-getting-smarter-flynn-excerpt

             
          • Pete posted at 8:45 pm on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            Pete Posts: 3152

            Barry O's latest presser provides futher empirical evidence that old Walter was right when he wrote, " Oh, what a tangled web we weave...when first we practice to deceive.”

             
          • Rob123 posted at 7:19 pm on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            "A retaliating petition calling for "everyone that signed a petition to withdraw their state" to be deported had 18,000 signatures Wednesday afternoon."

            http://www.kpax.com/news/thousands-sign-montana-petition-to-secede/

            "The first Montana petition was posted by "Scott E.", who is reportedly from Columbia Falls. As of Wednesday afternoon, the petition had drawn more than 12,000 names with another 12,900 needed by December 10th to meet the goal of having 25,000 names."

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 6:06 pm on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            BEST OF THE WEB TODAY, The Wall Street Journal
            November 14, 2012
            She's Back! Old familiar faces in the House leadership.
            By JAMES TARANTO

            Nancy Pelosi surprised no one by announcing today that she won't step aside as leader of the House Democrats. But there was considerable weirdness in the way she went about it. For one thing, she held a segregated press conference: Only female congressmen and congressmen-elect joined her on stage.

            Then, as Slate's Dave Weigel notes, she got crabby with a reporter:

            "Pelosi started taking questions. The first one that broached the reality--that Pelosi, for the second time, would be leading a minority--came from Luke Russert of NBC News.

            "Mrs. Pelosi," said Russert, "some of your colleagues privately say that your decision to stay on prohibits the party from having younger leadership. It hurts the party in the long term. What's your response?"

            "The women around Pelosi erupted--booing, hissing, one member snapping "discrimination!" Pelosi told Russert to ask the same question to Mitch McConnell. The women cheered.

            "Excuse me!" interjected Russert, who was asking a question that was inevitably going to come up. "You, Mr. Hoyer, Mr. Clyburn, you're all over 70. Does staying on prevent younger leadership from moving forward?"

            "So you're suggesting that everyone move aside?" asked Pelosi.

            "No, I'm simply saying that to delay younger leadership from moving forward . . ."

            "Let's, for the moment, honor that as a legitimate question, even though it's very offensive. . . .""

            Pelosi's tu quoque is a fair enough point. One could just as easily ask the same question of McConnell--or, for that matter, of John Boehner or Harry Reid. On the other hand, Mrs. P. is awfully touchy. It's hard to imagine McConnell, Boehner or Reid responding to the question by lecturing the reporter that "it's very offensive."

            Another strange statement came at a press conference yesterday, noted by the Daily Caller. Referring to the minority she will lead in the 113rd Congress, she said: "They are extraordinary leaders who will make our House Democratic caucus the first caucus in history--in the history of civilized government--to have a majority of women and minorities."

            We guess what she means by this is that if you count up the number of incoming Democratic representatives who are female, black, Hispanic, Asian-American and any other categories of "minorities," you come up with a number that is greater than the remainder--i.e., Democrats who are both white and male.

            But is this really the first time "in the history of civilized government" that is the case? It seems to us that if you bean-count just about any government or opposition party in Spain or most Latin American countries, you'd come up with a large majority of Hispanics. Likewise for African countries and blacks. Is Pelosi suggesting these lands are uncivilized?

            Of course this objection does not apply if Pelosi means "minorities" in the literal sense rather than the politically correct one: Hispanics are the majority in Spanish-speaking countries, and blacks in most African ones. But in that case, what about parties that predominantly represent an ethnic or racial group that is a minority in its country, such as the Freedom Front Plus (Afrikaners in South Africa) or Israel's United Arab List?

            There's no getting around it: Pelosi has a rather parochial view of what constitutes civilization. And it's hardly a sign of progress that her grandiose proclamation is in the service of demonizing a minority, even if that minority is white men.

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 5:56 pm on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Katrina survivors should be thankful they had Bush's FEMA and not Obama's:

            Staten Islanders offer to school FEMA after Sandy's wrath
            By Ben Evansky
            November 14, 2012 | FoxNews.com

            As President Obama prepares for his post Hurricane Sandy visit to New York, he might be able to learn a thing or two from Staten Island residents who mobilized volunteers to help keep thousands of residents clothed and fed in what they say was an absence of government help.

            Now, some are saying their drive, organization and efficiency could serve as a model for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA, and other relief agencies.

            "There's no leadership here, nobody knows what's going on," said Christopher Janusis, a Staten Island resident, whose house and neighborhood were badly hit by Sandy.

            Speaking to Fox News surrounded by wreckage last week, Janusis said he awoke the morning after the election without even knowing who'd won. In a neighborhood where many lacked power, there was no way to keep up with the news.

            For Janusis and thousands of other Staten Islanders whose lives were so suddenly changed by Sandy, there are many reasons to complain. But rather than do that, and rather than wait for government help, the residents took matters into their own hands: They organized a volunteer-driven relief effort that could be an example for FEMA and other aid agencies might do well to study.

            Traci Cangiano owns real estate company Cangiano Estates and was one of many who took on the task of helping those who were hit by the storm.

            She says after driving around Staten Island and seeing the destruction her daughter asked her if they could start a donation drive. She agreed and turned her offices into a makeshift warehouse, where she and other family members and friends distributed thousands of aid parcels to fellow Staten Islanders.

            Last weekend, a massive truck arrived from Virginia with supplies. Within a couple of hours the aid was set for distribution throughout Staten Island.

            Cangiano and her fellow volunteers showed they could rip through the red tape that often stifles aid organizations, and focus on the calls for help.

            "We were monitoring Facebook and other social media," she said. "As calls and messages came in for help, we responded by sending cars full of food and supplies to the areas that needed it most."

            At Goodfellas Pizza on Hylan Boulevard, founder Marc Cosentino a former NYPD sergeant, is helping to coordinate local relief efforts where he, co-workers and volunteers have been going door to door day and night supplying neighbors with supplies, such as cleaning products, batteries and clothes and have been working in coordination with local churches, VFW posts and businesses so they can hit areas which need help right away.

            He says they are doing a lot of clean up and demolition but that "the reality is that we still need a lot of help as there are still people living in pitch black houses afraid to leave because of fear of looters."

            Cosentino tells Fox News that the main thing to be learned is "that the people themselves on Staten Island saved most of the lives here and are doing most of the work, along with volunteers from other areas." He says "you have incredibly valuable resources here that need be pooled to get the job done."

            New York Assemblywoman Nicole Malliotakis, who represents some of the worst-hit neighborhoods, said that Staten Islanders came together in the days after the storm as soon as they realized the government would fall short.

            She said small businesses, neighbors and local leaders teamed up to ensure people had clothes, food, water, blankets and hot meals, as well as other survival basics.

            Malliotakis said she welcomed the president's visit, and hoped he would help with rebuilding the community. However, she also told Fox News: "We don't just need him to come here just to take a walking tour. What we need is a commitment that he will do whatever he can to ensure that this community is rebuilt, and that the people of this community find homes, find housing and can put their lives together."

            Ben Evansky can be followed @globalposts

             
          • Rob123 posted at 5:45 pm on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            HighTechCowboy posted at 4:43 pm on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            Good stuff....thank you.

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 5:33 pm on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Well, the stock market sure doesn't smell a 'recovery', now that Obama has won reelection. But I'm sure the Obamatons have an explanation for that, too.

            BTW, Justitia, I meant to welcome you to the forum in my previous post but hit "post comment" a bit too soon; so, welcome to the 2-Cents forum!

             
          • JBSTONE posted at 4:54 pm on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            JBSTONE Posts: 4558

            HighTechCowboy posted at 4:43 pm on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            Then, jennny & Bronco are way ahead of the curve..............[beam]

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 4:43 pm on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Stanford scientists claim human intelligence peaked 2-6 millenia ago and we've been getting dumber since then. The paper opens with a very controversial suggestion: 'I would be willing to wager that if an average citizen from Athens of 1000 BC were to appear suddenly among us, he or she would be among the brightest and most intellectually alive of our colleagues and companions.' From there, Crabtree speculates we're on the decline of human intelligence and we have been for at least a couple millennia. His argument suggests agriculture and, following from that, cities, have allowed us to break free of some environmental forces on competitive genetic mutations.:

            http://bmi205.stanford.edu/_media/crabtree-2.pdf

            http://crablab.stanford.edu/labmembers.html

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 4:29 pm on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Justitia posted at 10:20 am on Wed, Nov 14, 2012

            I agree with you completely that what we're doing to our children and grandchildren is immoral and grossly unfair. Apparently a large percentage of the population now feels that it's OK to screw over our progreny.

            Seems we can't stop it, so I have no recommendations for your children other than to vote for those who are serious about stopping it.

             
          • kohana posted at 4:06 pm on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            kohana Posts: 2109

            http://israelisoldiersmother.blogspot.com/2012/11/watch-missile-attack.html

            15 seconds in Sderot.

             
          • Rob123 posted at 3:34 pm on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            JBSTONE posted at 1:51 pm on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            It was their 6th try JB, in 18+/- months.

             
          • kohana posted at 3:14 pm on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            kohana Posts: 2109

            http://www.seraphicpress.com/count-to-fifteen-israel-america-under-fire/#more-13239

            By Robert J. Avrech | November 14, 2012
            Count to Fifteen: Israel, America Under Fire

            While the Obama regime consolidates its power over every aspect of our lives here in America — soft tyranny in action — the Jew-haters and Jihadists are on the march.

            The so-called Arab Spring, which Obama enabled at every step, is turning, as Seraphic Secret predicted, into a full-blown Islamist movement that is sweeping through the Middle East like prairie fire.

            The massacre of Americans in Benghazi is but one aspect of a much larger picture. The day Obama threw his support behind the genocidal-yearning Muslim Brotherhood against the Mubarak regime was the day America signaled appeasement, if not surrender, to the cutthroats of Islam. Also, the day Obama turned his back on the revolutionary anti-mullah forces in Iran was further proof that Obama’s doctrine of appeasement and leading from behind means capitulation to the fascist theocrats of Islam.

            Israel, the one country in the Middle East that Obama openly scorns, is the canary in the coal mine of civilization. Children in southern Israel live in fear of the rockets of Islam. When the siren goes off in Kiryat Arba, Sderot or any other town within rocket and mortar range, people have 15 seconds to get to a bomb shelter.

            Homework Assignment:
            1) Run.
            2) Count to fifteen.
            3) And see how fast you can get anywhere.

            Gaza is a terrorist reichlet run by warring tribes of terrorist thugs and financed by the Gulf States, Tehran, and the oh-so-humane EU.

            The Muslim Brotherhood controls Egypt. And for all the noise made by pundits about the Egyptian military keeping a lid on the crazies, very few have noticed that Morsi and his MB masters are busy purifying the army, forcibly retiring old guard Mubarak officers, and replacing them with reliable MB zombies.

            Syria, never a real state, but warring tribes held together under the boot of the minority Alawites, has reverted to its natural state of clan and tribal warfare. One massacre is answered by another. In the meantime, Al Qaeda has moved in, gaining a foothold near the Golan Heights, bordering Israel.

            Libya, another Arab Muslim basket case cobbled together by the European colonialists, is also back to its natural state of internecine warfare. Obama touted Libya as an example of the success of leading from behind, but if this is success, well, what’s failure look like? Oh, right, we already know: Benghazi — which, if the mainstream media did its job, and they won’t — would emerge as a scandal dwarfing Watergate.

            Yemen is, well, Yemen, a huge goat-shtup. Not enough water for that arid and violent land. You know what happens when feuding clans start fighting over water holes? I can write a screenplay that would be wall-to-wall murder, rape and plunder, and it wouldn’t begin to approach the inevitable carnage. And, oh yeah, the country is chewing itself to death.

            Tunisia will be in the hands of the Islamists by the end of the year. The so-called Twitter and Facebook revolutionaries, are, as always, useless against Kalashnikovs.

            As we write, there are riots in the streets of Jordan over the price of fuel. And if you think the MB and its affiliates are not involved and planning to cut off some choice Hashemite heads, well, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

            Iraq: Gone. Iran runs the show.
            Afghanistan: Gone. Total Taliban.

            Whether you live in Jerusalem, New York, London, Paris, Dublin, Stockholm, or São Paolo, you are looking at a world set aflame by the armies of Islam. You cannot reason with these people. You cannot appease them. You cannot make peace with them.

            America is on a direct path to fiscal insolvency. Obama’s policies cannot end in any other way. We have seen the future and it is Greece, Portugal, Spain, Italy — the entire crumbling EU built on a leviathan of failed socialist-utopian dreams.

            Fools in the media talk about approaching the fiscal cliff.

            They haven’t noticed. We fell off the fiscal cliff during Barack Hussein Obama’s first term. Now, in his second term, we are falling, silently plummeting, with an electorate too stupid, too enervated by the promise of free condoms and abortions even to scream on the way down.

            Our military is being hollowed out. America’s military posture on the world stage, the only posture that counts, is deeply diminished. But don’t worry, our military touts gay marriage, won’t use the term “Islamic terror,” and is vigilant against the phantom of so-called Islamophobia.

            By the end of Obama’s second term, Americans might be begging the IDF for protection against the Muslim barbarians at the gates.

            Take a look at your children, your children’s children.
            Now: count to fifteen.
            For this is their future.

            Video at website.
            http://www.seraphicpress.com/count-to-fifteen-israel-america-under-fire/#more-13239

             
          • mooseberryinn posted at 2:01 pm on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            mooseberryinn Posts: 2686

            No, No - can't get rid of Cuba. they're the poster child for why Communism doesn't work, and why Comrade Obama's backwards economic policies don't work. Which is also a good example of why businesses are not hiring, etc. etc. etc. and so on etc.
            But - I do agree with Gaza assessment. give them 48 hours to leave, and then make it a smoking hole in the ground. (just kidding). The Palestinians know exactly what they are doing, and most of the world knows they are wrong. it's just the Islamic wackos have to play their parts to get sympathy.
            Iran - Need a max bunker-buster dropped on access point to underground nuke facility. Won't stop them, but it sure would add some delay and send a clear message.

             
          • JBSTONE posted at 1:51 pm on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            JBSTONE Posts: 4558

            kohana posted at 11:45 am on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            The point is not about "keeping score", but rather that Israel specifically targeted a Hamas leader [islamic nutcase] and neatly took him out without collateral damage. I was wondering how long they'd put up with it before something like this transpired.

            [thumbup]

             
          • kohana posted at 12:01 pm on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            kohana Posts: 2109

            If you want the truth try Israel Hayom instead of Reuter.

            http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id=6408

            If I were in charge, Gaza would have been turned into a sandlot, long ago. After more than 1000 rockets and missiles fired into Israel this past year, and some even after cease fire agreements is shameful, and the world tolerates it. However, Syria has slaughtered 30,000 of it's civilians and will never get the condemnation that Israel will get for retaliating a provocation and killing several military leaders.

            I wonder if the world would condemn USA if we actually leveled Cuba if we had waited out a year of rockets, mortars and missiles fired into FL.

            Of course, Gaza's soul purpose of being, and it's declaration, is to destroy Israel. But, the world has to blame "trouble brewing" on Israel. The fact is, Gaza has been raining missiles on Israel for years, even after 2009-2010. Their hatred never ceases.

             
          • kohana posted at 11:45 am on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            kohana Posts: 2109

            J.B. why isn’t the headline of this article, “After 150 rockets and Mortars fired into Israel from Sat to Mon, Israel finally retaliated when Gaza violated the cease fire agreement?”

            The total of rockets fired from Gaza in 2012 is now about a thousand.

            http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/11/13/Israel-Considering-Assault-On-Gaza

             
          • JBSTONE posted at 11:17 am on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            JBSTONE Posts: 4558

            Either more trouble brewing or problem solved......???

            Israel launches Gaza offensive, kills Hamas commander


            Jaabari killing is first of many Gaza strikes: Israel official
            10:14am EST
            Egypt condemns Israel attacks on Gaza, demands halt
            12:43pm EST
            Palestinian leader Abbas calls for urgent Arab meeting
            12:44pm EST
            Timeline: Israel and Hamas in repeated conflict
            1:12pm EST

            Analysis & Opinion

            Fighting threats in the age of austerity
            What the Cuban missile crisis teaches us about Iran

            Related Topics

            World »
            Israel »
            Middle East Turmoil »

            Hamas military chief killed in Israeli airstrike
            10:20am EST

            By Nidal al-Mughrabi

            GAZA | Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:12pm EST

            (Reuters) - Israel launched a major offensive against Palestinian militants in Gaza on Wednesday, killing the military commander of Hamas in an air strike and threatening an invasion of the enclave that the Islamist group vowed would "open the gates of hell".

            The onslaught shattered hopes that a truce mediated on Tuesday by Egypt could pull the two sides back from the brink of war after five days of escalating Palestinian rocket attacks and Israeli strikes at militant targets.

            Operation "Pillar of Defense" began with a surgical strike on a car carrying the commander of the military wing of Hamas, the Islamist movement which controls Gaza and dominates a score of smaller armed groups.

            Within minutes of the death of Ahmed Al-Jaabari, big explosions were rocking Gaza, as the Israeli air force struck at selected targets just before sundown, blasting plumes of smoke and debris high above the crowded city.

            Panicking civilians ran for cover and the death toll mounted quickly. Seven people including two girls under the age of five were killed, the health ministry said.

            A second Gaza war has loomed on the horizon for months as waves of Palestinian rocket attacks and Israeli strikes grew increasingly more intense and frequent.

            Israel's Operation Cast Lead in 2008-2009 began with a week of air attacks and shelling, followed by a land invasion of the blockaded coastal strip, sealed off at sea by the Israeli navy. Some 1,400 Palestinians were killed and 13 Israelis died.

            Hamas said Jaabari, who ran the organization's armed wing, Izz el-Deen Al-Qassam, died along with an unnamed associate when their car was blown apart by an Israeli missile.

            The charred and mangled wreckage of a car could be seen belching flames, as emergency crews picked up what appeared to be body parts.

            GATES OF HELL

            Israel confirmed it had carried out the attack and announced there was more to come. Reuters witnesses saw Hamas security compounds and police stations blasted apart.

            "This is an operation against terror targets of different organizations in Gaza," Israeli army spokeswoman Colonel Avital Leibovitch told reporters.

            Jaabari had "a lot of blood on his hands", she said. Other militant groups including Islamic Jihad were on the target list.

            Immediate calls for revenge were broadcast over Hamas radio.

            "The occupation has opened the gates of hell," Hamas's armed wing said. Smaller groups also vowed to strike back.

            "Israel has declared war on Gaza and they will bear the responsibility for the consequences," Islamic Jihad said.

            Southern Israeli communities within rocket range of Gaza were on full alert, and schools were ordered closed for Thursday. About one million Israelis live in range of Gaza's relatively primitive but lethal rockets, supplemented in recent months by longer-range, more accurate systems.

            "The days we face in the south will, in my estimation, prove protracted," Brigadier-General Yoav Mordechai, Israel's chief military spokesman, told Channel 2 TV.

            "The home front must brace itself resiliently."

            Mordechai said Israel was both responding to a surge in Palestinian rocket salvoes earlier this week and trying to prevent Hamas and other Palestinian factions from building up their arsenals further.

            Among the targets of Wednesday's air strikes were underground caches of longer-range Hamas rockets, he said.

            Asked if Israel might send in ground forces, Mordechai said: "There are preparations, and if we are required to, the option of an entry by ground is available."

            HAMAS EMBOLDENED

            Israel's intelligence agency Shin Bet said Jaabari was responsible for Hamas' takeover of the Gaza Strip in 2007, when the militant Islamist group ousted fighters of the Fatah movement of its great rival, the Western-backed Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas.

            It said Jaabari instigated the attack that led to the capture of Israeli Corporal Gilad Shalit in a kidnap raid from Gaza in 2006. Jaabari was also the man who handed Shalit over to Israel in a prisoner exchange five years after his capture.

            Israel holds a general election on January 22 and conservative Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has pledged to retaliate harshly against Hamas.

            Hamas has been emboldened by the rise to power in neighboring Egypt of its spiritual mentors in the Muslim Brotherhood, viewing them as a "safety net" that will not permit a second Israeli thrashing of Gaza, home to 1.7 million Palestinians.

            Egypt condemned Israel's strikes on Gaza and urged it to end the attacks at once.

            Hamas has historically been supported by Iran, which Israel regards as a rising threat to its own existence due to its nuclear program.

            In the flare-up that was prelude to Wednesday's offensive, more than 115 missiles were fired into southern Israel from Gaza and Israeli planes launched numerous strikes.

            Seven Palestinians, three of them gunmen, were killed. Eight Israeli civilians were hurt by rocket fire and four soldiers wounded by an anti-tank missile.

            Helped by Iran and the flourishing contraband trade through tunnels from Egypt, Gaza militias have smuggled in better weapons since the war of 2008-09.

            But Gaza's estimated 35,000 Palestinian fighters are still no match for Israel's F-16 fighter-bombers, Apache helicopter gunships, Merkava tanks and other modern weapons systems in the hands of a conscript force of 175,000, with 450,000 in reserve.

            Israel's shekel fell nearly one percent to a two-month low against the dollar on Wednesday after news of the Israeli air strikes broke.

             
          • Rob123 posted at 11:09 am on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-11-13/germany-has-built-clean-energy-economy-u-s-rejected-in-80s.html

            The first installment of Clean Break: The Story of Germany's Energy Transformation -- and What Americans Can Learn From It, an Amazon.com ebook
            Read Part II: German Law Gave Citizens a Stake in Clean Energy Switch

            We might as well get up to speed, and quit whining?

             
          • Justitia posted at 10:20 am on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            Justitia Posts: 6

            who new posted at 12:16 pm on Tue, Nov 13, 2012

            Hi, who new. Enjoyed your post as well as Sam Adams'.

            While I agree that democracy can be ugly at times, I also feel that there is always cause for hope in the tug-of-war between competing ideas.

            What concerns me, though, is the incredible debt that we're racking up which will fall to our children to pay off. If the generations making our political choices were the same ones that would pay for their mistakes, that would be fair. What we're doing isn't fair to our children and it hurts me to hear them talk despairingly about their future prospects because they know that they are the generation who will be most harmed by our deficit spending.

            What are your thoughts on that?

             
          • kohana posted at 10:06 am on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            kohana Posts: 2109

            Don’t know why I’m posting this jennydoe, as I doubt you would understand it. However, your snide cynicism of Ben Stein, a well know columnist, indicates your lack of any kind of critical thinking. It also is not an argument. Some of the columnists, on Ricochet, admittedly a conservative blog, are schoolteachers. There are a variety of subjects. Maybe a week of reading the columns might give you a better insight to conservatives, not nut jobs as all groups have them.

            http://ricochet.com/main-feed/Observations-from-the-Classroom

            In the comments:

            Copperfield

            Well, your class sounds interesting... one I think my kids might enjoy. You seem to be teaching them HOW to think, not WHAT to think. Those critical thinking skills, if they stick with the students, should inevitably lead to a conservative outlook. So, well done!

            I guess I'd say ask questions that might lead them to immutable truths. A few examples:
            Is a religious belief necessary to a free republic? (Leads to Tocqueville.)

            Is wealth created, or is there a finite stock of it, the only relevant question about which is how it should be distributed?

            Is political self-interest somehow nobler than economic self-interest?

            What is more generous, to help someone with your own resources or with someone else's?

            What is the ad hominem fallacy? (I.e. calling someone a racist, sexist, homophobe is not an argument.)

            What is the appeal to authority fallacy? (I.e. saying most mainstream economists agree is not a valid argument.)

            Are people smart enough to run their own lives?

            Is America really exceptional? (E.g. is it exceptional that America had slavery or that we joined the Brits to stamp it out utterly as an accepted institution in the world?)

             
          • Bronco posted at 9:42 am on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            Bronco Posts: 4328

            Left side of the room: We're giving the Democrats another four years to try to straighten out this mess.

            Right side: We are going to whine, complain, criticize, and obstruct every effort by the Democrats for ANOTHER four years. Then we are going to say in 2016, "Look how little was accomplished! The nation needs Republican leaders who are capable of reaching across the aisle."

             
          • mooseberryinn posted at 9:33 am on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            mooseberryinn Posts: 2686

            A "mandate" to raise taxes???? Only Comrade Obama could come up with that one.

            jennie - at last we agree! Comrade Obama wouldn't know anything about the Generals, even if he were told. He's only interested in his own ideas.

             
          • jennydoe posted at 9:21 am on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            jennydoe Posts: 2198

            kohana asks: Meanwhile, again, who the heck is this Jill Kelley?
            -----------
            She is the perfect republican. From shady Cancer charities, to millions in lawsuits to lavish cocaine parties.

            And we are supposed to believe that President Obama is privy to the sexual exploits of all. Wow.
            how I rate your article: Boo, Boo, Boo, Boo!!

             
          • kohana posted at 8:29 am on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            kohana Posts: 2109

            http://spectator.org/archives/2012/11/14/boom-boom-boom-boom

            Boom, Boom, Boom, Boom
            By Ben Stein on 11.14.12 @ 7:51AM

            The Petraeus/Holder/Obama super scandal just keeps getting bigger and bigger.

            Tuesday
            There is an unbelievably great song by the black blues man John Lee Hooker called simply, "Boom, Boom, Boom, Boom," as in "Boom, Boom, Boom, Boom, Gonna shoot you right down....".

            ......I keep thinking about that "Boom, Boom, Boom, Boom," song because of the Petraeus/Holder/Obama super scandal that is sweeping the nation's capital. And the nation. "Boom, Boom, Boom, Boom," it just keeps getting bigger and bigger.

            "Boom, Boom, Boom, Boom," the DCI has been telling big time lies by omission, has been doing spycraft Internet games with his mistress, using Gmail, again, which my computer pals tell me a ten year old can hack, leaving sexually explicit messages for her in a draft file that they can both access. And we are supposed to believe he's known her for eight years and this affair just started a year ago? When they were together in Kabul for long periods away from her hubby and his loyal wife? Are you kidding me? And ended a few months ago voluntarily? Are you really sure we are that stupid?

            "Boom, Boom, Boom, Boom," and we are supposed to believe that Barry Obama did not know about it? And that AG Holder didn't know about it? The FBI knew for months that the DCI was using an illegal Internet connection to carry on an affair with a beautiful blabbermouth and Holder did not know? And that he didn't tell the President?

            If that's true, I guarantee you that the Russians knew about it. They are pretty good at hacking, and the Chinese make the Russians look like kittens.

            "Boom, Boom, Boom, Boom," did you read about Paula telling an audience that the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi was really a CIA prison for captured terrorists? Where do you think she got that idea? How about this: someone high up in Obamaland says, "Hey, we'll say that place in Benghazi was a CIA operation. Then, we'll brief Romney and say that if you, Governor, are a patriot, you'll lay off this Benghazi thing because it was a CIA operation."

            So, Mr. Romney, like a patriot, like his father before him, gets brainwashed and ducks the whole Benghazi issue in debate 3. And Obama has suckered him in and wins the election with an elaborate trick and Paula somehow gets into the loop, too. Maybe she's just lying in bed with a certain someone and hears the conversation. I'm just saying.…

            I'm just saying that this is what Mr. Nixon tried to do with Watergate -- get the FBI off the trail be telling them that Watergate was a CIA thing. It worked for a while, too. Maybe Mr. Obama's far cleverer trick worked well, too.

            Meanwhile, again, who the heck is this Jill Kelley? Porn e-mails from the top U.S. general in Afghanistan? Flirting with General Petraeus? Runs some kind of questionable charity ? Who the heck is she? Getting sex pictures from an FBI man who helps "catch" Paula? She's an interesting girl. "Bad girl, bad girl, such a dirty bad girl, beep, beep," as Donna Summer sang. She's really interesting.

            Then there's that four-star General Ward, one of the highest ranking African-American generals ever, basically stealing money to furnish his house, take his wife and him on lavish shopping trips, roaring through town in a motorcade -- and he doesn't even get fired. He gets retired as a three star. Hmm. Let's see what might account for the difference in treatment....Why isn't he prosecuted for embezzlement or theft?

            Then there's a one star who's going to prison for forcing female officers to perform oral sex on him.

            What the heck is happening to this country? Is this the "hope and change" we asked for? I guess it's hope, anyway.

            Meanwhile, I love President Obama saying he has a mandate to raise taxes because he won the election. I fully agree taxes have to be raised. But does he really think he won for any other reason than that he got a huge nonwhite turnout and majority and he was running against a weak campaign? Surely he knows why he won. He has to. To now claim it had anything to do with taxation issues is comical. I don't know. Maybe he really thinks he got 95% of the African American vote because of fiscal policy issues.

            "Boom, Boom, Boom, Boom."

            Meanwhile, again, please do not allow me to leave the impression that I am any better than Gen. Petraeus or Gen. Allen or Paula and Jill. I'm not. I am a lot worse. I am a sinner, not a saint. But I'm giving you the straight scoop here because it takes one to know one. The MSM won't tell you what's happening here. I just did.

            http://spectator.org/archives/2012/11/14/boom-boom-boom-boom

             
          • mooseberryinn posted at 8:08 am on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            mooseberryinn Posts: 2686

            jennie - ya need some new material. Go look for your real talents. Bill39 - right on.
            Want some entertainment? Google "new federal regulations under Obama" - some truth, some propaganda, but something like over 11,000 pages? The bottom line is Obama is NOT about helping American economy. It seems he is attempting to satisfy his hunger to be "Emperor" by directing his regime agencies to create havoc thru regulations. (enjoy)

             
          • bill39 posted at 7:48 am on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            bill39 Posts: 1051

            Pete posted at 6:20 pm on Tue, Nov 13, 2012

            Well said Pete, but it wont happen as you know. I had to chuckle at CNN yesterday, every time they referred to our bloated natl.debt where it is headed to, as " the so called fiscal cliff ", EVERY time, then of course the they would snicker. They must want everybody to believe their party has a workable plan. There is one word that describes ALL democrats SELFISH

             
          • jennydoe posted at 7:07 am on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            jennydoe Posts: 2198

            Cranial - Rectal inversion has become pandemic, and you yourself, mooseberryinn, have caught it!
            Nullification = Obstruction. duh.

             
          • mooseberryinn posted at 6:34 am on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            mooseberryinn Posts: 2686

            Rob123 - No it won't.
            Pete and Kohana - very well said. I will check on the "nullification" thingy.
            It is so amazing that people can support Comrade Obama and cheer his obstruction of just about everything needed to get America going again. Cranial - Rectal inversion has become pandemic.

             
          • Rob123 posted at 4:41 am on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            mooseberryinn posted at 7:31 am on Tue, Nov 13, 2012.
            Posts: 853
            Rob123 - what is it you're trying to say?

            Why is it every time you post something, I feel like I should be a young E-1 Private, standing at attention, responding in a RAISED voice: " You're absolutely correct, Sargent Major! If you had made love to my mother, I would be as smart as you! OoRah!"

            ....of course, that will never happen.

             
          • Rob123 posted at 4:13 am on Wed, Nov 14, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=530102197017768&set=a.206138056080852.56660.205876559440335&type=1&theater

            Don't you just love fairy tales?

             
          • kohana posted at 11:33 pm on Tue, Nov 13, 2012.

            kohana Posts: 2109

            There is still hope, if the various states continue the present surge of the NULLIFICATION of unconstitutional federal laws that has finally begun!

            If you are unfamiliar with NULLIFICATION, please educate yourselves about its history and how it works. It has been done before in the early days of our great nation with some instances occurring in recent history; but it's time for all the states to dust off this old horse and ride it once again, -- all the way to the complete RESTORATION of our Constitutional government, reigning in this Leviathan that our federal government has become, by restoring the balance of power as it was intended to be: The largest amount of power to the people (intentionally undefined powers), the 2nd largest amount of power to the states (intentionally undefined powers), the smallest amount of power to the federal government (intentionally defined powers), with those federal powers LIMITED to the ENUMERATED powers specifically named in the Constitution and to ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ELSE.

            Please join the current efforts by your states to NULLIFY unconstitutional federal laws by visiting the Tenth Amendment Center at
            www.tenthamendmentcenter.com

            There are currently 29 state chapters of the Tenth Amendment Center with efforts underway to add state chapters in the remaining 21 states. This is NOT the work of sunshine patriots, but calls for action by all patriots in every state. Obamacare has already been NULLIFIED in several states and there is no reason it can't be NULLIFIED in all 50 states. That would send a much-needed message to all the branches of the federal government, -- to Congress, to the President, and to the Supreme Court, -- that the power to overturn unconstitutional federal laws still remains LEGALLY in the hands of the people and of the states, where it properly belongs!

            Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/11/will_white_house_be_forced_to_respond_to_texas_secession_petition_comments.html#disqus_thread#ixzz2C8wMz0MM


             
          • jennydoe posted at 6:27 pm on Tue, Nov 13, 2012.

            jennydoe Posts: 2198

            Bronco: None of these people can be Constitutionalists, jenny doe. The 14th Amendment forbids states from declaring independence from the Union. A state cannot “abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States,” it states. The what the Constitution lawyers say. I'm sure they are totally wrong...according to HTC.
            ----------
            I know that, but then again I am not a disgruntled teaparty member with bags on my hat.
            HTIC will be disputing this though. somehow.

             
          • Pete posted at 6:20 pm on Tue, Nov 13, 2012.

            Pete Posts: 3152

            Can't say as I was surprised by the outcome of the election, the American people got what they wanted and it is time to let them live with the consequences. The NEA educated public has been nibbling around the edges of socialism for a long while now, and I believe the time has come to let them have a nice big bite of it. No more "death by a thousand cuts" no more slippery slope, no more loyal opposition.

            For too long now Conservatives and Libertarians have been punished for being the adults in the room as they deign to stand up to a public clamoring for more handouts and politicians just as eager to feed the beast. No more. If I was advising Boehner, McConnell and others, I would tell them to stand down. Get out of the way of the mob. Let the likes of Bronco, JennyDoe, and the 37 Chicago precincts and 59 Philadelphia precincts et al, get exactly what they want. Let them gorge themselves at the trough of STATE in the name of compassion. Let them turn their lives over to the whims of government...in hopes it can do for them what they can't do for themselves. Let them suffer the consequences of open borders and unrestrained immigration policy. Let them have their vote nullified by dead people. Let them depend on the self-restraint of Reid, Pelosi, Leahy, Schumer, Markey, Miller, etc. (good luck with that) Let them figure out how to heat their homes, power their computers, or feed themselves once Al Gore gets to implement his environmental policy minus the restraint of sound science and reason. Let them argue the value of their personal healthcare to government bureaucrats when objective truth is nowhere to be found and the cost benefit analysis doesn't favor them. Sure it would be a disaster. Sure there will be a mess to clean up. (if the country survives) But...I truly believe they won't learn the lesson of history any other way.

            So get the he// out of the way Ryan, Boehner, Cantor, etc. and lets get on with the show while Bronco, Jennydoe, and the rest of the utopian socialists are still alive and kicking...because if there is one thought I can't stomach it is the idea that my children will bear the burden of consequences rightly due these selfish leeches.

             
          • Rob123 posted at 5:21 pm on Tue, Nov 13, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            Contract [wink]n America?

             
          • Bronco posted at 5:18 pm on Tue, Nov 13, 2012.

            Bronco Posts: 4328

            jennydoe: The other 18 states with requests for secession: Alabama, North and South Carolina, Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee, Michigan, Indiana, North Dakota, Montana, Colorado, Oregon, New Jersey, New York, Arkansas, Georgia and Missouri.
            All quote a passage from the Declaration of Independence that reads "whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and institute new Government."
            ---------------------------
            None of these people can be Constitutionalists, jenny doe. The 14th Amendment forbids states from declaring independence from the Union. A state cannot “abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States,” it states. The what the Constitution lawyers say. I'm sure they are totally wrong...according to HTC.

             
          • kohana posted at 3:25 pm on Tue, Nov 13, 2012.

            kohana Posts: 2109

            mooseberryinn posted at 1:01 pm on Tue, Nov 13, 2012

            All may not be lost.

            There is still hope, if the various states continue the present surge of the NULLIFICATION of unconstitutional federal laws that has finally begun!

            If you are unfamiliar with NULLIFICATION, please educate yourselves about its history and how it works. It has been done before in the early days of our great nation with some instances occuring in recent history; but it's time for all the states to dust off this old horse and ride it once again, -- all the way to the complete RESTORATION of our Constitutional government, reigning in this Leviathian that our federal government has become, by restoring the balance of power as it was intended to be: The largest amount of power to the people (intentionally undefined powers), the 2nd largest amount of power to the states (intentionally undefined powers), the smallest amount of power to the federal government (intentionally defined powers), with those federal powers LIMITED to the ENUMERATED powers specifically named in the Constitution and to ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ELSE.

            Please join the current efforts by your states to NULLIFY unconstitutional federal laws by visiting the Tenth Amendment Center at www.tenthamendmentcenter.com

            There are currently 29 state chapters of the Tenth Amendment Center with efforts underway to add state chapters in the remaining 21 states. This is NOT the work of sunshine patriots, but calls for action by all patriots in every state. Obamacare has already been NULLIFIED in several states and there is no reason it can't be NULLIFIED in all 50 states. That would send a much-needed message to all the branches of the federal government, -- to Congress, to the President, and to the Supreme Court, -- that the power to overturn unconstitutional federal laws still remains LEGALLY in the hands of the people and of the states, where it properly belongs!

            Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/11/will_white_house_be_forced_to_respond_to_texas_secession_petition_comments.html#disqus_thread#ixzz2C8wMz0MM


             
          • mooseberryinn posted at 1:01 pm on Tue, Nov 13, 2012.

            mooseberryinn Posts: 2686

            Sam - nicely done. it is indeed a sad day when corruption, lies, deceit unending is voted for. Don't forget the media's role in this. As in 2008, they simply ignore the steaming pile of Obama's regime, and tell "news" of something else, anything else. It is difficult to accept that so many Americans would vote for decay and failure to come. Are they simply ignorant? selfish? or has their pride been stripped away little by little with the gov't handouts as evidence of their own failure? Could they be so gullible as to believe there is going to be "free" care and coddling for them. Beware - soon enough all kinds of hidden taxes and fees will cut away any family's "extra" - America will appear as a poor communist country with empty store shelves, lines for food, old rusting cars, and little reward for labor.

             
          • Rob123 posted at 1:01 pm on Tue, Nov 13, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            BREAKING: Rep. Paul Ryan said yesterday, "In order to get things done, in order to reach common ground, both sides need to put out, not just rhetoric, but specific ideas on the table."

             
          • who new posted at 12:16 pm on Tue, Nov 13, 2012.

            who new Posts: 367

            Contrasting viewpoint to Sam Adams post-

            http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/12/opinion/frum-conservatives-despair/index.html?hpt=op_r1

             
          • Rob123 posted at 11:58 am on Tue, Nov 13, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            Sam Adams posted at 10:38 am on Tue, Nov 13, 2012.

            What a bunch of flaming bull......and I voted for Romney! It will be interesting if HTC picks it apart, in the name of Intellectual Honesty?

             
          • kohana posted at 11:07 am on Tue, Nov 13, 2012.

            kohana Posts: 2109

            Sam Adams posted at 10:38 am on Tue, Nov 13, 2012

            Thanks for your post. I don't think I felt horror as much as I felt grief, the kind that leaves one sobbing for weeks for our loss. I'm still getting e-mails from life long friends, rubbing the O's win in my face, absolutely denying the coming events. They are equating me with chicken little, "the sky is falling!" However, I see myself as the "little red hen," who worked hard for a loaf of bread, and when winter came, no one else had any. Fables had a moral to tell. Half of the American people never heard them or discarded them. Maybe I should start a story telling hour in my apt complex, at least a few children will hear them.

             
          • Sam Adams posted at 10:38 am on Tue, Nov 13, 2012.

            Sam Adams Posts: 81

            How do those of us who love America and believe in American Exceptionalism view last Tuesday's massacre? Read on... it is as if this guy were channeling Breitbart.

            http://casualsundayswithmrcurry.com/2012/11/07/gobsmacked.aspx

            Gobsmacked


            Well, It's official; I don't know anything.

            I thought for sure that given such a clear choice, Americans would vote for love of country over revenge.

            I was wrong.

            I thought, that just as every presidential election in my lifetime, the bad economy would be hung around the incumbent's neck, sinking him.

            I was wrong.

            I thought that even those few Americans who were fortunate enough to still be fully employed (not counting those leeching off the public system) would be cognizant of how much pain their neighbors were in and elect someone who would at least try to make improvements.

            I was wrong.

            I thought that now that FINALLY some of the disturbing truths about our first black president had come to light, voters would reject a man so dangerously at odds with the American experience.

            I was wrong.

            I thought the 2010 elections and the Tea Party meant something.

            I thought the enthusiasm on display at Romney/Ryan events, contrasted with the lack of same at Obama/Biden events meant something.

            I thought Americans would never sell their liberty for the sake of trinkets like cell phones or even big shiny lies like 'free health care'.

            I was wrong.

            Never in a million years would I have supposed that America would support a president who left his (our) people to die at the hands of our enemies overseas without lifting a hand to help, then lie about what he watched in real time for over two weeks, then lie about the lie for another month.

            I was wrong.

            I thought Americans could tell a hawk from a handsaw.

            I was wrong.

            We were offered the clearest choice we've has since 1980, where we had malaise and a misery index on one hand and a shining city on a hill on the other. Back then, we chose the city on the hill. This time the choice was between a man who says 7.9% unemployment and $4.00 gas is the new normal and a guy whose entire career has been about fixing broken entities.

            We chose to stay broken. And Broke.

            Maybe I'm wrong about the ramifications of this choice. Maybe windmills will actually turn out to be a viable energy source. Maybe America diminished will be loved overseas. Maybe a nuclear Iran won't be a threat. Maybe Israel is over reacting. Maybe western civilization was always over rated. Maybe life under sharia is fun. Maybe when the rest of the world realizes that we have no intention of ever paying back that $16,000,000,000,000.00 (and counting) that we've borrowed from them, they won't devalue the dollar, causing hyper inflation here at home. Maybe China will just keep on giving us money and not demand our hearts, souls, national monuments and marriageable daughters as payment.

            I've watched my candidate lose elections before but I've never felt the way I did last night when this one was called for Obama.

            It wasn't bitterness or sadness or even disappointment. It took me a while to figure out what it was. Then it hit me; it was horror.

            Pure, unadulterated horror.

            Not because of Obama, but because of what it says about us, the American people, that we chose this.

            It shouldn't have even been close. Faced with the choice between taking charge of our destiny and tackling our financial problems, we opted to get high and have sex. We re elected a guy who doesn't understand that a growing economy that creates more tax payers will bring in more revenue than higher taxes. A Commander in Chief who doesn't know our military still uses bayonets. A man who wants to control the economy without even knowing the difference between bankruptcy and liquidation. It was one thing to elect an unknown quantity, buying his line of 'Hope and Change'. It's something else to deliberately choose his failed policies over someone who has actually achieved success in life. I never dreamed America would do that.

            Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, Hello Idiocracy!

            Goodbye, recovery.

            Goodbye, energy independence.

            Goodbye, religious liberty.

            Goodbye, liberty and justice for all.

            Goodbye, America dream.

            It profits a man nothing to lose his soul for the whole world but we threw ours away for cell phones and birth control pills.

            In the twentieth century (the American Century), we stepped up to the plate three times and saved the rest of the world from fascism, nazism and communism. We were the cavalry, always riding to the rescue.

            Now, we've gotten rid of our horses, spent all our money on windmills, alienated our allies, bowed to our enemies, cut ourselves off from our own natural resources thrown away our children's birthright and spent their inheritance.

            And we did it on purpose.

            When the wolf is at the door (and he's coming, yelling 'Allahu Akbar') we're going to find out that there is no one out there to come to our rescue.

            On the bright side, maybe it'll all turn out great. After all, I don't know anything.

             
          • Rob123 posted at 9:20 am on Tue, Nov 13, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            mooseberryinn posted at 7:31 am on Tue, Nov 13, 2012.

            Well, now that there is some sexual intrigue in the issue, maybe you'll go back and reexamine your initial knee-jerk reaction? As you probably know, inside a war zone, one sometimes wonders which side the CIA boys and girls are on, besides there own side. I'm pretty sure Gen Petraeus knew that 1st hand? He didn't last long, eh?

             
          • jennydoe posted at 8:59 am on Tue, Nov 13, 2012.

            jennydoe Posts: 2198

            moose, at least the folks in California eat less than some of our southern red states.

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 8:57 am on Tue, Nov 13, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            jennydoe posted at 6:16 am on Tue, Nov 13, 2012

            Wow, those are some really incredible sweeping generalities, which, like most such wild claims, don't really hold up on close examination.

            Let's take a quick look at federal tax dollars paid in per capita for a couple of the reddest states in the nation versus two of the bluest:

            Nebraska - $10731
            Texas - $9428

            California - $8590
            Hawaii - $5973

            Let's look at a few more red states that surely must send more tax dollars to Washington per capital than little ol' redneck Texas and them cornhuskers in Nebraska:

            Pennsylvania - $9038
            Ohio - $9224 (Guess we're never getting the auto bailout money back)
            Michigan - $6942
            Wisconsin - $7815
            Oregon - $6262
            New Hampshire - $7071
            New Mexico - $4236
            Maine - $4774
            Vermont - $6126

            Boy, those are some pretty red states and they can't out do those cowboys and cornhuskers.

            Oh, those good ol' boys down in Wyoming wanted me to mention that they pay Washington $9036 per capita.

            Your author, like so many others on the left, picked absolute tax dollars rather than per-capita payments because he's either ignorant or a liar.

            But let's take a banker's approach here. Every banker takes a good hard look at your debt in order to determine your financial health and creditworthiness. Let's do that for some of the red and blue states, looking at their state debt per capita (FY2010):

            Texas - $1679
            Wyoming - $2694
            Nebraska - $1279
            Idaho - $2478

            California - $4,008
            Hawaii - $5682
            Massachusetts - $11310
            Delaware - $6157
            New Hampshire - $6341
            New Mexico - $4261
            Maine - $4542
            Vermont - $5585
            Connecticut - $8465
            New Jersey - $6944

            Seems the redder the state, the worse the balance sheet looks. Not a sign of good governance nor economic policy. Notice that the east coast's hotbed of liberalism, the state of MA, is #1 in per-capita indebtedness!

            But I know you'll go with liberal spin over fact, so I won't waste any more of my time responding to the rest of your post. It would be nice, however, to see you actually express your own thoughts with facts you dug up for yourself. I have yet to see you do that and that just reinforces the impression that you really do let other people do your thinking for you.

             
          • mooseberryinn posted at 8:47 am on Tue, Nov 13, 2012.

            mooseberryinn Posts: 2686

            Jennie - you fail to mention that the majority of states that are bankrupt (like Ca,) are democratic. This means that you and I will be feeding those folks. (enjoy).

             
          • mooseberryinn posted at 7:31 am on Tue, Nov 13, 2012.

            mooseberryinn Posts: 2686

            Rob123 - what is it you're trying to say? if you're implying that the whitehouse infesting Comrades are inept, then I agree. Wasn't King Obama partying in Las Vegas at the time?

             
          • Rob123 posted at 6:59 am on Tue, Nov 13, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            mooseberryinn posted at 6:16 am on Tue, Nov 13, 2012.

            Any thoughts concerning your rabid attacks on the President concerning Benghazi, in the weeks leading up to the election, as more information comes to light and we now realize it was a CIA 'deep cover' gun running operation?

             
          • jennydoe posted at 6:16 am on Tue, Nov 13, 2012.

            jennydoe Posts: 2198

            It’s a well-known irony that states that tend to vote Republican—the party that constantly raves about the “makers” and trolls the “takers”—generally take in more tax money than they pay out.

            The 10 highest tax-producing states have all been “blue states” over the last few presidential elections. Of the 10 lowest, eight are “red.” Even within states, Democratic-leaning counties tend to consume fewer services for the tax money they contribute than red counties do—even though Democratic areas generally include large urban populations.

            While food stamp growth ballooned during the president’s first two years in office, from 2010-2011 it only increased by three percent as the recovery began to take hold.

            Yet during the 2012 election, Newt Gingrich constantly referred to President Obama as “the food stamp president,” a term whistling with “welfare queen”-like racial overtones. Despite Gingrich’s racial connotations, the majority of Americans who use food stamps are white, and they increasingly live in Republican areas.

            Bloomberg recently compiled U.S. Department of Agriculture data and found that, “70 percent of counties with the fastest growth in food-stamp aid during the last four years voted for the Republican presidential candidate in 2008.”

            Democratic voters are increasingly supporting Republican voters. This is largely due to the lingering impact of the financial downturn, which has been exacerbated in red states and red counties with red policies. Republicans have been enacting austerity measures at state and local levels with unprecedented downsizing of public employees during the jobs crisis. Total governmental employment is down more than half a million since President Obama took office.

            Many of these workers who lost their good government jobs are unemployed or forced to take wages so low that they still qualify for food stamps. In 2010, 41 percent of those who received food aid had jobs.

            Blue states tend to take better care of the poor and also take steps to prevent poverty by spending more on education.

            “By nearly every measure, people who live in the blue states are healthier, wealthier, and generally better off than people in the red states,” according to The New Republic’s Jonathan Cohn.

            Republican states not only benefit most from government support, their policies create the need for food stamps in the first place

            http://www.nationalmemo.com/the-gop-is-the-food-stamp-party/

             
          • mooseberryinn posted at 6:16 am on Tue, Nov 13, 2012.

            mooseberryinn Posts: 2686

            Investigations into voter fraud are beginning to multiply. No surprise here. Soon to be "headline"..."Surveys show dead people prefer Comrade Obama"

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 9:22 pm on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Bronco: http://www.statisticbrain.com/food-stamp-statistics/

            HTC: I'm not sure what the "Date Verified" is supposed to mean because the data quoted on the site is actually from the last such report by the USDA in November of 2011, inclusive of data through August of that year. A lot has changed in the 15 months since then.

            Regardless, the data isn't suggestive of anything in terms of the politics of the recipients versus the voting at the state level in this past election. To learn anything useful in that regards, you'd have to look at what percentage of the recipients voted Democrat versus Republican.

            There are many reasons why the raw data of percentage of people on food stamps will vary significantly from state to state; for example, many blue states like California don't have outreach programs to enroll those actually eligible because doing so would trigger their eligibility for other programs and further increase the drain on the treasury of an already bankrupt state. Data also isn't necessarily indicative of that state's general poverty conditions because some states like CA have a LARGE percentage of illegals who are afraid to file for social services for obvious reasons.

            Additionally, if you're suggesting that local governance is largely to blame, you overlook the vast overreach of the federal government which has hurt many states like Montana by increasingly making their natural resourced virtually impossible to profit from.

            What most economists I know look at in the way of this kind of data is the trend in caseloads, as they help to document the general economic trends in those states. As I said previously, the absolutely latest such data available shows Hawaii as number one in the growth of SNAP caseloads. Three of the other four in the top five are also blue.

             
          • Bronco posted at 8:42 pm on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            Bronco Posts: 4328


            HTC: You didn't cite your source, so I have no idea how current it is/isn't or how accurate it is.
            -----------------------------
            http://www.statisticbrain.com/food-stamp-statistics/
            Source: Department of Agriculture – Food and Nutrition Service
            Date Verified: 9/5/2012

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 8:30 pm on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Bronco: HTC, explain why the ten of the top fourteen states with the most people on food stamps are red states and voted for Romney.

            HTC: You didn't cite your source, so I have no idea how current it is/isn't or how accurate it is. The USDA is VERY slow at updating their data, especially state-by-state comparisons. Much of that data goes back to 2010 and food stamp use has risen substantially since then:

            http://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/34SNAPmonthly.htm

            What I do find interesting is that you and your fellow progressives insist that we've turned the corner economically; yet, under Obama, the number of households dependent upon food stamps has risen dramatically. I can't help but wonder what your definition of a 'recovery' might be. It certainly doesn't resemble mine of that of the economics community.

            It is also interesting to note that, looking at the states with the fastest growing SNAP caseloads, your state of Hawaii is number 1. The other three of the top five states were also blue states in this past presidential election:

            "Increases in SNAP caseloads between June 2011 and June 2012 occurred in 39 states and the District of Columbia. The five states registering the highest over-the-year percentage increases were Hawaii (10.0 percent), Florida (9.6 percent), Georgia (7.2 percent), Colorado (7.0 percent), and Delaware (7.0 percent)."

            http://frac.org/reports-and-resources/snapfood-stamp-monthly-participation-data/#2jul

            So, according to current data, it appears that blue states are leading the trend in the wrong direction.

             
          • Rob123 posted at 7:15 pm on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            HighTechCowboy posted at 6:19 pm on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            That was an interesting put down.....still a put down, but I could see a spark of evolutionary psychology? Keep up the good work.

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 6:19 pm on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Bronco: I guess the people over at Berkeley haven't heard about that yet?

            HTC: You'll have to ask them - I can't speak for them.

            I gave you a clue in my prior post that you completely overlooked: microbiology. Microbiologists are the people at the forefront of modern evolutionary theory who are struggling to come up with processes to explain the origins of life and the numerous historical examples of the rapid appearance of new species that cannot be accounted for by Darwin's "natural selection."

            To a generalist, everything looks easy because you don't know what it is that you don't know; but, as the old saying goes, "the devil is in the details." Coming up with the detailed theories to explain the origin of life itself is proving to be VERY difficult for the scientists who possess the skills to actually attempt it.

            Thanks to modern technology which now allows us to see into the incredibly complex world of cellular biology, a world that couldn't even be imagined by 19th century naturalists/biologists such as Darwin, Nobel-winning scientists such as Christian de Duve and Ilya Prigogine and many others are convinced that random chance could not have even come close to producing the first simple cells. Statistical scientists and mathematicians specializing in chaos theory and other fields have also produced mathematical proofs of its improbability.

            This is not to say that they've suddenly embraced "intelligent design" or any other such notions, but merely that they now realize that Darwin's theory was grossly oversimplified and only appeared possible because of our lack of understanding of life itself.

            I'm sure you'll have no difficulty finding many in academia who still adhere to Darwin, just as you'll find no shortage of academics in economics who still follow Keynes, even though he's also been discredited by those whose honesty and intellect is far above their own.

            You should check out this research for yourself. It's pretty interesting stuff. A word of warning, though, since you couldn't see through Obama, you'll have a VERY difficult time getting past page one of this stuff.

             
          • mooseberryinn posted at 3:48 pm on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            mooseberryinn Posts: 2686

            Very well written Frank. I agree. Comrade Obama seems to desire America be a socialist state. If "bipartinsonship" equals we have to agree with that, then I hope Republicans and all freedom loving people disagree. Comrade Obama is purposely throwing obstacles in the way of economic recovery, the Keystone pipeline could bring lower fuel prices, but He decides to obstruct it. Our Montana coal power could hold Electric prices down, but His EPA regulates coal power so much that prices will go up. Comrade Obama even said that he wants Electric rates to "skyrocket" in one of his speeches. Then of course, there's "obamacare" and its' burden on small business. That is already apparent as businesses simply won't hire workers. Just wait until the liberals realize the cost. they may suddenly have a change of heart, but the damage is done. Comrade obama's regime will control health care by placing limits on cost, thereby "deciding" who will receive treatment, and who will not. Sounds much like the USSR and GDR. Again, I pity the fools who think they have won something.

             
          • Bronco posted at 3:36 pm on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            Bronco Posts: 4328

            HTC, explain why the ten of the top fourteen states with the most people on food stamps are red states and voted for Romney.

             
          • Bronco posted at 2:21 pm on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            Bronco Posts: 4328

            HTC: HTC: Interesting that you would quote Darwin, considering that the scientific community long ago abandoned classical Darwinism; so, who hasn't adapted?
            It began with the microbiologists (think of them as the "details guys") and soon spread througout the scientific community. Today, you'll have a hard time today finding any scientist who would call himself a "Darwinist."
            Seems you know as little about this subject as just about everything else you spout off about.
            -------------------------------------------------------------
            I guess the people over at Berkeley haven't heard about that yet?

            http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/misconceps/IIGreject.shtml

            Darwin’s idea that evolution generally proceeds at a slow, deliberate pace has been modified to include the idea that evolution can proceed at a relatively rapid pace under some circumstances. In this sense, “Darwinism” is continually being modified. Modification of theories to make them more representative of how things work is the role of scientists and of science itself.

            Thus far, however, there have been no credible challenges to the basic Darwinian principles that evolution proceeds primarily by the mechanism of natural selection acting upon variation in populations and that different species share common ancestors. Scientists have not rejected Darwin’s natural selection, but have improved and expanded it as more information has become available. For example, we now know (although Darwin did not) that genetic mutations are the source of variation acted on by natural selection, but we haven’t rejected Darwin’s idea of natural selection—we’ve just added to it.

             
          • jennydoe posted at 11:47 am on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            jennydoe Posts: 2198

            HTIC: Oh, and that 'majority' you're so fond of? Well, Obama won by 10 million votes in 2008 but only 2 million this time around. Seems it's OUR side that's growing, not yours.
            $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
            Do you think repeating this over and over again is going to change the outcome of the election? The only thing that is growing on YOUR side is your temper. Please, for society's sake, calm down.

             
          • jennydoe posted at 11:40 am on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            jennydoe Posts: 2198

            How about we donate part of Eastern Montana that isn't already controlled by the government, let those that are signing petitions to secede, relocate to such spot, let them drill, harvest and rape the earth as they see fit and have their very own country? HTIC could be Lord/Master.
            $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

            Within a week of U.S. President Barack Obama's re-election, citizens from 21 states have filed petitions asking to secede from the United States, according to the White House website.

            Louisiana was first, posting its request on Nov. 7.

            It was soon joined by Texas, on Nov. 9.

            In asking for the president to "peacefully grant" permission for his state to withdraw from the union, creator Micah H., of Arlington, wrote: "To do so would protect its citizens' standard of living and re-secure their rights and liberties in accordance with the original ideas and beliefs of our founding fathers which are no longer being reflected by the federal government."

            Petitioners have one month to obtain 25,000 signatures in order for the president to consider the request.

            As of Monday morning, Louisiana had 13,197.

            Texas had 17,260.

            The petition from Florida was created Saturday -- the same day the state finally declared Obama the victor in this election after another controversial ballot count. On Monday morning, it had 4,823 signatures.

            The other 18 states with requests for secession: Alabama, North and South Carolina, Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee, Michigan, Indiana, North Dakota, Montana, Colorado, Oregon, New Jersey, New York, Arkansas, Georgia and Missouri.

            All quote a passage from the Declaration of Independence that reads "whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and institute new Government."

             
          • It's a beautiful day posted at 11:31 am on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            It's a beautiful day Posts: 1832

            HTC- Will you display any respect and gratitude for the deserving Veterans who voted for President Obama before this Veterans Day ends in 12 hours, or will you continue to condemn them as unAmerican traitors ad nauseum for the next 4 years as well? If you were a real man you would make an apology to JennyDoe.

             
          • JBSTONE posted at 11:28 am on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            JBSTONE Posts: 4558

            Yodah posted at 4:47 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            .......congratulations..........!!!

            You're really showing your mental age.

            [thumbup]

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 11:20 am on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Bronco,

            You continue to amaze me with your total shallowness on virtually every subject important to our republic.

            You proudly declare your ignorance of economics, yet continue to insist that facts generally accepted by economists aren't facts.

            You proudly proclaim your support for individual rights and liberty, then vote for people and policies which attack those very rights and freedom itself.

            You pronounce as 'radical' the very founding principles of this country, yet claim to be a real American who loves his country.

            You claim to be opposed to the nanny state, yet continually vote to sustain and grow it.

            You have been asked to describe Obama's economic policies and explain why they could be expected to work, but could not. (In fairness, that was kind of a trick question because Obama doesn't really have an economic policy other than "tax the rich" and waste hundreds of billions on "green energy.") Yet, you voted for him anyway.

            I have made case after case for my positions but you only quote others while frequently slipping in insults in place of substantive argument; at the very least, I will repeat my arguments and facts several times before resulting to insult, and only after proving the appropriateness of that insult.

            Had Darwin been right, your ancestors would have been someone's dinner a long time ago.

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 11:05 am on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Bronco: ‎"It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is most adaptable to change." ♥ ~ Charles Darwin

            HTC: Interesting that you would quote Darwin, considering that the scientific community long ago abandoned classical Darwinism; so, who hasn't adapted?

            It began with the microbiologists (think of them as the "details guys") and soon spread througout the scientific community. Today, you'll have a hard time today finding any scientist who would call himself a "Darwinist."

            Seems you know as little about this subject as just about everything else you spout off about.

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 10:58 am on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Bronco: And, hey, you live in Montana which takes $1.47 from the federal government for every $1.00 in taxes you pay in.

            HTC: Of course, Hawaii scores quite highly in this department as well.

            But I'm willing to make a deal: We give up our 'subsidy' in exchange for the feds getting off our backs so that we can go after our natural resources, including timber, minerals and oil/gas. You get the feds to give us exemptions from their $4.5T per year hidden regulatory tax, and we'll build up a business base that will be the envy of the other 49 states.

            We'd rather create our own wealth than suffer along on your 'charity.'

             
          • Bronco posted at 10:50 am on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            Bronco Posts: 4328

            Constitutionalist: "Obama again? Proving once again the wisdom of the sainted Founding Fathers in not allowing the poor, the women folk, and the mud-people to vote."

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 10:45 am on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            MontanaJim72: Wow. The last two elections for president show the majority of America do not agree with you. And now, we are unAmerican because we don't believe what you believe, and we are the enemy of what you seem to think are REAL Americans. Apparently the last election has totally unhinged you.

            HTC: The problem with you lefties is that you think EVERYTHING should be decided by majority rule. You have no idea what a constitution is and the vital role it plays in preventing the very abrogation of civil and individual rights which you claim to support. You understand even less of what our own Constitution and Declaration of Independence mean and how they truly did make our nation "exceptional" in that we became the only nation to craft such a document which sought to protect the individual from the tyranny of the majority.

            Your argument isn't just with me, it's with the U.S. Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, the Federalist papers and even with the authors and Founders themselves, but because of your ignorance of those documents and the political philosophy which helped to produce them, you see it merely as my opinion and not the evolution of individual rights and mechanisms for their protection which span centuries.

            You are as ignorant of our real history and what being "American" means as you are of the fact that the people you vote for a playing you for a sucker and actually killing the middle class in the process.

            Oh, and that 'majority' you're so fond of? Well, Obama won by 10 million votes in 2008 but only 2 million this time around. Seems it's OUR side that's growing, not yours.

            MontanaJim72: You are a very scary person.

            HTC: I'm glad you think so. Must be the former cop thing. Maybe I was needlessly worried to think that, when everything goes into the crapper, no one would feel threatened by an "old man" and would feel free to take whatever he had that they wanted.

             
          • Bronco posted at 10:15 am on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            Bronco Posts: 4328

            Hardly, kohana. Becoming a Rightie has quashed your perception of people.

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 10:10 am on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            MT_foundation: Frank – what you propose, to wage a war and not to work together, is why republicans lost and will continue to do so until they drop the type of zero-sum approach that you seem to advocate. People have come to realize that the answers to our mutual problems are much more complicated than the type of solutions that you propose – e.g. no new taxes / starve the beast that is the government. Government is an indispensable partner in solving the challenges we’re faced with, people know that and they’re look for public officials who can articulate what that role is. Romney didn’t provide that sort of explanation, and Obama did.

            HTC: Were your facts correct, you'd be making some pretty compelling points. The problem is, your take on the 'average' American is far from the reality.

            Polls show that almost 80% of Americans believe that EVERYONE should be paying taxes, not just 51% that is the case today. 63% think that Romney's "47% comment" about people being dependent on government is true or mostly true. 76% believe that the average American is at least somewhat dependent on government. Before the Bush tax cuts, Gallup showed that nearly 70% of Americans felt that their tax burden was too high; after the cuts, only 47% still felt that way (are you paying attention, Obama?) Even in extremely liberal California where they had a measure on the ballot this year to increase taxes on the 'rich', the measure passed with only 53.9% voting for it.

            Exit polls showed that 57% of voters think that government is too big and involved too heavily in their personal and business lives. Nearly 60% think our regulatory burden is far too high and much of it unnecessary.

            There is a deep ideological divide in this country, fundamentally between those who want a nanny state and those who want a government which bears a much stronger resemblance to the one defined in our Constitution. The left, while pretending to be concerned with individual rights, is actually running roughshod over many of them in the pursuit of the "common good". Conservatives/libertarians, in the same vein as our Founders, emphasize individualism and personal responsibility. You see government as an "indispensible partner" while, like our Founders, we see it as a necessary evil that must be constantly kept inside its Constitutional boundaries, for history proves that it is the nature of government to grow more powerful and for liberty to concede ground to that power.

            Only one of these viewpoints has any legitimacy given it by our Founding documents which sought to protect the individual from the "tyranny of the majority." Sadly, our public education system has failed to adequately school over two generations in such basics as what those founding documents really mean, as well as give them a basic grounding in economics and critical thinking skills. This has given us an electorate which is profoundly ignorant of what real personal and economic liberty is and who think that the majority should decide everything, regardless of those founding documents or what sound economics/science would demand.

            For those of us who understand these things, we've already lost too much and allowed too much of our children's future to be mortgaged in the pursuit of such selfishness, power and dependency. Complete and utter resistance is all we have left and is the only rational move we can make.

            When one compromises with evil, only evil wins.

            MT_foundation: That being said, you miss the bigger lesson of this election – demographics. As scary as the debt is, even scarier to most people is a government run by a bunch of xenophobes, homophobes, and sexists. This election parted the curtains that is the Tea Party to expose a group of people who claim to be focused on fiscal issues, but don’t have any creative solutions to address them and are really infested by outdated social constructs that have little if any relevance in modern America.

            HTC: As is typical of you lefties, you paint everyone to the right of you with an incredibly broad brush that bears little resemblence to reality. I know a lot of Tea Party supporters and not one of them is a xenophobe, homophobe nor sexist. Most of them have advanced degrees and many are immigrants themselves. Nearly half of them are women.

            As usual, you have no frickin' idea what you're talking about. Reagan was SO spot on when he famously said "The problem with our liberal friends isn't that they're ignorant; it's that they know so much which isn't so."

            MT_foundation: Frank, a political party can’t simultaneously be the party of small government and a promoter of liberty and prevent law-abiding, committed people from getting married and hold prehistoric ideas about gender, reproduction, and rape. A viable Republican party is needed, and I’m persuaded to believe that it must purge the social warrior flank of its platform in order to stay viable. And, it also needs to drop the hostage-taking approach to how public policy is crafted, also known as the selfish war that you’re apparently a big fan of. Liberty and equality indeed.

            HTC: Like many of my Tea Party friends, I'm a libertarian and not what many today would call a "conservative." Because of my libertarianism and belief that our founding documents are exceptional precisely because they make no king nor federal majority sovereign over the individual and the state but actually seek to protect the individual and the state from federal tyranny, I believe that issues such as abortion, gay marriage, etc. should be decided by the individual states, just as heterosexual marriage and so many other matters always have.

            The Founders intended the states to be the real laboratories of democracy; in part, because they realized that local government naturally tends to be smaller and more responsive to its citizens, but also becaue it is much easier to keep track of the activities of a smaller government in your backyard than it is for a gigantic system which is located thousands of miles away.

            I would agree with you that the GOP needs to drop its unconstitutional efforts to impose its moral beliefs upon the nation, just as much as the left needs to abandon its unconstitutional nanny state.

            There is only one way we can come together as a nation and work effectively to right our many ills and that is for us to come together over our founding documents and agree upon them once again as the ultimate law of the land.

            Are you prepared to do that? I am.

             
          • kohana posted at 10:05 am on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            kohana Posts: 2109

            My goodness Bronco, how well you describe yourself!

             
          • Bronco posted at 10:00 am on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            Bronco Posts: 4328

            Remind you of anyone here?...

            The term "narcissism" can refer to a wide variety of behaviors or attitudes, though in most cases, it refers to a person who is self-centered, egotistic, or unable to form honest and meaningful relationships. Narcissism in men can be manifested as an inability to consider the emotions or thoughts of others, establishing a double standard, breaking down another person's self esteem or ego to boost one's own, and much more. .

            Some of the signs of narcissism in men that are easily distinguishable include an avoidance of discussing emotions and using other people for the man's personal gain. He may exhibit signs of extreme self-love, though he is likely to avoid talking about his own feelings or emotions. Many people who exhibit signs of narcissism may be outwardly aggressive but inwardly sensitive, especially to criticism or harsh interactions.

             
          • kohana posted at 9:59 am on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            kohana Posts: 2109

            America Votes to End Modern Civilization
            By Daren Jonescu

            “……..For the first time in America's history, a major party had been bold enough to make its challenge to the basic premise of America herself -- freedom -- the central issue in the election. It should not have been close.

            And it was not close: Obama's invitation to complete the dismantling of America won the day by a landslide. It was not just the sixty million who voted for him. It was also the even larger number of eligible voters who did not vote at all. Whether by active vote or passive consent, more than two thirds of eligible U.S. adults chose to join the march to nothingness.”

            READ the entire article:

            http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/11/america_votes_to_end_modern_civilization.html#ixzz2C1fhYf8f


             
          • Bronco posted at 9:48 am on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            Bronco Posts: 4328

            For the unhinged HTC...

            http://tinyurl.com/75g2z9b

             
          • jennydoe posted at 9:12 am on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            jennydoe Posts: 2198

            Bronco posted at 8:57 am on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            and HTIC is just our stepping stone![tongue]

             
          • jennydoe posted at 9:11 am on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            jennydoe Posts: 2198

            childish: “The president was elected on the basis that he was not Romney and that Romney was a poopy-head and you should vote against Romney,” Norquist said on CBS’s “This Morning.”

             
          • Bronco posted at 8:57 am on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            Bronco Posts: 4328

            A tip for all you head-strong Right Wing nuts:


            ‎"It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is most adaptable to change." ♥ ~ Charles Darwin

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 8:53 am on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Bronco: Good thing we don't rely on your bigoted definition of what an American is.

            HTC: You lefties don't rely on anything based upon historical, economic, financial, or scientific fact. That's why there's such a big chasm between us and why polite and productive dialog with you is virtually impossible. You just make up your own crap as you go; whatever is needed to support your current nincompoop position or policy.

            Bronco: What an angry, hateful, intolerant, sore loser you are.

            HTC: Yes, I am!

            I am angry that there are so many like you who recklessly cast your vote while you simultaneously celebrate your ignorance of our founding documents, our history, economics, science and every other subject critical to the future of our republic. Like all fools, you actually celebrate and advertise your foolishness while mocking your betters who've made the effort and taken the time to learn so that they could exercise their vote in a responsible manner and leave their children a better country than the one they were given.

            Yes, I am a "sore loser" over the loss of this country and the freedoms and vibrant economy we once had but, most of all, over the loss of hope that my children are already feeling for their futures and that of their children. You and your kind have mortgaged their futures for your present selfish needs and perverted sense of "social justice".

            I love my children and that pains me deeply. LIke every parent who loves their children, I want to save them from the evil actions of others and my inability to do so frustrates and angers me. I see no such reaction from you, so I am forced to conclude that you don't trully love your children; at least not nearly as much as we do. Everything about you lefties is a fraud. You constantly speak of "compassion", yet you financially rape your own children in the pursuit of that 'compassion' for people you don't even know.

            That, my friend, is as sick and twisted as it gets.

            As for my intolerance, I must again plead "Guilty!" I will not tolerate your efforts to completely subvert this country to the Marxist dream pursued by Obama. I will not tolerate any more stealing from my children and grandchildren, nor the loss of what few liberties we still possess. I will not tolerate your redistribution of the wealth which only guarantees a miserable existence for most of us and stagnant, if not declining, economy for all except our elitist progressive masters and their coconspirators in Big Business.

            The fact that you believe that my positions are 'radical' only shows how far you've strayed from the founding principles of this country and your complete lack of understanding of our founding documents. Whatever it is you celebrate on the Fourth of July, it has little to do with the real meaning of that day in our history.

            "Anyway, no drug, not even alcohol, causes the fundamental ills of society. If we're looking for the source of our troubles, we shouldn't test people for drugs, we should test them for stupidity, ignorance, greed and love of power." - P.J. O'Rourke

            "Giving power and money to the government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys." - P.J. O'Rourke

            "It cannot be said too often - at any rate is it not being said often enough - that collectivism is not inherently democratic, but, on the contrary, gives to a tyrannical minority such powers as the Spanish Inquisition never dreamt of." - George Orwell

             
          • mooseberryinn posted at 8:45 am on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            mooseberryinn Posts: 2686

            Comrade/King Obama "won" the election with uncommon aid from the media. There were no "unfavorable" stories or analysis of obama's record of failure. There was a great deal of unfavorable "news" or viewpoints given about Romney. Some half-true, some total fantasy. Sadly, the American electorate either did not make the effort to educate themselves on the truth, or they simply did not care. In any event, I don't think the damage already done or yet to come from Comrade Obama and his regime can ever be repaired. America is now pretty much a communist nation or soon will be. For a while, the Obama worshipers will rejoice, but it won't last for long as they realize costs of just getting by are increasing daily. I pity our younger population.

             
          • bill39 posted at 8:22 am on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            bill39 Posts: 1051

            Frank: On the other hand, the Republicans want to blow up that “bridge to socialism” with the dynamite of fiscal austerity. No more free stuff till the national debt of $16 trillion balances out at zero. Then we can talk about compromise.

            You are an inspirational writer Frank. To pay off our debt is in the best interest of ALL of us. Democrats too. If the voters would have given the house of representatives to the democrats I would say, sure democrats, do what you want. But democrats voters gave the republican held house a mandate. Hold the line.

             
          • Yodah posted at 5:43 am on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            Yodah Posts: 26

            I'm afraid that I let my wife see some of HighlyIntolerantCowboy's posts. She's suggested I not play with someone that seemed so unhinged. The kindest thing she said was that he sounded like a candidate for one of those South American Death Squads, not as a victim though. Since I always try to respect the wishes of the one that loves me the most I bid you a fond farewell. Before posting you should consider whether would you want your Mother, or spouse, or Pastor, or child to read what you are going to post. Not only the content but the spirit and tone. Fanatics never see themselves for what they are..that's the job of those left in the wreckage....if there's anyone left.

             
          • Rob123 posted at 5:06 am on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            Rob123 Posts: 6599

            Bronco posted at 1:17 am on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.
            "Montana which takes $1.47 from the federal government for every $1.00 in taxes you pay in...."

            Actually, we could use more.....sigh....I remember in the 80's screaming "Montana is NOT a zoo!". Lost that one......might as well turn it into a petting zoo, I reckon? But it will be expensive.

            http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.docstoccdn.com/thumb/orig/14162827.png&imgrefurl=http://www.docstoc.com/docs/14162827/Federal-Lands-and-Indian-Reservations---Montana-Map&h=1275&w=1650&sz=531&tbnid=0HBVjNEmBf5QJM:&tbnh=90&tbnw=116&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dmap%2Bof%2Bfederal%2Blands%2Bin%2Bmontana%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=map+of+federal+lands+in+montana&usg=__e7jZLWZnEAVqIy458a0w6o2BjKY=&docid=gQiuUWrpGSRdlM&sa=X&ei=q-KgUKOXIIXriwLkoYC4BA&ved=0CEoQ9QEwBA&dur=11493

             
          • MontanaJim72 posted at 2:30 am on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            MontanaJim72 Posts: 223

            HTC says...That is what you and your fellow progressives support and that is why you're unAmerican. That is what makes you the enemy of every rational, informed and freedom-loving American.
            __________________________________________________________________________________

            Wow. The last two elections for president show the majority of America do not agree with you. And now, we are unAmerican because we don't believe what you believe, and we are the enemy of what you seem to think are REAL Americans. Apparently the last election has totally unhinged you. You are a very scary person.

             
          • Bronco posted at 1:17 am on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            Bronco Posts: 4328

            HighTechCowboy posted at 9:36 pm
            ---------------
            Wow. Good thing we don't rely on your bigoted definition of what an American is. And, hey, you live in Montana which takes $1.47 from the federal government for every $1.00 in taxes you pay in. Define nanny state again and those democratic, New England States you guys suckle from just might welcome your secession from the union. Call yourselves the New Appalachia. I can see your future as angry, in-bred, gape-toothed, uneducated, well-armed, and broke after you sell off or use up all the natural resources in the state. Your infrastructure will crumble and all your grandchildren will move away.
            "Perish from within" indeed. Your kind seem to be the authors of that nowadays.
            What an angry, hateful, intolerant, sore loser you are. And you believe that's the definition of an American? Shameful and pathetic.

             
          • who new posted at 12:07 am on Mon, Nov 12, 2012.

            who new Posts: 367

            MT_foundation: “A viable Republican party is needed, and I’m persuaded to believe that it must purge the social warrior flank of its platform in order to stay viable.”

            While watching the election returns with some friends, I noticed a statistic stating Romney was losing to Obama by over 10 percentage points with women, and that women voters comprise over half of the electorate. So I asked the women in the room, who were predominately conservative, what accounted for that much difference. They looked at me incredulously and lamented how the Republican Party wants to control their bodies and deny their choices. There was also some discussion that Republican politicians secretly believe like Akin from Missouri and Mourdock from Indiana.

            Yesterday, I watched a segment on the John Stossel show where Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson spoke of the need for those who value personal freedom and limited government need to vote with their conscience, and not because they don’t want to waste their vote. Frank’s column on compromise and capitulation segues nicely into this train of thought.

            I am now convinced the Republican Party should nominate socially conservative candidates to decide the direction of the party once and for all. They need to be capable, credible candidates who most people believe could lead the country. Rick Santorum, Mike Huckabee, and Paul Ryan would be fine choices and I think would make strong leaders.

            These nominees may lose some elections in the short term, but it would be instructive as to what type of candidates could be elected, as I suspect MT_foundation’s statement is correct.

            Unfortunately, I will not be among those who will vote for these candidates. Although I will register Republican in the primaries to try to influence the choices going forward, in the general election I will vote Libertarian, because that is what my conscience tells me, and I am not going to worry about wasted votes.

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 9:36 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            jennydoe: We are as American as you. I am as American as you HTIC.

            HTC: I wish that were true, jennydoe; but, sadly it isn't.

            Being born in this country doesn't make one an American. Celebrating the Fourth of July doesn't make one an American. Being 'American' is a cultural thing which means that one has embraced the founding principles of this country and will protect and defend it and its Constitution from ALL enemies, both foreign and domestic.

            Being the wise men that they were, our Founders realized that this country would ultimately perish from within, NOT from without, and most likely when a majority of its citizens discovered that they could vote themselves whatever they wanted from the public treasury. That "death from within" is what many of us call the "nanny state" or the "entitlement state."

            That is what you and your fellow progressives support and that is why you're unAmerican. That is what makes you the enemy of every rational, informed and freedom-loving American. We did not make you our enemy. You did by choosing to embrace and help build a system which turns every citizen into a net liability; which dictates what its citizens can do on nearly every front; and which has sent its perverting tentacles so deep into every aspect of our economy that free markets no long work, producers are disincentivized to grow and the economy now remains locked in the economic doldrums, while unemployment continues to climb and median household incomes continue to decline.

            This is the he// that you progressives built and the only natural human response to it is utter contempt for your kind who imposed it upon us.

            So why don't you abandon your unconstitutional entitlement state and your hatred for free markets and join the rest of us in healing this nation and putting her back on the solid foundation she once enjoyed?

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 9:26 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            MontanaJim72: The Republican house better get over the fact that there is no need to obstruct bills that will help America, because they wanted a one term president. They obstruct bills now, and they will look back at the 2012 election in 2014, and wish for the "good ole days", when they at least controlled the House.

            HTC: Any bill to deal with the 'fiscal cliff' will have to originate in the House, as is required by the Constitution for all spending/tax bills. Expect to see that happen, just like the last few budget bills, with the REAL obstructionists, the Democrats in the Senate, never allowing those bills to see a vote on the Senate floor.

            As for any need for the GOP to shift further towards true conservatism, Romney already did some of that, both policy-wise, as well as in his choice of VP, and indeed closed the popular vote gap substantially compared to how that flaming RINO McCain did in 2008.

            Exit polls showed that many voters voted for gridlock and to reelect the devil they knew precisely because they weren't convinced of Romney's relatively recent conservative conversion. Other polls showed that many GOP voters stayed at home, although not as many as did in 2008, because they didn't feel that Romney was a real conservative and they weren't going to support the GOP until they nominated such a person.

            Additionally, many young people are starting to figure out that we're spending THEIR financial futures to finance our present selfish interests and they understandably don't like it. They're the reason why Ron Paul's support this time around was 3-4 times greater than in any prior presidential bid that he's made.

            Lastly, while progressives don't see this coming because they NEVER see very far down the road (that's why everything they do is rife with unintended consequences), there's every reason to believe that the economic contraction which will be caused by ObamaCare and Dodd-Frank fully kicking in, coupled with the increasing red ink from the bankrupt nanny state, will cause much deeper pain for many more Americans, and all on Obama's last watch.

            Pull all of this together, and there's ample evidence that America will soon resoundly reject the progressive agenda and swing to the right to reclaim our country.

            Delude yourself all you wish, it wlll only increase your shock when it happens.

             
          • It's a beautiful day posted at 8:14 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            It's a beautiful day Posts: 1832

            Whodah thunk it? The Flathead County local Republican-dominated government's 2012 Calendar of Events lists an 'End of The World Party' at the fairgrounds on Dec. 21, 6:00 pm - 3:00 am. The local republicans apparently don't plan on being around in 2016. Will someone please remind HTC to not forget to bring the kool-aid.

            http://flathead.mt.gov/calendar_of_events/index.php

             
          • jennydoe posted at 7:51 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            jennydoe Posts: 2198

            now we've got people from all over the country signing a petition for Montana to withdraw from the USA and start its own country. Along with 14 other states.

            https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/peacefully-grant-state-montana-withdraw-united-states-america-and-create-its-own-new-government/l76dWhwN

            talk about sore losers.

             
          • MontanaJim72 posted at 7:47 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            MontanaJim72 Posts: 223

            I have watched FOX News to some degree since the election, to see how it resonates with the analysts that have told us for four years that America was being taken over by liberals. What I expected was a possible lean toward moderation, since they had just lost an election that every FOX analyst said they would win. Instead, most of the main characters of FOX News thought that they needed to push farther to the right and that would get them the next election. Seriously...you really think that will happen. Then I read the Inter Lake and Frank is basically proposing the same thing. The fiscal cliff is less than two months away, and the Republican party in the House better realize, that if it happens, and the economy tanks, nobody is going to blame the President. They will blame Congress for doing nothing to stop it, because only Congress can stop it. The Republican house better get over the fact that there is no need to obstruct bills that will help America, because they wanted a one term president. They obstruct bills now, and they will look back at the 2012 election in 2014, and wish for the "good ole days", when they at least controlled the House.

             
          • jennydoe posted at 7:32 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            jennydoe Posts: 2198

            oh, this video.

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=p7D0d7ztLY0

             
          • jennydoe posted at 7:28 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            jennydoe Posts: 2198

            This video further emphasizes my point. Doesn't even get to the 30 second mark before war is discussed.

            You all are starting to scare me. Ugly demented people you've become. What is wrong with you? We are as American as you. I am as American as you HTIC. We are all in this together, but you have become unhinged and very undesirable to listen to.
            Speaking of undesirable to listen to, anyone seen Pete? I hope he hasn't drowned in his tears.[love]

             
          • jennydoe posted at 6:23 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            jennydoe Posts: 2198

            MT_foundation posted at 4:15 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.
            -------
            good post[thumbup]

             
          • jennydoe posted at 6:13 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            jennydoe Posts: 2198

            HTIC posted 932.
            You have indicated, stated how progressives are the enemy in this political war you fantasize about.

            HTIC later:
            It would be a grand lie to call any of you our "fellow Americans" because you don't even understand what it means to be a real American.

            We will do everything we can to restore this country to its founding principles.

            We are not this country's problem - you are.
            _____________--
            and we will do everything not to become as angry, bitter and so utterly intolerant of others as you.
            peace on man.

             
          • jennydoe posted at 6:07 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            jennydoe Posts: 2198

            truthiness posted at 10:26 am on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.
            Posts: 12 Obama is giving out free phones? Oh hell yes!!

            Seriously, where does he come up with this stuff!
            --------------
            Well, if you'd seek the truth you'd find Frank elaborating a bit.

            Phones became available to low income people in 1984 under Reagan.
            Cell phones became available in 2008 under Bush.
            Obamaphones became available in 2012 under President Obama when some crazy woman was caught on film happier than she's ever been receiving a phone. She was an overnight sensation, and as HTIC would say, "A republican's wet dream"
            The phones are not totally paid by our taxes. The telecommunications companies share the cost.

             
          • Yodah posted at 5:49 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            Yodah Posts: 26

            What I said before....in spades...................

             
          • Bronco posted at 5:46 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            Bronco Posts: 4328

            kohana, stop spreading that propaganda. I see some of the figures are from Canadian companies. The big Navistar layoffs is misleading. They are moving those jobs to other plants in the USA to shrink overhead and because commercial truck sales have been down since the economic meltdown in 2008. Businesses close and businesses open.
            A sampling...
            Sun Dog Diner in Neptune Beach FL---actually relocating to Atlantic, owners also just opened Sun Dog Brewery.

            Textbook publisher McGraw-Hill Cos. Closing 2 Distribution Centers - 166 Layoffs----The continued weakness in state and local education funding across the U.S. hit home in DeSoto this week.
            Textbook publisher McGraw-Hill Cos. said Friday that it plans to close two distribution centers operated by its education division on East Danieldale Road, putting 166 people out of work.

            Get real.

             
          • kohana posted at 5:17 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            kohana Posts: 2109

            Some of you O fans throw the same kind of insults that we as children used in 3rd grade 65 years ago. Obviously, there are some slow developers on this blog.

            If you go to this web site, you will find the layoffs, bankruptcies, and closings of businesses since October 29, 2012, that would be for the past 13 days.

            http://www.dailyjobcuts.com/#.UJwVDQHUOEh.facebook

             
          • Yodah posted at 4:47 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            Yodah Posts: 26

            I'm rubber...you're glue...it bounces off of me...and sticks to you...

             
          • MT_foundation posted at 4:15 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            MT_foundation Posts: 64

            Frank – what you propose, to wage a war and not to work together, is why republicans lost and will continue to do so until they drop the type of zero-sum approach that you seem to advocate. People have come to realize that the answers to our mutual problems are much more complicated than the type of solutions that you propose – e.g. no new taxes / starve the beast that is the government. Government is an indispensable partner in solving the challenges we’re faced with, people know that and they’re look for public officials who can articulate what that role is. Romney didn’t provide that sort of explanation, and Obama did.

            That being said, you miss the bigger lesson of this election – demographics. As scary as the debt is, even scarier to most people is a government run by a bunch of xenophobes, homophobes, and sexists. This election parted the curtains that is the Tea Party to expose a group of people who claim to be focused on fiscal issues, but don’t have any creative solutions to address them and are really infested by outdated social constructs that have little if any relevance in modern America.

            Frank, a political party can’t simultaneously be the party of small government and a promoter of liberty and prevent law-abiding, committed people from getting married and hold prehistoric ideas about gender, reproduction, and rape. A viable Republican party is needed, and I’m persuaded to believe that it must purge the social warrior flank of its platform in order to stay viable. And, it also needs to drop the hostage-taking approach to how public policy is crafted, also known as the selfish war that you’re apparently a big fan of. Liberty and equality indeed.

             
          • SorrySOB posted at 4:00 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            SorrySOB Posts: 484

            HTC: "You cannot be reasoned with nor should we compromise with you ever again"

            Considering that stubborn narrow-minded point of view from conservatives is pretty much what is keeping the Democrats firmly in control, knock yourself out.

             
          • kohana posted at 3:48 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            kohana Posts: 2109

            To all the Veterans who reads Frank's 2 cents, I hope today was good for you. My deepest gratitude, and thanks for your service in keeping me free for the last 3/4th of a century.

            I listened to a video last night, that stated the O was elected to captain the Titanic, and he won't be able turn it or stop it. Our government is too big for him to control and moving too fast towards disaster. Have any of you O fans stopped to think about how 144% of a county's population could possibly have voted for anyone?

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 3:38 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Yodah: Wrestle a pig you must not....both of you dirty must get .....and the pig......enjoys it he does.....

            HTC: Well, it's clear that you're the pig in this scenario since it's your half of America feeding at the public trough.

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 3:26 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            It's a beautiful day posted at 2:47 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012

            The only things which assured Obama's victory are the profound ignorance and personal greed of half of America.

            If you look at the popular vote, you'll notice that Obama won by a much slimmer majority than he did in 2008. After he's really mucked things up in his second term, you can be assured that he and his party will find themselves facing a very angry electorate.

            Half of America is against your guy and his Marxist agenda. Even the exit polls showed that 57% of voters feel that government is TOO big and too intrusive in our lives and businesses; so, why did they vote for Obama anyway?

            Simple, he was the devil they knew but they weren't convinced of Romney's conservative conversion. Thus, they reelected the devil they knew and gave him a gridlocked Congress to keep him in check.

            You can also be assured that my half of America will not be leaving but working instead to crush the life out of your socialist agenda and the nanny state you've built which has brought us to the brink of economic ruin. We will do everything we can to restore this country to its founding principles.

            We are not this country's problem - you are.

             
          • JBSTONE posted at 3:25 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            JBSTONE Posts: 4558

            Yodah posted at 9:15 pm on Sat, Nov 10, 2012.

            Why do I keep flashing on a mental image of the ruins....

            ~~~~~~~~~~

            OK, ease up on the doobies.

             
          • Retired USMC posted at 3:17 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            Retired USMC Posts: 2

            On the road today in North Carolina, I saw a sign on church marquee; You are not in charge, God is. And would like to have added a third line to the sign; Tell that to Obama.

             
          • It's a beautiful day posted at 2:47 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            It's a beautiful day Posts: 1832

            To HTC and his ilk......
            If you don't have anything nice to say about America's choice at the ballot box, why say anything at all? It is obviously apparent that Obama's victory was assured and deserves thanks due to the constant divisive diatribe from 'Ugly Americans' such as yourself.
            Your future contributions to Frank's columns will no doubt easily give the Presidency to Democrats again in 2016. However, if you are not happy living in a united America, you can always "love it and leave it" and please take your 'old school-yard bully variety tactics of Joe McCarthy and the John Birch Society unamericans' with you on your exodus to Neverland.

             
          • kohana posted at 1:21 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            kohana Posts: 2109


            The Broader Implications of the Petraeus Resignation: Personal Behavior and Public Office

            Posted: 11 Nov 2012 02:00 AM PSTBy Barry Rubin

            General David Petraeus was the hero of the victorious surge strategy in Iraq. But he also has the distinction of becoming America’s first Politically Correct field commander. His strategy in Afghanistan was in line with that of the Obama Administration by putting the emphasis on winning Muslim hearts and minds as a higher priority than military victories or even at times the safety of American soldiers. There’s a reason why President Barack Obama made him CIA director.

            Leaving aside the question of the resignation’s relationship to the Benghazi debacle, in some ways, his fall is more discouraging than the election results.

            Don’t these powerful people feel that their duty is more important than their personal self-aggrandizement or pleasure? We should remember, too, that Petraeus’s predecessor in Afghanistan was brought down because of some incautious things said in a magazine interview.

            Gary Hart, Bill Clinton, Herman Caine, John Edwards, Ted Kennedy, Larry Craig, Richard Nixon, and other politicians supposedly represented certain ideas, policies, and the hopes and dreams of millions of people who have worked hard for them and put their trust in them. Can’t they put aside what they might also desire for the sake of those things?

            I have seen with my own two eyes Kennedy drunk on the floor of the Senate and I know a lot from first-hand observation about the private adventures of former Senator Chris Dodd and Hart. And all of the above hasn’t begun to touch on financial corruption.

            Of course, many do behave differently and far better. A few years ago I’d have said that perhaps the media has become too willing and able to expose the foibles of those at the top. Yet after the spectacle of a Teflon Obama and his entourage it would be more correct to say that the media only exposes those it wants to for political purposes. Then, too, Clinton and Kennedy didn’t suffer at all from their amorousness and bad driving.

            If I’m not mistaken, there are now Democratic senators from Connecticut and Massachusetts who lied about their military records. The latter one, Senator John Kerry, may soon be secretary of state, which will be a global disaster of major proportions. There is also now a Democratic senator from Massachusetts who clearly lied about being a Cherokee in order to get preferential treatment in getting a job.

            I have seen in the National Archives the OSS report during World War Two that a Danish journalist was a Nazi spy. And this is the woman with whom John F. Kennedy had an affair and for that reason was shipped out by his father to the Pacific front, where he would be made a hero through a combination of his bad navigation and subsequent brave behavior in the sinking of PT-109. General Dwight Eisenhower’s and President Franklin Roosevelt’s affairs during World War Two are today well known. But those were times when things remained quiet.

            Why, though, are these personal matters anyone else’s business? The debate usually focuses around an argument between what is proper morality and whether Americans are too puritanical. The French, we are told, rejoice when their politicians get naughty.

            But there is another far more important issue altogether that is rarely aired. If a politician or major public figure believes in what he’s doing and knows that exposure of his misdeed would destroy that mission, how can they give in to temptation if they really believe in the importance of that mission or of the importance of keeping faith with those who are relying on them?

            And if they don’t care at all about those things, how can they be worthy of wielding power? It is not so much a question of personal morality as it is of character, not an issue of private life but of whether one takes seriously the concept of duty. If, for example, Bill Clinton was willing to risk his presidency for having some sort of relations--even if he could define them as not having had sex in some physiological sense--with Monica Lewinsky and then, according to the court finding, committing perjury about his behavior, that is not the sort of person one should want to be president. The fact that he escaped impeachment for the latter offense is not the point. His being willing to take that chance is the issue.

            There is also something in the character of those who lust for power and fame—and I write this from long observation growing up in Washington DC—that very much distorts one’s personality. Such people almost inevitably feel superior to others, arrogant that they can get away with anything, coming to take for granted that they deserve privileges but that the rules don’t apply to them. That’s why the founders of America wanted to limit government and the power of those who ran it.

            Such wisdom is even older, though it has only rarely done humanity much good. “Put not your trust in princes,” says Psalm 146. Rabbi Hillel said almost two thousand years ago that the obsessively ambitious end up by destroying themselves.

            Today, it isn’t so much that Republicans are more upstanding. The difference is that they pay for their sins because the media is so quick to devour them. If, say, a Republican candidate for the Senate in Missouri says something stupid once, he’s finished. If a Democrat does so, even repeatedly racialist statements, he gets to be vice-president for another four years. That’s reality.

            Before the revolution it was clearly defined in France which classes whose members could or could not be legally tortured. This distinction now applies to public figures along partisan and ideological lines as well.

            http://www.rubinreports.blogspot.cominfo@gloria-center.orghttp://www.rubinreports.blogspot.com

             
          • kohana posted at 1:00 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            kohana Posts: 2109

            http://carolineglick.com/

            A time for courage, and action

            Mitt Romney wasn't a bad candidate. He ran a fairly strong race. He made a few errors. And he made many good moves.

            Certainly he was adequate. And he was probably the strongest Republican candidate among the primary field of contenders. That is, he was the best man available to run against Barack Obama.

            And he did a pretty good job.

            Obama, on the other hand, was a horrible candidate. He was mean and vindictive. He was contemptuous and superficial. He ran on irrelevancies like abortion and a fictitious Republican war against women. He didn't give his supporters any reason to feel good about themselves.

            Instead, he used class warfare to stir them to hatred of their countrymen.

            Yet Obama won. And Romney lost.

            In retrospect it is possible that the race was over before it began. A strong case can be made that Obama secured his reelection in 2009 when he bailed out the US auto industry and so temporarily stanched the hemorrhage of jobs in Ohio and Michigan. And maybe, with the youth of the 1960s now the Medicare recipients of the 2010s and '20s, there are simply too many Americans dependent on government handouts to care about what happens in the future.

            An equally strong case can be made that Romney lost the election before he secured the Republican nomination. He may have squandered his chances when he took a strong position against illegal immigration in one of the early Republican primary debates and so arguably made winning Florida, and perhaps Colorado, a mathematical impossibility.

            Many have argued that demography is destiny.

            And the American electorate has changed tremendously in the past decade. Government dependency among the white working class has grown. Government dependency among an aging population and a rising tide of single-parent families has grown. And the Latino share of the vote has grown. Today some are arguing that Republicans today simply cannot win the presidency, regardless of their candidate.

            All of this is important because for the past four years, most Republicans, and most non-leftists throughout the world, had been hoping that the Obama years would be an aberration. They had hoped and trusted that he would be a one-term president. All the policies he enacted during that term, on domestic and foreign policy alike, would be reversed by his Republican successor, elected by voters who understood they had been taken in by a huckster in 2008. The US economy - the anchor of US power and the engine of the international financial system - would come roaring back.

            In international affairs, the US would reverse course. It would stop supporting the rise of its enemies from the Middle East to Asia to Latin America. It would embrace its allies. The former would be weakened. The latter would be secured and strengthened. America would be safe and defended.

            Alas, apparently it could not be. The American spirit has been overwhelmed by the European model of social democracy at home and appeasement and treachery abroad.

            But all the dependency champions who celebrated on Tuesday night cannot stop the coming storm. The greatest advantage Obama had going into the election was not demography but the fact that the full consequences of his statist economic policies and his pro-jihadist foreign policy have not yet been felt.

            Nationalized healthcare will only be fully implemented in 2014. Americans will only begin watching old men and women die because the federal government denied them lifesaving, but expensive, treatments a year from now. They will only lose their doctors due to dwindling Medicare reimbursements in a year.

            College students who got out the vote for Obama will only find themselves doomed to low-paying jobs and a life of indebtedness as they fail year in and year out to pay off their college loans, in a year or two. And by the time they realize what it means to be saddled with a national debt of $16 trillion, they will be locked into a government-controlled economy that requires them to keep their silence or lose their livelihoods.

            THEN THERE are the consequences of Obama's foreign policies. The attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi exposed the failure of his strategy of appeasing jihadists and had the potential to sink his presidency by turning suburban voters against him in places like Pennsylvania. But lucky for him, the Benghazi debacle was small enough for the media to hide from the electorate.

            Sure a US ambassador and three others were murdered. But four is not a very large number.

            And it was over in a day.

            It will be harder for Obama to contain the damage of his foreign policy when Iran gets nuclear weapons and begins molesting US shipping in the Persian Gulf as gas prices rise to $10 a gallon. It will be harder for Obama to hide the effect of his foreign policy when American tourists in Egypt are massacred or held hostage and Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood government demands the release of the Blind Sheikh, Omar Abdel Rahman, the mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, in exchange for intervention.

            It will be harder for Obama to hide the dangers of his foreign policy when the Taliban return to power in Afghanistan and al-Qaida rebuilds its training camps. It will be harder for Obama to blame his failure on hapless American filmmakers when Pakistan's nuclear arsenal is controlled by a Taliban-aligned government that seeks a nuclear war with India. It will be harder for Obama to protect America with a gutted, demoralized military, demobilized under his command.

            Rather than contend with these calamities, Obama and his statist, pro-Islamist supporters and advisers will blame their critics. Just as they blamed - and jailed - an American filmmaker for Ambassador Stevens's murder, so they will blame overworked doctors, struggling hospital administrators, "partisan" lawmakers and "Islamophobic, neoconservative warmongers," for the domestic decline and international mayhem Obama's policies will necessarily cause.

            With the critical election lost, Republicans have a very hard and thankless task before them. They have to do the hard work of opposing his policies with dwindling resources. They have the job of energizing, inspiring and expanding a base that is demoralized. They have the job of explaining to wavering citizens why the Republican alternative puts America on the right track.

            Conservatives need to prepare the ground for their return to power. They need to make the arguments for ending the welfare state. They need to make the arguments for destroying the ascendant - and politically savvy - forces of jihad at home and abroad. They need to argue against defense cuts even as the Obama-appointed Joint Chiefs of Staff abandon strategic reason for personal promotions.

            And they need to write the books, produce the movies, found the television stations, and prepare the school curricula that will enable a future resurrection of the American dream.

            AS MOST people know, Israel, as the forward base of freedom in the Muslim world, is the first target of the Obama-supported, ascendant forces of jihad. As a consequence, Israel will be the first to feel the repercussions of Obama's policies of appeasement and empowerment of Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood.

            Certainly, this is a horrible situation. But just as demographics have changed America, so they are changing Israel. Rising anti-Semitism and economic decline in Europe have dramatically increased immigration rates to Israel, and those rates will only grow as the situation on the continent worsens. In contrast to the rest of the West, Israelis have become more religious, readier to embrace the free market and more eager to compete in talent and productivity. While Americans have joined Europe in dwindling fertility rates, Israelis have matched the fertility levels of their Arab neighbors.

            Israel's demographic and economic power have been largely ignored and undervalued.

            But the time has come to use them for all they are worth. As America enters its age of dependency and decline, Israel must end its age of dependency on America and begin to depend on itself. That does not mean that Israel won't cooperate with America. But as America's foreign policy becomes indistinguishable from Europe's, Israel will increasingly need to take its fate in its own hands.

            We need to expand the size of the IDF ground forces. We need to expand the size of the navy.

            We should reinstate the Lavi jet fighter project.

            We need to expand our independent offensive missile programs, developing a serious cruise missile arsenal. And we need to promote a new generation of generals that is not psychologically dependent on their American counterparts.

            As for the Palestinians, and the international, leftist anti-Israel cottage industry that supports and feeds off of them, the time has come to take our demographic advantage for a spin. As we decrease our psychological dependence on America, we need to increase our trust in ourselves.

            We need to staunchly defend and assert our rights to our land. And we must exercise our right to defeat those who deny our rights and seek our national destruction.

            In other words, we need to begin applying Israeli law in Judea and Samaria.

            True, talk is cheap. We can expect - indeed we were warned to expect - for Obama to turn on Israel immediately after the election.

            Obama can be expected to dispatch his political advisers to Israel to run the Left's electoral campaign with the goal of defeating Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and paving the way for the return to power of the socialist, appeasement-crazed Israeli Left. We can expect the State Department, (under the guidance of New Israel Fund alumni) to renew its attacks against Israel's religious institutions and the Jews of Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria. We can expect the US to abandon us at the UN. We can expect the US military to undermine any Israeli strike against Iran.

            No one said any of this will be easy. But difficult is not the same as impossible. Within a year, the consequences of Obama's failed domestic and foreign policies will make him weaker rather than stronger than he was in his first term. He will be hard pressed to pressure Israel when the US loses its leadership role in the Muslim Brotherhood- dominated Middle East. And Israel's independence of action will consequently grow.

            Our side suffered a massive loss on Tuesday.

            But as long as we keep our minds and hearts focused on the fundamental goodness and truth that guide our path, we will not be defeated. We will endure, persevere and in due course, we will be vindicated.

            Note to my readers: I am currently writing a book in which I describe the strategic course Israel and the US should take in relation to the Palestinians. To complete my work in a timely fashion, I am taking a leave of absence from my column until next spring.

            Originally published in The Jerusalem Post.
            Posted on November 9, 2012 at 10:31 AM

             
          • Yodah posted at 12:43 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            Yodah Posts: 26

            Wrestle a pig you must not....both of you dirty must get .....and the pig......enjoys it he does.....

             
          • Bronco posted at 12:14 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            Bronco Posts: 4328

            Geez, HTC, you've got to stop using 'I'M RIGHT.com' as your home page. Can you even post without including the words stupid, ignorant, idiot, or fool? And jerkin to the tune of 'Real Patriots' is a bit weird after the country voted you down.
            Now you're babbling about who would win a civil war? Will this prediction be as accurate as your prediction about the election?

             
          • Yodah posted at 12:08 pm on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            Yodah Posts: 26

            Refrain from abusive discourse we must....lack of breeding it shows...

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 11:32 am on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Yodah: Vote with your wallet...

            HTC: If you had even the foggiest notion of how Obama and his party have negatively affected your wallet, you would never have posted that profoundly ignorant remark.

            People like you, every time you open your mouths, continue to validate the proposition that the only requirement to be a liberal/progressive is to be stupid.

             
          • Yodah posted at 11:20 am on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            Yodah Posts: 26

            Vote with your wallet...tell the businesses that advertise here you will not do business with them if they do business with The Daily InterLake. Let them pay more than $.02 for this kind of thinking....

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 10:30 am on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            jennydoe: Conclusion.....the Democrats won the election......the Republicans lost their war.... disgusting.

            HTC: If erroneous conclusions had the value of gold, you progressives would all be the 1%.

            Obama won in 2008 with a popular vote margin of 10 MILLION votes. This time around, the gap was a mere 2 million votes. Now, a ten year old can look at that and immediately spot the glaring error in your 'logic'; what does THAT say about you?

            If the voters had intended to return Obama for a second term with a clear mandate (and I'm not sure you can have a 'mandate' when you didn't actually run on anything other than "Romney's even worse than I am"), they wouldn't have saddled him with a more sharply divided Congress than he's had to deal with for the past two years.

            America clearly voted for gridlock since too many weren't certain of Romney's conservative credentials. They voted to return the devil they knew and then fence him in so that he couldn't do more harm.

            If you think that's a victory of some kind for your side, you truly are entirely delusional.

            FDR fooled the people for a long time into believing that his anti-business and socialist policies were actually lifting America out of the Depression; in reality, he extended the economic misery for 17 years and it was only the post-WW II boom which finally lifted us out of Depression. He pulled off this charade because he first assumed office with a national debt that was only 4% of our GDP.

            The thing about Keynesisan 'stimulus' is that it somewhat appears to work until the government spending is halted. FDR was able to keep it up because he could easily borrow the money to do so, since we had so little debt at the time.

            Obama and the Democrats don't have that luxury today, with our debt now at 108% of GDP and growing fast. Already, we find ourselves with fewer investors willing to buy that debt; hence, the Federal Reserve has become the largest single purchaser of that debt and is 'printing' funny money to purchase it.

            The CBO now projects that a second Obama term will end with at least 20 TRILLION DOLLARS in total national debt and a debt service burden of nearly a trillion dollars per year! The nanny state is simply unsustainable and is on the verge of collapsing on itself. When it does, vote buying by your guy and your party will become impossible, as the masses finally begin to realize that government truly is the problem and not the solution.

            It is not your side which won, for soon we'll realize that we all lost as a result of past compromise with your party and its progressive nonsense.

            “The legacy of Democrats and Republicans approaches: Libertarianism by bankruptcy.” -- Nick Nuessle, 1992

             
          • truthiness posted at 10:26 am on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            truthiness Posts: 12

            Obama is giving out free phones? Oh hell yes!!

            Seriously, where does he come up with this stuff!

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 9:52 am on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            SorrySOB: Typical GOP (Fox encouraged) thinking. Rather than even try to compromise or (OMG) try a little moderation where we might actaully work something out, Frank would rather make not so veiled threats of blowing things up in retaliation for an election handily lost by his inept narrow-minded redneck party.

            HTC: Were our Founders alive today, you and your fellow progressives would no doubt regard them as a bunch of "narrow-minded redneck(s)" as well. You would see them that way because of the fact that your political ideology stands in stark opposition to the principles upon which this country was founded and as are enshrined in the Declaration of Independence and our Constitution.

            Because of past compromising of those principles by the GOP, the Democratic Party has managed to grow a government and nanny state which far exceeds its constitutional boundaries and which now threatens to destroy our economy with its $200T in unfunded liabilities.

            Naturally, you and your fellow progressives cannot see this and will deny this, not because it is you who are the truly narrow-minded, but because you lack a mind altogether. What you fail to recognize is what was once called "common sense."

            You cannot be reasoned with nor should we compromise with you ever again. Those of us who understand the nature of our founding documents and the breadth and depth of personal liberty they sought to protect, will always regard your kind as the enemy because that is what you are.

            It would be a grand lie to call any of you our "fellow Americans" because you don't even understand what it means to be a real American.

             
          • It's a beautiful day posted at 9:41 am on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            It's a beautiful day Posts: 1832

            HighTechCowboy posted at 9:32 am on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            IABD- Ask yourself that question after removing your unambiguously 'Grand Old Partisan' hat while opening your eyes pardner.

             
          • Rick Spencer posted at 9:36 am on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            Rick Spencer Posts: 405

            It would seem to me that we have only one law: The Constitution, and it is a constrained vision of governance upon those who govern. That constrained vision has been sullied by the Progressives and several edicts from the Supreme court through the years leading now to promises by the federal government that are simply untenable, with the latest estimates leading to over $200 Trillion in unfunded liabilities. Now, divide that by 300 million citizens and you will know the debt that each of you owe. If we cannot pay it, then what?

            It is the most egregious and selfish act in that we have now transferred our greed through our debt to our progeny and their wealth to us, and we will be considered the horse thieves of old. The takers now outnumber the givers and the tipping point toward national fiscal responsibility is gone. There is no way out this as inflation, taxes, or growth will not suffice. It is simply mathematically impossible.

            Now Dear Readers, please tell me what has happened to every country in the history of the world that has experienced this kind of fiscal problem , and you will understand what you have done to your children and their children, mostly through greed alone. But, you will get your wish and the government you wanted, but my guess is that within a few years you will be hoisted by your own petard, as a wish that comes true is not always the wish you visualized. It will be the false promise of a utopia failed, and you will be the victim, deservedly so, as you voted it into being during 2012 National election as that was our last best hope to assume fiscal responsibility as a Nation. RLS

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 9:32 am on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            jennydoe: We are a country, a nation. It is republicans who choose the word WAR.

            HTC: You're really on top of your game this morning with these side-splitting jokes you're sharing.

            I believe it's the left who invented the phrase "get your war on":

            http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/09/get-your-war-on-the-aftermath_n_2101451.html

            jennydoe: Do you want to see a civil war? It sure is implied. My estimation is your rearends would be kicked.

            HTC: No one wants to see another civil war in this country but your suggestion that the real patriots in this country would get "your rearends....kicked" is another gut-buster of joke. You'd have to enact a draft just to raise an army and then half of them would flee to Canada or Mexico before you could even mobilize that army.

            Please stop with the jokes - I'm already laughing so hard I can barely breathe....

             
          • HighTechCowboy posted at 9:19 am on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            HighTechCowboy Posts: 9901

            Tillie posted at 7:56 am on Sun, Nov 11, 2012

            I really must ask - what does reality look like to someone so completely devoid of any real intellectual capacity?

             
          • Tillie posted at 7:56 am on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            Tillie Posts: 69

            more of the same from frank, a load of complete bollocks

             
          • Moski posted at 7:31 am on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            Moski Posts: 1

            Won't Zero be stopped by his own party from going on an even bigger Leftist binge? They do want to retain power after all. I realize principle-free Republicans blame Americans for not voting in Republicans' farcical "traditional American values." They're delusional. But the Democrats aren't so stupid as to believe Americans will continue to back them if they follow Zero down the path to hell.

             
          • jennydoe posted at 6:11 am on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            jennydoe Posts: 2198

            We are a country, a nation. It is republicans who choose the word WAR. Do you want to see a civil war? It sure is implied. My estimation is your rearends would be kicked. The republican party is shrinking and 847 people per hour are defriending your boy Mitt on facebook. If you say no to all comprimise than it is you who will suffer miserably. You cannot have it all your way. The nation has voted such. The republicans have spent the last 4 years and bucco bucks trying to make sure our first Black President didn't get a second term. There is such blantant hatred in your party which the dems have catered to in the past but now appears to have a backbone. Well, your very own hatred and dominance is what got President Obama elected to a second term.
            If you wish to see our country sit stagnant for four years for your own ego then it is your own children who will suffer the consequences and end up voting democrat in their future.
            Conclusion.....the Democrats won the election......the Republicans lost their war.... disgusting.
            We must stop this extremism and both parties come to the center for the sake of our country.

             
          • SorrySOB posted at 12:29 am on Sun, Nov 11, 2012.

            SorrySOB Posts: 484

            Typical GOP (Fox encouraged) thinking. Rather than even try to compromise or (OMG) try a little moderation where we might actaully work something out, Frank would rather make not so veiled threats of blowing things up in retaliation for an election handily lost by his inept narrow-minded redneck party. Go ahead and keep pretending the revolution is "right around the corner." It is pretty much what we have been hearing every week for the last four years with nothing new. Why dont you try a new approach and possibly someone other than your devoted lemmings might just actually listen to some of your ideas..

             
          • Yodah posted at 9:15 pm on Sat, Nov 10, 2012.

            Yodah Posts: 26

            Why do I keep flashing on a mental image of the ruins of Berlin at the end of WW 2. They had a guy that wouldn't see when the game was over and his people suffered needlessley. And in the film remember the Dr.'s final line when the Bridge is blown and everyone is dead, "It's madness". Fanatics never see themselves for what they are..that's the job of those left in the wreckage.

             
          • Rick Spencer posted at 8:02 pm on Sat, Nov 10, 2012.

            Rick Spencer Posts: 405


            Some time back I wrote a review of Thomas Sowell's, A Conflict of Visions and here are some excerpts from it as they relate to Frank's core argument that compromise is self-defeating in the long run.

            http://cargomasterraster.blogspot.com/2010/08/august-book-of-month.html

            "Compromise is the acceptance of less by each side and is usually twice as costly to those who pay the bill. It also exposes the two sides to political danger or disgrace, so gridlock becomes less painful and less costly. In turn, that may be more productive.

            This basic conflict about governance has been the fuel for the best of mankind and the worst; and, it is at the forefront of our democratic world that struggles to govern mainly through political parties. However, the folly of the argument for our country lies in the fact that the Constitution is largely one of a constrained view of the people to be governed. There should be no argument as our Founders’ goal was to construct a governance system that allowed man his individual freedom to be all that he can be. As you will see, that is far different than the unconstrained view of Progressives.

            The Unconstrained Vision

            The tradition inherent to the unconstrained view is the conviction that immoral or foolish choices explain the evils of the world and that wiser social policies are the solution to create a more humane society. In other words, the social engineering that seems to come naturally to academics, journalists, and Progressive politicians as they deem themselves wiser then the individual to make decisions about how one should live. They believe that a larger, centrally controlled apparatus is better for the individual than the individual is for himself. It is always found in fascism, communism, and socialism. In fact, it is the central theme for each of these and the end result has always been a disaster for those subjected to it, and seldom bloodless. It is the false promise of a utopia failed.

            The present administration has ushered into our society some of the most radical social changes the country has ever experienced while acting within their unconstrained view of those they govern. Progressives have been largely guided by concepts that revolve around intentions and using words such as sincerity, commitment, and dedication all leading to the social justice they desire, usually the controlled conduct of our personal and economic lives. They create social contrivances through their artificial logic without regard to the unpleasant side effects that deceptive reasoning always produces. Their unconstrained view of governing largely rejects the doctrine of American Exceptionalism and its values of self-reliance. It, thusly, rejects one’s own private stock of reasoning for guidance to his life’s concerns. They are viewed as the Liberals/Progressives among us.

            The Constrained Vision

            Turning to this vision, and as Sowell points out, those favoring the constrained vision put little faith in those deliberately designed social processes touted by the unconstrained vision since there is so little faith that any set of decision-makers could cope with the enormous complexities of designing an appropriate system of morality or politics for governance. In fact, the constrained vision does not envision any man-made social contrivance that would encompass the values and be more worthy than those that have historically evolved with their systemic order and without a deliberate design.

            The constrained vision sees freedom as finite and that government power is accumulated at the expense of private freedom. Hayek, Smith, Hamilton, Burke, and our Founders were proponents of the constrained vision of governance for those to be governed and thus it became the basis for our Constitution. Those who value free trade, limited government, rational decision-making, are Constitutionalists, and believe that the bigger the government, the less free the society, make-up the present day body of citizens favoring a constrained view of governance. They are viewed as the Conservatives among us.

            The Disease of Progressivism

            As opposed to the unconstrained view, the constrained view accepts its citizen’s own private stock of reasoning as appropriate guidance for life’s concerns. That was the basis for our revolution, for our Constitution, and for our nation’s guidance until the Progressive era began at the turn of the 20th century."

            Enjoy! RLS

             
          rss

          Carol Marino: Good News

          Premium Rounding up bills makes a difference

          Flathead Electric’s Roundup for Safety Program has been making the rounds around Northwest Montana for 18 years, ensuring our communities are safer places to live.

          More From Carol Marino: Good News

          rss

          Warren Illi: Flathead Outdoors

          Premium After session, changes ahead for hunters, anglers

          The 2015 legislative session is over. Our legislators passed and modified a wide range of hunting and fishing laws that will affect every person in Montana who hunts and fishes.

          More From Warren Illi: Flathead Outdoors