Yeah, so why is anyone taking them seriously? They should be in prison.

Couldn't have said it any better...

No, Really? :lol: "Teabaggers"? Really? How the hell could a minority group have the government they deserve? How does that work?

Get off your high horse. God damm Dems are no better. They ran up the credit cards exponentially in the last few years and now want everyone to figure out how to pay for it. And the rest of the sane people have asked at every boondoggle of a BS spending bill passed, "How are you going to pay for it?". Obamacare is a perfect example, the Dems and Obama played smoke and mirrors with the costs and how it was going to "pay for itself", what hose shit. They fudged the numbers to the GAO to make it look like a bed of roses, everybody gets what they want..... it will break the bank. The Stimulus package! "Hundreds of Thousands of Shovel Ready Jobs", more BS, unemployment rate still above 9% and no end in site. Obama, Pelosi, and Reid OWN it.. Downgrading of US for the first time in history! Obama and the Dems own it... The Republickins have their share, but they don't OWN it like the Dems do, not by a long shot. Guess we will see in 2012.... How'd that work out for the Dems in 2010?:D

Really? I wonder how the Left would react if a top strategist said they would have to do the same to Obama to beat him? Call them a racist or just call the secret service?

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories...#ixzz1UYLi6ixG

You don't need to go all coy on me, Merc. There's plenty of examples of substantial minority groups swinging a party by its tail. A recent Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll showed 35% of potential voters support the Tea Party and they favor the Republicans by 84% - That's a nice little chunk of the vote as shown by the 2010 elections when Tea Party-endorsed candidates upset established Republicans in several primaries, such as Alaska, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Nevada, New York, South Carolina and Utah. (I got my stats from Wikipedia if anyone cares.)

No thanks. I like the view from up here. The feeling of deja vu is interesting too. This stuff has only been argued about a million times before on this forum with no one's mind changed one iota. All, I'll say is that by refusing to pay taxes like any other responsible citizens would, the tea flavored Republicans are just as much at fault or more than the democrats.

SamIAm - why do you persist in a battle of logic with an unarmed man?

:lol:

Ohhh SNAP!

I'm practicing keeping my claws sheathed - sort of. :stickpoke

You mean the 47% of Americans that don't pay Federal Income tax? All, I'll say is that by refusing to pay taxes like any other responsible citizens would, the Demoncrats who cry out that they want every entitlement under the sun are just as much at fault or more than the republickins, as long as they don't have to pay for it, we call them Zero Liability Voters.

And now they are just "tea flavored" not as you call them "Teabaggers"? Why the change of heart?

You really should stop using the term 'Demoncrat'. It undercuts any rational argument you attempt to make.

That being said, I am envious since even if I were so inclined to retaliate, which I am not, I cannot think up a similar term for Republicans:rolleyes:.

Resnublicans?

Reflublicans?

Repub-asslicans?

GOP is a bit easier:

Bland-old-party

rePUBICans.:D

Darn. Completely missed that one:smack:. So much better than my ideas.

Let's see. You state %47 of Americans. You do not state 47% of adult Americans. I am refraining from checking your figure on Snopes at this point through an extreme act of will.

So first let me state that I consider the fact that the government is not taxing my 2-year-old grandson to be something of a victory.

Also, there is not much point at taxing people at the poverty level, since any money you have to take away from them would have to be returned to them in the form of assistance, at least until some people are finished completely shredding the safety net.

I agree the fact that there is such a large percentage of people who do not pay taxes is disturbing, but for a different reason. This is a symptom of the larger problem which is a wealth distribution system that has become more and more dysfunctional in the past few decades. With unrealistic tax cuts, we have stolen from the public treasury to enrich a small segment of our population at the expense of everyone else. This should not be possible in a democracy unless you are able to find a large enough number of people who are willing to vote against their collective self-interest in a fiscally sound government. The Republicans have found a way to do so.

If you don't like the %47 number, become a Democrat and find a way to help them become richer.

Easy. Congress works only when members are intelligent. And work for America. A mentally deficient minority can easily subvert everything - in the tradition of George Jr and hate.

Anyone knows a Congress dominated by a mentally deficient, wacko extremist minority is subverted. Why would anyone post otherwise? This mental midget minority (that now dominates the Republican party) intentionally tried to put America into default. Then said default was not harmful due to soundbyte logic and insufficient education. Only the most easily brainwashed would say that wacko minority could not create harm.

A man who bothered to become educated defined the problem. NY Times on 15 Aug 2011 published a Warren Buffet's "Stop Coddling the Super-Rich".
Only the dumbest of Americans say that is good. That the richest should have a 500% increase while an average American has seen his income *drop* 2% (before a George Jr created recession). Only the most brainwashed would say that was good.

Buffett was on Charlie Rose on 16 Aug to further define the problem:
Wackos love to destroy rather than compromise. Extremists as intolerant as bin Laden and Milosevic threatened to backstab the Speaker maybe three times because Boehner was compromising with Obama. Because Boehner was working to advance America as only an intelligent person would do. Wackos want government to default. To destroy America so that Obama will fail. And then said a default is not harmful. Would blame Obama rather than admit to their own brainwashing.

TheMercenary, using cheapshot language and a mocking tone, says that cannot harm government. Buffett said otherwise - quite bluntly and with example. Wackos openly coddle the super-rich. The most easily brainwashed even say default would be good - because they want Obama and America to fail. Only an adult who is still a child would believe wacko extremists are not harming America.

"And the American people lost, incidentally." Only the dumbest or most brainwashed among us would deny that. How many more trophies to zero intelligence do we create? Constellation, Ares, and Orion? Bernie Maddoff? Enron? Protecting criminals who invented a CA energy crisis? Protecting bin Laden? Mission Accomplished? A housing bubble intentionally created to avert recession. Hydrogen as a fuel? Ethanol. Man to Mars. White House lawyers rewriting science papers. Hate of Muslims in lower Manhattan. Protecting Wall Street bandits. Subverting the American hybrid because it was created by Clinton. Put Social Security in the stock market. More children left behind. Destroying the Oslo Accords. All disasters advocated by wacko extremists and approved by TheMercenary who now says wackos do not create harm. Buffett proves otherwise.

Stewart used this graphic Thursday night. To paraphrase, the reason they have no skin in the game is that they have no skin. They do however continue to pay non-payroll taxes.

I wonder what the British equivalent breakdown is.

Hmmm... we'll have to look. This is from before the crash so it may look nominally better now that everyone is poorer. :yelsick:

Something to look at although I don't have the same year.

I am equal opportunity user of the term Demoncrat as I call Republicans Republickins! :D

Well thank God for that. :)

Agreed.

This is a Republic, not a democracy. This focus on wealth distribution is a problem because unless you plan to forcibly take money legally earned through the capitalistic model of the Free Market you would have to be going against the very essence of our Constitution. A simple change in our current tax structure would solve many of our problems.

No, they are as evil as the Republickin's and rely on victimhood to keep them in office.:)

Harry Reid is willing to allow the government to shut down over this. After all the complaining about the Republickins and the Debit Ceiling crisis and here we have the Demoncrats doing the same thing for a lessor cause. Sad....

http://thehill.com/homenews/news/182...wn-is-possible

Watchdog spotlights lawmaker ethics in 'most corrupt' report

http://thehill.com/homenews/news/182...corrupt-report

The "lessor cause"...

Is that from the storm?

Yep.

http://www.pressconnects.com/

Bad luck.

Gov't paid $600 million in benefits to dead people

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...09-23-11-58-21

That's all? puh... chump change.

I agree, about a tad less than they will get on the new Millionaires Class Warfare Tax......

Scary Budget Fact of the Day:

The United States will officially pass the 100 percent debt-to-GDP line on Halloween.

http://reason.com/blog/2011/10/20/sc...act-of-the-day

Senator Bennett from Colorado takes a 3 minute look at congressional popularity...

"We're almost at the margin of error for zero"

If you're in a hurry, skip over to 2:00 :rolleyes:

.

Is he talking to an empty room?
I take comfort that Castro is only at 5% - lol

The word seems to be that the "SuperCommittee" has failed to come to agreement on the US budget.

Talking heads were saying that the cuts in defense spending would be
argued in Congress for the coming year, and eventually would be removed.

But in a press conference this evening Obama said "No" to such changes.
He stated that he would veto any attempts by Congress to alter the consequences
of the outcome from the SuperCommittee.

It will be interesting (?) to see how the jibber jabbers interpret this,
and then over the next several months to see if, in fact,
Obama actually holds congressional feet to the fire.
.

Does it really take that long to assess the polling data?

For once, I didn't intend to send a political message in that post.
I do think fixing the budget is important, and hope something is accomplished.

Politically, I wish Obama had invoked the veto many months ago.
Politically, I think it will hold Obama in good stead in the election if he does use the veto,
and does not end up agreeing to some minor, but slippery slope, compromise.
.

Might as well be. He's talking to Congress. There's no light in THOSE eyes. :right:

Yeah, but 11% want the US to go communist!?! :eek: I guess only if Castro doesn't become president.

"SuperCommittee" I'm thinking the reason they can't get anything done, is because they haven't had enough time to cover all their campaign donors, friends, and family.
Create new loopholes. Etc. IMHO.

:corn:

You've got some congresscritters thinking like adults, and you've got some wanting the bread and circuses to continue.

Obama campaigned on bread-and-circuses, and in immediate consequence I voted for the other guy. Obama is unable to stop believing in bread and circuses, so I am capable of voting against him a second time. Along with the entirety of the Donkey Party. They'd rather I didn't have valuable values; fuck 'em without lube and with splinters. They require to be discomfited.

I think they, both parties, went into it knowing they were going to fail. Each group started from non-negoitable part and never moved past that point. I want Obama to explain why he failed to take up the recommendations of his Bi-partisan Debit Commission long before we got to this point. He basically dismissed their recommendations without comment and never explained to the American people his reasoning. It is another fine example of the many lies about "Transparency" to heap upon the pile of failures of his presidency.

Every Republican entered negotiations having already signed a very public document to not raise taxes on the rich. Any Republican that did not abide by that signing was routed from office. No Republican can negotiate in good faith until after the next year's electrons.

Everyone knows that eight years of tax reductions to the rich has resulted in less jobs and a large recession. As was true with previous tax cuts to stimulate the economy. As usual from history, tax cuts caused a minor economic stimulus in the middle 2000s. And then contributed to this current recession.

A classic example of economics taking revenge. As cited previously with the "Lawn example". Pass a law that required everyone to replace their front lawn annually. Then jobs are created for all. Followed by greater job losses many years later. Economics always takes revenge on all when money games are used to 'stimulate an economy'. Deja Vue.

Until Republicans admit that taxes must be restored to Clinton levels, then nothing will be solved. We know Clinton tax rates resulted in a booming economy and the elimination of deficits. Extremists must forget reality to let Limbaugh tell them something different.

Do you feel this way about the stimulus?

Clearly that is what he said. I didn't know he understood the issue.

Well the CBO agrees that there is less of a "multiplier effect" with the stimulus which is precisely what he was talking about with the lawn thing.

The lawn thing demonstrates negative growth. Same reason is why welfare to the rich also causes negative growth.

I was quite blunt about this when extremists gleefully advocated harm to the American economy using soundbyte logic and money games. Nobody can say the obvious was undefined and not predicted. We now have predicted job losses traceable to what was posted ten plus years ago in the Cellar.

Posted on 11 April 2001:
Laffer curve - the real laugh
Facts demonstrated by Kennedy's tax cut of 1960 did not change. But spin from extremist hoped everyone will remain naive and dumb. Most Americans ignored economic lessons from history.

Well, we all can now learn because history repeated itself.

Government cannot fix an economy. Only innovation fixes economies. But government can harm economies as extremists in Congress are now gleefully advocating such as welfare for the rich. We all must suffer big time, as predicted, because wacko extremists did more than just hate science, the American soldier, and stifle innovation. Extremists used soundbyte logic to advocate money games. "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter". That reality reposted how many times when extremists were intentionally harming the American economy.

We all must pay for their lies. See the numbers in Wall Street Protests. Under 35 year olds once earned $45K in 1992 (George Sr called those money games "voodoo economics"). And $47K in 1999 (Clinton raised taxes to balance budgets and therefore create a booming economy). By 2009, the same age group was only earning $32K (George Jr proved Mission Accomplished and deficits don't matter as Nixon also did).

Why is that latest post somehow different? I repeatedly cautioned about serious economic harm by money games in 2001. When wackos even advocated putting Social Security into the stock market. Because Limbaugh, et al said it was good. What we have now was predicted, with reasons why, ten years ago.

There was an intelligent and thoughtful conservative on NPR the other day. He was saying that the problem with the Republican party was that they went to all this effort to get their base all riled up about the horrible Democrats. That anger worked out well for them because it made them stronger. But it backfired when it came time to negotiate with the Democrats, because even if they wanted to make a deal with the Democrats on the budget, this big machine of anger was steamrolling right behind them and wouldn't allow them to make a deal. Because those Democrats are evil, and you can't negotiate with evil.

So you can't let loose the dogs of war, and then hope to get them back on the leash when it's convenient.

And, they may have finally succeeded in ruffling Obama's demeanor !

Obama has a demonearor?

Don't tell Santorum, he'll hire an exorcist.

ftfy

The news that (D) Barney Frank, Chair of the House Finance Committee,
has decided to not run for re-election is very disappointing to me.

His voting district was re-aligned, losing liberal and gaining conservative voters.
So, at 71 yrs of age, he would have a much more difficult campaign in his next election.
At least that's what his office put out to the news media.

I've always regarded him as the most knowledgeable member
of Congress when it comes to the budget, and day-to-day politics.
For me, if he said it on TV, I accepted it as true. And I think he was
very well accepted by both Dem's and Rep's
I just heard one of his quotes on TV:

Apparently, his seat in Massachusetts is safe for the Dem's.
But Congress is losing so much "institutional memory" that
can not be replaced by a database or the Congressional Record.
.

Santorum's expertise is in resuscitating dead brains.

The news that Barney Frank (D), Chair of the House Finance Committee,
has decided to not run for re-election is very gratifying to me.

He was a total insider and never admitted his role in the Fannie/Freddie disasters.
He was in charge of oversight and was caught completely flat-footed when it all went down.

He was linked to many a scandal including numerous lending institutions, his "special loans" with countrywide and also his admitted affair with a 17 year old page.

He is simply one of the entrenched professional politicians of which there are far too many in both parties still in Wash. IMO, his leaving is a good start at cleaning house.

Classic, if you believe all that were true and overwhelmingly important,
why would you think it would do any good to bring in a new politician ?

I'd suggest a quick read of Frank's congressional history in Wikipedia
to see if instead, and on balance, you might think he is has a better fit
with what we want in from a 30-year veteran politician.
.

I already read it, but thanks. That info on wiki is why it isn't really a valid source for unbiased accurate info.
Do a little more digging. I did just to cover my ass in my post.
I'm not interested in getting into an argument here about Barneys checkered past.
I just thought I'd lay out some of the "other side" of him.
There was much much more which he wasn't indicted/convicted/charged as well. I left that stuff out.

I don't know about Classic, but I don't think it will do much good to bring in a new politician. Our current system all but guarantees that if a Congressman is not corrupt to begin with, he soon will be.

Yeah, Barney Frank did some good things, but Classic is correct in stating that Frank played a role in the Frannie/Freddie fiasco. Read Morgenson's and Rosner's "Reckless Endangerment" - a detailed account of the events and players leading to the great financial crash and subsequent Wall Street bailout.

Barnie Frank was one of Frannie's and Freddie's greatest defenders, claiming that concerns about the the safety and soundness of these two institutions were highly exaggerated. Frank was duly rewarded for his partisanship in this regard.

He said exactly what his handlers told ... err ... paid him to say. Then the bottom fell out.

Or he truly believed that, and erred.

"Selling out is an overrated phenomenon. If selling out paid better, I wouldn't have to be here tonight." Gridiron Dinner, December 5, 2009
-Barney Frank

Do as I say and not as I do?

James Johnson, the exec in charge of running Fannie in the 90's, was slipperier than an eel. He was adroit in both politics and business, and the way he packaged Fanny to appear vs what it actually was is outrageous. Johnson profited well from his deceits. The man should be in prison. Instead, he now sits on the board of directors for Goldman Sachs. (Occupy Wall Street, anyone?)

When I read the book I mentioned above, "Reckless Endangerment," the thought also occurred to me that Johnson and his criminal corporate pals had pulled the wool over Frank's eyes just as they had fooled so many others.

The thing is that Barney Frank was chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, a powerful committee charged with the oversight of all America's housing and financial services sectors. That's a lot of outfits to keep an eye on, but Fannie and Freddie were big enough and important enough that SOMEONE should have been watching what they were up to. No one was.

This all happened on Barney Frank's watch and his favorite proteges were well rewarded by Johnson and Fannie for Frank's vigorous support.