Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Saturday, October 1, 2016

President Obama appears ready to move past the politics of the sequester and move on to an issue he knows voters love — rebuilding America’s crumbling infrastructure.

Speaking at the Port of Miami Friday, the president gave a quick speech outlining the “Partnership to Rebuild America.” The proposal builds on ideas he presented in his State of the Union address to use federal spending to spur construction of roads, bridges and other public needs in order to create jobs.

“Let’s get started rebuilding America,” Obama said, after noting that his proposal is backed by both the Chamber of Commerce and the nation’s largest union, the AFL-CIO.

A recent Gallup poll found that 72 percent of Americans, including a majority of Republicans, support spending federal money to create jobs.

“We still have all kinds of deferred maintenance. We still have all kinds of ports that aren’t equipped for today’s commerce. We’ve still got too many rail lines that are too slow and clogged up. We’ve still got too many roads that are in disrepair– too many roads that aren’t safe,” Obama said. “That congestion wastes time and money.”

The president’s speech followed his tour of the Port of Miami Tunnel, which he cited as an example of a partnership between local and state governments and the private sector that he’d like to encourage.

Outlining the Partnership to Rebuild America, he said it would set up a means of selecting the best projects to avoid wasteful spending. It would also establish “America Fast Forward” bonds to attract foreign and domestic investment in local infrastructure.

“We can’t afford Washington politics standing in the way of America’s progress,” Obama said, noting that “ultimately, Congress has to fund these projects.”

The proposals would cost $21 billion but would not add to the budget deficit, according to a White House aide.

“I know in Washington D.C. people like to argue. It gets them on TV,” the president said. But he again harkened to the popularity of what he’s proposing. “Building better roads and schools, that’s not a partisan idea.”

Notably, Governor Rick Scott (R) welcomed the president to his state as all Republican politicians must do — with an attack. But what was Scott calling Obama out for? Not sending enough infrastructure money to Florida.

What possibly stood out the most about the president’s speech is what he didn’t mention — the sequester.

Before his trip to Israel, Obama called up the automatic spending cuts in nearly every appearance he made. As the sequester took effect and the cuts were only evident to those directly impacted, Obama’s approval ratings declined from the highs he experienced after his re-election.

Spending cuts in their vaguest form are nearly as popular as rebuilding infrastructure. It turns out the sequester cuts are vague enough that the public is willing to absorb them. Or perhaps the Republican strategy of pinning the sequester on Obama, claiming the policy is a victory and attacking the specific cuts they don’t like, is working.

Regardless, the president has signed a continuing resolution that keeps the government funded with the sequester cuts in place. And he’s decided to move the discussion back to an issue the public understands and cheers — rebuilding America.

 

  • howdidisraelget200nukes

    Wow. This means that maybe in 10 or 15 years, Washington might be able to do something about this.

    Perhaps they should start by passing a law that mandates our infrastructure be maintained.

    How did they miss that?

    • When Some Of Their Butts Start Getting Hurt And Maimed On Some Of These Crumbing Bridges And Roads Bet They Do Something Then!!

  • Like Congress gives a rats patootie what the President wants! They obviously have their own agenda!

    • Inthenameofliberty

      The President likes Monsanto. He had no problem signing that bill. Again, the fact that you don’t understand this concept is very interesting me. Shouldn’t you know your leader better than that?

  • empiremed

    Maybe Majority Leader Harry Reid didn’t want a lot of attention as the United States Senate voted on a budget resolution for the first time in four years. Or maybe he’s a Las Vegas night owl.

    Whatever the reason, it was 5 a.m. last Saturday when the Senate approved a budget resolution for fiscal year 2014 by a razor thin 50-49 vote. Both houses of Congress have now passed resolutions setting the overall level of outlays for the fiscal year that starts Oct. 1, as well as subtotals for the budget’s major areas.

    As Mr. Reid feared, bringing up a Senate budget resolution put congressional Democrats on record as favoring new taxes and continued deficits.

    Over the next decade, the Senate’s Democratic budget resolution would increase taxes $1 trillion while spending a total of $47.2 trillion and never balancing the budget. The resolution calls for $837 billion of cuts over the same period. The House Republican resolution would hold the line on taxes, cut outlays $5.7 trillion while spending a total of $41.5 trillion, and balance the budget in 10 years.

    The Democrats’ resolution calls for spending $3.715 trillion this coming fiscal year. That is $184 billion more than the Republican resolution and $97 billion more than what the Congressional Budget Office says outlays would be with normal spending increases based on current law. No wonder four Senate Democrats rejected their party’s budget blueprint, as did 35 House Democrats when the resolution was brought up for a vote in the lower house.

    The parties’ big differences make it virtually certain the House and Senate resolutions won’t be reconciled in a conference committee. The chambers also have different rules. The House spending levels are binding for each of the 13 appropriations bills that fund the government. Since the Senate resolution didn’t get 60 votes, its spending levels are not binding on the upper chamber’s appropriations process.

    The 2011 Budget Control Act (which produced the sequester) already capped fiscal year 2014 discretionary spending for both chambers at $966 billion. And while two-thirds of the overall federal budget consists of mandatory outlays and interest payments, much of the congressional appropriations process is devoted to distributing discretionary spending. The central partisan dispute is likely to be over the split between defense and nondefense spending.

    In both chambers, there is likely to be the give-and-take that Americans routinely saw when Congress went through regular legislative order in years past to pass the budget. This would be an improvement: Since 2010, Washington has been funded through continuing resolutions, stopgap measures generally passed in a crisis that spell out how much government can spend for a few months. In fiscal year 2012 there were five continuing resolutions in 12 months. That’s no way to run a small business, let alone the $3.5 trillion enterprise that’s the federal government.

    This year, Republicans will block any new taxes or mandatory spending. Democrats are likely to oppose any significant entitlement savings. There is little chance of a “grand bargain” of tax increases, spending restraint and entitlement reform without serious presidential leadership. In any case that would require trust, something Mr. Obama has not done much to create and a lot to destroy.

    Astonishingly, little importance in all this has been attached to the president’s budget. Mr. Obama was required by law to deliver one to Congress by Feb. 4. He has yet to do so. It hardly seems to matter: Congressional leaders plowed ahead anyway.

    The budget drama reveals a more important phenomenon—that Mr. Obama has become a minor actor on Capitol Hill. On a growing array of issues, members of both parties have come to understand that progress is more likely with the president on the sideline.

    For example, bipartisan groups of senators and congressmen are doing the difficult work of writing detailed immigration reform legislation. Mr. Reid—contrary to the president’s wishes—took it upon himself to sculpt a gun control bill that doesn’t include Mr. Obama’s bans on so-called “assault weapons” and, perhaps, limits on the capacity of ammunition clips.

    There has been no movement in Congress on the president’s carbon tax. During Saturday’s budget debate, 79 senators supported repeal of ObamaCare’s tax on medical devices and 62 senators backed construction of the Keystone XL pipeline (alas, both nonbinding votes). On issue after issue, Mr. Obama is being routinely ignored or rebuffed.

    No president is ever irrelevant, but less than 10 weeks into his second term Mr. Obama’s power is waning. Even members of his own party view him as an obstacle to getting things done.

    • jgsoliveira

      What about Bush? Did he do anything wrong?

      • Hell Yeah He Did A Whole Lot Of Things Wrong!!! He Screw Up This Country After Being Giving A Surplus Bush Sent This Country OVER THE CLIFF!!! And The Rest Of The GOP/Tea Party American Taliban Is Hell Bend On Finishing Where Bush Left Off!!! Cause They No Way Trying To Help Get This Country Back On It’s Feet!!! 🙁

        • Inthenameofliberty

          You and I agree!!! Wow! Bush did many, many things wrong. I didn’t vote for him, don’t blame me. But I am blaming you for not holding your current president to the same standards that you expected from Bush.

          • Why In The Hell Do You Keep Talking To Me?? What Part Of Stop Talking To Me You Can’t Seem To Get Thru Your Head??? SCREW YOU TROLL!!!!!!

          • Inthenameofliberty

            Oh come on now. If children are told to have discussions and get along with each other, how can you tell me that you can’t talk to me? Are you really no better than a third grader? Aren’t you an adult? Aren’t we supposed to be the people who compromise and find a way to move forward? Why don’t we try? Have a great day!

          • inthenameofbeinganasshole We’re Not Kids As An Adult I Choose Not To Talk To Lying Tea Bagging Trolls It’s Just That Simple!!! Bye Bye! You Can’t Brainwash Me And I Can’t Be Bullied And You Sure In The Hell Can’t Shut Me Up!! Go Talk To Your Fellow Lying Tea Bagging Trolls I No Way In Hell Want To Hear Your BS!!! What You Think You Can Pull A Paul Ryan On Me?? Fake It!! LOL Not Buying Your Bullcrap Bye Bye!!! TROLL!!!

          • Inthenameofliberty

            As you wish. M’am.

          • Why Don’t You Go To Hell???

      • empiremed

        Yes he did. He allowed too much money to be spent, although not nearly as much as Obama. The added another costly entitlement. And he tried to pass the wrong kind of imigration reform. But he did cut taxes, strengthened our defenses, protected us from more terrorism and took down a horrible dictator, those are good things.

        • Oh Gees Another Lying Troll!! Don’t You Guys And Gals Ever Get Tried Of Telling The Same Old Bald Face Lies!! We Are Not Buying Your Bullcrap!! We See What’s Going On For Ourselves!! That Might Work For The Rest Of Your Airhead Fellow Haters But We’re Not Biting!! Maybe You Need To Go On WND!! The Web Site For The Wackos And Dummies!!

          • BDC_57

            Fern they don’t have any prove of what they are saying ther a bunch lying teabaggers.

          • howdidisraelget200nukes

            So, you contend that no dems supported any of bush’s policies?

            You really are stupid.

        • Independent1

          Really, protected us from more terrorism?? What a joke!! Is that why he and Cheney totally ignored 7 warnings from the CIA between May 1 2001 and August 6 2001 that al Qaeda was planning an IMMENENT attack on the US?? And even had the gall to take more than 30 days vacation right after getting those warnings?? Tying Nixon for taking the longest continuous vacation in US history? And why because he refused to grand the CIA permission to spend more moiney trying to stop the al Qaeda attack that he DELIBERATELY let 9/11 happen?? Where more than 3,000 people were killed?? And is that why during his two terms there were 11 other terrorist attacks on Americas’s overseas consulates and Embassies with over 70 people being killed including an American diplomat? (Which the GOP never questioned by the way!). And is that why in those 11 attacks, his administration allowed 3 of them to occur in one Consulate, the consulate in Karachi Pakistan?? Doing absolutely nothing to prevent future attacks even after a diplomat was killed?? And why din’t any of the hypocritical GOP nitwits like McCain and Graham raise a stink about?? Because the GOP is the most hypocritical, anti-Christian organization in America..That’s why!!!! George Bush did absolute NOTHING to prevent another terrorist attack – he didn’t strengthen our ports, or our borders or any other facilities that would have prevented an attack. All he did was permit the CIA to torture suspected militants totally against international law, virtually turning the whole world against our country – making us look like fools!!!!

          • empiremed

            Wow, if you really believe all that, you’re sick.

          • Independent1

            Of course I believe it because what I said are all facts that you could verify via the internet if you spent just a few minutes doing some interent searches – you’re nothing more than the typical GOP lover in denial – refusing to believe that Bush and Cheney are the absolute criminals they are who should have been in jail years ago for their absolutely abhorrent actions. And even your total nonsense about Obama spending more than Bush proves just how clueless you are. If you did one search on deficit spending and another on presidential budgets, you’d learn very quickly that when Bush took office the deficit was at 4.9 trillion and when he walked out the door in January 2009 it was 10.6 trillion BUT, he also left Obama with a big gift, a budget that ran until 9/30/09 with another 1.6 trillion in deficits. Spend just a few seconds adding that up and you’ll see that Bush is clearly responsible for 7.3 trillion in deficit spending (12.2 trillion minus 4.9 trillion) which also is clearly much more than Obama could have ever spent. And that’s not the end of it, any economist or rational person will concur, that Bush is totally responsible for at least another two trillion in spending that Obama had to agree to to keep America from falling into the GOP’s, yes the GOP’s second created world-wide depression. The GOP was totally responsible for the misguided nonsense that created the Big Depression in the 1930s.

          • old_blu

            Not to mention the two unfunded wars that were hidden until President Obama took office.

          • Independent1

            The GOP has hidden a lot of unfunded legislation that’s added to the deficit, at least ever since Reagan was in office. In addition to his nonsensical notions of trickle-down economics and tax cuts spur the economy, Reagan started the practice of keeping 25% or more of actual spending outside of his budgets; which has resulted not only in driving deficits sky high, but also in the GOP legislatures passing sham budgets for 20 of the past 30 years. GOPers love to say Obama has not created a budget the past 4 years, when that’s nonsense. The problem is that every budget Obama has sent to the House of Reps, they’ve taken it and stripped out all the detail from the budget before presenting it for a vote; so of course Obama’s budgets keep getting voted down because Reps are not going to vote for a budget that just has bottom line totals for all the categories in the budget (just another way for the GOP to lie and distort the facts). But whether or not Obama has had a budget passed these last 4 years doesn’t change the fact that he’s 1st president, at least since Truman, to have 3 straight budgets with negative increase percents because spending went down for 3 straight years. That’s a whole lot better than 8 sham budgets being passed which didn’t include 25-50% of actual spending, such that spending went UP and average of 8.3%/yr in all of Bush jr’s disasterous 8 years in office.

          • howdidisraelget200nukes

            They were not hidden. everyone knew from the beginning that there was no funding for them yet all of those Dems supported them anyway.

          • empiremed

            President Obama’s fourth budget has now been released, which allows for a relatively full accounting of deficit spending during his four years in office. The picture isn’t pretty, but it is revealing.

            According to the White House’s own figures (see table S-1 here for 2011 to 2013, and table S-1 here for 2010), the actual or projected deficit tallies for the four years in which Obama has submitted budgets are as follows: $1.293 trillion in 2010, $1.300 trillion in 2011, $1.327 trillion in 2012, and $901 billion in 2013. In addition, Obama is responsible for the estimated $200 billion (the Congressional Budget Office’s figure) that his economic “stimulus” added to the deficit in 2009. Moreover, he shouldn’t get credit for the $149 billion in TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program) repayments made in 2010 and 2011 to cover most of the $154 billion in bank loans that remained unpaid at the end of the 2009 fiscal year — loans that count against President Bush’s 2009 deficit tally.

            Adding all of this up, deficit spending during Obama’s four years in the White House (based on his own figures) will be an estimated $5.170 trillion — or $5,170,000,000,000.00.

            To help put that colossal sum of money into perspective, if you take our deficit spending under Obama and divide it evenly among the roughly 300 million American citizens, that works out to just over $17,000 per person — or about $70,000 for a family of four.

            Obama’s Now Added $6 Trillion to the National Debt

            The previous record for most deficit spending during a presidency was set by President George W. Bush (see table 1.3 in the White House’s Historic Tables). During Bush’s 8-year administration, total deficit spending was $3.402 trillion. That’s a truly extraordinary and reckless sum. It’s also $1.768 trillion less than deficit spending in just four years under Obama. Per year, deficits under Bush averaged $425 billion. Per year, deficits under Obama (according to his own numbers) will average $1.293 trillion — or more than three times as much.

            Because the gross domestic product (GDP) nearly always grows from year to year, the most favorable way to view Obama’s deficit spending is as a percentage of GDP. Surely he can’t look as bad in that light, right?

            Well, prior to Obama, our annual deficit spending had only exceeded 6.0 percent of GDP during the Civil War, World War I, and World War II. Except during those huge conflicts, our deficits had never exceeded 6.0 percent of GDP in any year — not during the Great Depression, not at the height of the Cold War defense buildup, not ever. But that’s no longer the case. During Obama’s four years in the White House (and, again, using his own numbers), annual deficit spending will average 8.4 percent of GDP.

            That’s nearly double the average annual level of deficit spending under any other post-War president. As the following chart shows, this has truly been a historic presidency — more profligate than any other by far:

          • Independent1

            What you’re forgetting Empiremed, is that the deficits that have been run up during Obama’s term were not a result of overspending. if you also do some research, you’ll find that outside the military budget, that non-military spending over the past 4 years has actually been at the lowest level in 60 years; so if spending is already at the lowest level in 60 years, how is it that you would have expected Obama to bring the deficit spending down any faster than he already has – it’s actually come down faster over the past 4 years (at a -1.4% rate) than actually at any time in American history. THE PROBLEM ISN’T SPENDING!! The problem is the economic disaster that George Bush allowed the country to fall into which resulted in 14 million lost jobs and hundreds, maybe even thousands of belly up companies – all of which are not paying taxes which has decreased tax revenues by as much as the deficits. Indicating that if it wasn’t for the reduced tax revenues, there would be no or very little deficits. And go out and ask 2 or 3 hundred economists what should be done about spending during a deficit, and more than 75% of them will tell you: DON’T CUT SPENDING!!
            Cutting spending is exactly what super businessman Herbert Hoovere did in the late 1920s/early 30s. He expected that the private sector would be able to take care of spurring the economy. So on top of cutting spending, he jacked up the max tax rate to around 65%, thinking I guess, that if the private sector got the economy reved up that he could really bring in some tax revenues by taxing people to death. Well guess what, the private sector failed miserably at spuring the economy; and not only did it not spur the economy, but with the government now taxing people at a high rate, it was taking a big chunk of the little profits that the private sector was making, driving more companies and people into the poor house. And you and I know exactly what happened then – the world-wide Big Depression with millions upon millions of people really in the poor house. And believe it or not, Europe is on the brink of almost doing just that, falling into a depression; and why? Because they tried the nonsense that the GOP wants America to try – AUSTERITY!! Which is nothing but TOTAL NONSENSE!!!

          • empiremed

            I have no reason to believe that what you’re saying about Hoover is not true. My belief is that he should not have raised taxes. To me that is always a mistake. I believe in cutting taxes and cutting spending. Let people keep their hard earned money and spend it or invest it themselves

          • Independent1

            Just a few facts for you on recessions: Are you aware that since WWII that only one GOP president has governed without the economy falling into at least one recession, while during that time 4 Dem presidents have not had a recession start in their term. Here’s a list of the recessions America has experienced since WWII, and remember, recessions are often a function of the government mishandling the economy:
            Truman – I recession in 8 years lasting 11 mos from ’48 into ’49
            Eisenhower – 3 recessions in 8 years lasting a total of 2 years 4 months: in 53-54 & 57- 58 and 60-61.
            Kennedy – no recessions in 2 years
            Johnson – no recessions in 6 years
            Nixon – 1 recession in 5 years lasting 1 year 4 mos: 73-75
            Ford – no recession in 3 years
            Carter – 1 recession in 4 years lasting 6 mos: in 1980
            Reagan – 1 recession in 8 years lasting 1 year 4 mos: in 81-82
            Clinton – no recessions in 8 years
            Bush – 2 recessions in 8 years lasting 2 years & 4 mos: in 2001 and then 2007 into 2009
            Obama – no recession started in 4 years

          • empiremed

            Your data seems to be correct and a fair assessment, but let’s dig a little deeper. Eisenhower had a democratic congress for the last 6 years of his presidentcy. Then Kennedy ( a Democrat who I like) came in and cut taxes ( 25% for the top bracket) which led to an economic boom through the Johnson years. Please, please go to youtube and look up Kennedy’s 1962 speach on taxes. Digest that for a while and I’ll comment on the rest later.

          • Independent1

            Sorry, but cutting taxes in 1962 and cutting taxes in 2012 is like comparing apples and oranges. In 1962, the maximum tax rate was almost at the highest it had ever been in America at 91%, where else were tax rates to go but down. In 2012, the 35% tax rate was the lowest max tax rate since there was a 31% max rate in 1992; and a 28% rate between 1989 and 1990. Kennedy had good reason to say that cutting a 91% tax rate may well spur the economy – that doesn’t really hold true for a 35% max rate which is one of the lowest overall rates in the industrialized world. And there was no sudden drop in the tax rate in1962 to spur the economy, the max tax rate didn’t drop to 77% until 1964 under Johnson.
            Here’s a list of the max nominal tax rates for married couples since 1962:
            Max Rate On Income Over
            1962-1963 91.1% > $400,000
            1964-1964 77% > $200,00
            1965-1982 50% > $85,600
            1983-1983 50% > $109,400
            1984-1985 50% > $162,400
            1986-1986 50% > $175,200
            1877-1988 38.5% > $90,000
            1989-1989 28% > $30,950
            1990-1990 28% > $32,450
            1991-1992 31% > $86,500
            1993-2000 39.6% > $250,000
            2001-2001 39.1% > $307,050
            2002-2002 38.6% > $311,950
            2003-2003 35% > $311,950
            2004-2012 35% > $388,350 increasing to >$450,000
            2013 -2013 39.6% > $400,000

          • empiremed

            Boy, you’re hard headed. Listen to the speech. There is no mention of specific taxes rates. He states that when rates are lower revenues rise and when you raise rates revenues decline. It has been proven every time. You are only looking at specific rate changes. You are not considering changes to deductions and credits. Back before Reagan, interest deductions for credit cards were allowed, among others too numerous to name. Kennedy’s tax cuts led to an economic boom as well as Reagan”s tax cuts led to a boom. You’re smarter than this. Don’t be so short sided. As far as the rest of the industrialized world, we don’t want to be like them. We’re better than them partly for this reason.

          • Independent1

            Unfortunately, you’re viewing things as a typical conservative, like you can apply one rule to all situations. In flying, I believe there’s a general rule that the slower you fly the more fuel you conserve because it doesn’t take as much horespower to push through the wind. Well, if you’re flying a jet at least, that only works to a point, if you let the plane slow down to far, it will fall out of the sky. Well the same kind of thing is true with an economy; if people are being way over taxed, like they were during Eisenhower’s and Kenney’s time (and the Dems didn’t have enough majority in both houses such as they dictated anything to Ike, so you can’t blame the high tax rates togetheer with the super low spending on the Dems), cutting taxes may well getl you a reall spur of the economy because taxpayers will be struggling with limited cash resources because a lot of it is going to the government; but in todays scenario, wealthy taxpayers, those earning over $250,000 are living over indulgent lives, awash in cash; so a tax cut now would just give these people more money to stash in overseas tax havens and to splurge over seas in buying goodies they don’t have to pay US sales taxes on. Bush proved this in spades, he gave the rich the biggest tax cuts they’d seen in over a decade, and the next 8 years were the most dismal in at least 60 years both from an economics standpoint and from a job growth standpoint: the Bush administration averaged creating about 31,000 jobs a month for 8 years: that’s 3.1 million jobs in 8 years time: Obama created more jobs than that in his 1st 15 months in office and as I mentioned in another note, thee 235,000 jobs created last month was more than Bush created in any 8 mos period over 8 years.
            Sorry but you’e the one whose got tunnelvision and is refusing to realize that that the GOP is wrong about virtually everything they propose these days.

          • empiremed

            Man, man, okay, let’s try this again. To use your airplane analogy, if you lower taxes you dump weight off the airplane so it can fly faster and more efficiently. Profit and private money in people’s hands is the engine that runs the economy. There spending and investing create more jobs in the private sector that doesn’t have to be paid for with taxes. If taxes weren’t so high, people would not have to sent their money overseas. We need to make it more attractive for businesses here. I do not believe in the keynesian economists. Welfare money and unemployment money do not help because you have to take money out of the system and then put it back in. The government can run nothing efficiently. Your comparasons about job creation and unemployment between presidents is all screwed up because so many people have quit looking for work.

          • empiremed

            To finish my comments, Johnson rode Kennedy’s economy all through his presidency, but he started the “Great Society” which has skyrocketed spending ever sense. Then came Nixon, bless his crooked little heart, he was sattled by a Democratic Congress and gas lines. He could do nothing domestically so he spent all his time on foreign affairs. There was a recession at the start for Ford but he cycled out of it. Carter created more government departments and more spending which led to a recession Reagan inherited. Carter had double didgit inflation and interest rates, horrible economy. Reagan cut taxes(top rate 70% down to 50%) or there abouts which led to a boom. You forgot Bush 1, he got screwwed in a deal with a Democratic Congress. He foolishly agreed to raise taxes now for spending cuts later, the cuts never came. However, in the last quarter year of his time the economy rebounded which Clinton took credit for and rode with a Republican Congress until his final year. Bush 2 inherited a downturn but his tax cuts brought the economy back. However, he allow a Republican Congress to spend too much money trying to buy votes. That backfired by pissing off the republican voting base and they lost in 2006. The Democrates took congress in 2006, continued to spend money and created the sub-prime lending debacle which Obama inherited and made worse with even more spending. Baleouts, stimulas, etc.

          • Damn We Are Being Invaded Again With Lying GOP Tea Bagging Trolls

          • Independent1

            Fern, it’s my thinking that the apparently new poster here: which a screen name ending in 200nukes, is really the old antagonizer: ‘nobsartist’ using a new screen name.

          • One Of The Crazies Going Even More Crazier!! Guns, Bombs And Bibles Oh My!!

          • neeceoooo

            There are an awful lot of Americans who believe that, so jump on board with the rest of the intelligent population.

          • empiremed

            CAUGHT ON TAPE: Democratic presidential hopeful General Wesley Clark offered
            lavish praise for the Bush Administration and its key players in a speech to
            Republicans — just two years ago, the DRUDGE REPORT can reveal!

            MORE

            During extended remarks delivered at the Pulaski County GOP Lincoln Day
            Dinner in Little Rock, Arkansas on May 11, 2001, General Clark declared: “And
            I’m very glad we’ve got the great team in office, men like Colin Powell, Don
            Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice… people I know very well – our
            president George W. Bush. We need them there.”

            A video of Clark making
            the comments has surfaced, DRUDGE can reveal.

            MORE

            Clark praised
            Reagan for improving the military:

            “We were really helped when President
            Ronald Reagan came in. I remember non-commissioned officers who were going to
            retire and they re-enlisted because they believed in President
            Reagan.”

            Clark continued: “That’s the kind of President Ronald Reagan
            was. He helped our country win the Cold War. He put it behind us in a way no one
            ever believed would be possible. He was truly a great American leader. And those
            of us in the Armed Forces loved him, respected him, and tremendously admired him
            for his great leadership.”

            Clark on President George Bush: “President
            George Bush had the courage and the vision… and we will always be grateful to
            President George Bush for that tremendous leadership and statesmanship.”

            Clark on American military involvement overseas:

            “Do you ever ask
            why it is that these people in these other countries can’t solve their own
            problems without the United States sending its troops over there? And do you
            ever ask why it is the Europeans, the people that make the Mercedes and the
            BMW’s that got so much money can’t put some of that money in their own defense
            programs
            and they need us to do their defense for them?”

            “And I’ll tell you what
            I’ve learned from Europe is that are a lot of people out in the world who
            really, really love and admire the United States. Don’t you ever believe it when
            you hear foreign leaders making nasty comments about us. That’s them playing to
            their domestic politics as they misread it. Because when you talk to the people
            out there, they love us. They love our values. They love what we stand for in
            the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.”

          • Independent1

            Wesley Clark, let’s see, he was going to run for president on the GOP ticket in 2008, and we’re suppose to believe his opinion?? Just like we were suppose to believe Collin Powel when he told us there were WMDs in Iraq. Boy are you in denial. If you think Clark gave an honest opinion, you’re sicker than you said I was. And how does Clark’s opinion change the facts? Does it bring back to life the 274 people who were killed in the 7 embassy and other overseas attacks during Reagans 8 years? Or the, 60 people who were killed in the 12 attacks during Bush Sr’s 4 years? Of the 274 killed during Reagan’s 8 years, 241 were Marines that died in their barracks in Lebanon while they slept and 17 Americans died in t he 7 emabassy/consulate attacks. If you keep on believing the lies and distortions spewed by GOP lovers you’ll definitely be much sicker than I am.

          • empiremed

            No, he was a Democratic canadate in 2004 and was thinking about the Democratic ticket in 2008. He and Powel are now both Democratic supporters. Bush did a great job of protecting us after 911.

          • Independent1

            My mistake. His opinion still belies the facts. You seem to think Bush did a great deal to keep America safe; my feeling is the only thing Bush did was get lucky that al Qaeda never chose to attack us again in the homeland during his two terms; although they attacked American consulates and Embassies a number of times. Since you’re so convinced he did something to keep us safe, I’d appreciate if you’d outline what that was, because I can think of nothing other than capturing a few suspected al Qaeda sympothizeres that he allowed the CIA to torture and got virtually nothing for doing that. I know he didn’t do anything to beef up port security, or border security, or air travel security (enhanced TSA air travel security was implemented in 2010), and he never caught or killed any key al Qaeda leadership; so exactly what did the Bush administration do to keep us safe other than geting darn lucky that al Qaeda didn’t try another attack. Let’s hear all these wonderful things they did to protect us!!!

          • empiremed

            Here is a list of terrorist captured since 911. Note the dates, some were captured while Obama was president. Later I’ll find the ones that were killed and let you know what Bush did besides forming Homeland Security and removing communication walls between the FBI and CIA.

            CAPTURED

            1. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM)

            Third ranking member of al Qaeda, operational planner and mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. He was captured in Pakistan in March 2003, and is held at Guantanamo Bay (GITMO), Cuba

            2. Abu Faraj al-Libi

            Replaced KSM after his capture, directed operations against US and coalition forces in Afghanistan, planned 2003 assassination attempt against then Pakistani President Pervez Musharref. He was captured in May 2005 and is held at GITMO

            3. Ramzi Bin al-Shibh

            Involved in planning of 9/11 attacks, associated with some of the 9/11 hijackers, believed to have been targeted to be the 20th hijacker but was unable to get into the US. He was captured in September 2002 and is held at GITMO

            4. Abu Zubaydah

            Initially believed to be a high ranking al Qaeda leader, but the US later concluded he held a much lesser position. He was captured in Pakistan in March 2002 and is held at GITMO.

            5. Umar Patek

            Connected to the 2002 Bali nightclub bombing which killed more than 200 people including 7 Americans. He was captured by Pakistani forces in January 2011 and sent to Indonesia

            6. Younis al-Mauretani

            A key planner for al Qaeda who is believed to have had direct contact with Osama Bin Laden and was involved in planning attacks in Europe. He was captured by Pakistani forces in September 2011 and is held by the Pakistanis.

            7. Hambali (also Riduan Isamuddin)

            Operations Chief for the terrorist group Jemaah Islamiya (JI), often described as Bin Laden’s leader in Southeast Asia, believed to be connected to a number of deadly bombing attacks in Indonsia. He was captured in a joint US/Thai operation in Thailand in August 2003 and is held at GITMO

            8. al Rahim al Nashiri

            Head of al Qaeda operations in the Persian Gulf, believed to be the mastermind of the bombing of the USS Cole in 2000 which killed 17 US sailors. He was captured in November 2002 and is held at GITMO

            9. Ali al Aziz Ali

            Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s nephew and chief deputy who helped train some of the 9/11 hijackers. He was captured in April 2003 and is held at GITMO

            10. Walid bin Attash

            Former Bin Laden body guard, assisted 9/11 hijackers, helped with preparations for the 1998 bombings of the US Embassies in East Africa and the 2000 attack on the USS Cole. He was captured in April 2003 and is held at GITMO

            11. Mustafa Ahman al Hawsawi

            Worked with Khalid Sheikh Mohammed on numerous al Qaeda plots including providing assistance to 9/11 hijackers. He was captured with KSM in March 2003 in Pakistan and is held in GITMO

            12. Abdul Ghani Baradar

            A founder of Afghan Taliban, deputy to leader Mullah Omar, directed the insurgency against US and coalition forces from Pakistan. He was captured by Pakistani and American intelligence forces in February 2010 and is held by the Pakistanis

            Post by: By CNN Senior National Security Producer Pam Benson
            Filed under: 1 Year After Bin Laden’s Death • Afghanistan • Al Qaeda • Osama bin Laden • Terrorism

          • Independent1

            So the sum affect of Bush’s work to ‘keep us safe’ was capturing a few true al Qaeda operatives and a few suspected ones (12 of them over 8 years); Wow!! That”s really something: NOT!!

            In less than 3 years of his presidency, the Obama administration virtually decimated al Qaeda by killing over 20 of its top leadership, including Osama bin Laden and capturing several others.

            Here’s a real list that’s worth checking just from 1/20/09 through 9/30/11:

            There’s Osama bin Laden, of course, killed in May.

            Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) leader Anwar al-Awlaki as of today.

            Earlier this month officials confirmed that al Qaeda’s chief of Pakistan operations, Abu Hafs al-Shahri, was killed in Waziristan, Pakistan.

            In August, ‘Atiyah ‘Abd al-Rahman, the deputy leader of al Qaeda was killed.

            In June, one of the group’s most dangerous commanders, Ilyas Kashmiri, was killed in Pakistan. In Yemen that same month, AQAP senior operatives Ammar al-Wa’ili, Abu Ali al-Harithi, and Ali Saleh Farhan were killed. In Somalia, Al-Qa’ida in East Africa (AQEA) senior leader Harun Fazul was killed.

            Administration officials also herald the recent U.S./Pakistani joint arrest of Younis al-Mauritani in Quetta.

            Going back to August 2009, Tehrik e-Taliban Pakistan leader Baitullah Mahsud was killed in Pakistan.

            In September of that month, Jemayah Islamiya operational planner Noordin Muhammad Top was killed in Indonesia, and AQEA planner Saleh Ali Saleh Nabhan was killed in Somalia.

            Then in December 2009 in Pakistan, al Qaeda operational commanders Saleh al-Somali and ‘Abdallah Sa’id were killed.

            In February 2010, in Pakistan, Taliban deputy and military commander Abdul Ghani Beradar was captured; Haqqani network commander Muhammad Haqqani was killed; and Lashkar-e Jhangvi leader Qari Zafar was killed.

            In March 2010, al Qaeda operative Hussein al-Yemeni was killed in Pakistan, while senior Jemayah Islamiya operative Dulmatin – accused of being the mastermind behind the 2002 Bali bombings – was killed during a raid in Indonesia.

            In April 2010, al Qaeda in Iraq leaders Abu Ayyub al-Masri and Abu Omar al-Baghdadi were killed.

            In May, al Qaeda’s number three commander, Sheik Saeed al-Masri was killed.

            In June 2010 in Pakistan, al Qaeda commander Hamza al-Jawfi was killed.

          • neeceoooo

            Good work, I like you facts.

          • empiremed

            You asked me what Bush did. You said he did nothing. You are obviously wrong. Here is what he did for port security,

            WASHINGTON (AP) — President Bush signed a bill Friday to help prevent terrorists from sneaking a nuclear, chemical or germ weapon into the United States inside one of the 11 million shipping containers that enter the nation each year — many without inspection.

            “We’re going to protect our ports. We’re going to defend this homeland, and we’re going to win this war on terror,” Bush said.

            The president used the bill-signing ceremony to assert that Republicans are tough on terror, a key issue in congressional elections just less than four weeks away.

            He didn’t mention an unrelated provision that seeks to put teeth into laws that forbid most online gambling. Instead, Bush focused on the multiple ways the legislation tightens security and closes a loophole in anti-terror defenses, especially at ports.

            SPORTS SCOPE: Poker players versus Bush

            The SAFE Port Act authorizes the development of high-tech inspection equipment so customs agents can check cargo containers for dangerous materials without having to open them. It requires radiation-detection technology at 22 of the nation’s busiest ports by the end of next year.

            “We’ll do everything we can to prevent an attack, but if the terrorists succeed in launching an attack, we’ll be ready to respond,” Bush said.

            The president said the bill codifies the Container Security Initiative, which deploys U.S. inspectors to dozens of foreign ports on five continents where they can screen cargo bound for the United States. He said it also codifies the Customs Trade Partnership Against Terrorism, a joint public-private sector initiative in which private shippers agree to improve their own security measures and in return can receive benefits, including expedited clearance through U.S. ports.

            Bush also noted that the bill provides additional authority for the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, which was established to guard against the threat of terrorists smuggling a nuclear device into the country. And the act requires the Department of Homeland Security to establish a plan to speed the resumption of trade in the event of a terrorist attack on a U.S. port or waterway.

            “This bill makes clear that the federal government has the authority to clear waterways, identify cleanup equipment and re-establish the flow of commerce following a terrorist attack,” the president said.

            Congress approved the bill two weeks ago, one of its last acts before lawmakers left to campaign for the Nov. 7 midterm elections in which national security, the war in Iraq and terrorism are expected to be major factors.

            The administration has spent about $10 billion to enhance security at the nation’s ports since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. About 65% of cargo, that considered most high-risk, is screened for nuclear or radiological materials. The Homeland Security Department aims to increase that number to 80% by the end of the year and to almost 100% by the end of 2007.

          • Independent1

            I’ll concede he did one good thing. It makes me feel a litte better today knowing that at least the cargo coming into many of our ports has been checked for “dangerous materials”; I wasn’t aware that he had taken that step.

          • empiremed

            Thanks. you seem like a fairly smart guy. You just need to read and consider the opposition’s point of view sometimes, I do. Here is what Bush did for airport security.

            Congressman Faleomavaega announced today that President Bush has signed into
            law the Aviation and Transportation Security Act. The law requires that the
            persons who screen baggage at U.S. airports be federal employees, that airlines
            strengthen cockpit doors, and that there be an increase in the number of U.S.
            air marshals on domestic and international flights to and from the United
            States.

            “This legislation is far-reaching and will have a direct impact on
            American Samoa,” Congressman Faleomavaega said. “We are a part of the federal
            aviation system, and the public flying to and from American Samoa – just like
            those from the states and the other territories – will benefit from this
            increased security. We can expect continued, careful scrutiny of carry-on
            luggage, and within the next 60 days, individual inspection or personal
            identification of all checked baggage.”

            “I am pleased to report that should an emergency need ever arise, the
            legislation also includes an authorization for the Secretary of Transportation
            to grant full or partial waivers to any restrictions which are placed on the
            transportation of freight, mail, emergency medical supplies or patients. Given
            the fact that we are so dependent on air transportation for mail, medical
            supplies and other important cargo, this is a critical provision included to
            ensure that our Territory’s needs are met,” Congressman Faleomavaega said.

            “Airline passengers can also expect new equipment for baggage
            inspection, increased security around airport perimeters, and additional
            training for personnel who screen baggage,” the Congressman continued. “All
            security screening personnel will be federal employees for at least two years
            and possibly longer, and every security station will have federal supervision.
            To pay for the increased cost of inspections, Congress authorized a new fee of
            $2.50 per plane boarding, up to $5.00 per one-way trip.”

            “At present, all security screening personnel must be U.S. citizens,”
            Congressman Faleomavaega said. “Although there was some debate surrounding the
            issue of whether or not permanent aliens could screen baggage, Congress was
            adamant about the U.S. citizenship requirement. In the case of American Samoa,
            however, I am hopeful that the law will be amended to allow U.S. Nationals to be
            treated as U.S. citizens for purposes of screening baggage.”

            “Finally, this new law will require the creation of a database to
            allow the cross-checking of passenger lists with lists of suspected national
            security risks. The law will also strengthen airplane cockpit doors, provide
            for the installation of video cameras so that airline crews can be aware of
            security problems in the passenger section, and increase anti-hijack training
            programs for flight crews and attendants,” Congressman Faleomavaega
            concluded.

          • empiremed

            Here is a partial list of thwarted terrorist plots during Bush’s tenor.

            40 Foiled Plots

            Compiled by The Heritage Foundation since 2007, the following list outlines those publicly known terrorist plots against the U.S. that have been foiled since 9/11.[1] While all categories of terrorist attacks against U.S. targets at home and overseas have been declining steadily since 2005, thwarted plots have more than doubled during the same period, showing that terrorists continue to plan to harm the United States and its people.

            1. Richard Reid—December 2001. A British citizen and self-professed follower of Osama bin Laden who trained in Afghanistan, Richard Reid hid explosives inside his shoes before boarding a flight from Paris to Miami on which he attempted to light the fuse with a match. Reid was caught in the act and apprehended aboard the plane by passengers and flight attendants. FBI officials took Reid into custody after the plane made an emergency landing at Boston’s Logan International Airport.[2]

            In 2003, Reid was found guilty on charges of terrorism, and a U.S. federal court sentenced him to life in prison.[3] He is currently incarcerated at a federal maximum-security prison in Colorado.

            Saajid Badat was sentenced to 13 years in jail for planning to blow up a passenger plane. The 26-year-old, a religious teacher from Gloucester, was sentenced after he admitted conspiring with fellow Briton Reid. Badat pled guilty in February to the plot to blow up the transatlantic flight on its way to the U.S. in 2001.[4]

            2. Jose Padilla—May 2002. U.S. officials arrested Jose Padilla in May 2002 at Chicago’s O’Hare airport as he returned to the United States from Pakistan, where he met with 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and received al-Qaeda training and instructions.[5] Upon his arrest, he was initially charged as an enemy combatant, and for planning to use a dirty bomb (an explosive laced with radioactive material) in an attack in the U.S.[6]

            Along with Padilla, Adham Amin Hassoun and Kifah Wael Jayyousi were convicted in August of terrorism conspiracy and material support. It was found that the men supported cells that sent recruits, money, and supplies to Islamic extremists worldwide, including al-Qaeda members. Hassoun was the recruiter and Jayyousi served as a financier and propagandist in the cell. Before his conviction, Padilla had brought a case against the federal government claiming that he had been denied the right of habeas corpus (the right of an individual to petition his unlawful imprisonment). In a five-to-four decision, the U.S. Supreme Court found that the case against him had been filed improperly.[7] In 2005, the government indicted Padilla for conspiring against the U.S. with Islamic terrorist groups.

            In August 2007, Padilla was found guilty by a civilian jury after a three-month trial. He was later sentenced by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida to 17 years and four months in prison.[8] He is being held at the same penitentiary as Richard Reid.

            3. Lackawanna Six—September 2002. When the FBI arrested Sahim Alwan, Yahya Goba, Yasein Taher, Faysal Galab, Shafal Mosed, and Mukhtar al-Bakri in Upstate New York, the press dubbed them the “Lackawanna Six,” the “Buffalo Six,” and the “Buffalo Cell.” Five of the six had been born and raised in Lackawanna, New York.[9] All six are American citizens of Yemeni descent, and stated that they were going to Pakistan to attend a religious camp, but attended an al-Qaeda training camp in Afghanistan instead. The six men pled guilty in 2003 to providing support to al-Qaeda. Goba and al-Bakri were sentenced to 10 years in prison, Taher and Mosed to eight years, Alwan to nine and a half years, and Galab to seven years.[10] Goba’s sentence was later reduced to nine years after he, Alwan, and Taher testified at a Guantanamo Bay military tribunal in the case against Osama bin Laden’s chief propagandist, Ali Hamza al-Bahlul.[11]

            Jaber Elbaneh, one of the FBI’s most wanted and often considered to be a seventh member of the Lackawanna cell, reportedly has been captured in Yemen. It remains to be seen whether he will be tried in the U.S., since the U.S. does not have an extradition treaty with Yemen.[12]

            4. Iyman Faris—May 2003. Iyman Faris is a naturalized U.S. citizen, originally from Kashmir, who was living in Columbus, Ohio. He was arrested for conspiring to use blowtorches to collapse the Brooklyn Bridge, a plot devised after meetings with al-Qaeda leadership, including Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.[13] The New York City Police Department learned of the plot and increased police surveillance around the bridge. Faced with the additional security, Faris and his superiors called off the attack.[14]

            Faris pled guilty to conspiracy and providing material support to al-Qaeda and was later sentenced in federal district court to 20 years in prison, the maximum allowed under his plea agreement.[15]

            5. Virginia Jihad Network—June 2003. Eleven men were arrested in Alexandria, Virginia, for weapons counts and for violating the Neutrality Acts, which prohibit U.S. citizens and residents from attacking countries with which the United States is at peace. Four of the 11 men pled guilty. Upon further investigation, the remaining seven were indicted on additional charges of conspiring to support terrorist organizations. They were found to have connections with al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and Lashkar-e-Tayyiba, a terrorist organization that targets the Indian government. The authorities stated that the Virginia men had used paintball games to train and prepare for battle. The group had also acquired surveillance and night vision equipment and wireless video cameras.[16] Two more men were later indicted in the plot: Ali al-Timimi, the group’s spiritual leader, and Ali Asad Chandia.

            Ali al-Timimi was found guilty of soliciting individuals to assault the United States and was sentenced to life in prison. Ali Asad Chandia received 15 years for supporting Lashkar-e-Tayyiba.[17] Randall Todd Royer, Ibrahim al-Hamdi, Yong Ki Kwon, Khwaja Mahmood Hasan, Muhammed Aatique, and Donald T. Surratt pled guilty and were sentenced to prison terms ranging from three years and 10 months to 20 years. Masoud Khan, Seifullah Chapman, and Hammad Abdur-Raheem were found guilty and later sentenced to prison terms ranging from 52 months to life.[18] Both Caliph Basha Ibn Abdur-Raheem and Sabri Benkhala were acquitted at trial.[19]

            6. Nuradin M. Abdi—November 2003. Nuradin M. Abdi, a Somali citizen living in Columbus, Ohio, was arrested and charged in a plot to bomb a local shopping mall. Abdi was an associate of convicted terrorists Christopher Paul and Iyman Faris and admitted to conspiring with the two to provide material support to terrorists. Following his arrest, Abdi admitted to traveling overseas to seek admittance to terrorist training camps, as well as meeting with a Somali warlord associated with Islamists.

            Abdi has since pled guilty to conspiracy to provide material support to terrorists, one of the four counts for which he was indicted. He was subsequently sentenced to 10 years in jail per the terms of a plea agreement.[20]

            7. Dhiren Barot—August 2004. Seven members of a terrorist cell led by Dhiren Barot were arrested for plotting to attack the New York Stock Exchange and other financial institutions in New York, Washington, D.C., and Newark, New Jersey. They were later accused of planning attacks in England. The plots included a “memorable black day of terror” that would have included detonating a dirty bomb. A July 2004 police raid on Barot’s house in Pakistan yielded a number of incriminating files on a laptop computer, including instructions for building car bombs.[21]

            Barot pled guilty and was convicted in the United Kingdom for conspiracy to commit mass murder and sentenced to 40 years.[22] However, in May 2007, his sentence was reduced to 30 years.[23] His seven co-conspirators were sentenced to terms ranging from 15 to 26 years on related charges of conspiracy to commit murder and conspiracy to cause explosion.[24]

            8. James Elshafay and Shahawar Matin Siraj—August 2004. James Elshafay and Shahawar Matin Siraj, both reportedly self-radicalized, were arrested for plotting to bomb a subway station near Madison Square Garden in New York City before the Republican National Convention.[25] An undercover detective from the New York City Police Department’s Intelligence Division infiltrated the group, providing information to authorities, and later testified against Elshafay and Siraj.[26]

            Siraj was convicted and sentenced to 30 years in prison. Elshafay, a U.S. citizen, pled guilty and received a lighter, five-year sentence for testifying against his co-conspirator.[27]

            9. Yassin Aref and Mohammad Hossain—August 2004. Two leaders of a mosque in Albany, New York, were charged with plotting to purchase a shoulder-fired grenade launcher to assassinate a Pakistani diplomat.[28] An investigation by the FBI, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, and local police contributed to the arrest. With the help of an informant, the FBI set up a sting that lured Mohammad Hossain into a fake terrorist conspiracy. Hossain brought Yassin Aref, a Kurdish refugee, as a witness. The informant offered details of a fake terrorist plot, claiming that he needed the missiles to murder a Pakistani diplomat in New York City. Both Aref and Hossain agreed to help.[29]

            Aref and Hossain were found guilty of money laundering and conspiracy to conceal material support for terrorism and were sentenced to 15 years in prison.[30]

            10. Hamid Hayat—June 2005. Hamid Hayat, a Pakistani immigrant, was arrested in Lodi, California, after allegedly lying to the FBI about his attendance at an Islamic terrorist training camp in Pakistan.

            Hamid was found guilty of providing himself as “material support” to terrorists and three counts of providing false statements to the FBI.[31] In interviews with the FBI, he stated (correctly) that he specifically requested to come to the United States after receiving training in order to carry out jihad.[32] He was sentenced to 24 years in prison.[33]

            11. Levar Haley Washington, Gregory Vernon Patterson, Hammad Riaz Samana, and Kevin James—August 2005. The members of the group were arrested in Los Angeles and charged with conspiring to attack National Guard facilities, synagogues, and other targets in the Los Angeles area. Kevin James allegedly founded Jamiyyat ul-Islam Is-Saheeh (JIS), a radical Islamic prison group, and converted Levar Washington and others to the group’s mission. The JIS allegedly planned to finance its operations by robbing gas stations. After Washington and Patterson were arrested for robbery, police and federal agents began a terrorist investigation, and a search of Washington’s apartment revealed a target list.[34]

            James and Washington pled guilty in December 2007. James was sentenced to 16 years in prison and Washington to 22 years. Patterson received 151 months, while Samana was found unfit to stand trial and was initially detained in a federal prison mental facility. He was later sentenced to 70 months in jail.[35]

            12. Michael C. Reynolds—December 2005. Michael C. Reynolds was arrested by the FBI and charged with involvement in a plot to blow up a Wyoming natural gas refinery; the Transcontinental Pipeline, a natural-gas pipeline from the Gulf Coast to New York and New Jersey; and a Standard Oil refinery in New Jersey.[36] He was arrested while trying to pick up a $40,000 payment for planning the attack.[37] Shannen Rossmiller, his purported contact, was a Montana judge and private citizen working with the FBI. Rossmiller posed as a jihadist, tricking Reynolds into revealing his plan. The FBI later found explosives in a storage locker in Reynolds’s hometown of Wilkes–Barre, Pennsylvania.[38] Reynolds claimed that he was doing much the same as Rossmiller, and was working as a private citizen to find terrorists.[39]

            Reynolds was convicted of providing material support to terrorists, soliciting a crime of violence, unlawful distribution of explosives, and unlawful possession of a hand grenade. He was sentenced to 30 years in prison.[40]

            13. Mohammad Zaki Amawi, Marwan Othman El-Hindi, and Zand Wassim Mazloum—February 2006. Amawi, El-Hindi, and Mazloum were arrested in Toledo, Ohio, for conspiring to kill people outside the United States, including U.S. Armed Forces personnel serving in Iraq.[41] The men also conspired to train and arm for a violent jihad against the United States, both domestically and abroad.[42] Training involved use of materials including those found on secure and exclusive jihadist Web sites, downloaded and copied training videos, and materials for jihad training sessions. The men also were found to have provided material support to terrorist organizations and to have verbally threatened attacks on President George W. Bush.[43] The investigation was begun with the help of an informant who was approached to help train the group.[44]

            In June 2008, the three men were convicted of conspiring to commit acts of terrorism against Americans overseas, including U.S. military personnel in Iraq, and other terrorism-related violations. Amawi was sentenced to 20 years, El-Hindi to 13 years, and Mazloum to approximately eight years.[45]

            14. Syed Haris Ahmed and Ehsanul Islam Sadequee—April 2006. Ahmed and Sadequee, from Atlanta, Georgia, were accused of conspiracy, having discussed terrorist targets with alleged terrorist organizations. They allegedly met with Islamic extremists in the U.S. and gathered videotape surveillance of potential targets in the Washington, D.C., area, including the U.S. Capitol and the World Bank headquarters, and sent the videos to a London Islamist group. Ahmed is said also to have traveled to Pakistan with the goal of joining Lashkar-e-Tayyiba.[46]

            Both men were indicted for providing material support to terrorist organizations and pled not guilty.[47] In June 2009, a federal district judge found Ahmed “guilty of conspiring to provide material support to terrorists here and overseas.”[48] Ahmed was subsequently sentenced to 13 years in jail. Sadequee was also found guilty and sentenced to 17 years.[49]

            15. Narseal Batiste, Patrick Abraham, Stanley Grant Phanor, Naudimar Herrera, Burson Augustin, Lyglenson Lemorin, and Rotschild Augustine—June 2006. Seven men were arrested in Miami and Atlanta for plotting to blow up the Sears Tower in Chicago, FBI offices, and other government buildings around the country. The arrests resulted from an investigation involving an FBI informant. Allegedly, Batiste was the leader of the group and first suggested attacking the Sears Tower in December 2005.[50]

            All of the suspects pled not guilty. On December 13, 2007, Lemorin was acquitted of all charges, but the jury failed to reach a verdict on the other six.[51] The second trial ended in a mistrial in April 2008.[52] In the third trial, the jury convicted five of the men on multiple conspiracy charges and acquitted Herrera on all counts. On November 20, 2009, the five were sentenced to prison terms ranging from six to 13.5 years, with Batiste receiving the longest sentence.[53]

            16. Assem Hammoud—July 2006. Conducting online surveillance of chat rooms, the FBI discovered a plot to attack underground transit links between New York City and New Jersey. Eight suspects, including Assem Hammoud, an al-Qaeda loyalist living in Lebanon, were arrested for plotting to bomb New York City train tunnels. Hammoud, a self-proclaimed operative for al-Qaeda, admitted to the plot.[54] He was held by Lebanese authorities but was not extradited because the U.S. does not have an extradition treaty with Lebanon. In June 2008, Lebanese authorities released him on bail.[55] He is awaiting trial before a Lebanese military court.

            17. Liquid Explosives Plot—August 2006. British law enforcement stopped a terrorist plot to blow up 10 U.S.-bound commercial airliners with liquid explosives.[56] Twenty-four suspects were arrested in the London area. The style of the plot raised speculation that al-Qaeda was behind it, but no concrete evidence has established a link.

            The United Kingdom initially indicted 15 of the 24 arrested individuals on charges ranging from conspiring to commit murder to planning to commit terrorist acts.[57] Eventually, in April 2008, only eight men were brought to trial. In September, the jury found none of the defendants guilty of conspiring to target aircraft, but three guilty of conspiracy to commit murder.[58] The jury was unable to reach verdicts on four of the men. One man was found not guilty on all counts.[59]

            18. Derrick Shareef—December 2006. Derrick Shareef was arrested on charges of planning to set off hand grenades in a shopping mall outside Chicago. Shareef reportedly acted alone and was arrested after meeting with an undercover Joint Terrorism Task Force agent. FBI reports indicated that the mall was one of several potential targets, including courthouses, city halls, and government facilities. Shareef, however, settled on attacking a mall in the days immediately preceding Christmas because he believed it would cause the greatest amount of chaos and damage.[60] Shareef was also found to have connections to convicted terrorist Hassan Agujihaad, who was charged with attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction and later sentenced to 35 years in prison.[61]

            19. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed—March 2007. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, captured in Pakistan in 2003, was involved in a number of terrorist plots and is one of the most senior bin Laden operatives ever captured.[62] He is being held at the U.S. military detention facility in Guantanamo Bay. In March 2007, Mohammed admitted to helping plan, organize, and run the 9/11 attacks. He also claimed responsibility for planning the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center and the 2002 bombings of nightclubs in Bali and a Kenyan hotel. He has stated that he was involved in the decapitation of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl and took responsibility for helping to plan the failed shoe-bomb attack by Richard Reid, along with plots to attack Heathrow Airport, Canary Wharf, Big Ben, various targets in Israel, the Panama Canal, Los Angeles, Chicago, the Empire State building, and U.S. nuclear power stations. He had also plotted to assassinate Pope John Paul II and former President Bill Clinton.

            In December 2008, Mohammed and his four co-defendants (Ramzi Binalshibh, Mustafa Ahmad al-Hawsawi, Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali, and Walid Bin Attash) told the military tribunal judge that they wanted to confess and plead guilty to all charges.[63] The judge has approved the guilty plea of Mohammed and two co-defendants but has required mental competency hearings before allowing the other two conspirators to plead guilty. In November 2009, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder announced that Mohammed would be relocated to the United States to face a civilian trial in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.[64] That decision has now been reversed and the Administration announced that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the other Guantanamo Bay detainees would be prosecuted in military tribunals at Guantanamo.[65]

            20. Fort Dix Plot—May 2007. Six men were arrested in a plot to attack Fort Dix, a U.S. Army post in New Jersey. The plan involved using assault rifles and grenades to attack and kill U.S. soldiers. Five of the alleged conspirators had conducted training missions in the nearby Pocono Mountains. The sixth helped to obtain weapons. The arrests were made after a 16-month FBI operation that included infiltrating the group. The investigation began after a store clerk alerted authorities after discovering a video file of the group firing weapons and calling for jihad. The group has no known direct connections to any international terrorist organization.[66]

            In December 2008, five of the men were found guilty on conspiracy charges but were acquitted of charges of attempted murder.[67] Four were also convicted on weapons charges. The five men received sentences ranging from 33 years to life plus 30 years. The sixth co-defendant pled guilty to aiding and abetting the others in illegal possession of weapons and was sentenced to 20 months in jail.[68]

            21. JFK Airport Plot—June 2007. Four men plotted to blow up “aviation fuel tanks and pipelines at the John F. Kennedy International Airport” in New York City. They believed that such an attack would cause “greater destruction than in the Sept. 11 attacks.” Authorities stated that the attack “could have caused significant financial and psychological damage, but not major loss of life.”[69]

            Russell Defreitas, the leader of the group, was arrested in Brooklyn. The other three members of the group—Abdul Kadir, Kareem Ibrahim, and Abdel Nur—were detained in Trinidad and extradited in June 2008. Kadir and Nur have links to Islamic extremists in South America and the Caribbean. Kadir was an imam in Guyana, a former member of the Guyanese Parliament, and mayor of Linden, Guyana. Ibrahim is a Trinidadian citizen and Nur is a Guyanese citizen.[70]

            In 2010, Kadir was found guilty on five counts and sentenced to life in prison. In February, both Defreitas and Nur were also found guilty. Defreitas was sentenced to life in prison, while Nur was sentenced to 15 years.[71] The final conspirator, Kareem Ibrahim, was convicted in May 2011 and faces up to life in prison.[72]

            22. Hassan Abujihaad—March 2008. Hassan Abujihaad, a former U.S. Navy sailor from Phoenix, Arizona, was convicted of supporting terrorism and disclosing classified information, including the location of Navy ships and their vulnerabilities, to Babar Ahmad and Syed Talha Ahsan, the alleged administrators of Azzam Publication Web sites (the London organization that provided material support and resources to terrorists). Abujihaad was arrested in March 2007 and pled not guilty to charges of supporting terrorism in April 2007. In May 2008, he was convicted by a jury and sentenced to 10 years in prison.[73] In 2010, his conviction was upheld in a federal court of appeals.[74] Both Babar Ahmad and Syed Talha Ahsan are being held in Britain on anti-terrorism charges and are fighting extradition to the U.S.[75]

            23. Christopher Paul—June 2008. Christopher Paul is a U.S. citizen from Columbus, Ohio. He joined al-Qaeda in the 1990s and was involved in conspiracies to target Americans in the United States and overseas. In 1999, he became connected to an Islamic terrorist cell in Germany, where he was involved in a plot to target Americans at foreign vacation resorts. He later returned to Ohio and was subsequently arrested for conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction—specifically, explosive devices—“against targets in Europe and the United States.” Paul pled guilty to the charges and was sentenced to 20 years in prison.[76]

          • empiremed

            And here’s what Bush did for border security.

            1- Increased funding

            In 2002, President Bush passed the Homeland Security Act, creating an umbrella entity charged with keeping the U.S. safe from future terrorist attacks. The new department would oversee a range of agencies, including those dealing with immigration — U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CPB).

            With the creation of the Department of Homeland Security came an avalanche of federal funding. Last year, a pair of economists estimated that the creation of Homeland Security cost the U.S. $589 billion from 2001-2011.

            2- Spending on deportations

            Immigration enforcement increased dramatically after September 11. Immigrant removals — including deportations and so-called voluntary departures — went from roughly 200,000 people in 2001 to nearly double that in 2011.

            One reason for the increase in deportations is the growth in the undocumented population, according to Chung-Wha Hong, the executive director of the New York Immigration Coalition. But another is the increased spending on border security.

            “A lot of it is super-funding of enforcement activities,” Hong says. “[Customs and Border Protection’s] budget is almost $12 billion; that’s an enormous amount of resources.”

            Despite increased spending, unauthorized immigration continued over the span of the decade, with the undocumented population rising from an estimated 8.5 million in 2000 to nearly 12 million in 2008.

            3- Removing criminals — even those we’re not worried about

            Deportations have doubled in the last decade, but criminal deportations have increased at a much higher clip.
            In 2001, there were roughly 18,000 criminal deportations compared to a projected 91,000 in 2012 — roughly a 400 percent increase, according to data from TRAC.

            In 2011, ICE reported a record-high 188,000 criminal removals, which includes both deportations and voluntary departures.

            But the figures should be looked at critically. Many of those deported have never actually been convicted of a crime, since simply being charged with a crime is grounds for deportation. Of those who have been convicted, the crime may have been minor or non-violent, including a prior immigration infraction or drug possession.

            “The Obama administration claims that more of the people they’re deporting have been convicted of a criminal violation, although our data says that may not be true,” says TRAC’s David Burnham. “What they mean by a criminal violation is someone arrested bicycling on the sidewalk; really they’ve defined everything as criminal. And they’re using that to get rid of people.”

            4 – Turning local police officers into immigration agents

            One of the reasons for the spike in deportations during the Obama administration is a relatively new immigration enforcement program called Secure Communities. First launched in 2008, the program is now in effect in states across the country, and will be national by 2013.

            Secure Communities requires local law enforcement to share the fingerprints of arrestees with Homeland Security. The prints are run through a database, and if the search turns up an immigration hold, the arrestee can be detained until federal immigration authorities arrive.

            The program empowers local police officers to serve as de facto immigration agents, whether they want that responsibility or not. If a police officer arrests someone for running a stop sign, the officer might be effectively threatening the arrestee with deportation. Likewise, an undocumented crime victim fearful of being accidentally arrested, fingerprinted, and deported may be less likely to come forward with tips for authorities.

            5- Tying immigration enforcement to corporate profits

            Considering the billions of dollars allotted to immigration enforcement in the past decade, it’s not surprising that private businesses want to get onboard. Enter the Corrections Corporation of America and the GEO Group, the two companies that manage most of the country’s private immigration detention centers.

          • Bush Formed Homeland S. Cause He Cause The Need For Them!! Had He Not Been Screwing With And In Bed With The Bin Laden Family And GOP Screwing Around In The Middle East Trying To Beat Those People Out Of Their Oil There Would Never Been No Need For The Homeland S. Agency!! Duh!!!

          • Inthenameofliberty

            Let’s now forget that our military did that. That has nothing to do with Obama.

          • Independent1

            Sorry but I disagreee. Our military was there for more than 7 years during the Bush Administration and they did not actively pursue al Qaeda. They passively went after al Qaeda only aprehending those that our intelligence arm could get leads on. Al Qaeda has been decimated over the past 3 years because the President (Obama), deliberately established an objective for the military to pursue and capture all terrorist organizations especially al Qaeda (dead or alive). And he was willing to support and back up the military in virtually every instance that they needed approval from someone higher than the Pentagon to follow through on a mission.

            And in case you’re not aware. Not only did Obama establish a war on terrorists, he also established a war on fraud in the defense and healthcare sectors when he first took office in 2009, and because he deliberately set an objective for his administration to find and prosecute those perpetrating fraud on the government, his administration has prosecuted more defense contractors and healthcare providers attempting to defraud the government than the 4 past presidents combined – recovering billions of dollars (do a search – ‘War on fraud in the defense industry’ and read a paper found under Pepperlaw dot com that documents some of the cases that have been brought to trial).

          • Inthenameofliberty

            Interesting. Thank you for the information.

          • empiremed

            And here is a list of terrorists killed. Again note the dates, some of them were killed while Obama was president. Also, check out the ABC documentary on 911(Path to 911)

            DEAD

            1. Osama Bin Laden:

            Founder and leader of al Qaeda, responsible for the 9/11 attacks against the US as well as numerous other mass casualty attacks. He was killed by US Navy Seals during a raid on his compound in Abbottabad,Pakistan in May 2011

            2. Muhammad Atef

            Founding member and military chief of al Qaeda. He was killed by a US airstrike during early fighting in Afghanistan in November 2001

            3. Abu Musab al-Zarqawi

            A militant jihadist who opposed US presence in the Middle East and had a profound hatred for Israel. He formed his own terrorist group, Tawhid wal-Jihad. In 2004, he pledged alliance to al Qaeda and changed the name of his group to al Qaeda in Iraq. He was responsible for hundreds of attacks in Iraq. US bombs killed Zarqawi in Iraq in June 2006.

            4. Abu Layth al-Libi

            Senior al Qaeda military commander who planned attacks against US and coalition forces in Afghanistan including a 2007 bombing of the Bagram Air Base during a visit by then Vice President Richard Cheney. He was killed in a drone attack in Pakistan in March 2008

            5. Atiyah Abd al-Rahman

            Until his recent death, he was the number 2 to al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri and was a key facilitator with al Qaeda affiliates. Materials seized in the Bin Laden compound showed Rahman was in frequent contact with Bin Laden. He was killed by a drone strike in Pakistan in August 2011

            6. Abu Hamza Rabia

            Third ranking member of al Qaeda who replaced Muhammad Atef after his death. He served as an operational planner for attacks against the US and was killed by a drone strike in Pakistan in November 2005

            7. Abu Ayyub al Masri

            Replaced Abu Musab al-Zarqawi as leader of al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) and the insurgency in Iraq. He was killed in a joint US/Iraq operation in April 2010

            8. Sayeed al-Masri (also known as Abu Shaykh Mustafa Abu al-Yazid)

            Number 3 in al Qaeda hierarchy, commander of operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and chief financial officer. He was killed in drone strike in Pakistan in May 2010

            9. Mohammad Hasan Khalil al-Hakim

            Senior operational manager, deputy chief of external operations, head of propaganda for al Qaeda. He was killed by a drone strike in Pakistan in October 2008

            10. Abu Khabab al-Masri (also known as Midhat Mursi)

            Al Qaeda’s chief bomb maker and chemical weapons expert. He was killed in a drone attack in Pakistan in July 2008

            11. Abu Obeidah al Masri

            Senior al Qaeda operative who was implicated in the 2006 Trans-Atlantic plot to bomb commercial airliners after take off from London. He died of natural causes in December 2007

            12. Anwar al-Awlaki
            Yemeni American, Muslim cleric who advocated violent jihad against the United States. He was connected to two of the 9/11 hijackers as well as the accused Ft. Hood shooter Maj. Nidal Milik Hasan and suspected underwear bomber Umar Farouk AbdulMutallab. He was considered an operational leader of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) in Yemen. A CIA drone strike killed Awlaki in September 2011.

          • Inthenameofliberty

            Yes sir, Obama the Nobel Peace Prize winner sure loves his drones. Doesn’t he?

          • DurdyDawg

            Actually I have to disagree with you on Bush’s luck in protecting the homeland when in fact it was a brilliant ploy to control the population, keep us in fear and continue to abuse his position which is still in force and working in the neocons favor today. Look at the airports, they’ve done things to the people of this nation that in a sane world would be deemed blatant abuse and in the over all effect, just how many terrorists did they discover who was carrying more than a fingernail clipper in their possession? I’m surprised it didn’t expand into bus depots, amusement parks and fast food chains.. Maybe they just decided to throw us a bone.

          • howdidisraelget200nukes

            Although we differ in our opinions a lot, you sure did fall for that Al Qaeda crap didnt you?

          • neeceoooo

            The only people he protected were the Bin Laden family. When all planes were grounded and nothing was in the air, one plane was allowed to leave and it carried 24 members of the extended Bin Laden family. That is who he protected.

          • empiremed

            If you’re into documentaries, check out ABC’s Path to 911

          • Independent1

            I’m not interested in ABC’S path to 9/11. Here’s something from CBS that reinforces several other sources which say Bush and Cheney deliberately ignored 7 warnings from the CIA from 5/1 to 8/6/2001:

            CBS News spoke with Eichenwald Monday. He said, “What I’ve been able to see are the presidential daily briefs before August 6 of 2001. And they’re horrific, and they are – our reports are ‘an attack is coming,’ ‘there are going to be mass casualties.’ The worst of them, the Pentagon, the neo-conservatives at the Pentagon, as the CIA was coming in saying, ‘al-Qaeda’s going to attack,’ said, ‘Oh, this is just a false flag operation. Bin laden is trying to take our attention off of the real threat, Iraq.’ And so there are presidential daily briefs that are literally saying, ‘No they’re wrong, this isn’t fake, it’s real.'”

            “CBS This Morning” co-host Norah O’Donnell said, “Then when a lot of people hear this, aren’t they going to say, ‘This is another example of where, not just the Bush administration, but our intelligence community dropped the ball. They failed to heed the warnings that were in a number of these (documents) that went all the way up to the president of the United States.'”

            Eichenwald replied, “Actually, the counterterrorist center of the CIA did a spectacular job, and that’s what really comes down. You know, in the aftermath, the White House and others said, ‘Well they didn’t tell us enough.’ No, they told them everything they needed to know to go on a full alert and the White House didn’t do it.”

            Eichenwald has stumbled onto a well-worn path, according to CBS News senior correspondent John Miller, former FBI deputy director and assistant director of National Intelligence, said on “CBS This Morning.”

            “We knew some of that,” Miller said. “What he has added is the granularity of the actual memos and some of the actual words that were there in front of the White House and the National Security team. But, you know, Richard Clark, who is the national security advisor for terrorism, in his book, he said all the lights were blinking red and we were pushing this in front of Condi Rice every day and it was hard to get any priority on this. In George Tenet’s book, he details the
            briefings they were given, so some of this we knew, and there’s some of it in terms of the level of detail we didn’t know.”

            The above from CBS reinforces another source that I came across previously confirms that what the CIA wanted was nothing more than authority from Bush and Cheney to spend money they didn’t have on putting additional resources into following up on the al Qaeda leads they already had; and Bush and Cheney refused to give them that authorization. They had the CIA totally focused on trying to find them an excuse for attacking Iraq, and they did not want to deter the agency by focusing it on another agenda. In fact, after a briefing in early July, several of the CIA briefers requested transfers to other assignments because they were discouraged about Bush and Cheney’s constant refusal to listen; even though they were constantly reinforcing that they had credible evidence of a imminent attack coming.

          • empiremed

            You really should here both sides of a story before you make up your mind. These people hate Bush and slant everything against him. When you say you have no interest in ABC’s Path to 911, it means you don’t want to hear something just because you don’t want to believe it. ABC is certainly no right wing mouth piece.

          • Independent1

            I’m not interested in the intricate details of how 9/11 came about; I’m only interested in the fact that several papers writen by CIA people who took part in warning Bush made it clear that Bush and Cheney were not going to listen to anything they had to say. Why? Because there’s no money involved in trying to thwart a specific terrorist attack, especially when you’re hellbent on starting a war in Iraq so you’re rich buddies in the defense industry can rake in billions of dollars by providing loggisical support to our troops. If you’re so clueless that you haven’t realized yet why Haliburton and a number of other defense industry contractors that Cheney and Bush were intimately associated with got no-bid contracts and subsequently defrauded our government of millions, mabe billions of dollars, then you’re the one that obviously has a closed mind. I’m guessing that you’re still in denial as to the fact that Bush and Cheney orchestratd the entire Iraq war scenario based on one lie and distortion after another. If you are, I feel sorry for you.

          • empiremed

            I believe he fact that I read the opposing sides view, including yours, that I am not close minded. I believe you are and your hate is consuming you. Can’t you see that the CIA, FBI, airlines, and both the Bush and Clinton Administrations were all trying to cover there asses. Path to 911 lays unpreparedness on the Bush Administration but it also blames Clinton for not taking action on Bin-Ladin and for weakening our intelligence gathering. I’m sorry, but I do not believe the left’s fabrications about Bush and Cheney, they both have plenty of money not to have to start a war.
            The left’s hatred is so strong they continue to promote that nonsence.
            ;

          • Independent1

            Sorry, but I’m not buying it. Clinton has nothing to do with this, whatever he did or didn’t do, has nothing to do with two guys that were charged with protecting America, totally ignoring 7 warnings that an attack was imminent and refusing to authorize the CIA to do whatever it was they could do to stop the attack. You trying to make excuses for their obvious dereliction of duty is an absolute travesty and does nothing to erase the fact that Bush and Cheney should be in jail for totally failing to do their job. .

          • empiremed

            Okay, but I’m not buying your take either. Bush is not my favorite, as I’ve said in other posts hedid several things I disagreed with but I just don’t think he is a criminal. We’ll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

          • DurdyDawg

            “but I do not believe the left’s fabrications about Bush and Cheney, they both have plenty of money not to have to start a war.”..

            Oh yeah? Well why not check to find out just how much money they had then to how much more money they have today then ask them how they acquired this wind fall. If we’ve been in a major recession/depression for the last four years then isn’t it only logical that it would affect the wealthy as well but Like all sleepers, you believe that money mongers somehow have a cut off line.. WRONG! The more money they have, the more money they want and how they acquire it is inconsequential.

          • empiremed

            Okay, How much money did they have before and after? No difference.
            The Kennedy’s, Soros, Hollywwod, Buffet, they weren’t hurt either.

          • You Got That Right My Friend!! Long Time Business Partners!! Bush Partners In Crime!!

          • Inthenameofliberty

            Interesting.

          • plc97477

            I think the fact that he took the longest vacation in history right after the august 6th daily briefing is a little suspect if you ask me.

          • howdidisraelget200nukes

            And bush couldnt have done it without the support of all of those democrats

            You have to give them credit though. They will all admit that they were duped by bush’s lies but in reality, its because most are just stupid.

          • To This Day The Bushes And The Bin Laden Family Are Still In Business Together Thru A Corporation Called Carlile!! Why You Think George W. Let Bid Laden Family Fly Out Of The USA Under A No Fly Zone?? They Are Partner In Crime!!!!!

          • A Big Joke That Not Funny Plus Stuck On Stupid Like The Rest Of These Lying TROLLS!!!

          • A Joke That’s Not Funny What So Ever!! A Dictator His Own Party Gave 500 Million Dollars To ( Reagan) And His Father Was In Bed With ( George H Bush) Sadaam Huiseen Also!! Independent1 These Tea Bagging Trolls Never Seem To Fact Check Nothing That Flies Out Of Their Mouths!! They Need To Quit Listen To Lying Drug Addicts Like Rush Limpdick And Watching Fox Fake News!! That’s All They Do Is Lie Or Make Shit Up!! I Know Cause I Live Thru Those Years And Seen This For Myself!!!!

        • [email protected]

          It’s ignorance like this that has our country the problems we face today. Don’t bother about facts, just make up what you might think supports your position. This probably reflects the state of our education system.

        • Obama is a tightwad, he has the lowest percentage of spending since Eisenhower.

          • Independent1

            Yeah, they say the Eisenhower Administration had an average expenditure rate of around 18% of GDP for his 8 years in office, but although that may sound good, it resulted in their being more recessions (3) during his 8 years than during virutally any other presidency (Bush had only 2 & Nixon had 2). The country was in recession for almost 3 years of his 8 years in office. Ike did some good things but I’m not convinced his miserly spending was necessary all that good for the country.

      • howdidisraelget200nukes

        Yes. Bush did a lot wrong and Obama let him get away with it.

        He wants to “look forward, not backward”.

        • Independent1

          And exactly how did Obama do that? given that Bush had a rubber stamp GOP dominated congress for at least 6 of his 8 years in office.

    • howdidisraelget200nukes

      How can you say this? You are going to upset the idiots that drank the kool-aid and there are plenty around here.

      Thanks for the succinct post. Most of these morons on here just dont get it.

      • You Just Don’t Get It Look Down You Got A Whole Lot Of Thumbs Down Going For You!! You Must Have Thought This Was The LIAR CLUB Or The New Tea Bagging Hangout!! Looks Like You’re Wrong!! Bye Bye!! TROLL

      • Plus You Need To Stop Drinking The Snake Venom!! Guess You Are The New Re Branded GOP/Tea Party !! LOL Same Bullcrap Liars Like The Old GOP/Tea Baggers

    • DurdyDawg

      “The House Republican resolution would hold the line on taxes, cut outlays $5.7 trillion while spending a total of $41.5 trillion, and balance the budget in 10 years.”

      And just who would they target for these outlandish ‘outlays’? Oh yeah, they already told us.. The common man and those who can’t fight back.. In ten years they [A] just might accomplish their goal as [2] there will be less elderly and indigents alive and roaming about looking for those ‘liberal’ entitlements that have somehow made their way to the 1%’ers.. Wow, what a deal. And you, playing middle man on the corruption of both parties, I’ve heard you dissect every word Obama says but totally ignore the underhandedness of the pubs.. And I agree that there are probably just as many corrupt dems as there are pubs and the liberal attention that the dems show toward the common man could be just another ploy but in reality, the 95% are satisfied that the dems seem to care for them rather than the pub butt sniffers who view the middle class and poor as bugs while they salivate over the 5%..

    • Inthenameofliberty

      I wish EVERYONE would read this.

  • montanabill

    I’m all for it. Start diverting the all too easy to find waste projects money, start making people responsible for their own welfare and stop taking uber expensive executive vacations. I did read the ASCE report card and reviewed the states I’m very familiar with. Those guys reported more dams in trouble than anyone knows exist! I’ve yet to travel a bad highway in those states, unless they are mountain logging trails. Thinking you can solve a major city’s traffic congestion with either more lanes or railroads is farcical thinking. If you think the Europeans have solved congestion with enormous taxes, more roads and high speed rail, try driving though one of their major cities!

  • adriancrutch

    His buddy Rahm is closing schools faster than you can say=hokked on fonics!

  • DurdyDawg

    ” Find out why the president is changing the subject..”

    He’s changing the subject because (1) the do-nothing congress will continue their back stepping other wise and (2) to turn to a subject that the American people have been fighting for through the last four years that the do-nothing congress just keeps sweeping under the carpet. The pubs say that Obama is a do nothing welfare president, I say he can’t do anything so long as the do nothing congress continues their do nothing mentality. We know he’s trying and we also know that there are too many walls that prevents progress and when he tries to over ride their blockage, they retaliate by calling him a Muslin loving Hitler and reignites the birther B.S.. Face it, their a bunch of biased hypocritical manipulators intent on making this president fail even if they have to sacrifice the entire nation to achieve it.

    • Even A Blind Man Can See That This Congress Is Not Working For The 98% Of The American People They Are Working Only For Themselves And The 2% Wealthy People!! They Rather Destroy This Country And The People That Live Here!!! 🙁

      • howdidisraelget200nukes

        Neither is the “President”. After all, he did sign the bush tax cut extension.

        • Please Don’t Talk To Me I Don’t Talk To Dumb Trolls I Know He Signed It And Why So I Don’t Need Your Bullcrap Opinions!!

          • howdidisraelget200nukes

            Why did he sign it then? Why does this upset you so much?

            You cant deal with reality, can you?

          • What Part Of Stop Talking To Me Do You Not Understand???????? TROLL!!!

          • howdidisraelget200nukes

            Does it bother you that much that you have no way of defending Obama’s record?

            As a registered Dem for over 40 years and a straight ticket voter, I am disgusted with Obama and the rest of the castrated liars that the Democrat party has been over run with.

            Sorry, but it is very apparent that both parties are the same and they are gaming millions of chumps like you to continue to support them.

            Heck, Bernie Sanders doesnt even like the Dems.

          • Why Don’t You Go Back To Your Cave A Finnish Worshiping The Devil!! Guess What We Here At National Memo Don’t Like You Cause You Are A Lying Teabagging TROLL!!!

          • howdidisraelget200nukes

            You are an idiot.

          • You Are The Biggest IDIOT Here Nobody Like What You Have To Say And Yet You Keep Coming Here Flapping Your Gums And Getting More Thumps Down!! LOL TROLL!!

          • Inthenameofliberty

            Get over yourself and grow some tolerance and some good language skills. The only worshiper I see is you. Because you will not acknowledge the lies of your leader. You give him a free pass on everything. Which makes you a hypocrite.

          • It’s Getting Late Better Get Those Lips Ready The Koch Brothers Are Waiting For You To To Clock In!! Better Get Ready To Plucker Up Fool!! LOL

          • BAAA BAAA BAAA We Had This Dance Before!! GO SCREW YOURSELF BAAA BAAA BAAA If You Don’t Like The Way I’m Writing STOP READING IT !!! It’s Just That SIMPLE!!! 459 Comment From Your Dumb Butt And All You Got Is 135 Thumbs Up!! LOL That Says It All!!LOL

          • Independent1

            Just for your info nobsartist, I’m responding to some of your shopworn statements, not because I think anything I say will give you any insight from the information I give you, since you’ve made it clear over the past months that you’re really not interested in being enlightened by the truth, but rather are simply participating in these comment threads to be an antagonist; therefore, I’m responding to you for the benefit of the sensible people who post on The National Memo, those who may actually be informed by learning the facts about the issues that your shopworn comments bring up.

          • howdidisraelget200nukes

            howdidisraelget200nukes wants to know what your response to nobs is?

            your response?

          • You Need To Stop Dreaming And WAKE THE HELL UP!! Your Party Are Nothing But A Bunch Of Traitors And Terrorists!! All They Do Is Try To Gut Out Their Own Country And Screw Over The People That Live Here Just To Make A Profit!!!

          • howdidisraelget200nukes

            you are a bigger idiot.

          • Inthenameofliberty

            Keep going!

          • Your Mother Is The Biggest Idiot Around She Had Your Dumb Butt When She Could Have Just Gave Your Father Some Head!!! LOL TROLL!!

          • Inthenameofliberty

            Thank you for shutting her up. Ms W spews our more hatred than anyone else, yet no one calls her on it. I am tired of the hatred. Let’s see her come up with some progressive bipartisan ideas instead of buying into the hatred. I, too, was a Democrat for most of my voting life. By 2011, Mr Obama had cured me. No way the he could tell me “I’ll label GMO’, that’s my promise to you’, then go on ahead and appoint the FDA leadership [the way he did] then expect I’ll EVER trust him. It’s all about special interests and paying back those people that propelled him into office. He is NOT to be trusted. He turned his back on many a promise. But I guess that does not matter to his staunch supporters, does it? They’ll rip apart Bush, but give their leader a free pass when he perpetrates similar policies to Bush. I thank you, sir, for telling it the way it actually is. And not the fantasy land that many of the current Democrats are living in.

          • NOBODY GOING TO EVER SHUT ME UP BUTTWIPE!! INTHENAMEOFIGNORANT!! Kiss My Grits!! TROLL!! Nobody Like You Either Maybe You To Numb Nuts Ought To Leave!!!LOL Tea Bagging TROLL!!

          • SHUT ME UP LOL NEVER!! WHY ARE YOU TWO HERE?? Nobody Here Like Either One Of You!! Both Of You Haters Are Just Koch Brothers Butt Kissing Trolls!! There Other Web Pages Out Here That Support Your Way Of Thinking!! WND It’s Full Of Lies Just Like You both Like Things To Be Re Brand Lying Traitors!!! THUMBS DOWN FOOL CAUSE YOU’RE DUMB DOWN!!!

    • howdidisraelget200nukes

      Obama could use the Sherman Act to put those bastards in their place but he wont because he will not profit from it.

      Dont forget, he signed the bush tax cut extension……..because he benefited from it.

      • howdidisraelget200nukes

        So you kool-aid drinkers dont like the fact that Obama could use the Sherman Act but has not, for what reason?

        Is he lazy or is he in bed with them?

        I say he is in bed with them and this is just part of the drama show they are putting on instead of actually doing something.

        (aside from covering up for bush)

        • Better Kool-Aid Than The Snake Venom You Been Drinking Sold To You By The Lying GOP/Tea Party American Taliban Snake Oil Salesmen!! Way TOO Much Venom Now You Just Brain Dead!!!

          • howdidisraelget200nukes

            Snake venom? Are you a drunk or do you just suffer from dementia?

          • Your Mother A Drunken Gutter Tramp!! She Should Have Gave Your Father A Blow Job And Spit Your Ignorant Lying Teabagging Butt On The Floor And Step On You!!! The Koch Brothers Looking For More Buttholes Let You To Give Them Blow Jobs A Night If You Hurry You May Get Hired!! Better Get The Sucking And Earn You Keep!! TROLL

          • howdidisraelget200nukes

            Very nice. Now go fuck yourself, whore.

          • Inthenameofliberty

            Don’t stoop to her level. It is often difficult to remember that not everyone has the benefit of going on line and actually reading more than one opinion. It is quite obvious to me that Ms W just sees skin color and must therefore be a racist. {she calls me one, so I’ll return the favor} otherwise she would be willing to acknowledge that our current two party political system is so corrupt that it will fall. Just like Rome. We’re in a free fall now. If only the 60% of Americans that did not bother to vote had come out and pulled the handle for Gary Johnson……THAT would have indeed been a banner day,

          • Your Mother Is The Biggest Whore Out Here FUCK YOU AND YOUR MOTHER DICK SUCKING BITCH!!!

          • Dumb Ass Cock Sucking BITCH Go Screw Your Mother And Sister Like You been Doing Inbred Tea Bagging Bitch!!

          • FUCK YOU!! BITCH!!

          • Your Mother Is The Biggest Whore I Ever Seen!! She Should Have Gave Your Father Some Head!! LOL

          • Inthenameofliberty

            You are so not a nice person. Yet SO many people seem to like you. IQ levels? Just wondering. You, Fern, have the power to be a positive leader. I am waiting. Don’t disappoint me.

          • STILL TALKING TO ME IGNORANT TROLL!!! WHY??

          • You Are One Lying ASSHOLE!! STOP TALKING TO ME!!!!

          • Shut Up Talking To Me TROLL You Got The Power To Do That So Why Don’t You???

          • Inthenameofliberty

            You have much more sway with those who post on this site. They agree with your point of view. They don’t want to hear mine. I was a Democrat so I get it. When someone likes a leader, they will forgive him or her of anything. And TIME magazine had a report that the more intelligent/the higher the IQ of the voter involved, the MORE they will forgive their choice of leader.

          • Baaaa Baaa Baa Shut The Fuck Up And LEAVE!!! Inthenameofanasshole!! Bye Bye!!

        • Independent1

          Again, if you paid attention to the news, you’d know why Obama hasn’t taken a more active role YET on prosecuting the banks, many of which are considered TOO BIG TO FAIL!! It’s because the Obama administration is focused on getting America back working again from the Great Recession (inspite of the GOP’s every effort to prevent that from happening); and because of the very tenuous financial situation of the whole world. Just like 2009/10 was not the time for America to undertake single-payer health insurance, when the country was running trillion dollar deficits, the past few years have not been the time for the American government to start breaking up financial companies that play significant roles in the financial well being of many foreign countries that also have struggling economies. The last thing that the world needs is for America to create uncertainty in the financial well being of large banks that many countries depend on to keep their economies running.

  • bcarreiro

    mr president keep the faith …………we all know you appreciate what you have unlike most of congress who think they are the ones losing something. it takes an average joe 10-20 yrs to gross a million. take all your expenses that are paid for by the taxpayers we would be on the road to somewhere.

    • Independent1

      I’m not sure what your point is here, but it it’s to underhandedly criticize Obama for taking expensive vacations, let me assure you that given that Obama has taken by far much fewer days vacation than the previous 4 presidents, he has not spent any more if as much money on vacations as they have. Bush 2 leads all the previous 5 presidents in abusing vacation by far – in just his 1st term he took over 240 days vacation flying constantly from Washington to his Texas Ranch with a large enterage of security people each time – And he tied Nixon for taking the longest consecutive days vacation from early August 2001 until just days before the 9/11 attack (over 30 straight days off). Reagan is by far second on the list with well over 180 days off his 1st term flying constantly from Washington to his ranch in California, again costing millions. Bush Sr., is third on the list with over 150 days his 1st term shuttling constantly between Washington and Kennebunkport, Maine. Clinton is 4th with over 135 days vacation spending a lot of his vacation days at Camp David. Lastly is Obama with just over 120 Days off his 1st term. The only reason it seems that Obama has taken a lot of vacation is because of the advent of 24/7 media coverage of every breath that the president now takes.

      • Media Owned By The KKK Rupert Murdocks And Big Corporation Who Don’t Want To Pay Their Fair Share Of Taxes Around Here!! 🙁

      • old_blu

        Hello Independent my friend, not to mention the republican congress that only works two days a week for 3 hours a day.

        • Hello old_blu So Glad To See You My Friend!!! 🙂 You And Independent And The Rest Of The Gang!! 🙂 Looks Like We Got Our Selves Some New Trolls!!! LOL

          • old_blu

            Just like old times huh? : )) Only a new batch of tea partiers.

          • Independent1

            Good morning old_blu! I think one ‘new poster’, the one ending in 200nukes is really an old antagonizer, nobsartist, posting under a new screen name.

          • old_blu

            What happened to him he used to make sense? And good morning to you my friend.

          • Or Maybe They Are The New Re Branded GOP Trolls You Know Like onedeadwrong, anal draw, And bozomustgo!! Just Like The Ones In Offices With The Same Old Rerun Polices, Lies, Racism, And Kissers Of The Koch Brothers Butt!! In Other Word Tea Bagging TROLLS!!!

          • plc97477

            he level of intelligence in this latest bunch isn’t an improvement.

      • howdidisraelget200nukes

        For someone that doesnt spend time on vacation, Obama sure has not accomplished much except covering up for bush.

        “Look forward, not backward”.

        • Independent1

          I guess you’re right. I guess that’s why the stock market has hit it’s highest level in decades; and why consumer confidence is again higher than it’s been in 5 years; and why more jobs have been created in the past 2 months than Bush created in welll over a year, in any of his disasterous 8 years, and why we’re almost out of Afghanistan actually winning the war because many Afghan communities and warloards have become fed up with the Taliban and are actually driving them out even without our help, and I guess that’s because Obama has Obama has done nothing that Ameria’s auto industry is back humming again and hundreds of thousands of new jobs have been created in the industry; And yeah, it’s been his laziness that have recovered Billions in fraudlently charged monies in the defense and healthcare sectors through his wars on fraud in those industries; and through his laziness, millions of high school graduates can now afford to go to college because of the changes his administration has made in the programs that help them get scholarships and much cheaper loans; and it’s probably the fact that he’s done nothing that has brought spending down faster over the past 4 years than at any time since WWII. Yeah! What a lazy guy.
          It’s a shame we don’t have a real go getter like George Bush who can lie us into more unnecessary wars; and disregard warnings from the CIA about pending terorrist attacks so thousands more Americans get killed, and spend money like a drunken sailor at an 8.3%/yr spending increase rate so he can drive up the deficit by another 7 plus trillion dollars. Wow! We really need these go getters to destroy America in faster, don’t we!! You’re as dumb as it gets.

    • jgsoliveira

      I cannot understand what you mean. Could you repeat that?

      • Duh?? I Think He’s Trying To Say ( I’m A Troll) LOL

        • plc97477

          Great interpretation.

        • old_blu

          They won’t say that about you Fern, hey good to see you my friend.

          • They Can Say It All They Want But We Know Better!! LOL Trolls Lie And Make Crap Up Just Like Fox Fake News And Rush Limpballs!! LOL GREAT To See You My Friend!! 🙂

        • BDC_57

          He cant read lol

      • Independent1

        I agree. I’m still not sure what his point was in making the post. I’m afraid Fern thought your post was questioning her comment instead of bcarreiro’s.

        • LOL I Was Telling jgsoliveria , bcarreiro Was Just Saying He Or She Was A Troll In So Many Words!! LOL

  • Kurt CPI

    In those places (and there are quite a few) where existing infrastructure is overburdened
    , and where existing infrastructure needs replacement to avert disaster, I’m all for it. The problem with “spending federal funds to create jobs” is that politicians use the funds to reward contractors who favor their campaigns with funding. “Prevailing wage” (code for “union scale”) keeps smaller players out of contention and the viscious cycle is perpetuated. “Investment” in infrastructure is like any other investment – it ceases to to be so when there’s no hope of a return. Government funds (tax dollars from the private sector) are used to enhance the capital foundation that business and industry needs to thrive. It makes no sense to spend money provided by industry, to create jobs they can’t afford to pay for, with no hope of ever seeing a return on our “investment”. Someone replied to a comment I made when this came up last week that, “government has to build infrastructure because business isn’t going to do it themselves” (paraphrased). And that’s absolutely not true. I promise you that if the lack of a bridge were preventing companies on an island from shipping product, and if the cost of the bridge represented a sound business investment, they’d build the bridge. Actually the do it all the time – they trade donations for favors – and get their representatives to get the “build the bridge” project through committee. The government (you and I) doesn’t have funds to spend on infrastructure that won’t produce anything in return. Instead of throwing more borrowed money at the problem, let’s work on the solution – getting the US back in the business of being in business. Then there will be justification for investment.

    • Independent1

      Sorry but I seriously doubt your premise ” I promise you that if the lack of a bridge wee preventing companies on an island from shipping product, and if the cost of the bridge represented a good sound business investment, they’d build the bridge.” The only way that businesses would build such a bridge is if the only residents on the island were the businesses that went together to build the bridge and the only people who could use the bridge were their employees; they would absolutely not build the bridge for general use of the public. The liability insurance associated with such a venture would be totally prohibitive. No business would build infrastructure such as bridges or highways intended for the general public (unless it’s something that’s bringing the public to partake of their business) simply because no business would get themselves involved in the liabilty associated with such a venture.

      • plc97477

        Also if a company built the bridge what is to stop them from charging the public to use it?

        • Independent1

          And as Charle01 pointed out in this thread, a private company could go out of business which would end the maintenance on the bridge and leave no one liable for injuries and deaths that may occur from the eventually less than safe bridge. Private ownership of publicly used infrastructure is basically total nonsense. It just wouldn’t work, like at least 90% of what the GOP is proposing these days that we should be doing to prepare for the future.

      • BDC_57

        They still think they won witch is a joke.

    • charleo1

      I have to congratulate you, in stating very well, why government
      should not be investing in the Country. The problem with that is, to keep
      that theory out of trouble, one needs to discard reality, and history, pretty
      much, right away. And, you use your personal opinion that government
      is not capable of doing public works projects in a cost effective way, to
      do most of the heavy lifting required to sustain your argument. Assuming,
      private enterprises could, and would step in, using profits as their motivator.
      This would also require the company’s best interests, as well as the public’s
      best interests, to align perfectly, or very close. As this is seldom the case,
      should government also abdicate it’s responsibilities of public safety, and
      oversight as well? So, XYZ Corporation builds the bridge out of it’s own
      resources. The taxpayer wins! Right? Now, the company charges the
      public a toll, and makes a profit. God smiles! But who maintains the bridge?
      Who inspects the bridge? Who says when this little money maker is
      endangering the public? And, who pays when a school bus falls into the
      river, and drowns the kids? The company explains, the bridge had gotten
      expensive to repair over the last few years, So, we called in some of our
      own engineers, and they told us the most cost effective way to keep the
      bridge in service. So, blame them. Do you really want to live in a Country
      where that scenario plays out thousands of times? I think we first
      should realize, things are like we find them, for a reason. The company
      on the island would not build the bridge. It would relocate to the mainland.
      Leaving island residents with no option but to take a boat. Other small
      businesses, servicing the larger ones, would go out of business. As would those
      who run hotels, and restaurants, and dozens of other shops that depended
      on people accessing the island across that bridge, that would not exist,
      that would have never been build, if not for government investment.

    • plc97477

      Yo don’t write like an idiot, you didn’t spell to many things wrong: but what you wrote makes no sense.

    • old_blu

      Kurt you are absolutely not right, and I don’t necessarily mean you are wrong you’re just not right.

      They do get a return on the investment because when people work they pay taxes and they buy product that is also taxed, cars, tv’s, houses, and those people that sell said tvs, houses, and cars also make money and pay taxes. Do you see where I’m going with this?

      • Independent1

        Hello old_blu, great point. Let’s hope some other posting here see your point to; it’s a good one.

  • EMS

    Yes…and even that “continuing resolution” had a “rider” snuck into it by the obstructionist Republicans on a totally unrelated subject .. one that defies the Constitution and instigated Congressional meddling with the Courts. Both make me angry, I will quote from an article by an expert……

    “Section 735 “Monsanto Rider” is reported by NY Daily News to have been written in concert with Mosanto by Sen. Roy Blount (R-MO), perhaps Monsanto’s biggest Senate contribution beneficiary. Senate Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) allowed the language to stand without consultation with the Agriculture Subcommittee, or any others, for that matter. This infamous action has been widely criticized in the strongest terms, even within the Senate. Sen. Mikulski’s Facebook page has dozens of comments in opposition. Unlike a typical “Rider,” the “Section 735″ paragraph did not appear at the end of the bill. Because of this, the President could not issue a Signing Statement nullifying it. We know Mr. Obama consulted the White House Consul in detail to explore this possibility.
    Most believe Section 735 of this bill violates the US Constitution’s “Separation of Powers” which provides for the Courts to maintain authority whenever cases are brought. This provision requires the Secretary of Agriculture to grant permits and temporary deregulation without Court intervention. Additional opinions suggest it violates the National Environmental Policy Act which calls for vairous Environmental Impact disclosures among other procedures.”

    • jgsoliveira

      Typical!

    • howdidisraelget200nukes

      And the “Affordable Care Act” has a law in it that restricts gun control. How did that get in there?

    • Of Course A GOP Buttwipe Hide That In There All Their Care About Is Getting More Money For Themselves They Give Less Than A Damn Who That Have To Kill To Get It!! 🙁

      • BDC_57

        Yeah its only for the them and ther rich buddies

        • Just Think If Romney Would Have Won We Would Be Eating Solent Green ( For All Of You Who Remember The Omega Man)And They Would Have To Hid That Bill For Him To Sign It!!!

      • howdidisraelget200nukes

        Like Obama did by signing the bush tax cuts?

        • Independent1

          If you paid the least bit of attention to the news, you’d know why Obama agreed to extend the Bush tax cuts:it was as a compromise to the GOP in order to keep the GOP from recking the recovery from the Bush economic disaster by having them also agree to extending unemployment benefits for millions of unemployed and the social security tax breaks. With Scott Brown in the Senate and the GOP filibustering everything the Dems wanted to enact, the GOP was holding the economy hostage then as they are now (refusing to keep unemployment benefits and SS tax cuts going unless Obama agreed to also extend the Bush Tax Cuts). Obama had no choice but to compromise; he did not want to extend the tax cuts for those making over $250,000 then or now.

          • howdidisraelget200nukes

            So explain how great our economy is to the rest of we idiots.

            Oh, you cant so therefore, another failed, half assed attempt by Obama.

    • howdidisraelget200nukes

      I sure am glad that dems dont hide anything in those bills they pass. Like embedding gun laws in the “affordable health care” joke.

      By the way, why is Obama so intent in continuing the failed republiCON health care law of 1982 making “for profit” health care legal by forcing us all to buy into it?

      It would seem to me that Dems would have fought “for profit” health care like republiCONs fight abortion but instead, Dems force us all to buy into the failed republiCON health care policy.

      If it stinks like a fart, generally it is a fart.

      If you force failed republiCON policies on America, you must be a republiCON.

      Maybe thats why Obama is so not interested in investigating bush.

      bush is just another party member with Obama, the best republiCON president we have had since clinton.

      clinton, the great compromiser that brought us NAFTA.

    • howdidisraelget200nukes

      Yes, and the dems hid a law that prevents gun registration in the Affordable Health Care Joke.

      So explain the difference between the two parties because I guess I am just stupid.

      However, once we all hear your answer, I will surly be topped.

    • Inthenameofliberty

      Then he should never have signed the bill. Yet, he did. What does that make Obama? Oh, yes, the president of ‘I’ll make labeling of GMO foods a priority when I get into office”. Oh, yes, him. The man that took a previous head honcho of Monsanto and appointed him HEAD OF THE FDA. Yes, that wonderful president. Are you REALLY surprised that he the signed that bill? For crying out loud – Obama officially tasked Monsanto to end hunger in Africa. You know, the country that has been trying to kick Monsanto out FOR YEARS. Where have you been? Obama KNEW what he was doing when he signed the bill! He knew VERY WELL all about it and he DOES NOT CARE. The fact that you think he did – well that is laughable. Obama NEVER does something by accident. He’s brilliant. He knows EXACTLY what he signed. I can not believe that you actually think he gives a shit. About you. Or me. He obviously does not think there is a problem with GMO’s. And THAT is really, really sad.

  • James5:1-6 . Serving God by helping the poor and helpless.
    Closing the loop holes is not a tax increase.
    Pres. Obama will not take away your Gun. why do you need an assault weapon in the peace of your home. you will be allowed to have a six shooters, a shotgun and a hunting rifle. IF EVER YOU WANT AN ASSAULT WEAPON , WHY NOT SERVE AND JOIN THE ARMY ,ITS PATRIOTIC.