Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Friday, October 28, 2016

WASHINGTON — One of the lovely formulations in John F. Kennedy’s inaugural address expressed his hope that “a beachhead of cooperation may push back the jungle of suspicion.” Kennedy was talking about the Cold War, but we could use a little of this in the partisan and ideological warfare that engulfs our nation’s capital.

And so let us pause at the beachhead established after the midterm elections by Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI). They have co-sponsored a bill that’s unlikely to get a lot of attention but deserves some — not because it will revolutionize politics but because it could, and should, encourage both sides to begin their arguments by asking the right questions.

The Murray-Ryan bill would create a 15-member commission to study, as they put it in a joint announcement, “how best to expand the use of data to evaluate the effectiveness of federal programs and tax expenditures.” The commission would also look into “how best to protect the privacy rights of people who interact with federal agencies and ensure confidentiality.”

Before you sigh, dismiss this as “just another commission,” and turn or click elsewhere, consider what Murray and Ryan are trying to do. Whatever your views, they’re saying, you should want government programs to achieve what they set out to do. And in this age of Big Data, there are more metrics than ever to allow you to have a clear sense of how well they are working.

Also, credit Murray and Ryan for this: They are looking not only at whether programs live up to their billing but also at whether the various tax breaks Congress has enacted — they are worth about $1 trillion a year — bring about the results their sponsors claim they will. If we are ever to reform the tax system, it would be useful to know which deductions, exemptions and credits are worth keeping.

The bipartisan duo — they worked together amicably on budget issues despite large disagreements — is not asking the commission to invent something out of whole cloth. On the contrary, evidence-based social policy is a hot idea at the moment.

Ron Haskins, my Brookings Institution colleague, has just co-authored a new book with Greg Margolis, Show Me the Evidence. It’s about what Haskins sees as the “terrific work” of the Obama administration in subjecting some 700 programs to careful testing based on the idea, “if you want the money, show me the evidence.”

Haskins, by the way, is a Republican with whom I’ve engaged in a long-standing (though friendly) argument over welfare reform. His interest here is not partisan but in having both sides pay more attention to what it takes to create “high-quality programs.”

“In politics, evidence is typically used as a weapon — mangled and used selectively in order to claim that it supports a politician’s predetermined position,” Haskins and Margolis write. “That is policy-based evidence, not evidence-based policy.”

The Haskins-Margolis effort comes in the wake of Moneyball for Government a book whose title is a play on Billy Beane’s approach to baseball. Edited by Jim Nussle and Peter Orszag, a pair of former budget directors of opposing parties, the book is part of a campaign by the group “Results for America” that is also looking to evaluate programs by their results. The basic idea is that government is better off focusing on “on outcomes and lives changed, rather than simply compliance and numbers served.”

No one, of course, should pretend that by marinating ourselves in data, we’ll render our philosophical and partisan differences obsolete. The major divide over how much government should do and which problems it should take on will persist. So will disagreements over the extent to which government should push back against rising inequality and the degree of regulation a capitalist economy requires.

But conservatives who care about more than just scoring points against government inefficiencies (both real and invented) should want taxpayer money spent in a sensible way. And progressives have more of an interest than anyone in proving that government can work effectively to solve the problems it sets out to deal with. It’s on those two propositions that Murray and Ryan have found common ground.

Argument is at the heart of democracy, so we shouldn’t fear that we’ll be having a lot of disagreements over the next few years. But dumb arguments are not good for anyone. Insisting that politicians base their claims on facts and evidence ought to be the least we expect of them.

E.J. Dionne’s email address is [email protected] Twitter: @EJDionne.

Photo: Gage Skidmore via Flickr

  • Independent1

    What interested me most, which E.J. didn’t cover, is “what would the makeup of the committee look like?”. I was hoping that Murray and Ryan weren’t suggesting that there would be politicians on the committee.

    What I was hoping for, came true. Here’s my answer:

    The Commission is comprised of 15 members representing an array of disciplines relevant to program evaluation and data management, including economics, statistics, and data security. The Majority and Minority leaders in the Senate, and Speaker and Minority Leader in the House are authorized to appoint 3 members each, as is the President.

    The Commission is authorized to hire a Director (appointed by the Commission chair with the concurrence of the co-chair) and staff. The Director of the Census shall contract with the National Academy of Public Administration to administer the Commission.
    Given the proposed structure of the Commission, I would have much more confidence that what the commission would come up with would be reasonably accurate and actually make sense. Had they suggested the committee be comprised of politicians – that would never happen.

    It looks like the objectives that Murray and Ryan have set up do offer some hope that if Congress would really listen to what such a commission would recommend, that maybe real progress could be made in making some meaningful changes to our tax code and other legislation.

    See these as the what Murray and Ryan have laid out as the Commissions objectives:

    The bill establishes a “Commission on Evidenced-based Policymaking.” The Commission is charged with reviewing the inventory, infrastructure, and protocols related to data from federal programs and tax expenditures while developing recommendations for increasing the availability and use of this data in support of rigorous program evaluation.

    In the course of its review, the Commission is specifically required to evaluate the merits of and provide guidance for creating a “clearinghouse” for program and survey data. The clearinghouse would make available and facilitate the merging of datasets that are valuable in evaluating program effectiveness and informing domestic policymaking.

    The Commission’s findings and recommendations are due to Congress 15 months after the Commission reaches 8 members—a simple majority. The Commission ends 18 months after the date of enactment.

    The bill requires several agencies to provide assistance to the Commission including OMB, Census, and the Departments of Health and Human Services, Education and Justice.

    The Commission would also study how best to protect the privacy rights of people who interact with federal agencies and ensure confidentiality.

  • Dominick Vila

    The pragmatism of this proposal confirms my belief that the GOP is already in full campaign mode, and ready for 2016, without abandoning their conservative credentials.
    Instead of the radical, far right, politicians we were hoping for, we are likely to face a Congress determined to demonstrate a willingness to govern and compromise…as long as their agenda and values prevail.

    • Brian Harvill

      The thought of compromise as long S the republicans prevail means of course, no compromise at all. The very term, compromise, means thet you don’t get everything you want. The GOP is as extremist as ever and are not going to change. This is why they will lose in 2016, there will be no scapegoat to hide behind.

      • Dominick Vila

        As a Democrat, I hope you are right, but I have the feeling that what we are going to see during the next two years is going to be something much more dangerous for us than an obstructionist Congress. The worst thing that could happen to us is a GOP controlled Congress willing to work with the Administration, without abandoning their conservative goals, and the nomination of a center-right presidential candidate. If that happens, Hillary is going to have the fight of her life ahead of her…and the GOP knows that.

      • FireBaron

        Brian, the very fact that Patty Murray is the co-sponsor of this will be enough to drive significant numbers of Far-Right Republicans to reject this proposal. After all how dare Ryan think the can bring something to them that a Liberal endorses?

        • Brian Harvill

          Its also quite possible that as happened to Eric Cantor, Ryan will find the intolerance of the rightwing extremists focusing on him and the end of his political career. The rightwing hates anything that hints of working together. It flies in the face of their obstructionist policy. Just suffice to say that I don’t see this effort going anywhere. My only hesitancy on the matter would be what has been stated already, that this will simply turn into a witch hunt and millions of citizens will suffer as the social programs are gutted in favor of corporate welfare. We need to cut corporations out before attempting any of this stuff to gaurd against the inevitable corruption that is corporate money in politics.

        • plc97477

          It could trash his hope of ever being elected to the white house.

    • Independent1

      I’m not sure about your comment “radical, far right, politicians”. The committee is not supposed to be comprised of politicians but people representing a number of disciplines ” comprised of 15 members representing an array of disciplines relevant to program evaluation and data management, including economics, statistics, and data security”. ; and initially compriised of 9 people selected by the Democrats – 3 by Pelosi, 3 By Reid and 3 by Obama.

      I’m a bit confused as to many bloggers’ take on this.

      The issue to me, is whether or not Congress, especially Republicans, will actually listen to what such a committee would tell them about how best to change the tax code and other legislation.

      • jointerjohn

        Does anyone think that the party with so many members who insist that global climate change is a hoax, and that unregulated gun ownership will make us safer, has any interest in facts or truth? Of course they don’t.

        • Independent1

          That’s why I said in one of my posts that it still had to seen if Congress would even listen to recommendations made by a bi-partisan committee.

    • mike

      “as long as their agenda and values prevail”, what horse manure.
      What does Obama say”send me a bill I LIKE and I will sign it.” Which means “as long it fits my agenda and values I will sign it”. If not, “fah-getta bout it .” After 6 years we know Obama disdains working with congress.
      We will see what he signs and doesn’t sign.
      What a silly comment about campaign mode, Democratcs are in election mode for 2016 not just Republicans,

      • Independent1

        Yeah right!! Same old RWNJ nonsense. You know very well that Obama IS NOT going to sign any legislation that includes big giveaways to Big Oil, Big AgriBus, Big Pharma and other sectors that are already very profitable. And he IS NOT going to sign any legislation that recommends large cuts in social programs and the like (such as Medicaid). So guess what, virtually every peace of trash enacted by the GOP House has included just those kinds of POISON PILLS, with Boehner and McConnell KNOWING FULL WELL, that none of the trash they’ve wasted more than 400 million dollars on over the past 6 years was even going to get PAST THE SENATE!!

        So Obama hasn’t declined to sign VERY FEW PIECES OF LEGISLATION!! The Democrats in the Senate for the most part have exactly the same ethics!! They’re not going to continue to foist over billions of tax payer dollars to companies that are already profitable and making billions!! Nor are thy going to sign legislation that is going to make people already living below the poverty level and on social security STRUGGLE EVEN MORE!!

        And you conveniently FORGOT TO MENTION, that it was THE REPUBLICANS who waged a war on Obama from the 1st day he stepped into the Oval Office, MAKING IT CLEAR TO THE WORLD! That the GOP’s #1 OBJECTIVE was to make his time in office A TOTAL FAILURE!!!

        And you also conveniently FOR GOT TO MENTION, that 14 TRAITOROUS REPUBLICANS, met on the night of Obama’s inauguration, AND ACTUALLY PLOTTED TO SABOTAGE AMERICA’S ECONOMY during Obama’s 1st term, IN THE FAILED HOPES, of making him a ONE-TERM PRESIDENT!!!


        • mike

          I see still the same old zealot, but now just a dumb one.

          So glad you think you have such a crystal ball that you know all the republican moves.

          And no democrats waged war on Republican presidents, Right??? Such ignorance and stupidity on your to part to make that statement.

          You can’t even get the time frame right. Yes, republican members met to discuss the future policies of a president that wanted to transform America and now we see they had legitimate concerns. PS: it did not have to do with sabotaging the economy. His rule by regulations is a perfect example. His bypassing congress at every opportunity is a known history.

          You can’t deny he has cost more democratic congressional seats than any other president(D) except one. It’s his policies, his lack of leadership, etc.. If he was doing so well where was his base in November??? You know the war on women fell on deaf ears, as everything else he tried.

          As to “one term president” that comment was made before the 2010 mid-terms, you ignoramus.

          Read and weep you dumb s_ _ t.

          As to my going somewhere else, I don’t think so!!!!

          • Independent1

            Look kiddo!! You seem to forget that I’m old enough to remember FDR’s fireside chats and have been well aware of at least all the Congressional dealings since the 1st president I voted for ‘Eisenhower’ was in office for a long regression intensive 8 years (he leads all presidents in having 3 recessions which together lasted almost 1/2 his 8 years in office).



            All 14 of those treason acting legislators should at a minimum be in jail. Their actions, together with what they’ve instigated with respect to numerous other GOP legislators, has resulted in far more damage to America and its people, than anything Benedict Arnold ever committed, and he was executed for actions far less injurious to our country than the GOP has committed over the past 6 years!!!!!!!!

          • mike

            What a load of horse manure!
            When you were going to school in the one room school house they sure didn’t teach you the meaning of Treason.
            The republican meeting on that night did not have even a smidgen of treason, not even scintilla of treason.
            As I have said before they were worried about the direction Obama would try to go and their concerns were right.
            What you can’t get through your head is the fact that the majority of people see what he is trying to do and are rejecting his agenda. Remember the mid-terms, both of them and all the lost congressional seats by democrats.
            if the implementation of Obamacare had been in 2012 he would have lost. All his lies, deception would have cost him the election. But alas, if wasn’t so we will endure another 2 years

          • Independent1

            I couldn’t care less what the official definition of Treason is – in my book, anyone who comes out and officially claims that their #1 priority is to do everything they can to make the president of our country fail as a leader, is committing Treason – whether he or she is a Republican or a Democrat. And when a group of nitwit legislators and a failed presidential wannabee meet on our President’s inauguration night to plan how they can follow through on the first Traitor’s statement by doing everything they can to SABOTAGE THE AMERICAN ECONOMY. are in my mind, COMMITTING TREASON TOO!!

            And about your idiot statement on the recent mid-term election, it was was a total failure for the GOP not the Dems!! Even a GOP columnist for a paper in Houston could see that right off.

            You’d better read this before you make any more clueless statements about how great of a victory the GOP had in the mid terms – NOT!!!!!!

            (Note especially item c) below where the GOP columnist points out that this supposedly resounding GOP ‘LANDSLIDE” was accomplished by the GOP Senate candidates garnering all of 13% of the votes from all Americans who are of voting age and only around 17% of even all registered voters – which makes it clear that even around 50% of the 37% of registered Republicans who didn’t turn out because even they are so fed up with the uselessness that the GOP has turned Congress into):

            GOP Columnist: The VERY Bad News FOR THE GOP in the GOP’s Midterm Victory

            But what about that RED Map….well it accounts for 149 electoral votes. The biggest Republican victory in decades did not move the map. What was Red before in electoral politics is still Red (and maybe less Red considering NH and VA).

            Republican support grew deeper in 2014, not broader.

            Some other observations

            a) Republican Senate candidates lost every single race in the Blue Wall.

            b) There were some GOP victories in Governor’s races, but in each case there were no coat tails. None of these candidates ran on social issues, Obama, or opposition to the ACA. Look at Rauner who took out Quinn in Illinois, but Democrats in Illinois retained their supermajority in the State Assembly having not lost a single seat.

            c) Voter turnout was awful. It was more awful for the Democrats but the GOP won 52 percent of 35 percent of the vote: in other words their mandate is 17 percent of the registered electorate (and 13 percent of those eligible to vote).

            d) Good news for the Democrats: They have consolidated their power behind the sections of the country that generate the overwhelming bulk of America’s wealth outside the energy industry.

            e) Voter suppression is working remarkably well, but that won’t last. They key is voter ID. Eventually Democrats will top whining and will help people get the documentation they need to meet confusing new requirements and obstructions. The whole “voter integrity” sham may have given Republicans a one or maybe two-election boost in low-turnout races, but the message to minority (but growing) groups is clear. We GOP don’t give a damn about you.

            f) Every major Democratic ballot initiative was successful, including every minimum wage increase, even in the red states. AND every personhood amendment failed.

            g) Half of the Republican Congressional delegation now comes from the former Confederacy. There are no more white Democrats from the South. All of the Dixiecrats are now GOP.

            h) Democrats in 2014 were up against a particularly tough climate because they had to defend 13 Senate seats in red or purple states. In 2016 Republicans will be defending 24 Senate seats with at least 18 of them very competitive based on geography and demographics. Democrats will be one seat looks competitive.

            i) McConnell’s conciliatory statements were encouraging, but he cannot persuade Republican Senators and Congressmen to cooperate on anything constructive.

            j) This is an age built for Republican solutions. The global economy is undergoing a massive, accelerating transformation that promises massive new wealth and staggering challenges. Ladd say that the GOP could address a this with heads-up, intelligent adaptations to capitalize on those challenges. Republicans, with their traditional leadership on commercial issues, he claims, should be at the leading edge of planning to capitalize on this emerging environment.

            k) Instead, he predicts, what the GOP will spend its time on is: Climate denial, theocracy, thinly veiled racism, paranoia, and Benghazi hearings.

            He closes his essay saying: “It is almost too late for Republicans to participate in shaping the next wave of our economic and political transformation. The opportunities we inherited coming out of the Reagan Era are blinking out of existence one by one while we chase so-called “issues” so stupid, so blindingly disconnected from our emerging needs that our grandchildren will look back on our performance in much the same way that we see the failures of the generation that fought desegregation. Something, some force, some gathering of sane, rational, authentically concerned human beings generally at peace with reality must emerge in the next four to six years from the right, or our opportunity will be lost for a long generation. Needless to say, Greg Abbott and Jodi Ernst are not that force. ‘Winning’ this election did not help that force emerge.”

          • mike

            And the World cares less what you think or your definition of Treason.!!!!
            Such Rage and Anger from you!!! So sad!!
            As to mid-term and article. One guys opinion, who may or may not be on the right.
            Again!! Where was the Democratic base for Obama and his policies. Where were they??? If things were so great and Obama policies so wonderful, why didn’t they show up in mass. Where were the independents, the Milleniums if all was so good.
            Why are Dem. Senators Schumer and Harkin now saying the their party blew it.
            As to the rest of your post, a bunch of half baked ideas and unknowns.

          • Independent1

            And just in case you’ve forgotten about this GEM!!

            UPDATE: Eric Cantor Plotted to Sabotage US Economy in Secret Meeting with Hensarling & Luntz

            Here are the Facts:

            FACT 1. In Robert Draper’s book, “Do Not Ask What Good We Do: Inside the U.S. House of Representatives” Draper wrote that on inauguration night, 2009, during a four hour, “invitation only” meeting with GOP Hate-Propaganda Minister, Frank Luntz, the below listed Senior GOP Law Writers literally plotted to sabotage, undermine and destroy America’s Economy.

            FACT 2: Draper wrote the guest list included:

            The Guest List:

            Frank Luntz – GOP Minister of Propaganda
            Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI)
            Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA)
            Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA),
            Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX),
            Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX),
            Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-MI)
            Rep. Dan Lungren (R-CA),
            Sen. Jim DeMint (SC-R),
            Sen. Jon Kyl (AZ-R),
            Sen. Tom Coburn (OK-R),
            Sen. John Ensign (NV-R) and
            Sen. Bob Corker (TN-R).

            Non-lawmakers present Newt Gingrich – Failed GOP candidate for President

            FACT 3: Newt Gingrich confirms meeting took place in an interview with Al Sharpton’s Politics Nation on June 12, 2012

            SHARPTON: In fact, let`s go to a book that Mr. Draper wrote about the night of the inauguration. There was a meeting at a hotel near the inaugural ball, about a mile away … He writes about that night the plan was to show united and unyielding opposition to the president`s economic policies … And Draper writes that you told the group — you, Newt Gingrich, “You will remember this day…you will remember this day the seeds of 2012 were sown.”
            If there was a commitment from day one, before he ever took a seat behind the desk of the Oval Office, that everyone was going to obstruct him, then what he`s done has been almost unbelievable, against those kind of odds, Speaker Gingrich.

            NEWT: The first is, it was an important meeting and I was glad and honored to be part of it … I said to Callista when we left the hall — because we were at the Capitol for the inaugural. As we left, I said, you know, if he sticks to the kind of moderation and bipartisanship he`s been describing, he will split the Republican Party. He`ll govern like Eisenhower and he`ll get reelected. Now this is — this is the inaugural day.

            SHARPTON: I`m glad you admit you had it.

          • mike

            I see you are still living in the past.
            The massive loses of Demo. Congressional seats is the fault of Republicans, not Obama and his poor leadership. The increase in Republican Governorship, and state legislatures is because of those terrible republicans, Right???
            Newt; “if he sticks to the moderation and bipartisanship he’s been describing, he will split the Republican party.” Well Obama didn’t from day one and that is the point. Your selective memory wants to forget the first meeting at the WH with congressional leaders he looked at Kyl and said “I won” when Kyl questioned parts of stimulus package. Obama, End of discussion.
            Obama has never presided over a skilled political operation, his relationship with Congressional leaders and state political leaders has always be frayed because of his disdain of working with congressional leaders of his own party let alone of the right.
            Best description of Obama: “he lets his self-confidence curdle into excessive self regard.”
            Latest Bloomberg poll- Job Approval, 39% approve and 52% disapprove.
            As to race under Obama 53% say it is worse. The Obama, the Uniter, has failed again. Republicans fault again, Right???

          • jmprint

            “As to “one term president” that comment was made before the 2010 mid-terms, you ignoramus.”

            On the eve of his first inauguration, they were conspiring. Please mike you are the only one forgetting.

          • mike

            So what!!!! And the democratic party has never conspired against a republican president???
            I see your cranium is still one vacuous vessel.
            PS: “one term president” was made in 2010 not that night.

          • Carolyn1520

            “WASHINGTON — As President Barack Obama was celebrating his inauguration at various balls, top Republican lawmakers and strategists were conjuring up ways to submarine his presidency at a private dinner in Washington.

            The event — which provides a telling revelation for how quickly the post-election climate soured — serves as the prologue of Robert Draper’s much-discussed and heavily-reported new book, “Do Not Ask What Good We Do: Inside the U.S. House of Representatives.”

            According to Draper, the guest list that night (which was just over 15 people in total) included Republican Reps. Eric Cantor (Va.), Kevin McCarthy (Calif.), Paul Ryan (Wis.), Pete Sessions (Texas), Jeb Hensarling (Texas), Pete Hoekstra (Mich.) and Dan Lungren (Calif.), along with Republican Sens. Jim DeMint (S.C.), Jon Kyl (Ariz.), Tom Coburn (Okla.), John Ensign (Nev.) and Bob Corker (Tenn.). The non-lawmakers present included Newt Gingrich, several years removed from his presidential campaign, and Frank Luntz, the long-time Republican wordsmith. Notably absent were Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) — who, Draper writes, had an acrimonious relationship with Luntz.

            For several hours in the Caucus Room (a high-end D.C. establishment), the book says they plotted out ways to not just win back political power, but to also put the brakes on Obama’s legislative platform.

            “If you act like you’re the minority, you’re going to stay in the minority,” Draper quotes McCarthy as saying. “We’ve gotta challenge them on every single bill and challenge them on every single campaign.”

            The conversation got only more specific from there, Draper reports. Kyl suggested going after incoming Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner for failing to pay Social Security and Medicare taxes while at the International Monetary Fund. Gingrich noted that House Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.) had a similar tax problem. McCarthy chimed in to declare “there’s a web” before arguing that Republicans could put pressure on any Democrat who accepted campaign money from Rangel to give it back.

            The dinner lasted nearly four hours. They parted company almost giddily. The Republicans had agreed on a way forward:

            Go after Geithner. (And indeed Kyl did, the next day: ‘Would you answer my question rather than dancing around it—please?’)

            Show united and unyielding opposition to the president’s economic policies. (Eight days later, Minority Whip Cantor would hold the House Republicans to a unanimous No against Obama’s economic stimulus plan.)

            Begin attacking vulnerable Democrats on the airwaves. (The first National Republican Congressional Committee attack ads would run in less than two months.)

            Win the spear point of the House in 2010. Jab Obama relentlessly in 2011. Win the White House and the Senate in 2012.

            “You will remember this day,” Draper reports Newt Gingrich as saying on the way out. “You’ll remember this as the day the seeds of 2012 were sown.”

            Draper’s timeline is correct. On Jan. 21, 2009, Kyl aggressively questioned Geithner during his confirmation hearings. On Jan. 28, 2009, House GOP leadership held the line against the stimulus package (Senate GOP leadership would prove less successful in stopping defections).

            The votes, of course, can be attributed to legitimate philosophical objection to the idea of stimulus spending as well as sincere concern that the secretary of the Treasury should personally have a clean tax-paying record. But what Draper’s book makes clear is that blunt electoral-minded ambitions were the animating force.

            Whether or not that’s shocking depends on the degree to which one’s view of politics has been jaded. What’s certainly noteworthy is the timing. When Mitch McConnell said in October 2010 that his party’s primary goal in the next Congress was to make Obama a one-term president, it was treated as remarkably candid and deeply cynical. Had he said it publicly in January 2009, it would likely have caused an uproar.

            By extension, however, the Draper anecdote also negatively reflects on the Obama administration for failing to appreciate how quickly congressional Republicans would oppose the president’s agenda.”

          • Carolyn1520

            Oh please don’t leave. We need the contrast.

          • mike

            Wouldn’t think of it my little emotional wreck 1520.

          • Carolyn1520

            You make my point. Stay simple minded, your party is counting on it.

          • mike

            All you have to do is prove your talking points earlier made about “First” , until then you will continue to be both intellectually dishonest and an emotional wreck.
            You really are a simpleton with these little inane attempts at come back.

          • Carolyn1520

            “All you have to do is prove your talking points earlier made about “First” , until then you will continue to be both intellectually dishonest and an emotional wreck. You really are a simpleton with these little inane attempts at come back.”

            LMAO Hold your breath while you wait and no breathing through your mouth. I know that’s hard for the right to do.

          • mike

            Did you are or did you not say “even when Obama has agreed with something they liked “FIRST”, they will obstruct”, Yes or No.
            So you can laugh all you want but what we see is a person who can’t even remember what she said. Plus, won’t or can’t refute. So you are either disingenuous, smoking something, drinking something hard or is just a mental midget.

          • Carolyn1520

            Get over yourself. Like I said, look it up if you are so inclined.

          • mike

            Here is your post just to show you that you did say it. And to show you are a dishonest person unable to back comments made by you. What a loser!!!

            Carolyn1520 mike • 2 hours ago
            The dems won twice. Of course it has to fit the agenda and values of the majority. What’s the point of winning otherwise? Working with and congress is and has been an oxymoron. Even when Obama has agreed with something they liked first, they still attempt to obstruct.
            In these last two years, there will be no extension of olive branches unless it’s to thrash the right.
            Then we’ll do it again in 2016.

          • Carolyn1520

            Not unable, unwilling. Comprehension deficit disorder?
            Maybe I should be typing in capitals and speaking slowly
            Stay a fool, your party is counting on you.

          • mike

            Gee, aren’t you the one that admitted you couldn’t remember saying it, well you did, and you couldn’t back it up then or now!! But you love that narcissistic moron in the White House, now that is funny!! Two losers together, quite a pair.
            Now who is the fool now. LOL!!!

            TA TA back to Renee Fleming and Kurt Elling

          • Carolyn1520

            Get some help.

        • Carolyn1520

          Yeah, mike, what he said!

      • Carolyn1520

        The dems won twice. Of course it has to fit the agenda and values of the majority. What’s the point of winning otherwise? Working with and congress is and has been an oxymoron. Even when Obama has agreed with something they liked first, they still attempt to obstruct.
        In these last two years, there will be no extension of olive branches unless it’s to thrash the right.
        Then we’ll do it again in 2016.

        • mike

          Yes, Obama won twice based on lies. if ACA had been implemented in 2012 he would have lost the election. Everything he claims it would do has been proven to be a lie. But alas, it wasn’t.
          So, we will have endure 2 more years of his corrupt admin. and lack of transparency he so promised.
          I know you will enlighten me on all these “first”, yes?? Please don’t waste my time on Heritage plan, that is a no-brainer(apple to oranges, etc.).
          Next 2 years will be quite interesting.
          Stay tuned.

          • Carolyn1520

            I have no intention of attempting to enlighten you. There’s a learning curve and I’ve long become bored with repeating facts when those on the right operate on the other two f’s, fear and feelings.
            I do agree the next two years will be interesting, So will the next 8 to follow. I don’t think you’ll be particularly happy though. Stay unenlightened, the GOP depends on it.

          • mike

            As usual when the left on this site are asked to produce the evidence to support/enforce their statement, they can’t or won’t. Even if you could, how it is written/proposed has much to say with who will vote for it. No, you have enlightened me with your lack of intellectual honesty.
            I too would be an emotional wreck if I had watched what the president had done to the party and his legacy.
            I just know the thinking on the left is based strictly on emotion and very little else.

            You just couldn’t find all those “first” that were just like what the right wanted, could you???
            No, I get the last laugh.

          • Carolyn1520

            I already told you I’m bored with attempting to provide facts to the right. You already have false assumptions and feelings about the left and would not be susceptible to facts. You provided nothing to back up your opinions, why should I waste my time doing so, over and over again.
            The rest is your typical run of the mill right wing tired old script . Stay simple minded, the GOP depends on it.

          • mike

            As I said, you are intellectually dishonest.

          • Carolyn1520

            You’d be wrong twice then.

          • mike

            Wrong, don’t think so. Only in your intellectually dishonest mind am I wrong.

          • Carolyn1520

            Yeah, yeah, yeah. Repeating your rhetoric over and over only turns it into facts in your bubble. It doesn’t make it so in the real world.

          • mike

            Pretty simple!!!
            Quit regurgitating MSNBC and produce.

          • Carolyn1520

            MSNBC???? I’m crushed. 🙂
            I have no clue what post you are even referencing. I think you’ve confused me with someone else in your zealous attempts to get responses.

          • mike

            Oh, I don’t want you crushed, you just don’t remember watching. Just like you don’t remember saying earlier “even when Obama has agreed with something they like first, they still attempt to obstruct”, your words.
            I wonder what you are smoking or is it dementia???

          • Carolyn1520

            Nah, you make assumptions based on no evidence , just your own prejudices.
            Oh that comment, the one of many I don’t feel a need to justify with references. If you want to know you’ll look it up.
            Nope, pure boredom.

          • mike

            As I have said before, you regurgitate a statement by someone else and when called to prove the statement you opt out with “I don’t feel a need to justify”. So as I have said before you are a intellectually dishonest person.

            I think this sums you up perfectly:
            :As democracy is perfected, the of the President represents, more and closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day, the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last and the White House will be occupied by a downright fool and complete narcissistic moron.
            H.L. Mencken

          • Carolyn1520

            Yes you do keep repeating yourself. However I realize all of you use basically the same script.
            I thought there was one of you and the rest were sock puppets. Hard to tell.
            At any rate, time to give it up Zippy. I’m sure you can
            find some other “intellectually dishonest ” people to bore.

          • mike

            At least you can admit the dishonesty part of you now!!!
            Time to go!!! Have fun with all those empty words you spout from that vacuous brain.

          • Carolyn1520

            Yada Yada Yada

    • Independent1

      Why is everyone going off on a tangent here?? All this article is talking about is whether or not it’s a good idea for Congress to set up a committee of hopefully some kind of experts across a range of disciplines who will look at our existing tax code and other legislation, to let Congress know whether certain legislation is working, like our tax code, and if not, how to fix it.

      How did that objective get translated into all the negativism that seems to be present in most of the comments here??

      • Brian Harvill

        Simple, rxperiece of the way politics works. The proposal is great on paper but I doubt that will translate into gr great in practice. This is thr carrot that precedes the whip and it is the intelligent option to see what lies behind the clown’s mask before signing away yet more power to the gluttons in government and wallstreet. Will the committee seats be available to the highest bidder? Its about having lost the trust of the people because of the blatant corruption.

        • Independent1

          Okay! I can understand the skepticism, and the possible underhandedness on the part of Ryan and the GOP. But I guess I don’t see how having a group of, hopefully people more experts than the NO NOTHING legislators in Congress (irrespective of how they’re chosen), review existing tax code and other legislation to point out where they’re not serving America, can be as big a total fiasco as everyone seems to be assuming.

          Suppose this committee comes out and publishes to the world, how they can see that our tax code is grossly biased toward corporations and that feeding these corporations with tax loop holes is clearly injurious to America (remember, for the 1st 2 years, the committee would have 9 Democrats and 6 Republicans). How can this not be a good thing?

          Having a committee independent from Congress tell every American, that the corporate-biased tax code that the GOP has pushed for and enacted over the past several decades is bad for America??

          What am I missing?

          • Brian Harvill

            I first think its great that you are so hopeful for the political game but I and many others are too cynical for that hope.
            It would seem to me that what you are missing is the reality that corporations are NOT going to cut their own throats even when it is obvious that the system is skewed in their favor. The committee is going to be simply another opportunity to put a feather in the cap of the CEO’s that would then use that power and prestige to pressure their way into more profits and more corporate welfare, not less. The system is set to work this way…
            The business man takes a percentage of his company’s profits and pays that to a politician in the form of campaign donation. The bought off politician then elects that person to the membership of this committee, The on the committee, the business person guts the social welfare programs and utilizes the funds that have been “freed” to shore up their personal corporate business or the businesses of those people that pay him money or favors thus ensuring their own business survival.
            As I said before, the idea of this committee certainly looks good on paper but it counts on the one thing in humanity that is NOT present, honesty. When greed and profits are in the picture, honest appraisals go out the window. Greed rules and the committee falls into just another power-luncheon where the rich and powerful elite decide the fate of millions of poverty-stricken citizens and divvy up the proceeds among themselves.
            Its an admirable idea but one that is naïve at best and collusion at worst. With the inclusion of money and power, it is assured that this is nothing more than a campaign fund-raiser for politicians and a method of padding their corporate profits on behalf of business experts. IF there is to be true honesty in this process, there should be complete transparency in the election of members including the publication and broadcasting of the political and corporate ties between candidate and member-elect. There should also be a moratorium on ANY campaign donations between the member on the committee or his/her business dealings and the political member that elected them or their corresponding political party. (it doesn’t do to bar donations to the candidate if they are donating to the political party and earmarking that on the sly for this or that candidate).
            This will not happen of course and the losers will be the regular person that is trying to survive. NOT just those in poverty but the middle classes who are having to rely more and more on social programs as well. This is simply not a great idea in practice because it doesn’t realize and make allowances for the most basic of impulses… human self-interest.

          • plc97477

            I think we will just have to wait and see what happens when big businesses bottom line is endangered. I hope for the best but realize we need to be realistic.

          • Independent1

            Okay, but what is the alternative?? Not having a committee of hopefully somewhat experts reviewing our tax code and current legislation to figure out what needs to be fixed – right?

            Are you suggesting that the EXISTING IDIOTS in Congress would do a better job or actually know enough to figure out what to fix; than a committee set up with some people who would actually know something about what needs to be fixed??

            My problem is, that I have NO CONFIDENCE WHATSOVER that the existing politicians have enough brains to really go through our tax code and a lot of legislation and actually come up with any semblence whatsoever of what needs to be fixed.

            Given that there have been numerous supposedly bi-partisan committees appointed by Congress to
            review specific issues and come up with their recommendations on how to resolve that issue – and so far the biggest problem has been that Congress generally totally ignores what those committees come up with as solutions – I fail to see how what Murray and Ryan are proposing could end up being either a success – in that this bipartisan committee would come up with some recommendations that the idiots on the right might buy into – or the idiots on the right are going to totally ignore what the committee comes up with.

            I have no clue as to how you or anyone of the other posters on this blog who see this as the sky is falling, think that this committee could end up doing something other than either being a success or simply a total waste of more money – which is what the GOP is going to do anyway for the next 2 years as they go round and round the barn because THE GOP HAS ABSOLUTELY NO CLUE AS TO WHAT THEY ARE DOING!!!

            All the GOP knows how to do is cut taxes, cut budgets while throwing money at big corporations to solve every problem. They have absolutely no idea how to create any meaningful legislation on their own.

            And again remember, if this commission were approved, it is quite likely that 9 of the people for the commission would be appointed by a Democrat for possibly the next 6 years (assuming the Dems can win in 2016). That means in coming up with solutions for fixing whatever it is this committee would address, that 9 of the 15 votes would come from people appointed by Dems AND THEY WOULD NOT BE POLITICIANS!!!!!

          • Brian Harvill

            I understand your sense of frustration and I have readily admitted that I do NOT have any viable alternatives. Yet that doesn’t mean that I cannot be VERY concerned over this proposal and the probability of abuses being perpetrated.
            Maybe if there were some sort of safeguards installed into the legislations as well that would help. BUT you are correct I don’t trust congress to fix the issue, they have proven time and again how ineffective and completely uncaring they are about the way in which people are forced to live.
            And while I agree on your assessment of this proposal being either a success or just another wasted time who’s committee findings are ignored, there is yet the third option which is that the committee makes its recommendations to gut the entire social support system and leave the corrupt corporate business model alone or even strengthened and the congress, in the pay of those same businesses actually does that! This is all conjecture anyway and it all may be nothing but fearful musing based on past experiences and disappointments yet I cannot but help to point out the ease with which this proposal can backfire and disastrously so for the millions of Americans that require government assistance just to put food on the table, see a doctor, or have a roof over their head. The GOP is already trying to make the healthcare system withdraw the subsidies and make what has already been paid out returned to the government which means taking money out of people’s lives that cannot afford that expenditure, it isn’t that far to withdrawing the food stamp program or gutting section 8 housing and turning over the proceeds to the businesses that clear profits in the billions of dollars a year.
            So in essence I agree with you that this is the best proposal so far yet stress that extreme caution needs to be used and safeguards implemented or else you find yourselves at the mercy of a court that committee that acts as a court, deciding arbitrarily based on their own greed and profit-driven motives, to gut the needy and pay out to the wealthy. AND while it is true that the committee would NOT be politicians, the membership could be money hungry and greedy robber barons that care less than even the idiot politicians do. They see a chance to stuff their wallets , or take that European vacation and be paid while doing it and they will do so.

          • Brian Harvill

            OH and I believe firmly that the Dems WILL win in 2016 and the reversal of the GOP fortunes is almost a shoe-in.

        • Independent1

          Actually, I misspoke: the committee wouldn’t be made up of Democrats and Republicans necessarily – it would be 9 appointees by Pelosi, Reid and Obama, And 6 appointees by Boehner and McConnell. Hopefully, Pelosi, Reid and Obama would appoint experts that were sympathetic to progressive principles.

          • Brian Harvill

            I would also hope that the appointees would be :favorable” to the cause of social supports yet that is just not assured. Unfortunately, I have been around long enough to see that neither party is immune from accepting the corporate buy-off when it comes to elections and so neither side is immune from the corporate corruption that is destroying this nation. AND then of course there is the problem of what happens when this committee term runs out and new appointees are selected with a new president and new representatives making the membership recommendations?
            Say the [process works well and as it is planned to work for the next 5 years.. that ios certainly a good thing but when after than 5 years, the committee uses its powers to destroy the social networks? they have then become firmly entrenched and removing them would be exceedingly difficult. These are the ramblings of a cynical man and I am aware of that and if this proposal passes, I will be praying that it performs as designed and does so for years to come, I do not lay money towards that bet though. I hope I am wrong in this but seeing the way that Washington works and especially the way the Republicans have worked for the last 30 years, I am not as hopeful as you appear to be. I would like nothing more than to be mistaken but I fear that I am not and that others will suffer because of this well intentioned proposal.

      • Dominick Vila

        The proposal presented by Murray and Ryan is fair and long overdue. We need unbiased, expert, recommendations to establish an agenda designed to pursue policies that benefit our society and strengthen our national security. From social programs improvements, to infrastructure, the economy, job creation, the budget, the environment, all the way to national security, every policy and every budget item should be reviewed to ensure they reflect what the American people expect and what is best for us as a society and as a nation.
        It really doesn’t matter if this proposal is politically motivated or not, the fact is that it is a step in the right direction and that it deserves our support.
        Why do so many posters look at it with suspicion? Because we are a politically divided nation, and neither side trusts the other, because of a record of obstructionism – acknowledged by a national leader – that should be condemned by everyone, and because our political focus is already shifting to 2016.

        • Independent1

          I certainly don’t disagree with what everyone is saying, and I’m as anxious to see the GOP get defeated in 2016, but I also tend to agree with E.J., in that the Murray/Ryan proposed legislation is something Dems should look at with an opportunistic eye.

          It could be, and again that’s a big if, that the GOP is finally realizing that they have little or less how with winning the presidency in 2016 given that they have virtually very little, if anything, with respect to positive accomplishments since their last president was such a disaster.

          Therefore, it’s possible, that Ryan and some other GOPers are realizing that they have to do something that will give them a positive to run on for 2016; and that positive could be a willingness to do something about our tax code and some other legislation,

          However, they may not feel comfortable in negotiating those changes on their own with other hated Democrat legislators. So this, olive leaf if you will, from Ryan, may be the GOP’s attempt to do something positive during 2015 and going into 16, that they can campaign on saying: Hey, look, we supported the creation of a committee that will recommend bipartisan solutions to updating legislation like our Tax Code, Obamacare and maybe more.

          Now, Republicans have sometimes been known not to be too bright with respect to how they handle some things. And in that regard, Ryan and some other GOPers may not realize the position that this bi-partisan committee their recommending with respect to it making Americans across the country more aware of just how far to the right (damaging to America), much of the legislation and issues they’ve been pushing especially hard since GWB left office.

          I realize I may be pieing in the sky! But I really would like to see something get accomplished in Congress over the next to years that helps America and millions of people in America who are really struggling. And without creating something like this committee, which might, just might, present to Congress some solutions that both sides could agree to; because it’s not coming directly from the other side; I really don’t see, two political parties who virtually hate each other, agreeing on anything. Nor, do I see Obama signing the far-right type of legislation that the GOP on it’s own would create, including what the GOP is trying drum up now for immigration.

          So, from where I sit – if the committee that Murray and Ryan are proposing gets trashed; I’m fairly confident that we can kiss any progress being made by Congress in the next to years – goodbye!!!

          • ericlipps

            Why do so many posters look at [the Murray-Ryan plan] with suspicion? Because we are a politically divided nation, and neither side trusts the other, because of a record of obstructionism – acknowledged by a national leader – that should be condemned by everyone, and because our political focus is already shifting to 2016.

            It couldn’t be, could it, because Democrats justifiably fear it would serve as a Trojan horse to destroy Social Security, something right-wingers have been panting to do for 80 years?

        • highpckts

          I sincerely wish that a “committee” would be able to start a serious discussion on that subject. It certainly needs done but not from politicians that are way to biased and invested in the outcome.

  • ericlipps

    I can just see where this would go under the incoming GOP Congress: a witch-hunt dedicated to proving that all government programs (except for military ones and subsidies for oil, tobacco and cotton production, of course) are a waste of money and that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme.

    It’s not that the idea is bad, in the abstract. Rather, it’s that trusting its execution to a Congress stuffed with wild-eyed wacko wingers guarantes that instead of being a genuine effort at making sure our tax money is better spent, it will evolve (oh, that word!) into a crusade to discredit and destroy what remains of the Great Society and the New Deal. And, oh yes, find real witches, too (they’re the ones teaching our young ’uns about eeee-volution).

    • Independent1

      Wait! do you understand that the initial committee set up by this idea would be comprised of 9 people selected by the Democrats and 6 people by the Republicans. 15 people across a range of disciplines such as: “program evaluation and data management, including economics, statistics, and data security.”

      This would be an independent committee from Congress that would look at our tax code and other legislation, and recommend to Congress how best to change things.

      Now admittedly, as E.J. pointed out, a lot of these types of committees haven’t panned out well in the past, but if it could work, what the idea is saying is, that instead of a bunch of NO NOTHING politicians trying to craft our tax code and legislation, hopefully this committee comprised again, hopefully of some experts across these disciplines would know much better how to build a tax code and legislation that actually accomplishes the intended objectives and really works for America.

      How can that evolve into what most of the bloggers here have taken this to be???

      • highpckts

        The operative word is Congress., To trust a politician from either party to be fair and balanced in this day and age is pie in the sky. We need people that are not involved in the Government that specialize in this not politicians that have a very vested interest.

  • Eleanore Whitaker

    No matter what the majority of Americans want or demand, the GOP is going to do what they damn well please. It’s time to realize that they do not care about anything but themselves and their back room masters they serve.

    No amount of protesting matters. No amount of rebellion matters. They do not care. They will get what THEY want because what THEY want is what they are paid by billionaires to want.

    Europeans wonder how in the hell Americans, of all people, have lost their ability to control their government.

    • janis mcdonald

      You can pretty much say the same thing about the democrats. Talk seems to be ramping up a little bit about a third party, but how long would it take the third party candidates/electees to figure out the game, really? Re Americans’ ability to control their government — do you think we EVER had it, or was it merely that the information highway wasn’t as open as it is today?!

      • Eleanore Whitaker

        Of course we had control of our government. That was before corruption became the favorite political game and Pay to Play exploded on a National scale. You are likely too young to recall the days during the Truman and Eisenhower administrations when the president wasn’t constantly belittled, dragged around like a dog on a leash or subjected to tyranny too many younger generations of control freaks think is fine and dandy. They won’t once they figure out they are working to pay taxes so the rich can live like pigs.

        The information highway has nothing to do with Americans who sit back and take all the guff the GOP tyrants are loading on our backs. They want wages so low you can’t live on them. They want corporations to be unregulated so you can drink benzene with your water and bathe in carcinogens from all manner of toxic chemicals..Then, they call that Christian? BS. What the GOP tyrants are doing today is nothing short of their post Civil War “The south shall rise again” fantasy.

        It may rise again but it will topple the same way it did the first time around…for their “ignernce” and stupidity. If the GOP bulls had their way, women would go back to caves like the Neanderthals they are.

      • highpckts

        Good question. What with the amazing scope of information we have today that was certainly not around in the day, we should be able to make educated choices but, sadly, this media highway also invites lies and misinformation which most people don’t have time to sort through. We are getting what we voted for and I fault the voting public for their lack of time, ignorance and just plain stubborness as to which party they support.

  • Theodora30

    This is bizarre comings from Paul Ryan who is still pushing Reagan’s faith wtale of magical tax cuts that pay for themselves. He is even pushing for the CBO to use dynamic scoring to include all that imaginary revenue from his proposed tax cuts for the wealthy. THe evidence that that tax cuts have never come close to paying for themselves is so clear that even BushII’s top economic advisers admitted it – a fact our “liberal” media has conveniently overlooked, preferring to frame Ryan as a guy who is knowledgable and serious about deficit reduction. Please, please Google “Mr. Giuiliani and the Tax Fairy” and read the WaPo article quoting top advisers to Bush making it clear that the evidence shows tax cuts do not pay for themselves. Send the link to your friends. ( I would post it but cannot get the link to paste on this site.)

    Paul Ryan has to be aware of this evidence but he is willing to overlook it since it contradicts his Ayn Randian view of the world. If he is willig to I be so dishonest about this, as well as about his reverence for Rand, you can bet he will not be honest about other evidence that contradicts his free market fundamentalist, supply side ideology.

    Once again a mainstream media journalist is being duped by a right winger posing as a moderate. Fool me once, fool me twice fool me again and again………and I still have a job?

  • stcroixcarp

    I don’t trust anything Paul Ryan has his hands in.

  • atc333

    As long as you have politiicans, and their supporters claiming the constitutional right to deliberately lie in politiclal campaigns (Freedom of speach supposedly) claiming that it is up to the public to ferret out the truth.
    This is the claim of an anti pro choice group claimed when deliberately lying about an opposing candiates position on abortion. He sued, as that state had a statute requiring truth in poltiics, seeking an injunction, alleging a violation of that law. The antiabortion group filed a suit claiming a constitutional right to lie, challenging the state law requring truth in political campaigns The worst part was that they apparently won in court.

    • Bill

      I have a problem believing anything Ryan is involved with will bring meaningful change after looking at everything he’s done in the past. Everything he’s done in the past has been for the benefit of the rich at the expense of the poor and middle class, you can always tell when Ryan is lying, anytime his mouth is moving.

  • Blueberry Hill

    Fine each one who lies Half a Million dollars for each lie. It has to be about money, or it won’t mean anything to them, it’s always all about the money. They live on lies. We can change that.


    • mah101

      Heck, I’ll go one better. Cut their campaign contribution limit for every lie. Republicans would be running for office with no money in less than a day.

      • Blueberry Hill

        Good idea, but most republicans running are millionaires or owned by millionaires. Would need to fine them a Million dollars for each lie.


        • Independent1

          But that at least would force them to spend their own money to get themselves elected; and if they weren’t able to accept campaign donations, that should cut back some of the stuff they do that is based on bribery.

          • Blueberry Hill

            Yes, it would. We need to find some way to stop the lies, Money is all they worship. Should do it for their ads and TV stations too.


        • plc97477

          Wow we could pay off the debt and put us in the black in short order.

          • Blueberry Hill

            With all the lies they tell, it should take far less than a week and another one to fix all the infrastructure.


  • Joe T

    copy and paste anywhere 2014

    Conservatism vs Liberalism

    >Political Views:
    Right-wing:Anti-federalist. Republicans.
    Prefer smaller government, less regulation, most services to be provided by the private sector in a free market, and a literal interpretation of the Constitution.

    Left-wing:Federalist: Democrats.
    Prefer more regulation and services like free universal health care to be provided by the government to all citizens.

    >Economic Views:
    Government should tax less and spend less. Cutting spending to balance the budget should be the priority. Higher income earners should have an incentive to invest (credits). Charity is the responsibility of the people.

    Left Wing:
    Government should provide more services to the less fortunate (like health care) and increase taxes if necessary. High-income earners should pay a larger percentage of their income as taxes.

    >Social Views:
    Right Wing:
    Opposed to gay marriage, abortion and embryonic stem cell research. Support the right to bear arms, death penalty, and personal
    responsibility as an individual.

    Left Wing:
    Gay couples to get equal rights like everyone else (e.g. marriage); abortion should be legal; support embryonic stem cell research. Support restrictions and regulation around the right to bear arms.

    >Personal Responsibility:
    Right Wing:
    Individuals should exercise personal responsibility and it is the governments role to hold them accountable even with severe penalties. Laws are enacted to reflect the best interest of the society as a whole.

    Left Wing:
    The people should look to the government to provide a structure. Laws are enacted to protect every individual for an equal society sometimes at the expense of economic freedom if necessary.

    • Independent1

      All anyone has to do is look at the vast majority of Red States to see how disastrous “right-wing” ideas and governance are.

      Even the results of a study in this Month’s AARP Bulletin on “The 10 Most Dangerous Cities to Take a Walk” reveals that all 10 of those Most Dangerous Walking cities are in GOP-governed states: Orlando, Tampa, Jacksonville and Miami, FL; Memphis, TN; Birmingham, AL; Houston, TX; Atlanta, GA; Charlotte, NC and Phoenix, AZ.

      And on top of that, some recent surveys by 24/7 don’t come out very well for Red States either:

      9 of the 10 most miserable cities in America are in Red States:
      Huntington/Ashland, WVA, Charleston, WVA, Redding, CA, Spartansburg, SC, Hickory–Lenoir-Morganton, NC, Beaumont/Port Arthur, TX. Columbus, GA/AL, Shreveport/Bossier City, LA, Mobile, AL, Evansville, In/KY.

      All 10 of America’s poorest cities are in Red States: Brownsville-Harlingen, Texas, Dalton, Ga., McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, Texas, Gadsden, Ala., Lake Havasu City-Kingman, Ariz., Albany, Ga., Monroe, La., Cumberland.W.Va., Fort Smith, Ark.-Okla, Pine Bluff, Ark;

      All 10 of America’s most miserable states, those with the least
      “well-being factor” for their residents are GOP-Run states with the worst being West Virginia and then: Kentucky, Mississippi, Alabama, Ohio, Arkansas, Tennessee, Missouri, Oklahoma and last but not least – Louisiana.

      8 of the 10 most corrupt states are GOP-Run states: Mississippi,
      Louisiana, Tennessee, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Alabama, Alaska, South Dakota, Kentucky and Florida.

      – More than 80% of food stamp recipients live in GOP-RUN STATES. Six of the top 10 food stamp-using states are GOP-RUN states and beyond that the greatest food stamp using states are the sparsely populated red states. And of the 456 counties in America that use more than 90% of all food stamps, 421 of those
      counties (92%) voted for Mitt Romney in the 2012 election.

      All 15 of the states with the lowest life expectancy in the U.S. are GOP-RUN STATES?? Such that there is a large disparity in longevity between Red States and Blue States: on average, residents of blue states live 2 years longer than residents of red states. To the extreme, the Blue State residents of 9 states with longevity projected to 80 and older, live as much as 5-6 years longer than the residents of the 4 shortest-lived GOP-RUN STATES of MS,WV,AL & LA. Follow this: starting with longevity projections for red states of 75 in: Miss., W. Va., Ala. & LA.; to 76 in: Arkansas, Kentucky & Tennessee to 77 in: S. Carolina,
      Georgia, Missouri, Indiana, Ohio & N. Carolina; while no Blue State has a longevity projection of less than 78, and many Blue states have longevity projected to 80 and over: N.J., N.H., Vermont, N.Y., Mass., Calif., CT, Minn. & Hawaii; Only one red state has longevity projected to 80 Utah (80.2), while 2 Blue States have longevity projections of over 81 –Minn. & Hawaii)

      All those issues you posted really don’t mean much DO THEY??

      It’s crystal clear not only that living in a Red State is like living in Hell!! It’s also clear living in a Red State is going to guarantee you a shorter life span!!!!!!

  • jamesowens

    apply a 3 strikes and your out rule- politicians are elected as representatives of the people. If found to be lying by independent fact checkers they get kicked out of office without all of their exorbinant benifits and retirment checks

    • highpckts

      Boy that would be one way to clean house so to speak. We would have to have a special election to replace 3/4th of Congress!

  • Carolyn1520

    Why should they deal in facts and truth? When your constituents accept everything you and Fox “news” says at face value, it’s a winner for them.
    That the GOP still has a following is proof enough , evidence isn’t important.
    They deal in fear and play to how people feel. Facts be damned.

  • annienoel

    Last week during a hearing on immigration Cong. McCaul’s entire testimony (or opening statement) was lies. Among his claims were that “illegals” were streaming over the border…when the truth is that undocumented immigration has slowed to a stop. Another was that the American people are against the President’s immigration plan. Maybe that’s true among republicans but it isn’t true when all groups are tested.

  • jointerjohn

    Paul Ryan opposes liars in Congress? What’s next, the Pope wants Catholics banned from the Vatican? Paul Ryan has to hire another guy just to call his dog.

  • Blueberry Hill

    Paul Ryan needs to get rid of his own lies. We could wallpaper all of Wall Street with his lies.


  • highpckts

    All well and good but I don’t trust the politicians on both sides of the aisle anymore to do this fairly! They have all proven, especially the GOP, that they will say anything to get what they deem necessary at the expense of everyone!

  • Whatmeworry

    We have had 6 years of non stop lies, from Barak to CBO as well as IRS State so the chances of this bearing fruit is nil

    • Daniel Max Ketter

      I have had 6 years of non stop lies, from blogging false info about Barak to CBO as well as IRS State so the chances of this bearing fruit is nil

    • Joe T

      RELAX, they are hanging themselves, let the liberals keep thinking their delusional thoughts, it only hastens the demise of the liberal agenda and brings more of their base – the ones who are finally seeing the truth behind their rhetoric to the ranks of Conservatives voters. People are waking up to the fact that liberal “solutions” do more harm than good to our nation, our people and our economy so their solutions are based on lies, fabrications and their Gruber mentality that the American electorate is stupid, makes poor choices and only they can lead us to the promised land. A promised land where the US becomes a 3rd rate 3rd world 2 bit country of misery, no hope, no change and divided.

  • TMZ1928

    Liar of the Year – Barack Hussein Obama.

    • Joe T

      LIAR of the Century……..actually bigger lies than Herr Hitler

  • Joe T

    Copy and paste elsewhere…Lovely Liberal Mental State, INSANITY
    February 17, 2008, reprint – Psychiatrist Confirms: Liberalism Is a Mental Disorder

    As a clinical and forensic psychiatrist, Lyle Rossiter has treated over 1,500 patients and examined over 2,700 civil and criminal cases. Turning his hand to political psychopathology, the author of The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness, has diagnosed an alarming percentage of the population as suffering from the grotesque form of mental derangement known by some as moonbattery

    The Liberal Mind is the first in-depth examination of the major political madness of our time: The radical left’s efforts to regulate the people from cradle to grave. To rescue us from our troubled lives, the liberal agenda recommends denial of personal responsibility, encourages self-pity and other-pity, fosters government dependency, promotes sexual indulgence, rationalizes violence, excuses financial obligation, justifies theft, ignores rudeness, prescribes complaining and blaming, denigrates marriage and the family, legalizes all abortion, defies religious and social tradition, declares inequality unjust, and rebels against the duties of citizenship. Through multiple entitlements to unearned goods, services and social status, the liberal politician promises to ensure everyone’s material welfare, provide for everyone’s healthcare, protect everyone’s self-esteem, correct everyone’s social and political disadvantage, educate every citizen, and eliminate all class distinctions. Radical liberalism thus assaults the foundations of civilized freedom. Given its irrational goals, coercive methods and historical failures, and given its perverse effects on character development, there can be no question of the radical agenda’s madness. Only an irrational agenda would advocate a systematic destruction of the foundations on which ordered liberty depends. Only an irrational man would want the state to run his life for him rather than create secure conditions in which he can run his own life. Only an irrational agenda would deliberately undermine the citizen’s growth to competence by having the state adopt him. Only irrational thinking would trade individual liberty for government coercion, sacrificing the pride of self-reliance for welfare dependency. Only a madman would look at a community of free people cooperating by choice and see a society of victims exploited by villains. [From The Liberal Mind; The Psychological Causes of Political Madness by Lyle H. Rossiter, Jr., MD]

    • atc333

      Reagan, Bush I, Bush II, and the lemmings in the GOP have done more to wound this Nation than any delusional Liberal thinking.

      Why don’t you go back to the 50s and 60s, and see tax policies there, job creation, wealth distribution, and income levels, and Federal Deficits then, and compare them with today, and see just which Administrations created havoc with the American economy and way of life.

      As far as I know, only Radical Republicans claim a “constitutional right” to deliberately lie to the voters of America on political issues,
      claiming it is up to each individual voter to determine the truth of a candidate or his dark money’s claims.

      • Joe T

        February 17, 2008, reprint – Psychiatrist Confirms: Liberalism Is a Mental Disorder

        As a clinical and forensic psychiatrist, Lyle Rossiter has treated over 1,500 patients and examined over 2,700 civil and criminal cases. Turning his hand to political psychopathology, the author of The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness, has diagnosed an alarming percentage of the population as suffering from the grotesque form of mental derangement known by some as moonbattery

        The Liberal Mind is the first in-depth examination of the major political madness of our time: The radical left’s efforts to regulate the people from cradle to grave. To rescue us from our troubled lives, the liberal agenda recommends denial of personal responsibility, encourages self-pity and other-pity, fosters government dependency, promotes sexual indulgence, rationalizes violence, excuses financial obligation, justifies theft, ignores rudeness, prescribes complaining and blaming, denigrates marriage and the family, legalizes all abortion, defies religious and social tradition, declares inequality unjust, and rebels against the duties of citizenship. Through multiple entitlements to unearned goods, services and social status, the liberal politician promises to ensure everyone’s material welfare, provide for everyone’s healthcare, protect everyone’s self-esteem, correct everyone’s social and political disadvantage, educate every citizen, and eliminate all class distinctions. Radical liberalism thus assaults the foundations of civilized freedom. Given its irrational goals, coercive methods and historical failures, and given its perverse effects on character development, there can be no question of the radical agenda’s madness. Only an irrational agenda would advocate a systematic destruction of the foundations on which ordered liberty depends. Only an irrational man would want the state to run his life for him rather than create secure conditions in which he can run his own life. Only an irrational agenda would deliberately undermine the citizen’s growth to competence by having the state adopt him. Only irrational thinking would trade individual liberty for government coercion, sacrificing the pride of self-reliance for welfare dependency. Only a madman would look at a community of free people cooperating by choice and see a society of victims exploited by villains. [From The Liberal Mind; The Psychological Causes of Political Madness by Lyle H. Rossiter, Jr., MD]

  • Joe T

    Why Did Obama Change His Name?

    In his early years, Obama changed to his formal African name to “Barack” instead of Barry. This joined him more closely with his African father. Obama was trying to remake himself for


    his political career. His Pastor and mentor, Reverend Wright, taught him paranoid delusions about the conspiracy of white people to spread HIV to eliminate the black race. Obama changed his persona to convey his rebellion to white controlled society. In his White House years he has fostered racial division in America, bringing in advisors with the same ideology, such as the race-baiting activist, the Reverend Al Sharpton. This destructive political and cultural division of America should cause both black and white Americans great concern because of its ignition of racial discord and stoking the embers of a brewing racial civil war in America.

    Obama’s adopted name was Barry Soetoro, which came from the marriage of his mother, Ann Dunham to his Indonesian step-father, Lolo Soetoro. In Indonesia, Obama was known as “Barry Soetoro.” A 1958 law passed in Indonesia does not permit dual citizenship. The Indonesian schools Barry Soetoro attended, the Fransiskus Assisi Catholic School, which accepted students of all faiths, and Menteng Elementary – only accepted Indonesian citizens.

    Aaron Klein of World Net Daily uncovered an image of Obama’s Fransiskus Assisi school registration card showing his step-father, Lolo Soetoro, registered Obama as Barry Soetoro, a citizen of Indonesia born, August 4, 1961, in Honolulu, Hawaii. His religion was listed as Muslim. So, it is apparent President Obama’s name, while being raised in Indonesia, was Barry Soetoro, he was listed as a Muslim and his citizenship was Indonesian. No information can be found showing Obama’s conversion from being a Muslim to a New Testament Christian, an action that would have branded him an apostate by the Muslim world, and investigative reporters have not been able to determine when Obama regained his US citizenship.

    Documentation of Soetoro’s legal name being changed to Barack Hussein Obama is missing, much of his early years remain a mystery and the identity of his true father is unknown. While being sworn in as an Illinois attorney Barack Hussein Obama denied, under oath, he had used any other names, but foreign student exchange records showed a foreign educational grant had been given to a “Soetoro” from Indonesia. All of his school records have been – sealed. In addition, Obama made a mysterious trip to Pakistan, which he did not mention in either of his books. During his campaign, to justify his foreign experience and to silence Hillary Clinton he stated:

    “I traveled to Pakistan when I was in college. I knew what Sunni and Shia was [sic] before I joined the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.” Let me note an aside here, seats on Senate and House committees are routinely not based on the candidate’s experience in the field, but on a “contribution” they pay to gain the seat and their ability to raise money using that position.

    Obama never mentioned this trip to Pakistan during his years of campaigning and did not admit it until 2008 after his election. Why the silence? Revelations of this mysterious trip surfaced after Obama’s travel documents were leaked by two contract employees of the Department of State, who worked for Analysis Corporation, whose CEO was none other than, John Brennan, a


    thirty year veteran of the CIA, who allegedly converted to Islam while CIA station chief in Saudi Arabia, donated $2,300.00 to Obama’s campaign and was a close political advisor to Obama for years. After his appointment as Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism and Assistant to the president, Brennan was appointed Director of the CIA, during the fallout from Benghazi scandal. He was also behind orders to remove the terms Jihad, radical Islam, Islamic terrorism and all connections of Islam to terrorism from all government training programs. During the Benghazi scandal, under acting Director Mike Morell, the CIA omitted information documenting the terrorist connection to the attacks, protecting Obama’s deception that the attack was caused by an Internet video. This makes one wonder if John Brennan had access to information on Obama’s past and his connections to Islam that enabled him to enter Obama’s inner circle and rocket him to one of the highest intelligence positions in government, now overseeing the arming and supporting Islamic rebel factions in the Middle East and managing the hacking into Senate computers containing the Senate investigation of the CIA interrogation program. Two other people involved in Obama’s passport search worked for Stanley, Inc., who’s CEO was a Clinton campaign donor. Stanley, Inc., is a major contractor supporting the CIA and the intelligence community. What a coincidence. Whatever was found by these employees in Obama’s travel records was immediately sequestered.

    Obama was to rise to the position of Illinois US Senator, and then to the most powerful position in the world, President of the United States, a mere ten years after he began his political career. Perhaps only the global financial magnates that groomed him, such as George Soros and his deep connections in the US State Department, know Obama’s true parental lineage and place of birth.

    Is Barack Obama simply the puppet of global financial handlers that orchestrated his election? Is this one of the reasons he leaves critical leadership to others in Washington, such as Valerie Jarrett, during global crises, while he routinely departs to play golf or attend fund raisers, gathering millions for his ideological political elite? Why would a president depart during or immediately after serious global crises, some of which could lead to war, to play golf or raise money? His actions reveal something Americans need to investigate.

    Just when we thought it was safe to go out at night.

    Many Americans think Obama’s is not Obama at all.

    • atc333

      So far, despite your concerns, it is safe to say that the GOP has done far more to undermine the American Economy, strong family relationships though lower wages, resulting in two working parents absent from the home, redistribution of wealth to the top 2%, massive deficits resulting from “tax cuts to job creators”, and of course the Bush II economic meltdown, a permanent testament to the true effectiveness of failed GOP economic policy..

      While Obama has made mistakes, one thing is now established. He has doubled all major economic indicators since Bush II left office with the Bush II meltdown in full operation, creating more jobs than Bush II lost during his Administration, spending less based upon the size of the budget compared to GNP, and of course, having to deal with GOP Right Wing block and stall. Think of where our economy could be now, had real job creation legislation been allowed to pass by the GOP House, instead of inserting “poison pills”, and playing the shut down game..

      • Joe T

        Michael Savage’s new book, “Stop the Coming Civil War: My Savage Truth,” is the prominent radio host’s 30th, and warns of President Barack Obama’s divisive effect on the nation. “I fear the worst. Right now Americans are angrier and more divided than I’ve seen them since the 1960s. What fires this rage is that we’ve become a post-Constitutional society,” he said, according to The Washington Times.

        “Right now the prognosis is not good. We have an incompetent zealot taking the nation down the road of weakness and centralized governmental control of every aspect of our daily lives. Just as individuals snap when the pressure becomes too great, so, too, does a nation.” Read Latest Breaking News from

        • atc333

          Newsmax is only slightly worse than Fox News, which according to at least one fact checking site has been demonstrated to be inaccurate in 66% of its political reporting.

          That pretty much says it all.

          Factually, if you take the time to look at this Nation’s Federal Debit, and distributio of wealth, you will see this nations current fiscal mess was created in GOP Adminstrions, including and following Reagan’s . After WW II, the US debt was larger than it is now. With the tax code in effect then, that debt was substantailly paid down.which also kept the middle class and working class strong and self sufficient. Now, consider what those same GOP polices of low taxes for job creators has done to the Federal Defict, and the distribution of weath in this country since Reagan.

          Mr. Savage’s book is published to misdirect, and divert the attention of the Right wing, and any others who may read, and take his work seriously rather than do their own research, from the abject failures of the past three GOP Administrations, and the disasterous effect they have had upon the American Economy. If those economic theories actually worked, then the Bush II Adminstration would have been a golden age of American Prosperty, and economic development for all Americans. It was not.

          Considering that Obama, despite the GOP obstructionism, block and stall, and govenrmental shut downs, has doubled most economic indicators since Bush II left office,

          Just think of where our economy could have been had the GOP actually worked with Obama to pass real job creation legislation, instead of deliberatly keeping the economy strubbling with its block and stall agenda, seeking to make him a “one term president”.

          • Joe T

            WOW….thanks….I know that from USA historical records and events that both parties are really dysfunctional and rife with cronyism (due to no term limits) and when becoming a President of the USA “sometimes” goes to a person’s head when elected to said office; e.g. Barry Soetoro aka Barack Hussein Obama aka El Presidente de USA, albeit temporary…..term limit!

            BUT…most Presidents retain some semblance of INTEGRITY !

            Pursuant to his continual blatant and daily 24/7 prevarications, categorically Herr Obama has demonstrated that he has no integrity….none!

            Definition:Integrity-the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles; moral uprightness, honesty , probity, rectitude, honor, good character, principle(s) ethics morals, righteousness, morality, virtue, decency, fairness, scrupulousness, sincerity, truthfulness, (NOT LYING) trustworthiness.
            best regards….

          • Allan Richardson

            You are addressing our President with a phony GERMAN title, despite the fact that he has no significant German ancestry, and a German title NO LONGER implies a Nazi ideology (actually, it never did, because ALL men in Germany were addressed as Herr ___ whether Nazis or not, when Nazis were in poser). Furthermore, there is nothing Nazi about the political views of Mr. Obama.

            If you want REAL Nazi connections, how about our SENATOR Prescott Bush losing his bank because it was STILL financing Hitler in 1942? Whatever became of his family anyway?

            And if you want ethnic German connections, how about President Eisenhower? An American so loyal to his ancestors’ adopted country that he led the force that crushed the Nazis! Or GW Bush’s campaign adviser Carl Rove … formerly Karl Roverer, son of an SS member.

            Since any American citizen can be labeled with some effort as being connected with any country, let’s just stick to RELEVANT facts, not made-up names that belong in the sandbox in kindergarten (OOH, a GERMAN word!), not in serious discussion of serious public business, OK?

          • Joe T

            Your opinion.not mine.
            best regards

          • idamag

            People like joe are short on intelligence, are not well educated nor well read. I have studied the holocaust for years trying to see how an entire nation could follow a crazy man. Believe me, people like joe owes all those who were victims of the holocaust an apology.

          • Joe T

            noun Herr plural noun Herren
            a title or form of address used of or to a German-speaking man, corresponding to Mr. and also used before a rank or occupation.

            a German man.
            Nothing phony about the definition of Herr
            it’s a title like MR. I can’t find NAZI in the definition…..and I am of Prussian decent, not Nazi decent………veritas.

          • idamag

            Colorado has called out faux news’ kelly for reporting that Colorado allowed people to print ballots off the internet and mail them to a specific commissioner. Of course the radical right (that does not include intelligent and thoughftul Republicans) is like the lady who asks if the dress makes her look fat and when you lie and tell her she looks fabulous – she loves you. She wouldn’t like you if you told the truth.

  • idamag

    Is this the Breitbart site? As usual, the hate mongers and racists are on here without discussing the issues of Congress lying to us. Not important. As for the biggest liar ever – I would award that to the people who led us into war with “WMDs,, chemical warfare, and mushroom clouds. Torture became enhanced interrogation. I started out with a first name that was nicknamed later. I would say “Barry” was just that – a nickname. Big deal for the white supremists.

    • angelsinca

      Democrat-approved Obamacare affects more lives than the Democrat-approved preponderance of WMDs in Iraq.

  • idamag

    How many of you had nicknames in college? If you did, (scary music here) something sinister was afoot. Names like Mickey, Cathy, Kathy, Shelley, Buddy, Butch, bubba, Tony, Becky, Tony, jimmie, johnnie, eddy, ed, maggie, peg, peggy, ike, sweetcakes, honey, sweetheart, or pumpkin might be a clue that those people are liars. Call the FBI.

  • Joe T

    Obama’s record of failure:

    He failed in Libya, failed in Egypt, failed in Yemen, failed in Sudan, failed in Crimea, failed in Ukraine, failed in Syria, failed in Iraq, and failed in Palestine. Most of all he is making us less secure on the border with millions of criminals, illegals, and terrorists entering the USA….Not to mention, healthcare, the economy, employment, Fast and Furious, IRS, NSA.. Benghazi, Solyndra…Too Big To Fail bailouts, Shovel Ready Jobs…etc etc…. Obama, an anti American, incompetent leader and Failed President!

  • Joe T

    WHO…BUT the Supreme Liar Herr Obama

    WHEN – he refused to disclose who donated money to his election campaign, as other candidates had done, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -he received endorsements from people like Louis Farrakhan, Muramar Kaddafi and Hugo Chavez, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -it was pointed out that he was a total newcomer and had absolutely no experience at anything except community organizing, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -he chose friends and acquaintances such as Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn who were revolutionary radicals, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -his voting record in the Illinois Senate and in the U.S. Senate came into question, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -he refused to wear a flag lapel pin and did so only after a public outcry, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -people started treating him as a Messiah and children in schools were taught to sing his praises, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -he stood with his hands over his groin area for the playing of the National Anthem and Pledge of Allegiance, people said it didn’t matter

    WHEN – he appointed 5 national security advisors who are documented members of the Muslim Brotherhood – a global terrorist organization, people said it didn’t matter

    WHEN -he surrounded himself in the White House with advisors who were pro-gun control, pro-abortion, pro-homosexual marriage and wanting to curtail freedom of speech to silence the opposition, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -he said he favors sex education in kindergarten, including homosexual indoctrination, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -his personal background was either scrubbed or hidden and nothing could be found about him, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -the place of his birth was called into question, and he refused to produce a birth certificate, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -he had an association in Chicago with Tony Rezco- a man of questionable character, who is now in prison, and had helped Obama to a sweet deal on the purchase of his home – people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -it became known that George Soros, a multi-billionaire Marxist, spent a ton of money to get him elected, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -he started appointing White House Czars that were radicals, revolutionaries, and even avowed Marxist /Communists, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -he stood before the Nation and told us that his intentions were to “fundamentally transform this Nation” into something else, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN – it became known that he had trained ACORN workers in Chicago and served as an attorney for ACORN, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -he appointed cabinet members and several advisers who were tax cheats and socialists, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -he appointed a Science Czar, John Holdren, who believes in forced abortions, mass sterilizations and seizing babies from teen mothers, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -he appointed Cass Sunstein as Regulatory Czar who believes in “Explicit Consent,” harvesting human organs without family consent and allowing animals to be represented in court, while banning all hunting, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -he appointed Kevin Jennings, a homosexual and organizer of a group called Gay, Lesbian, Straight, Education Network as Safe School Czar and it became known that he had a history of bad advice to teenagers, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -he appointed Mark Lloyd as Diversity Czar who believes in curtailing free speech, taking from one and giving to another to spread the wealth, who supports Hugo Chavez, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -Valerie Jarrett, an avowed Socialist, was selected as Obama’s Senior White House Advisor, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -Anita Dunn, White House Communications Director, said Mao Tse Tung was her favorite philosopher and the person she turned to most for inspiration, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -he appointed Carol Browner, a well-known socialist as Global Warming Czar working on Cap and Trade as the nation’s largest tax, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -he appointed Van Jones, an ex-con and avowed Communist as Green Energy Czar, who since had to resign when this was made known, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -Tom Daschle, Obama’s pick for Health and Human Services Secretary could not be confirmed because he was a tax cheat, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN – as President of the United States, he bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -he traveled around the world criticizing America and never once talking of her greatness, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -his actions concerning the Middle East seemed to support the Palestinians over Israel, our longtime ally, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -he took American tax dollars to resettle thousands of Palestinians from Gaza to the United States, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -he upset the Europeans by removing plans for missile defense system against the Russians, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -he played politics in Afghanistan by not sending troops early-on when the Field Commanders said they were necessary to win, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -he started spending us into a debt that was so big we could not pay it off, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -he took a huge spending bill under the guise of stimulus and used it to pay off organizations, unions, and individuals that got him elected, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -he took over insurance companies, car companies, banks, etc., people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -he took away student loans from the banks and put it through the government, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -he designed plans to take over the health care system and put it under government control, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -he claimed he was a Christian during the election and tapes were later made public that showed Obama speaking to a Muslim group and ‘stating’ that he was raised a Muslim, was educated as a Muslim, and is still a Muslim, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN -he set into motion a plan to take over the control of all energy in the United States through Cap and Trade, people said it didn’t matter.

    WHEN – he announced in the state of the union address he plans to override the Constitutional Congress, similar to a dictator, people missed the significance of what he plans to do

    And now what? Only Americans can answer that question, if it matters to them.

  • Joe T

    Democrats aiding and abetting the enemy. NO INTEL should ever be released….PERIOD>

    Dianne Feinstein presents findings from the CIA torture report released on 9 December, 2014. The documents show that the CIA’s post-9/11 embrace of torture was brutal and ineffective – and the agency repeatedly lied about its usefulness