fbpx

Type to search

5 Things To Tell Your Republican Relatives At Thanksgiving Dinner

Featured Post Politics Top News

5 Things To Tell Your Republican Relatives At Thanksgiving Dinner

Share
Republican elephant

The guy your aunt met on ChristianMingle.com is going to be in such a good mood.

His third “Make America Great Again” hat just came in the mail. He’s certain that his prolific Internet commenting as “RINOHUNTz69” has singlehandedly dismantled the candidacy of Jeb Bush. And the last two years of off-year elections have helped Republicans gain more power at the state and local level than at any time since the Republicans led us into the Great Depression.

So what if some choice refugee scaremongering wasn’t enough to overcome a prostitution scandal and eight years of Bobby Jindal?

A Democratic governor in a red state doesn’t change the fact that the Paris attacks represent a “positive development” for the GOP presidential candidates, who got a boost in the polls from their competition to see who can act the most terrified of the Islamic State, while focusing on issues that have nothing to do with the actual attacks.

So there’s not much you can say to bum out your uncle-to-be. And no matter what you say, he won’t hear you.

More than half of Republicans believe that the unemployment rate has risen under president Obama — even though it’s been sliced in half. The other half of the GOP has been trained to shout about the labor participation rate — a “last refuge for scoundrels” that mostly indicates Baby Boomers are retiring at an appropriate age.

No, Republicans need to believe that Barack Obama is a failure on par with George W. Bush and nothing you say will change that. But if politics come up, either put on some Adele or make these points for the benefit of any relatives who are not immune to facts.

1. We’re experiencing the best job growth of the century.
Last year — 2014, the first year Obamacare went into effect, the year when the American economy was supposed to shatter into a catastrophe of job killing — was the best year of job creation since 1999. This year, 2015, could be the second best year — if the last two reports aren’t revised down and we average 220,000 new jobs for November and December, which seems possible given that we’ve averaged 234,000 new jobs a month since January 2014. Average jobs created per month under George W. Bush? A mere 65,000 if you don’t count his disastrous final year — and if you do, 20,000 a month. So things aren’t perfect. But they’re better than they’ve been so far in this century.

2. We have the lowest uninsured rate in American history.
Another piece of news cheering up conservatives is that United Healthcare , the nation’s largest insurance company, says it’s not making enough money from Obamacare. They hope this will lead to the demise of the health care law, which has helped more than 17 million Americans gain health insurance. What the United Health announcement actually shows is that premiums have been lower than expected and fewer employers have dumped their employees into the exchanges. More affluent, middle-class people are needed in the exchanges, but major insurers aren’t echoing United Health’s concerns. Regardless, America has never had so few uninsured people — ever. And that trend promises to get even better as red states like West Virginia and possibly Louisiana finally expand Obamacare.

3. We survived Ebola and we’ll survive a few thousand refugees.
The scaremongering led by the right against destitute refugees is so offensive that the United States Holocaust Museum felt the need to object publicly. The opportunistic attempt to feed off people’s fears is nearly a doppelgänger of the GOP’s highly effective freakout over Ebola — a disease that killed exactly zero Americans who contracted the disease in this country. Accepting refugees is safe and makes us safer. And getting tough on the victims of ISIS is the exact opposite of getting tough on ISIS. In fact, it’s exactly what ISIS wants us to do.

4. The U.S. has led the fight against ISIS. But without local ground troops, we’ll just get a new ISIS.
Every time a new country begins bombing ISIS, conservatives immediately praise them and suggest that Obama should do the same. For some reason the right wants to ignore the fact that the U.S. has launched nearly 3,000 air strikes against Daesh — more than any other country by a factor of 10.

Image via @Walldo

Image via @Walldo

This military campaign clearly hasn’t defeated ISIS. And even though the group has lost ground this year, you can argue that the attacks in Paris show it’s not contained. What you can’t argue is that the U.S. can do much more than it’s doing. “From the American intervention in Somalia, in 1992, through the French intervention in Mali, in 2013, industrialized countries have been able to deploy ground forces to take guerrilla-held territory in about 60 days or less,” Steve Coll writes in The New Yorker. Marines could take the ground ISIS holds and unless there’s a local force to hold it, we’ll be back there to fight ISIS or worse again, and soon. Trying to defeat ISIS using the methods that created it is so insane that the only people proposing to use U.S. ground troops are the same people who still back the Iraq War. We’re paying the costs of ignoring reality in the Middle East. And the costs get higher each time a new Bush decides on a new war there.

5. The deficit is too low — and Republicans want it to be way higher.
If you love cutting the deficit, Barack Obama must be your hero. Spending that exceeds revenues we take in as a nation is now lower than it has been since 2007. Given that we’re still recovering from the Bush Recession and our infrastructure is tragically decaying, we should be borrowing at record low rates to rebuild roads and bridges while investing in high-speed trains and other prudent, necessary expenditures. Republicans won’t do that now, however, because they know it would boost the economy. But the GOP candidates for president have proven they could not care less about fiscal discipline by proposing tax breaks mostly for the rich that are “basically insane.”

Republicans have reasons to be happy. If they win the most important election of our lifetime, they’ll add the most conservative Supreme Court in the modern era to their control of the House, Senate, and state capitols. But their insistence on ignoring reality while alienating precisely the voters they need to win over, could result in a shattering defeat.

Then we’ll see who’s smiling next Thanksgiving.

Illustration: DonkeyHotey via Flickr

Tags:

164 Comments

  1. Dominick Vila November 23, 2015

    All the points made in this article, and others such as the DOW Index rising 10,000 points since Barack Obama became president, and our international credibility recovering from the disastrous days of the Bush II presidency, would resonate in a forum of rational, pragmatic, people. They would transform the person articulating them into cannon fodder if they are made in front of any Republican. Several close members of my family are Republicans, Tea Party supporters. If I were to even broach one of the talking points cited in this article, I fear I would end up with a chronic case of indigestion impossible to control.
    The sooner Democrats accept the fact that we are not dealing with rational people, that the mindset of the far right has been made up long ago, that there is absolutely nothing we can say to convince them to consider alternatives, that the only facts they are interested in are those articulated by FOX and Rush Limbaugh, that many of them could not find Syria on a world map to save their lives, that suggesting that people who are trying to escape the barbarity of ISIS are as bad as the people they are running away from because most of them are Muslims, that all foreigners are evil, that our economy is on the verge of total collapse, that the job creation we are enjoying is actually a horrible liberal plot designed to punish hard working Americans who can’t fill professionals jobs because they only have a HS diploma, and other such things is ingrained in their psyche. The best thing to do is enjoy the turkey and pumpkin pie!

    Reply
    1. Karen Bille-Golden November 23, 2015

      Happy Thanksgiving, enjoy the feast, avoid heartburn at all cost for the day! Heartburn we can avoid, heart ache is going to be with us always I think. Lest we forget, Thanksgiving is the day we celebrate our earliest refugees who were seeking a new life..

      Reply
      1. joe schmo November 23, 2015

        May I remind you, Christian refugees fleeing persecution. Not Muslim’s who would not assimilate. We would be praying to Allah and we would be ruled by Sharia law if these were our forefathers. THERE WOULD BE NO FREEDOM only suppression. As a Jewish woman you should really see it for what it is. Israel has a 99% effective wall:)

        Reply
        1. Karen Bille-Golden November 23, 2015

          Twisted as usual. Joe/Josie, I would expect nothing less from you. Enjoy the holiday, whatever your perceptions and give it a rest for the day.

          Reply
          1. BillP November 23, 2015

            You have to have a good laugh at Joe/Josie’s lack of thinking when he/she writes something like “Not Muslim’s who would not assimilate. We would be praying to Allah and we would be ruled by Sharia law if these were our forefathers” Really if the original settlers of this country were Muslims we would be using their law instead of good old Judeo/Christian law that original Christian settlers, who were fleeing religious persecution in their own country, would have installed instead of Sharia law. Joe/Josie gets a little illogical in his/hers logic.

            Reply
          2. joe schmo November 26, 2015

            …and you would have plenty of wives who you could oppress. You would be fighting with the opposition constantly. Gays would be as good as dead. Yup, keep dreaming those ridiculous dreams Billy boy!. Why at bunch of hypocrites.

            Reply
          3. BillP November 27, 2015

            No Schmuck it’s you with your misinformed and inaccurate comments after all you stated ” We would be praying to Allah and we would be ruled by Sharia law if these were our forefathers. THERE WOULD BE NO FREEDOM only suppression.” I didn’t dream this, you brought it up and then ran away from it as you usually do when your comment is shown to be ridiculous. You just like paulyz who uses the Imagine if argument for unemployment. The funny thing is both of you choose to imagine negative things not positive ones. This just reinforces your negative outlook.

            Reply
          4. joe schmo November 25, 2015

            LOL, you as well. You know I’m right:)

            Reply
        2. stcroixcarp November 23, 2015

          bs

          Reply
          1. joe schmo November 25, 2015

            Why bother!

            Reply
        3. Hueight November 23, 2015

          Christian refugees fleeing persecution who would not assimilate. Instead they eliminated anyone different from themselves. What’s the name of that law?

          Reply
          1. RED November 23, 2015

            I propose calling it Salem law!! After all that’s where the “christian” refugees were murdering people based on their weird, peasant mythology known as religion. Personally I think anyone who talks to invisible people or thinks they have access to mythical supreme old guy in the sky is suspect and should be evaluated, I mean diagnosed with mental disorder. After all talking to people who aren’t actually there and believing they really exist is pretty much the definition schizophrenia. It’s even more frightening that one group of nutballs thinks their invisible friend is better than another group of nutball’s invisible friend. Truly crazy!! Plus, there’s nothing like watching the good “christians” showing their bigotry and hatred toward “god’s children.”

            Reply
        4. silas1898 November 23, 2015

          Christian refugees fleeing persecution from “better” Christians.

          Reply
      2. Dominick Vila November 23, 2015

        Good thing the indigenous people did not ask for entry visas, no need for interminable vetting, did not seem too concerned over the country of origin of the newcomers, didn’t care if they were Christians or Muslims, and did not build walls…
        Yes, I will focus on the turkey and since my hearing has been deteriorating I will probably miss the barrage of conservative orthodoxy coming my way.

        Reply
        1. joe schmo November 23, 2015

          Yes, and the indigenous people fought against the progression of the invaders for all it was worth…..didn’t they?

          Reply
          1. Dominick Vila November 23, 2015

            Only after the invaders stole their land, engaged in Indian wars, little episodes such as the “Trail of Tears”, and confined them to reservations.

            Reply
          2. silas1898 November 23, 2015

            The Pilgrims would have starved to death if the Natives hadn’t helped them.

            Reply
          3. joe schmo November 26, 2015

            ..and the indigenous are having the last laugh with all those casinos they have built….

            Reply
          4. Dominick Vila November 26, 2015

            Some tribes are doing fairly well, others not so much. The issue, however, is not whether or not their ability to succeed, but the treatment they got at the hands of the people they welcomed. Happy Thanksgiving.

            Reply
        2. paulyz November 23, 2015

          Just Our Country? The history of the World was about people migrating the Earth when there were low populations & establishing of nations. Same as the American Indians, and all of South-Central America, & Mexico. Can’t even celebrate our wonderful holiday of Thanksgiving without Libs trashing our Country.

          Reply
      3. paulyz November 23, 2015

        These early settlers weren’t refugees, they came voluntarily for a better way of life. But I will enjoy Thanksgiving with my family for living in this still great Country, and won’t be discussing politics at all. Happy Thanksgiving.

        Reply
        1. BillP November 23, 2015

          Go back to your American history book and see that the Pilgrims (who were Puritans) were escaping religious persecution in England, same with Roger Williams and his settlers in Rhode Island, and William Penn & his settlers in Philadelphia and others. Settlers or refugees doesn’t matter, different areas were settled by people escaping religious persecution not just looking for a better way of life.

          Reply
          1. paulyz November 24, 2015

            Like I said, they came here voluntarily.

            Reply
          2. BillP November 25, 2015

            You really are a simple-minded troll. If they left their homeland to escape religious persecution then it was hardly a voluntary choice, it was a life or death choice. Read some history books before doing what Mark Twain wrote “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt”

            Reply
          3. joe schmo November 26, 2015

            I guess that makes you the ‘fool’ then doesn’t it?

            Reply
          4. BillP November 26, 2015

            No it makes you, your daddy and paulyz fools every time you write on this site. People who fled religious persecution are hardly voluntary settlers, they are refugees from their country of orgin.

            Reply
          5. Jay Singh November 26, 2015

            Agree, those who flee do so at great peril, they leave everything behind. But, we need to have as close to an airtight vetting process as possible, and not vilify people who have concerns.

            Reply
          6. BillP November 27, 2015

            From what I’ve read the current vetting process takes 18-24 months. Here is a list of steps they must go through:

            1 – Register with the UN
            2 – Interviewed by the UN
            3- Refugee status granted by the UN. There is a less than 1% acceptance rate of refugees worldwide.
            4 – Referral for resettlement in the US
            5 – Interviewed by State Dept. contractors
            6 – 1st background check
            7 – Higher-level background check for some refugees
            8 – 2nd background check
            9 – 1st fingerprinting & photo
            10 – 2nd fingerprinting screening
            11 – 3rd fingerprinting screening
            12 – Case reviewed at US immigration Hq
            13 – Some cases referred for additional review (Syrians have to undergo the last 2 steps.
            14 – Extensive in-person interview
            15 – Homeland Security approval is required, if the House bill passes the FBI director & National Intelligence director will also have to approve
            16 – Screening for contagious diseases
            17 – Cultural orientation class
            18 – Matched with an American resettlement agency
            19 – Multi-agency security check before leaving for the US
            20 – Final security check at an American airport
            No process is going to be 100% fool-proof but this is an extensive time consuming event. What should be more alarming is the visa process that allows people to visit this country. This is probably where people would try to gain entry to the US for illegal purposes rather than go through an 18-24 month process.

            Reply
          7. Jay Singh November 27, 2015

            At first blush, we should be impressed by all these steps. But, the background checks are less than meet the eye. You have a civil war raging, are you going to interview their neighbors? Confirm their job experience? Look at their tax returns? Most background checks occur face to face, how are you going to do that in Syria?

            I am in favor of the acceptance of refugees, but the executive branch needs to explain how these steps will work, and we need to hear from government officials (or former officials) who have doubts about the effectiveness of the vetting, and once that has happened, and the government has shown us how the risks are minimized, the refugee acceptance should go forward.

            Developing a consensus on this is what is needed, and that is what Obama should do. Some people will never go along, but I actually think this is a compassionate country, and if we quit the political posturing (you are evil if you have concerns about the refugees), this can go forward with a lot more goodwill from most of the people in this nation.

            As to the visa process, that is, as you comment, very alarming, and we have not had a good discussion of that topic. It is like having the house windows wide open, and wondering why the air conditioning is not working.

            Reply
          8. BillP November 28, 2015

            No how any blushes you have at the refugee process you will continue to find problems with it. You can check out numerous sites that deal with the UN and US refugee process. 1st the UN must declare the person is a refugee and there is a less than “1%” acceptance rate. After that the person has to be referred for US resettlement they will go through interviews, background checks and at least 3 fingerprinting & photo steps.

            Reply
          9. Jay Singh November 28, 2015

            I make my comments, and you cannot lump my comments into anyone else’s comments, any more than one can put all of any group into one box.

            Although you did not note it in your response, I favor the acceptance of the refugees, But, getting the majority of the populace on board with that view, via respectful dialog, is the way to go.

            Honorable people have concerns, and the administration should address those concerns. Not everyone will agree, but a consensus can be achieved. But, a background check from a war zone does not offer nearly as much insurance as we would like. That too can be explained.

            Nevertheless, we should do the best we can, and sell it to those who have understandable concerns.

            Reply
          10. BillP November 28, 2015

            Jay you need to do another blush. You state you are in favor of accepting of refugees your original statement has a few riders to it. Here it I “I am in favor of the acceptance of refugees, but the executive branch needs to explain how these steps will work, and we need to hear from government officials (or former officials) who have doubts about the effectiveness of the vetting, and once that has happened, and the government has shown us how the risks are minimized, the refugee acceptance should go forward.” What I wrote was in response your claim that you are evil if you have concerns about the refugees. I stated that I have seen numerous negative claims about the Syrian refugees, I didn’t lump you into those commenters.

            Reply
          11. paulyz November 28, 2015

            No one MADE them leave Dummy.

            Reply
          12. BillP November 30, 2015

            Here is a little of how England treated Quakers. “Persecution in England was severe and swift. Quakers were jailed frequently during the Society’s first forty years. “Some historians estimate that 15,000 had been imprisoned by 1689, when the Act of Toleration finally was passed” (Bacon 19). If prison were not enough, Quakers would be whipped publicly or have to endure tongue borings and brandings in the government’s efforts to rid England of this sect. During his lifetime, George Fox was jailed eight times. The conditions of the jails were horrifying and disgusting, filled with stench and filth. There was no heat in the wintertime, no toilet facilities; sometimes there was no shelter from wind and rain. “Prisoners were supposed to pay the jailers for their food, and to endure whatever whippings or other punishment the jailer saw fit to inflict. There was no privacy for women, and lice were a common problem” (Bacon 19).”

            Quakers weren’t separatists they created a more simple religion with less grandeur than the Church of England. It had no clergy, pulpit or church. Einstein I think this certainly describes religious persecution and was the main reason Quakers fled to the new world. Need a little more proof – “William Penn, son of Sir William, was granted a charter in March, 1681, as a repayment of debt to his father from Charles II. This charter and new colony named Pennsylvania would be the laboratory and Penn the scientist for what he called a “holy Experiment.” Penn had a spiritual vision for Pennsylvania. He would create a colony where Quakers and other religious groups could live without persecution, worship as they pleased, and govern themselves as they saw fit. It would be a colony based on Christianity and virtue. He viewed it as an experiment and/or example of what mankindcould do if living by the will of God (Bronner 1). In the fall of 1682, more than one hundred Quakers including William Penn boarded a small ship named Welcome and began a fifty-three day journey to religious freedom and away from religious suppression”
            I can show you some of the same type of persecution of Puritans but I don’t want to strain you r brain Einstein.

            Reply
          13. paulyz November 30, 2015

            The point was, there is no comparison to their “persecutions” than to the thousands slaughtered by radical Muslims. Get it?

            Reply
          14. BillP November 30, 2015

            Do you get it? The Quakers were imprisoned, they were whipped, had to endure tongue borings and being branded. That’s why they left England to go to the new world. Here is your original comment on this “These early settlers weren’t refugees, they came voluntarily for a better way of life” I never compared the situations and neither did you. You changed your argument that originally stated that Quakers, Pilgrims and other people left arts of Europe voluntarily and not because of religious persecutions. They all are considered refugees, as per US immigration law

            U.S. immigration law does not list specific examples of the kinds of persecution that would qualify someone for asylum or refugee status. However, from the law that has been developed through court cases, we know that it can include such acts as threats, violence, torture, inappropriate imprisonment, or denial of basic human rights or freedoms.
            Historically, for example, the need for asylum or refugee status has been recognized in situations where a foreign government has:

            1 – imprisoned and tortured political dissidents or supposed undesirables
            2 – fired weapons on protesters
            3 – committed genocide against a certain race
            4 – made sure that members of a certain religion were left out of the political process,and much more.

            Reply
    2. CrankyToo November 23, 2015

      My guess is that, contrary to what you’re suggesting, you won’t sit idly by, staring into your mashed potatoes while the wingdings in your family trumpet their fantasies about the “failures” of the Obama administration and the impending Repugnican landslide victory.

      You’re smarter than all of them combined, and yours is an essential voice of reason. You may not be able to make them drink, but it’s incumbent upon you to lead them to the water.

      Reply
      1. Dominick Vila November 23, 2015

        Thank you. I have not sat idly in the past, but as the senior member of my family, I must try to behave. 🙁

        Reply
        1. CrankyToo November 24, 2015

          As one cranky patriarch to another, all I can say is, I’m feelin’ you, Man.

          Reply
    3. bcarreiro November 23, 2015

      They can’t take your comments out of context when it is the truth we all seek for. Make sure to bring sum Tums.-)

      Reply
    4. @HawaiianTater November 23, 2015

      As one of the few rational people from Alabama, I can firmly attest that the holidays are much more pleasant in Hawai’i where I don’t have to deal with my Republican voting idiot family.

      Reply
  2. 'Tis Moi November 23, 2015

    Please share opinions other than your own? The non-background-ckeck
    people are correct. There’s no way to know in advance, people must be
    turned back. But the UN can still aide these people.

    Journalists are still anti-islam. The muslims who agree their faith is being mis-used need to step-up!

    Reply
  3. DMPerson November 23, 2015

    Dominick , just Love it, besides ,how do you discuss with a balloon .

    Reply
  4. greenlantern1 November 23, 2015

    Donald Trump’s TAJ MAHAL just paid a $10,000,000 fine!
    It was used by terrorists [ISIS ?] for money laundering!
    Wouldn’t it be prudent to keep an eye on it?

    Reply
  5. joe schmo November 23, 2015

    1) The guy your aunt met on ChristianMingle.com is going to be in such a good mood.
    His third “Make America Great Again” hat just came in the mail. He’s
    certain that his prolific Internet commenting as “RINOHUNTz69”(
    HOW VERY ONE-SIDED AND NARROW MINDED OF YOU LIBERALS. TYPICAL CHEAP SHOT)
    2) Just 1 Democrat Governor. Doesn’t change much.
    3) Unemployment is really much higher @ 25%. Your media lies again. Good try.

    4) Insurance rate premiums are set to explod and increase. Good try.
    5) ISIS – Leading from behind has endangered us and the rest of the world. Just look at Paris. Look at the influx of migrants into Europe. These people DO NOT assimilate. They don’t know who the terrorists are. You would not win this debate.

    6) LOL Deficit dropped but GDP is nearly at 0% (you need growth folks not outsourcing) and the debt is over 18 trillion. You’re poor children.

    One thing is for sure. If I would be a conservative family member of yours. You WOULD NOT win the debate. Too much against your side….. Shows in the polls.

    Reply
    1. DocP November 23, 2015

      This is the most recent release of GDP. As you can see it is not nearly 0. Please stop making up “facts”

      Reply
    2. Paul Bass November 23, 2015

      Yep, Joe, right on cue, EVERY one of you statements is a lie! Amazing, been listening intently to Fox again, I see.

      I’ll let Eleanore or H Tater take you this time, what a tool you are!

      Reply
      1. joe schmo November 26, 2015

        Too bad you don’t know the truth even if it hits you square in the face.
        Elenora can’t even compete with me. Don’t really know Tatertot.

        Reply
    3. itsfun November 23, 2015

      Don’t be confusing the left with facts and truth. After years of Obama and Hillary lying the left is honest challenged.

      Reply
      1. BillP November 23, 2015

        Well after 8 years of the great W’s work the country is doing much better since he left office. The U3 rate is down to 5% and the U6 rate is under 10% but now Frank Luntz is having the right talk about the “not in labor force” number, a number that includes retired people, high school students, college students, stay at home parents, etc. Schmo’s unemployment rate of 25% is just another right wing made up number. The GDP is not “0” the 2nd quarter GDP was 3.9% and the 3rd quarter was 1.5%, that doesn’t look like “0” to me. So Schmo has constantly written comments using inaccurate or completely made up data.

        Reply
        1. itsfun November 23, 2015

          Anybody can make numbers look like they want them to. How about the huge national debt now. I doubt if anyone knows what the actual unemployment rate is.

          Reply
          1. BillP November 24, 2015

            Well it seems that some right wing commenters have stopped using the U3 (the always published #) & U6 unemployment rates since they have gone down to reasonable rates. U3 is at 5% & the U6 is at 9.8%, all lower than when Obama took office. This not so new # “not in the labor force” is being thrown out by Republican candidates & right wingers on several websites. The main reason this # is increasing is that more & more Baby boomers are retiring. This number includes high school & college students too along with other non-working groups. To call this # an unemployment # is pure bullshit. Look at paulyz’s comment below mine for an example of this lunacy.

            Reply
          2. itsfun November 24, 2015

            Good Morning Bill: As I said I am not a big fan of numbers. I just don’t trust number people. Both sides probably have some truths on their sides. I would like to know if and how many full time jobs have been made into part time jobs because of ACA. I wonder if making one full time job into 2 part time jobs is part of any of these numbers.

            Reply
          3. BillP November 24, 2015

            Data of that nature would be useful. Some #’s like the average weekly work hours can be important too, those #’s are increasing, they are at 34.5 hours per week. The thing I will agree with you is that at times statistics can be interpreted to prove any point of view.

            Reply
          4. Jay Singh November 26, 2015

            Let’s remember that Jimmy Carter used the “misery index” (interest rates plus inflation) to bash Ford, and then wanted nothing to do with the index when Carter ran against Reagan in 1980.

            An honest analysis of all the data is tinged by politics. The best I can see is we have a stock market going way up because there is no other investment source (interest rates too low for investors), and businesses can rack up high profits offshore. This raises demand for stock, raising prices. The low interest rates help housing, as they hurt savers.

            The job growth post great recession is not real high paying, but numerically speaking, the quantity of jobs is fair, no better.

            At the same time, we have a record number of food stamp recipients, which seems to confirm that the numerical job growth is tilted toward the low paying side.

            We can argue the politics and the blame, but a fairly weak recovery from the great recession is clear. With globalization, it will be hard to get back to a 4% annual growth level. At the same time, calling 2.1% growth (the most recent quarter, restated upward from 1.5%) really good growth, eludes me, from a logical standpoint.

            Reply
        2. joe schmo November 26, 2015

          Get over it. These past 7+ years are all on your man….. What a mess he’s made.

          Reply
          1. BillP November 26, 2015

            What a mess the S&P 500 (remember a month ago you called me a fool for being invested in the market) since the great President Barack Hussein Obama took office is up 148.6%, Nasdaq is up 240%, DJIA is up 117% while your daddy’s gold is up 39% & silver is up 47%. By my math the 3 stock market indices are higher than gold &silver. Loving all of my investments! Is the US dollar stilling tanking you stated last year (you must be a real investment genius) 1 unit of the foreign currency equals ? USD for the Euro 12/31/13 – 1.38,12/31/14 – 1.22 11/25/15 – 1.07, British Pound 12/13 – 1.65, 12/14 – 1.56, 11/25 – 1.51, Yen – 12/13 -0 .0095, 2/14 -0 .008, 11/25 -0.0082.You do realize that this means it takes less USD to buy these currencies. U3 & U6 unemployment rates are lower then when the great BHO took office U3 is at 5%& the U6 is at 9.8% that lower than when the not great W left office. Housing market is in better now, prices are up and so is new housing. I could list more things but I know you have a short attention span. If this is a mess I can live with it!

            Reply
    4. paulyz November 23, 2015

      Good post, the Memo knows how to push Liberal buttons. They also ignored that the #1 Medical insurer for Obamacare is planning on dropping out, plus the huge coming increases in premiums & co-pays, the long term unemployed & the part time, or low paying jobs, the 43% increase in food stamps, and the HUGE growth in the National Debt.

      Also, for 3 years now we have had Baby Boomers retiring at the rate of 10,000 per day! Imagine what the unemployment rate would be had they all still been working.

      Reply
      1. Insinnergy November 23, 2015

        Ahhh the sockpuppets are conversing again.
        Don’t you get sick of talking to yourself?

        Reply
      2. BillP November 23, 2015

        Are you as stupid as your statements make you sound? Baby boomers are retiring because the oldest are turning 70 and many are in their 60’s when most people start to retire. They didn’t lose their jobs they “RETIRED” it’s a natural life and work progression. If they were still “WORKING” the unemployment rate would be down since they are “WORKING” not unemployed! Did you read that ridiculous statement before you posted it.

        Reply
        1. @HawaiianTater November 23, 2015

          RWNJs include retired people in their unemployment numbers because they think people should work until they die.

          Reply
          1. BillP November 24, 2015

            I know retired people are included along with high school citizens. Ever since the U3 rate has gone down, it’s now 5% and the U6 rate is down to 9.8% the right wing has used the “not in labor force” number. It’s produced by the Bureau of Labor monthly, it includes everyone 16yo & older so this number has high school students, college students, stay at home parents and retired people. It shows how desperate the right is when they resort to using this type of data.

            Reply
          2. @HawaiianTater November 24, 2015

            Yeah, I was trolling an article on Breitbart recently with the “not in the labor force” numbers. It’s insanely stupid to count high school students and senior citizens against unemployment numbers; otherwise known as par for the course amongst those crowds.

            Reply
        2. paulyz November 24, 2015

          Let me explain this to you s-l-o-w-l-y….. IF Millions of boomers WEREN’T retiring, but STILL working, that means they would be doing jobs that are now available BECAUSE they would still be in the workforce, working those jobs!!! You apparently aren’t very bright are you? Why you are a gullible Liberal .

          Reply
          1. BillP November 25, 2015

            That’s not what you wrote this is” Imagine what the unemployment rate would be had they all had still been working”
            It’s another false argument, people retire all the time. As you stated 10,000 retire every day. Why because they have worked for a good portion of their lives and now want to enjoy not working. Carrying your illogical thought why not include people who have died, imagine (the key word, you can imagine anything, you just are trying to ignore reality) they didn’t, they would still have their jobs too so the unemployment rate would be astronomical! As for brightness your luminosity is about the equivalent of a 20 watt bulb and I’m being very generous in your case. Your argument is based on an invalid point trying to changing reality.

            Reply
          2. paulyz November 28, 2015

            Exactly the same thing I said in both comments, but I see I need to talk even S L O W E R since you have trouble understanding simple concepts. Are you a product of our wonderful public schools? The point is Dummy, no matter why they retire, by retiring in huge numbers, freeing up the jobs they HAD been doing, this creates more employment opportunities, thereby lowering the unemployment rate. Please don’t respond, or look even more the ignorant fool. Your Liberal prejudices restrict your ability to see or thing clearly, or objectively. LMAO.

            Reply
          3. BillP November 30, 2015

            Gee I’m so sorry Einstein I didn’t realize that you can use the term Imagine” to start a statement that would ague that the unemployment rate would be higher “IF” retired people hadn’t “RETIRED”. Why imagine if 4.2 million jobs weren’t los in the last year or so of GW Bush’s administration. Imagine if 2 wars, including the unnecessary Iraq war, weren’t started thereby saving the US economy over 2 trillion dollars. Imagine if there hadn’t been an ill-designed tax cut during this same time, a tax cut that heavily favored the wealthy. Imagine if W hadn’t squandered the surplus left by the Clinton administration. We could have a unemployment rate around 3% or less, a healthy economy, over 3,000 American lives not lost in the wars, we would still have a surplus. I’m so glad you showed me the way by using the word “imagine”. I will never ever lose an argument again with

            Reply
          4. paulyz November 30, 2015

            Getting a little hot I see by me showing anyone reading your responses to me, how un-bright you are. LMAO. Like I said, quit before you show everyone how ignorant you are.

            Reply
          5. BillP November 30, 2015

            You are a really true buffoon with an ego greatly bigger than your addled brain. I didn’t even know that you showed my responses and don’t care at all. You are totally oblivious to the ridiculousness of trying to prove a point by starting your comment with “Imagine”? That anything written after imagine isn’t real or didn’t happen. So writing LMAO just reinforces the fact that you are juvenile and ignorant.

            Reply
          6. paulyz December 5, 2015

            Imagine that! LMAO.

            Reply
          7. BillP December 5, 2015

            Don’t look now but your senility is showing. Anyone who writes an argument starting with the word “Imagine” has no credibility and then when they LMAO they fail to realize that they have lost a good part of their brain in Laughing their Ass off.

            Reply
          8. paulyz December 5, 2015

            Here’s a little brain enhancement for your feeble IQ, farrrrrt! LMAO, I have intelligence to spare.

            Reply
          9. BillP December 7, 2015

            Not really if you lost any more brain matter your knuckles would drag along ground. My 8yo nephew exhibits more intellect in his writings than you.

            Reply
          10. paulyz December 7, 2015

            Hold on, here’s some more IQ helpers for you: faarrrrt! Please use them wisely weedhopper.

            Reply
          11. BillP December 8, 2015

            More infantile humor from a low class, low intellect troll. Go wipe the drool from your chin you simplistic little fool!

            Reply
          12. paulyz December 5, 2015

            You STILL don’t get it. You are brainwashed into thinking somehow I am discussing the statement that 9 Million Americans aren’t in the workforce. That has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with my comment. The facts are that because HUGE numbers of Americans ARE retiring, that means they are leaving employment to enjoy retirement, thus freeing up MILLIONS of those jobs, (previously held by them). This creates employment opportunities for other by Millions, but STILL Millions are unemployed. DAMN are you dense!

            Reply
          13. BillP December 7, 2015

            You’ve changed your story many times from “Imagine” how high unemployment would be if they didn’t retire to how many millions of jobs were freed up by those retiring. You start out with one statement then change to another. You have changed your mind more then you change your clothes. There are large #’s of people retiring because they have reached retirement age, this is a situation that has been in existence for a large part of the 20th century and continues today. Here’s your original statement “….. IF Millions of boomers WEREN’T retiring, but STILL working, that means they would be doing jobs that are now available BECAUSE they would still be in the workforce, working those jobs!!! And the unemployment rate would be much higher”
            Now you are changing that statement because you finally figured out how stupid it was. Your analysis of the job market leaves out that companies don’t always replace the people who have chose to retire or have accepted an early retirement package. Companies have done this for decades and continue to do this. They do this to downsize their companies not hire replacement. Yes there are still millions unemployed but the # has decreased since 10/2009. Are for density don’t go in a lake or ocean you would sink rapidly!

            Reply
          14. paulyz December 7, 2015

            Puleeeze Stop, your showing everyone your complete ignorance. You STILL can’t comprehend a simple fact. Wow dude, give it up.

            Reply
          15. BillP December 8, 2015

            I hope you can understand basic arithmetic, I’m not sure based on the utterly stupid comments that you have written. Here are some #’s right from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The # of people unemployed has fallen from the recession high #’s in 2008 – 9.5 million
            2009 – 14.3 million (the recession hits)
            2010 – 14.8 million
            2011 – 13.7 million
            2012 – 12.5 million
            2103 – 11.4 million
            2014 – 9.6 million
            11/2015 – 8.1 million
            That’s a decrease in 6.7 million unemployed people from its high in 2010 as the country recovered from the recession to its current value of 8.1 million. I did the arithmetic for you so you didn’t have to strain your miniscule brain. These #’s are the fact not the bullshit you write. If you are going to reply provide some provable facts not your usual crap.

            Reply
          16. paulyz December 9, 2015

            Has absolutely nothing to do with Millions of baby boomers retiring in record numbers, you know you looked like a fool by your previous answers, now try to act intelligent by listing useless stats.

            Reply
          17. BillP December 9, 2015

            I know that real facts aren’t allowed in your little bubble world, so I will keep it simple the # of unemployed people are “decreasing”. Do you understand that word. I don’t think you will because you are as dense and smart as a stone wall!

            Reply
          18. paulyz December 11, 2015

            Enough , I can’t take any more of your embarrassing stupidity. Chill dude.

            Reply
          19. BillP December 12, 2015

            Your reply is just another example of a non-answer from a clueless uniformed right wing troll.

            Reply
          20. paulyz December 13, 2015

            You just won’t stop making a bigger fool of yourself will ya? You know my explanation on S.S. is correct but are trying desperately to save face. Please stop, you are looking extremely ignorant.

            Reply
          21. BillP December 14, 2015

            You are soooo delusional that you are starting to believe the bullshit at you are told or pull from your butt. Lets start with you providing some real facts to backup your nonsensical claims about SS. You can’t so you will just write your ridiculous claims.

            Reply
  6. InformedVoter November 23, 2015

    Joe is right on! The number of jobs includes part-time and low paying jobs. We now have 94.4 million not working, the largest number in history. The number of insured folks is higher than before the ACA, all the left reports is how many signed up but they didn’t subtract out those who lost their insurance when they had their hours lowered. The national debt continues to grow at a record pace. And now many Democrats are distancing themselves from Obama’s failed foreign policy. Even Mrs. Clinton, trying not to upset Obama or he’ll through his support behind Biden, has said the current policy is not working. Sounds like the left will be eating crow this Thanksgiving!

    Reply
    1. CrankyToo November 23, 2015

      You’re either an InformedLiar or an UninformedDumba$$. Which is it?

      Reply
      1. InformedVoter November 23, 2015

        ALL my facts are verifiable which is lots different than the half-truths and outright wrong statements provided by The National Memo. Are you going to deny that Diane Feinstein and Mrs. Clinton have called Obama’s foreign policy too soft? Are you going to deny that 47 Democrat senators have broken ranks with Obama? Are you going to deny that 94.4 million are not working? ETC, It would seem you’re either in denial or even more low information than the traditional Democrat.

        Reply
        1. Bren Frowick November 23, 2015

          It is the relevance of those cherry-picked factoids we laugh at. Clearly you have lost one argument and are desperately trying to make believe you were talking about something else all along. good luck with that…

          Reply
          1. Jay Singh November 26, 2015

            The article about which we are commenting is cherry picked in favor of the Democrats. I don’t have much time to comment, as I am trying to find the $2500 of health insurance savings, per year, that was supposed to be a consequence of Obamacare.

            Reply
          2. InformedVoter November 28, 2015

            I completely shred The National Memo’s “facts” and you say I cherry pick? You prove my point that most lefties are low information folks. If lefties are so happy about Obama, then ask yourself “why does The National Memo” have provide talking points for you pathetic thinkers? Because of the sad state the country is in! 10 days ago, The National Memo ran a survey asking “Is Obama the WORST President EVER?” and 83% responded YES! And this is from regular readers of The National Memo. No wonder they felt obligated to try and provide some crumbs for you lefties to help you swallow your Thanksgiving crow!

            Reply
          3. Bren Frowick November 29, 2015

            LMAO… “completely shred”??? You parade your ignorance and then brag that you’re “winning”, a la Charlie Sheen. Pretty much the poster child for “low-information voter”. I’m done wasting time on such an ignorant person.

            Reply
          4. InformedVoter November 29, 2015

            Can’t stand the truth can you? Obama was rated as high as 15 during his first term. Now Obama is riding in the high 30s, just above Carter as being one of the worst presidents. When you limit the rating scope to “recent” presidents, then Carter comes out last and Obama is second from last. And this is from left-leaning political scientists! Enjoy your leftover crow.

            Reply
    2. Insinnergy November 23, 2015

      New Flash: “InformedVoter” Fails to even remotely be Informed.

      Reply
      1. InformedVoter November 23, 2015

        It’s amazing how easy it is to shred the low information left “facts”. You are in self-denial. Even Diane Feinstein and Mrs. Clinton are saying Obama’s foreign policies are too weak. Just as when Trump claimed the illegals were rapist and murderers, tonight’s news stories are verifying Trump’s claim. How does your crow taste?

        Reply
        1. Bren Frowick November 23, 2015

          Apparently UninformedVoter realizes on some lizard-brain level that he lost the previous argument, since he is desperately shifting gears onto ANOTHER issue he is hopelessly wrong about…

          Reply
          1. InformedVoter November 28, 2015

            And what argument did I lose? The fact that I shredded The National Memo’s 5 points? That Trump has again been proven correct about Arabs cheering 9-11? That Trump was proven correct about Mexicans committing more crimes than their population percentage would suggest? That many Democrats are distancing themselves from Obama and his failed foreign policies that may lead the world into WW III (ask Tulsi Gabbard, D, Hawaii)? You lefties never fail to convince me that you are truly low information people.

            Reply
        2. Insinnergy November 23, 2015

          Yes because one news story makes all Trump’s generalisations true.
          Good grief you’re a total idiot.
          I assume your next trick will be to disprove global warming because it’s snowing outside your house?

          Plus anyone who says the words: “… are verifying Trump’s claim.” is immediately mentally suspect.

          From your rhetoric I can only assume you’re an astroturfer, and paid to present these views. What does your little grey playbook say to do once you’re outed by someone?
          Change the subject perhaps?

          Reply
    3. BillP November 23, 2015

      The 94 million number is something that the right has to push now that the U3 rate is 5% & the U6 rate is under 10%, all lower than they were in 1/2009. The 94 million number is the not in the labor force, that number includes everyone 16yo & older. This would be high school students, college students, stay at home parents, handicapped people who can’t work, the retired, etc. The numbers you are referencing are reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and are those not in the labor force including those in my prior sentence so while they are not working, it’s because of several valid reasons – they are in school, they are taking care of their children and they are retired, none of these are unemployed. The average weekly hours are 34.5 (hardly a typical part-time) and the average hourly wage is up to $25.20 and the weekly earnings is $869.40, all numbers are up over the last year. These numbers came from the same report you got the bogus not working number, did you forget to list this data?

      Reply
      1. @HawaiianTater November 23, 2015

        Bill, you should know better. Facts are irrelevant to these people.

        Reply
        1. BillP November 24, 2015

          I try smacking my hands when I type comments on this site but it doesn’t work.

          Reply
      2. InformedVoter November 28, 2015

        The average work week in hours does not alter the fact that millions went from full-time jobs to working less than 30 hours/week, and thus lost their health insurance. You keep referring to the U1-U6 numbers, but in January, 2010, Obama’s team changed the criteria on how and what they collect. Just like the National Ocean agency changed the historically recorded temps from the 1920’s & 30’s (they lowered them – 3 times! – WITHOUT even a footnote to “prove” the earth is getting warmer) the BLS has neglected to include the change in their reporting process. The 94.4 million not working has been claimed to be false by left sources, while most economics sources verify that the number is correct. The average wage number rose slightly, not because wages really went up, but because all the high paid jobs got big raises while the average Joe got no increase. Of course with the UAW finally getting a new contract and a wage increase, the average wage will go up – but not because of anything Obama did. Regarding changing the recorded temps, the Washington Post had a huge story about how warmer temps are getting more and more frequent. It claimed that seals and other ocean creatures were traveling further north to get to cooler temps. It went on and on about rising ocean levels and the ice bergs melting. Oh, I forgot to tell you the story was from 80 years ago! Enjoy your crow?

        Reply
        1. BillP November 28, 2015

          Would that be the over 4 million people who “lost ” their jobs in 2008 under the so-called leadership of GW Bush? All you right wing trolls state this fabrication of the U3 & U6 3’s are calculated but never offer any provable facts. Where is the proof? As for the 94.4 million people in the “not in the labor force”, it’s not a false number. What is false is Trump’s and other right wingers claiming that these people are truly unemployed.

          Reply
  7. Otto Greif November 23, 2015

    The deficit is low because Republicans have constrained spending.

    Reply
    1. Paul Bass November 23, 2015

      Bwa HA HA HA! Thanks for the joke!

      Reply
    2. Chris19741949 November 23, 2015

      You are hilarious, old man.

      Reply
    3. Bren Frowick November 23, 2015

      LOL The REPUBLICANS constrained spending??? You mean, like, by shutting down the government (which added 24 BILLION to the deficit:http://money.cnn.com/2013/10/16/news/economy/shutdown-economic-impact/)?

      Reply
      1. Otto Greif November 24, 2015

        It’s a fact they constrained spending, it’s something Democrats complain about when they aren’t bragging about reducing deficit.

        Reply
        1. Bren Frowick November 24, 2015

          You are clearly as impervious to facts as any other right wing troll.

          Reply
          1. Jay Singh November 26, 2015

            Sequestration slowed spending, Obama opposed it, but took credit for the resultant lower deficit.

            Reply
  8. Otto Greif November 23, 2015

    Keep pushing the “refugees”, it helps Trump.

    Reply
  9. Otto Greif November 23, 2015

    Obamacare is imploding.

    Reply
  10. Otto Greif November 23, 2015

    Job growth has been anemic and the labor participation rate is as low as it was under the disastrous presidency of Jimmy Cater.

    Reply
    1. FireBaron November 23, 2015

      Actually it hasn’t. And if you would get that rectocraniotomy you have been avoiding, you would see it.

      Reply
      1. Otto Greif November 23, 2015

        Actually it has, go look at the data.

        Reply
        1. Paul Bass November 23, 2015

          Step away from Fox and slowly remove your tin hat ,otto.

          Reply
          1. Otto Greif November 23, 2015

            I’m using BLS data, what are you using, besides drugs?

            Reply
          2. joe schmo November 26, 2015

            Priceless:)

            Reply
        2. Bren Frowick November 23, 2015

          Were you perhaps attempting to use THIS chart to support your contention? Because, you know, it doesn’t…
          Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

          2005 134 239 135 363 176 243 375 196 66 84 337 158

          2006 277 315 281 182 24 77 206 185 156 3 209 172

          2007 237 88 188 78 145 71 -34 -17 86 83 117 97

          2008 15 -87 -79 -213 -183 -172 -210 -259 -452 -476 -765 -696

          2009 -796 -703 -824 -684 -355 -467 -325 -217 -227 -201 -6 -283

          2010 32 -68 161 247 518 -130 -64 -39 -49 248 121 89

          2011 75 167 206 321 103 185 117 128 223 183 146 226

          2012 380 247 216 87 113 35 177 188 144 213 164 293

          2013 205 314 115 187 219 127 164 256 150 225 317 109

          2014 166 188 225 330 236 286 249 213 250 221 423 329

          2015 201 266 119 187 260 245 223 153 137(P) 271(P)

          Reply
          1. Otto Greif November 24, 2015

            That’s anemic job growth.

            Reply
    2. Insinnergy November 23, 2015

      Idiot troll is idiotic.

      Reply
  11. bcarreiro November 23, 2015

    Republicans or Democrats don’t mean anything when it comes to your thanksgiving. We have Isis because of ignorance and greed. Some people have it to good.

    Reply
  12. Timmi November 23, 2015

    Trump is a curiousity to me. Often elderly people run for president. By this I mean 60+, which is fine. But most have some history of public or civic service. All his life the only one Trump has served is himself. Now suddenly, with maybe 10 years left in his life, he wants to serve us, wants to “make America great again”, whatever that means. It’s suspicious. He’s like a kid who has it all and is bored with all his toys.
    Another thing is, he’s putting out a lot of negativity and it seems to be working for him. He’s always raving about something. The man’s a demagogue. Nothing more. I don’t believe he has anything positive to offer our country, though I’m sure quite a few would disagree.

    Reply
    1. @HawaiianTater November 23, 2015

      Trump absolutely has something positive to offer our country; keeping Republicans far, far away from the WH.

      Reply
    2. sara November 24, 2015

      I think he meant to be doing the same thing he has done the last few elections. He blows a bit of hot air, gets some media attention, pouts that he can’t win, then goes back to his noisy little world. This time his nonsense happened to catch the wave of open racism that has stormed the GOP. Now he can’t figure out how to get out of it. No matter how outrageous he gets, they still keep cheering him. He may even have started to believe his own hype and think he wants Trump for president.

      Reply
  13. dtgraham November 23, 2015

    So that’s the deal with United Healthcare. I just finished having a series of exchanges with one of our long time Republican contributors on the weekend where he was crying the blues to me about how Obamacare is abusing poor United Healthcare. I thought he was going to compose a Mississippi delta Muddy Waters blues song for United Healthcare right then and there.

    Funny, he’s paying an absolutely exorbitant premium and deductible and also didn’t seem to care at all about those people that red state governors denied medicaid to. He also appeared to be deeply spiritual and offered to pray for all misled, decadent liberals on a range of issues. Yet, his spiritual priorities were apparently focused on the private health insurance company that’s draining his bank account. He also seemed utterly perplexed as to where health insurance might come from if the private insurance companies weren’t underwriting it.

    I’ve been reading the National Memo long enough now that I no longer spend any time wondering about these things. I don’t ask these questions any more.

    Reply
    1. charleo1 November 27, 2015

      I’ve been really busy lately, and had almost forgotten just how well you write. Well said!

      Reply
      1. dtgraham November 27, 2015

        Thanks charleo. I give it my best shot but I’m no professional writer. I’ve been going through one of those periods where I’ve been checking out the National Memo more often and I haven’t seen hide nor hair of you. You must have been busy.

        Hide nor hair. When driving I’ve been listening to old half hour radio broadcasts of Gunsmoke 2-3 times a week, from the 1940’s I think, with William Conrad as Matt Dillon. Must be rubbing off.

        Reply
  14. Steve Batchelor November 23, 2015

    I understand that it is essential to keep plugging along with trying to explain things to Repugs that even a 5 year old would understand and agree with you…BUT…Every time I get into a conversion with one all it does is make me feel like I am talking to a basketball…It’s big and round like a Repugs head and EMPTY!

    Reply
    1. @HawaiianTater November 23, 2015

      At least basketballs serve a useful purpose…

      Reply
      1. CrankyToo November 24, 2015

        You’re killin’ me, Tater…

        Reply
      2. TheResistance November 25, 2015

        Yes, basketballs are very useful; they distract the monkeys from their usual murdering, raping and pillaging.

        Reply
  15. Darsan54 November 23, 2015

    You’re assuming your Republiclan relatives will actually listen.

    Reply
    1. sara November 24, 2015

      No, it assumes the young and impressionable at the table could benefit from hearing real facts. Giving the stubbornly clueless free rein to dominate the conversation is very unfair to them.

      Reply
    2. Jay Singh November 26, 2015

      Rather than commenting on issues, if you have to discuss politics at the thanksgiving table (I certainly would not), right leaning people can ASK these questions of their benevolent, left of center, loved one:

      * Why do Democrats only seem to discuss homelessness when there is a Republican President? Do they care about the people in that situation? Or do they just want to press a political point?

      *Why is Al Sharpton a viable Democratic party figure? Was the Tawana Brawley hoax merely a mulligan?

      *Is it racist to have second thoughts about affirmative action?

      Will the Democrats listen?

      Reply
  16. HowardBrazee November 23, 2015

    The United States is a federation. We can try out many ideas state by state. And we can compare states that practice austerity with states that spend money on social programs and see which work the best in real life (reality should trump theory).

    Reply
    1. @HawaiianTater November 23, 2015

      We already know which works better. The problem is people who prefer ideology over actual facts.

      Reply
      1. Rabbi Bergblattsteinowitz November 25, 2015

        You see many of them writing for this site.

        Reply
  17. Rabbi Bergblattsteinowitz November 25, 2015

    Be good goyim now.

    Reply
  18. OllieK November 25, 2015

    If I hear any of this false propaganda from any of my relatives at Thanksgiving, they will get an earful of the truth they refuse to hear. Best line in this piece: “Accepting refugees…makes us safer.” Too many lies to count here.

    Reply
    1. Bren Frowick November 26, 2015

      And yet you are incapable of refuting any of the supposed “lies” and resort to assuming that merely labeling them as such constitutes an argument people should take seriously? What Higher “truth” do you imagine you possess that can repeal reality?

      Reply
  19. Richard November 25, 2015

    How about just saying, “Happy Thanksgiving!” and dropping politics for a day no matter what side you’re on?

    Reply
    1. Davis Johnson November 25, 2015

      Democrats just can’t drop it. Everything to them is politics.

      Reply
  20. Phil Christensen November 25, 2015

    We’re experiencing the best job growth of the century. I’m just going to reflect on this breath-taking stupidity for a moment.

    Reply
    1. Bren Frowick November 26, 2015

      The facts are clear. Are you really trying to deny reality?

      Reply
      1. Jay Singh November 26, 2015

        Numerical facts are clear, we are 15 years into a new century, small database, and not really high quality of jobs. Don’t deny reality.

        Reply
        1. Bren Frowick November 26, 2015

          The reality is based on JOB GROWTH. The numbers on that score are indisputable, and trying to deny that is ignorance squared.

          Reply
          1. Jay Singh November 26, 2015

            I did not dispute the job numbers. I also said we have a short time period, the first 15+ years of a century.

            I referred to the quality of job was not real high. Care to disagree with that? If so, go debate Senator Sanders.

            Reply
      2. Phil Christensen November 26, 2015

        A liberal using the word “facts.” That’s so cute.

        Reply
  21. Jay Singh November 26, 2015

    Best retail hamburger flipper job market I can ever recall. We just had the last quarter GDP growth rate re-estimated up to 2.1% from 1.5%. Wow, a 2.1% growth rate used to be considered slow growth.

    We are in 2015, barely into this century, and Obama has been President for six and a half years, so “best in the century” is a very small database.

    I hope we get more countries to help in the ISIS battle, I guess ISIS graduated from the JV squad.

    Refugees – lots of questions need to be answered about how we vet, especially the men, but most of the response from Obama and supporters is that to question the vetting process is racism.

    After all the contortions about Obamacare, we have seen exploding deductibles, and of course, “you can keep your doctor, period” did not pan out, did it?

    Don’t ask this at the dinner table, but where did the $2500 of health insurance premium savings go?

    The deficit is now as low as it was before the great recession. Long term projections are far from favorable. Obama appoints the Simpson Bowles commission and then, just as with the Republicans, refuses to implement the majority based recommendations, which never became full fledged official recommendations because the super majority level never got reached. But, Obama knows what the recommendations are, and will not act on them.

    Obama and Democratic cohorts support sanctuary cities on steroids. Not even serial felons with numerous deportations seem to be worth reporting to the federal government. That results in tragedies. But, since illegal immigration will swell the numbers of Democrats, the tragedies are collateral damage to the Democrats goals.

    The people killed in the bombing of the “Doctors Without Borders” hospital can’t hear Democratic propaganda, that awful occurrence, had relatively little publicity compared to the accusations that would have come from Democrats if the accident had occurred under a Republican.

    I think the Thanksgiving table is a place to avoid politics. This forum is not. The article is a joke.

    Reply
    1. Bren Frowick November 26, 2015

      Oh my, the bitterness…. One might point out that, for one, Obamacare isn’t even mentioned in the article, but if you want to whine about your insurance premiums, you might better direct your crying at the insurance industry and, especially, Big Pharma, which are using ACA as a boogeyman on which to blame their unconscionable greed.

      As to the deficit, the undeniable FACT is that it has been slashed by two thirds, and long term projections are just… projections. They depend entirely on assuming that current trends never change, which is never the case, and if Republican obstruction is ever removed, we could easily return to the policies of the Clinton era that had us on track to elimination of, not just the deficit, which had already been eliminated, but of the entire National DEBT, which trends W swiftly aborted and plunged us into the abyss. What would current Republican “leaders” do differently from the REAL worst president in our history, W? Apparently Not. One. Thing.

      The same goes for growth of GDP: 2.1% in the 21st century is pretty decent for a fully mature economy like that of the United States, and certainly better than the average for W’s two terms. If you are serious about understanding the way GDP and the economy generally fares under Obama (or Democratic presidents generally) v. W (or Republicans generally), take a little time to peruse this article: http://economyinperspective.com/inflation, keeping in mind that it only shows Obama’s first term, when he was busily cleaning up the previous administration’s mess, and which makes that 2.1% number look pretty decent.

      As to the hospital bombing…. you can’t really be serious. It has received PLENTY of publicity, and a number of high ranking military officers have been suspended as a result: http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-troops-suspended-after-afghan-hospital-bombing-1448472961

      In contrast to Republican attitudes towards the inevitable mistakes and horrors of wartime, which generally dismiss such events as “collateral damage” as they move on to the next massacre: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualties_in_the_war_in_Afghanistan_(2001–present)

      As to sanctuary cities and illegal immigration, that ball is clearly in the Republicans’ court. They control Congress and can pass reform whenever they wish, but instead prefer to let it twist in the wind while they stir up the uninformed with hysterical and. yes, racist scare tactics in order to get votes. Meanwhile, illegal immigration from Mexico (which seems to be the scariest source for Trump et al) is WAY down, with more people LEAVING than coming in last year, and has been stable overall for years: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/19/5-facts-about-illegal-immigration-in-the-u-s/

      Constantly squealing about a couple of isolated incidents in which an illegal committed a crime (after having found access to guns WAY too easy – but that is yet another issue) in no way changes the picture on immigration, but is the typical way right wingers try to attack: use an isolated anecdote and make believe it is representative of the entire issue.

      ISIS (or Daesh, as I prefer to call them, since they hate it so badly they have threatened to cut out the tongue of anyone using the term) has stalled out in its efforts to expand its territory and the latest foreign attacks (by homegrown thugs, NOT refugees) are a sign of a group desperately looking for a new strategy to attract recruits. They looted a tremendous amount of wealth, but are spending it like Niagara Falls water, while the US has launched thousands of air strikes against them, and is supported by a wide and expanding coalition.

      And finally, refugees…. the process for vetting refugees is long and comprehensive. Could it be strengthened? Maybe. But the focus on refugees is simply absurd, given that we allow a few thousand heavily vetted refugees into the country each year, but tens of millions of other travelers with virtually NO vetting. The 9/11 hijackers all came into the country on student/tourist/business visas. Should we bring the world economy to its knees by banning ALL travelers? That there is a strong taint of racism in the right’s hysteria over refugees is undeniable: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34860882

      Your post was long, and so my response is forced to be longer, as it is always easier to use a bumper sticker than an actual argument. So apologies for the length, and have a Happy Thanksgiving (perhaps we will both be better able to leave politics at the door, now 😉 )

      Reply
      1. Jay Singh November 26, 2015

        I am not a Republican, Your response is a joke. You compare things to Bush 43, whom I never characterized as a good President. Easy to look better when compared to a terrible President.

        *Evil big pharma existed when Obama spoke of the $2500 savings, he did not say we would get that if greed by big pharma ended.

        *The deficit is down from a record level, is projected to go up, and Obama ignored his own commission. No doubt about it.

        * 2.1% has never been a good growth rate, If Obama had said 2.1% was a good growth rate, in 2008, he would have been laughed off the planet.

        * I said the hospital tragedy has had relatively little publicity compared to what would have occurred in the media if it had occurred under Bush 41/43 or Reagan. I never defended Republicans on their collateral damage statements, so your link is not relevant.

        *Was Obama right or wrong in the JV comment about ISIS?

        *Obama should have concentrated on addressing the fears people have about Syrian refugees, instead of accusing these people of being fear mongers. It is the modus operandi of Obama to demonize people opposing his policies. I did not suggest banning all travelers. Your reference to it is nonsense. Several reasoned public official find fault with the vetting process. Obama can address these concerns, not demonize those who express them, or let his supporters like you go on tirades against people who have legitimate worries about the process. Demonize, yes, dialog,no.

        *The policy of sanctuary cities permits serial felons with numerous deportations to be shielded. We are not talking about hamburger flippers. And to blame the killings on lack of gun control is sad. The concept of shielding felons, as opposed to hard working, otherwise law abiding people, from deportation is wrong.

        The only bumper sticker response was from you. I stated my views, and you brought in the views of extremists, as if anyone who found fault with Obama were such an extremist. At no point did I say anything good about Bush, or Republicans, but your talking points response is the only way you can frame things.

        Typical intolerant Obama supporter.

        Reply
        1. Bren Frowick November 26, 2015

          Hmm, finishing your tirade of nonsense with an ad hominem attack merely demonstrates what a failure your “arguments” are. I’m done wasting time on someone who clings to their failed ideology like the mast of a sinking ship, and with about the same utility.

          Reply
          1. Jay Singh November 26, 2015

            I smoked you out, and you are throwing in the towel, No problem.

            Reply
      2. Buck Ofama November 26, 2015

        From the article:

        “Another piece of news cheering up conservatives is that United
        Healthcare , the nation’s largest insurance company, says it’s not
        making enough money from 0bamacare.”

        The deficit is currently just shy of $19 trillion:

        http://www.usgovernmentdebt.us/

        That’s more than double what it was under George W. Bush

        “Life is tough, but it’s tougher when you’re stupid.” – John Wayne

        Reply
        1. Jay Singh November 26, 2015

          No one should be cheered about a potential withdrawal of a health insurer from the marketplace, no one should enjoy misery befalling innocent policy holders. That is part of the tragedy of such polarization in politics.

          I don’t think Obama supporters are stupid, they are, like most zealots on either side of the spectrum, believers that the end justifies the means. Obama can say any nonsense he wants during a campaign, and his supporters will say “just being a politician” Supporters of a candidate play that game. Obama supporters also have this view that anything but a solid left Democrat is so horrible, that Obama and his like must win at any cost. Hence, a few broken promises are OK if they protect us from those horrible gun toting, anti choice, greedy, (add in another pejorative) Republicans. They support “by any means necessary” to get their way.

          This lack of scruples is also totally true of the committed Republicans, it is just that right now, the White House has a Democrat. Hence my emphasis here on Obama.

          Reply
          1. Buck Ofama November 27, 2015

            If you want to prevent withdrawal of health insurers from the marketplace, then you’ll need to repeal Husseincare. Of course, Husseincare was never designed to make health insurers prosper. It was designed to make them go bankrupt, after which the left will say, “see, the private sector isn’t the answer. We’re going to have to have a government-imposed single payer health care system.” Then, we can be Canada or the U.K.

            If you don’t like either Republicans or Democrats, I’m afraid you’re just going to be out of luck. Do recall, however, that the ONLY party that has ANYONE calling for the repeal of Husseincare is the Republican Party.

            Reply
          2. Jay Singh November 27, 2015

            You are right about the design of Obamacare. It was designed to add some people to the insurance rolls, fall well short of its promises, and create the “proof” that single payer was the answer. “We got more people health insurance, but the greed of the drug companies and insurance companies ,means we must go to the next step. If you want to finish the job, we must have single payer”.

            Anyone with a pulse knew that was the game plan.

            Reply
        2. Sand_Cat December 22, 2015

          idiot.
          You’re too blind and stupid to even bother trying to educate.

          Reply
  22. newguy68 November 26, 2015

    The “Democrat” that just got elected as Governor of Louisiana is Pro-Life, Pro-Gun and Pro-Christianity. I really don’t think that is someone the liberals are going to brag about. I would think he is more Republican than other Republicans.

    Reply
    1. Jay Singh November 26, 2015

      The opponent, Vitter, was a man who had been totally discredited. But Edwards would have been derided by Democrats as a religious fanatic, anti- choice, and a gun toting nut, EXCEPT for the fact the governor- elect is a Democrat. When a political party needs another victory, even if their candidate is almost totally opposed to their ideology, they will muffle their ideological views.

      Reply
      1. newguy68 November 26, 2015

        Agree. I’m glad Vitter is gone as he is a drag on the party. Repubs still hold a lot of sway in LA and will keep Edwards feet to the fire, so to speak.

        Reply
  23. Buck Ofama November 26, 2015

    “Then we’ll see who’s smiling next Thanksgiving.”

    I will, dimwit, because the only place any of this is true is in your left wing fantasy world.

    Reply
  24. Claim Proclaim April 20, 2017

    My retort to both Dems and Republicans is that neither Hillary, Barack, The Donald, are the savior of the world.
    You will not face any of these three on your death bed.

    Also all self-rightousness either by Dems or Republicans is like “filthy rags.’
    Read Isaiah and “get over it.”

    Reply

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.