Type to search

5 Ways The Republican Party Has Sabotaged Our Economic Recovery

Memo Pad Politics

5 Ways The Republican Party Has Sabotaged Our Economic Recovery



The Dow is over 15,000 and continually testing new highs. The unemployment rate and unemployment claims are at lows that haven’t been seen since before the economic crisis of 2008. If Mitt Romney were president, Republicans would be hailing him as the new Reagan with a better dye job.

Yet a right-wing group is suggesting that President Obama should be impeached for wrecking the stock market and slowing job growth.

The truth is that the Republican Party made a conscious decision to slow the economic recovery the moment the president took office. “After three hours of strategizing, they decided they needed to fight Obama on everything,” PBS’ Frontline reported.

To deny Obama a second term, they knew they had to slow the recovery. And their plan worked in 2010. The unemployment rate was rising as the GOP swept to the largest congressional landslide in the last half-century. However, their plans were thwarted as they paused their most aggressive efforts for the 2012 campaign and job growth continued at a steady pace of around 160,000 new jobs a month.

The Economic Policy Institute’s Josh Bivens and Andrew Fieldhouse summarized how the congressional GOP actively smothered the economic recovery. But the effort to cut spending and spread destructive myths about the economy united the entire party and could have easily caused a recession, if it had only been more effective.

Here are five ways the Republican Party has tried to sabotage our economy.

AP Photo


  1. montanabill May 10, 2013

    If you believe that taking money out of the economy then putting a percentage of it back will grow the economy, then yes, the Republicans slowed that growth. If you believe that Obamacare will help the economy, then yes, the Republicans slowed that growth. If you believe the President actually had a ‘jobs program’, then yes, the Republicans obstructed it. If you believe that allowing ever more indigent, low educated people to illegally enter the U.S. to get work or welfare, then yes, the Republicans slowed that growth. If you believe that borrowing ever more massive sums of money from China will grow the economy, then yes, the Republicans slowed that growth. If you believe those things, be sure to buy a lottery ticket to pay for your retirement.

    1. TZToronto May 10, 2013

      66% of the $16 trillion debt is U.S. owned. 8.1% is owed to China, 7% to Japan. That’s about $1.3 trillion owed to China. Most people think that China holds most of the U.S> debt, but that’s not the case.

      1. montanabill May 10, 2013

        You are right. China is used euphemistically for the 53% foreign owners of our debt. We owe a lot to ourselves via the IOU’s to the Fed and SS.

        1. If we continue buying Chinese products: the of course they have a source of lending money! People wake up and see the truth! Companies are slaving for cheap and bulk prosuction of their own profits! Are we that stupid to have the audacity to realize the America is a rich nation… But we choose to be selfish and exploit humans for personal gain and not the recovery of the greatest nation on earth! Stand up innovate and sell American for America!

          1. idamag May 12, 2013

            When we buy “made in China” we are also supporting slave labor. They use prisoners to produce a lot of that stuff.

      2. Barbara Morgan May 12, 2013

        We would not owe China anything if Bush had not borrowed money from China to finance his two, one of which was illegal, wars and then use Social Security as colleratral for the loans. IF we owe China 8.1% to China and owe Japan 7% how can you say that China doesn’t hold most of the US debt? When I went to school 8.1% was more than 7%, has math changed so much that 7% is more than 8.1%?

        1. TZToronto May 12, 2013

          How can China, at 8.1%, hold MOST of the U.S. debt? The U.S. owes ITSELF 66% of all the debt. When I went to school, 66% was more than 8.1% (and it still is). What you mean is that China holds more U.S. debt than any other foreign creditor, right?

          1. Barbara Morgan May 12, 2013

            I was answering your posted percentages as they read to me. It read like you saying we owed Japan more than we did China so China wasn’t our biggest debt holder. I guess I misunderstood what you were actually saying.

    2. charleo1 May 10, 2013

      Come on Bill. That ship has sailed. Of course the Republicans
      opposed every remedy that had been used by every Congress,
      and every President, since FDR to stimulate a contracting economy.
      You can’t tell me, that in the most severe recession, since 1929.
      They all just decided, they were going to rewrite the book on how
      to stop a sliding economy, plagued by extremely weak demand,
      and unemployment, by taking a meat ax to the budget. Not to
      mention, reminding a skittish nation, how terrible everything is.
      Just in case somebody would gather up enough courage, and
      actually take their billfold out, and buy something. I think it was
      plainly evident what the GOP was up to. And I have no doubt,
      they are an indescribable, bunch of stomach turning, pricks.
      Mostly, because they are pricks. But also, what they have been
      willing to put people through, in their efforts to put their sorry
      asses back in the political driver’s seat.

      1. Scott Ladd May 11, 2013

        And Barry has done what, to make things better?

        1. charleo1 May 11, 2013

          I’ll keep it simple Scott. For those who fail to see the
          value in President Obama’s economic policies. He
          kept Mitt Romney out of the White House.

          1. montanabill May 11, 2013

            Much to the detriment of the 15% of our population under and un employed.

          2. charleo1 May 11, 2013

            I don’t recall Romney ever suggesting he had a plan
            for the unemployed. He had several plans for making
            the gainfully employed, unemployed. Like letting GM
            go broke. And several ways to personally enrich himself,
            by eliminating jobs here, and employing cheap labor on
            the other side of the world. Then, stashing the profits from
            such deals, in the Cayman Islands. Where, undoubtedly
            he created jobs for some of the Islanders. But, all in all,
            his concern for Americans, were generally centered
            around safety net issues. Or, more specifically, Americans
            had a safety net, and in his opinion, they didn’t deserve it.
            Irresistibly charming to some, I know. But for most of us,
            he bombed.

          3. montanabill May 11, 2013

            He had a plan for bringing the economy back, but most of you were too distracted by the totally irrelevant Cayman Island stuff to understand that he had created orders of magnitude more jobs than were lost in his business ventures. If, and when, you ever understand economics and free enterprise, maybe you’ll come to realize that a very good man was demonized with gross distortions and outright lies, much to the country’s detriment.

          4. johninPCFL May 11, 2013

            “Orders of magnitude”? You know that means powers of ten, right? As in hundreds of times more, at least? So, actually not, but good try.
            You do know that Romney’s plan for most of the businesses that he took over was to buy them with money from “backers”, then loot the pension funds and load them up with debt by borrowing in the business name against assets (while paying himself and his “backers” with the borrowed funds), then walk away and let the bankruptcy courts handle the mess? GST steel company, detailed during the campaign, was $40MM in debt when Romney took it over, he and his cronies were paid over $250MM in “fees”, and the company went bankrupt owing more than $400MM. That’s a great record, huh?

          5. montanabill May 11, 2013

            That is patently untrue and is a continuation of the lies.

          6. johninPCFL May 11, 2013

            Over 1000 GST employees lost their jobs. Did Robme’s companies hire over 100,000 new employees (the minimum for “orders of magnitude”)? Didn’t think so.
            GST owed $40MM when Robme took over. They owed over $400MM as declared in bankruptcy court pleadings after Robme bailed out. Robme and his cohorts declared over $250MM in “fees” collected while Robme controlled GST. All those are facts. Robme, of course, rebated none of those “fees” to pay the vendors who went unpaid to support Robme’s overseas bank accounts.

          7. johninPCFL May 11, 2013

            I almost forgot, Robme and his cohorts paid $18MM for controlling interest in GST, and paid themselves $40MM from the GST pension fund immediately. They collected $250MM in “fees”, so got over a 10 to 1 ROI. That’s what leveraged buyouts are all about.

          8. idamag May 12, 2013

            Bill must be way out in the boonies. Several of those companies and their former employees were featured in news programs.

          9. montanabill May 13, 2013

            In order to ‘refresh your memory’, try this:
            http://www dot politifact dot com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/may/16/barack-obama/obama-ad-claims-romney-bain-left-misery-wake-gst-s/

          10. johninPCFL May 13, 2013

            Yes, they rated it “Mostly TRUE”. In case you missed reading the article: “After its initial $8 million investment, the new company issued $125 million in bonds — paying $65 million to stockholders in 1994, according to GS Technologies Operating Co. filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Bain collected a $36.1 million dividend, according to Reuters.
            GS Technologies announced plans to spend $98 million modernizing the Kansas City plant and in 1995, issued another $125 million in bonds to pay for a merger with another wire rod maker in South Carolina. Bain reinvested $16.5 million of its earlier dividend, Reuters wrote.
            GST’s total debt in 1995: $378 million.
            “Paying distributions with debt is not uncommon,” Campbell Harvey, a finance professor at Duke University, told Reuters. “The only thing that strikes me as a bit unusual is the size of the dividend. There would be logic in them saving some cash for a downturn.”

            So, in sum, Bain bought in for $8MM, paid themselves $36MM immediatley on their $8MM investment (plus part of the $65MM stockholder payout later), leveraged the company debt up to $378MM while they re-invested $16.5MM, and then walked away leaving the debtors with nothing. In comparison: I said they paid $18MM instead of their $16.5MM, paid themselves $40MM instead of $36MM, and left the company crippled with $400MM of debt instead of $378MM plus costs until they were liquidated. I’ll happily correct my rounding errors.

          11. Barbara Morgan May 12, 2013

            If untrue why did the US taxpayers have to replace the steel company workers pension fund that was federally insured? Why don’t you go and talk to the people that Romney stole their pension money from and see what is the truth. The steel company isn’t the only company that he stole pension funds from and even as he campaigned for President and was telling the American working class how much he cared for, he was closing down a plant in Indiana and getting ready to ship about 150 or more jobs and equipment to China. The company he shipped jobs and equipment to China December 31,2012 is now 50% by the Chinese Army as are all companies that American companies owners have shipped to China. China whose leader talks everyday about attacking the USA. Some nice guy Mitt Romney not.

          12. montanabill May 13, 2013

            All that makes good Democrat talking points, but is only fragments of the whole story with embellishment. Those who wish to remain closed minded will agree with your post. Those who are a little more open minded with investigate the complete history of Romney and Bain Capital with an understanding of how capitalism works.

          13. plc97477 May 12, 2013

            It is all easy to look up information. why don’t you give it a try?

          14. montanabill May 13, 2013

            I would offer you precisely the same advice.

          15. kayatz3 May 14, 2013

            Really? I think the people of Freeport Illinois would argue that point, since they were the latest victims of Bain and that’s romneys baby.

          16. montanabill May 15, 2013

            Bain may be Romney’s baby, but by the time the Sensata decision was made, Romney was no longer making any management decisions at Bain. Look at the total of Bain’s record during the Romney management years. Learn how a company like Bain operates and what their role is in business.

          17. charleo1 May 11, 2013

            Bill, the Cayman Island, “stuff,” may have been totally
            irrelevant. Small potatoes. But, he refused to allow the
            Country to see for itself. His call. But, when I have to
            pay my taxes, call me small minded. But, I want everyone
            that owes taxes, to pay those taxes. Just like I have to.
            And he didn’t have his money in a Cayman bank, because
            he likes the climate, and needs some walking around money,
            when he goes island hopping. How much understanding
            of economics, and free enterprise, does it take to know a
            tax cheat when we see one? And the most injurious things
            said about Mitt Romney, were said by Mitt Romney.
            Not distortions perpetrated by the Left.

          18. plc97477 May 12, 2013

            You are correct. He did a bang up job of hurting his chances.

          19. idamag May 12, 2013

            And Bill fails to see that the greedys’ jobs overseas are jobs lost in the US. Bill claims he made his fortune in medicine. That doesn’t say whether he made it selling oxycontin on the streets or some cure all snake oil stuff.

          20. montanabill May 13, 2013

            Since you are an expert on avoiding taxes by using Cayman banks, tell us how it is done. Are we sending before tax money to avoid taxes or after tax money? If the money from that account is used for overseas investing and never comes back into the states, why is our government entitled to any of it or do I have that wrong?

          21. charleo1 May 13, 2013

            I am not an expert on dodging taxes. I don’t get to
            play with my money in that way. But, the Cayman
            Islands is a well known haven, where the well to do
            stash their money in a web of shell corporate accounts,
            with various P.O Box addresses, located around the
            world. And the institutions there in the Caymans are
            notorious for being less than helpful to the I.R.S. in
            tracing the funds back to their U.S, owners. And, I am
            pretty sure profits on overseas investments are not
            subject to U.S. taxes, as long as they are kept offshore.
            So, there are billions being held in various places.
            And there are compelling reasons for these companies
            to bring these profits back to the U.S. Security, being
            one. But also, there are other advantages to these
            companies in bringing these monies back. Like paying
            U.S, stockholders dividends, and buying back their own
            stock, which, like the corporation, is located here.
            So, Congress in 2004, or 5, I’m not sure. Not important,
            But, they cut what they said, was a one time deal
            with these companies. If they would repatriate the money.
            Bring it back, they would only tax them 5%. And they
            took the government up on deal. But, now once again
            there is quite a pile built up, and once again, they
            are looking to make a deal. Personally, I wish they
            would deal with this issue, once and for all. The Country
            certainly needs the money in the economy. And the
            companies themselves enjoy many advantages by being
            headquartered here. Communications, are modern,
            well trained people are available, we have good transportation, and so they tell me, an excellent legal
            structure. Where the laws of business, and commerce,
            property Rights, and contracts can be enforced, regardless
            of where they happen to be doing business, But, the
            Caymans are synonymous with tax evasion.

          22. montanabill May 15, 2013

            You are right, the Cayman’s are synonymous with tax evasion. The only problem is, it is legal tax evasion. In fact, it is really not even tax evasion. It is banking for out-of-country business. Any money sent from the U.S. to the Cayman’s is subject to U.S. taxes. Any money sent from the Cayman’s to the U.S. on which tax has not been paid, is subject to taxes.

          23. Independent1 May 11, 2013

            Sorry Bill but Mitt’s plan to create 12 million jobs in 4 years was proven to be categorical fairytale as NOT ONE of the studies that supposedly backed up his claim was valid: either the study was for a different set of assumptions, or the study was for a longer period than 4 years (like over 10 years) or the study didn’t exist. And his tax plan was debunct by over 300 economists as : “it doesn’t compute” or “if implemented the deficits will skyrocket”; Not only is Mitt Romney a much bigger American JOB DESTROYER, than he was ever an American job creator, I’m startting to realize now why Mitt didn’t want Obama to bailout the auto industry – he was hoping that he and his rich hedge fund budies like Paul Singer could end up buying out GM and Chrysler for a song (like they did Delphi) and destroy those to companies like they did Delphi so they could ship GM and Chryslers auto manufacturing to CHINA, just like they did Delphi!! Here’s some excerpts from THE NATION that give you just a little flavor of that (Mitt Romney is the third most worthless human being on the planet behind Bush and Cheney!)

            Romney has slammed the bailout as a payoff to the auto workers union. But that certainly wasn’t true for the bailout of Delphi. Once the hedge funders, including Singer—a deep-pocketed right-wing donor and activist who serves as chair of the conservative, anti-union Manhattan Institute—took control of the firm, they rid Delphi of every single one of its 25,200 unionized workers.

            Of the twenty-nine Delphi plants operating in the United States when the hedge funders began buying up control, only four remain, with not a single union production worker. Romney’s “job creators” did create jobs—in China, where Delphi now produces the parts used by GM and other major automakers here and abroad. Delphi is now incorporated overseas, leaving the company with 5,000 employees in the United States (versus almost 100,000 abroad).

            Third Point’s Daniel Loeb, whose net worth of $1.3 billion owes much to his share in the Delphi windfall, told his fund’s backers this past July that Delphi remains an excellent investment because it has “virtually no North American unionized labor” and, thanks to US taxpayers, “significantly smaller pension liabilities than almost all of its peers.”

          24. Barbara Morgan May 12, 2013

            Independent 1, you forgot to add that Delphi and all other American companies that moved American jobs to China are now in a 50/50 partnership with the Red Chinese Army. Whose leader threatens this Country everyday.

          25. Independent1 May 12, 2013

            I wasn’t aware of that; thanks for the update!

          26. idamag May 12, 2013

            And we heard Romney’s own words describing his liaisons with China. He talked about one of his own firms there, where they locked the girls in at night, after a 16 hour shift, to “protect their jobs from others.”

          27. idamag May 13, 2013

            I’m not distracted now. Please put his plan on this board with credible backup.

          28. Melvin Miller May 11, 2013

            Well put, and all so true.

          29. idamag May 12, 2013

            One of the most brilliant descriptions of Romney was “vulture capitalism.”

          30. charleo1 May 12, 2013

            Rick Perry, wasn’t it? I’ll say this. If the Right Wing
            were trying to field a candidate that epitomized a
            good deal of what had gone wrong with the economy.
            How the exodus of jobs in manufacturing, and overseas
            investment, due to cheap labor, had decimated the blue
            collar, Middle Class. Mitt Romney was the poster boy
            for all of it. And there was clearly no love lost between
            Romney, and the other candidates. They thought he was
            a pompous ass! And when Newt Gingrich, thinks you’re
            a pompous ass. You really have had to reach a new
            level of pompous ass-ed-ness!

          31. cats33 May 11, 2013

            Fraud kept Mitt Romney out of the WH. Dems are the party of dirty. The end justifies the means

          32. Independent1 May 12, 2013

            Nice try, but no cigar!! Virtually every case of bona fide fraud in the 2012 election cycle has been shown to be on the GOP side: like having canvasers outside polling places convincing people that they would record their votes and then throwing them away; or calling people on the phone and saying that they would record their votes for them which is illegal in almost every state; or setting up billboards in areas which gave false information on when and where people could go to vote; or setting up billboards with intimidating threats for minorities about risking being jailed if they appeared to vote using all kinds of false schemes; and even using voting machines that were proven to have been gimmicked to change people’s votes from Obama to Romney; and it went on and on. Had all these irregularities been adjusted for, the landslide would have been far worse.

          33. idamag May 12, 2013

            cats33 is just another one of our resident nut’s user names.

          34. Independent1 May 12, 2013

            Charle, and that’s really a big accomplishment. Had Romney been elected, not only would America have become the world’s first corporate run nation, it’s very likely that America would have also lost a large chunk of its auto industry to China – GM and Chrysler. Shortly before the election, Romney convinced a number of CEOs to take a more proactive part in getting him elected by having them send intimidating letters to their employees stating that if Obama was elected that a large number of employees may be terminated; at least the Koch Bros and the CEOs of BofA, GE and several others did just that. Can you begin to imagine how corporate influence in elections would have snowballed in upcoming elections had Romney been elected. Mitt would have been nothing but a corporate figurehead – doing everything he could to get legislation passed that favored corporations. And you can be sure, that had Mitt been elected, there would have been no Auto Bailout, and Mitt and his hedge fund buddies like Paul Singer, would have scooped up GM and Chrysler for almost next to nothing, and done exactly what they did to the auto industry’s primary small parts maker, Delphi, stripping it of it’s pension monies and shipping all the auto industry jobs to China – they shipped about 25,000 union jobs from Delphi to China and would likely have done the same to GM and Chrysler.

          35. charleo1 May 12, 2013

            And, we’re a long way from being out of the woods.
            If more people got it. I’ve been reading your comments,
            And you obviously get it. But, I’m not sure enough people
            are aware how close the Country is to being in the total
            control of big corporate. They see no black booted Gov’t
            henchmen, going door to door. And, they’ve got their guns!
            By crackie! But, the day corporate, essentially gains tactic
            advantage of the U.S. (If that happens.) I imagine being, and looking, very much like an ordinary day.

        2. Madelaine Ayers Henne May 11, 2013

          Please!! Do your own research!!

        3. adriancrutch May 11, 2013


      2. montanabill May 11, 2013

        Highly recommended: a course in economics, just not by Krugman.

        1. charleo1 May 11, 2013

          It seems to me, the whole Country got a lesson in
          one kind of economics during the Bush Administration.
          “Just not by Krugman.’ What’s the matter with at least
          giving Krugman a try? Afraid he will really mess up the
          economy? Throw millions out of work, and we have to
          bail out Wall Street, so the economy doesn’t collapse?
          That would be pretty bad alright.

          1. montanabill May 11, 2013

            Krugman’s theories have been tested and have proven to be total junk science. Actually, if you look closely at Bush’s record, he got into financial jail with the Democrat spurred easy money for mortgages and a Democrat controlled Congress. His major failing was not using his veto pen.

            In case you haven’t noticed, millions are out of work. We didn’t need to bail out Wall Street. Those guys got themselves into the mess and they were smart enough to have found another way out if they hadn’t successfully conned the government.

          2. johninPCFL May 11, 2013

            Yeah that explains the multi-trillion dollar prescription drug plan give-away. Oh, wait, that was in 2003…
            Well at least it explains how Obama’s stimulus that GWB signed into law came about. How did the GOP not use the filibuster to stop that? Oh yeah, they were FOR it before they were against it.

          3. montanabill May 11, 2013

            As I said, GWB didn’t use his veto pen when he should have.

          4. Molly Brett May 11, 2013

            because Bush’s 2003 Housing Initiative was his idea!

          5. montanabill May 12, 2013

            And taken to steroids by Barney and company.

          6. plc97477 May 12, 2013

            He also didn’t use what brain he had when he should have but lets not quibble.

          7. charleo1 May 11, 2013

            The last thing I want is to interfere with your religious
            beliefs. So, if you want to worship Wall Street, I’ll not
            say any more. Because it’s evident your faith is so
            complete, they could take away everything you own.
            And your reaction would be to praise how smart they
            had to be, to swindle you out of your last dime.

          8. montanabill May 11, 2013

            I know how painful this must be to you, but none of the stuff that happened on Wall St. had the least bit of effect on me.

          9. charleo1 May 11, 2013

            How painful to me that you weren’t effected by the
            Wall Street, “stuff.” Why would that be painful to me?
            All I’m saying is, that policies that enrich the few
            at the expense of everybody else, has not been a good
            thing for the Country. Even if, like you say, it didn’t effect
            you. So what’s the problem? Why should I care?
            Because, whether you choose to believe it, or not.
            Whether we are rich, or poor, today, our fortunes are tied
            together, as Americans. But, America cannot be a force
            for good in the world. Or, even guarantee our own
            security for very long. If we continue to have, a dwindling
            percentage at the top, who always, to do very well.
            As vast majorities of people in the Country, struggle to
            make ends meet. Struggle for opportunities, And fall short
            of their potential. Then, the Country itself is also denied of
            the contribution that individual would have made. So we all
            lose. And that’s what it’s coming to, if serious changes aren’t made. So, all this may not effect you now. But, it will.
            So, even if your concerns are all about you. There is a
            reason you should care.

          10. montanabill May 13, 2013

            Sure, we are being divided into rich and poor. That is the current government’s strategy because it benefits them. The thing that most followers of the National Memo fail to realize is that while the President and top Democrats demonize ‘the rich’, they are actually talking up the sins of a very small percentage of the rich while applying ‘fixes’ to the millions of other ‘rich’ who are simply the people who create and run the millions of businesses that employ most of the middle class. When they want to punish a ‘Wall Street executive’ by increasing their taxes, they are also increasing the taxes on the guy in your town who creates employment for you and your neighbors. When they create tens of thousand of pages of new regulations to ‘protect you’, those same regulations have a significant cost to the guy who employs you and your neighbors. Those same regulations won’t do much to affect the business, but they have an enormous cost restricting funds that might be available for business expansion. Couple that with higher taxes, and bingo, a no growth situation.

          11. charleo1 May 13, 2013

            Well, we are being divided between rich, and poor.
            There is the economic popularism engaged in by both sides.
            And, there is the widening gap, between the rich, and poor.
            The recording of Mitt Romney, and his reference to the 47%,
            is one kind of economic popularism, the wealthy engage in.
            And, I think a lot of people were reluctant to believe such
            talk existed, to any great extent. And, certainly not by a man
            such as Romney presented himself to be. Because the accusations leveled aganist Middle America, were not deserved. Their votes are not for sale. And, their daily activities, for the vast majority, are spent gainfully employed, in the business of supporting themselves, and their families. Not, looking, waiting, or expecting their government to take something from the wealthy, and hand it to them. Economic Popularism. Practiced by both sides. But, there is in fact, another kind of division between the rich, and everyone else in America. it is real. And accounts for a good number of the
            financial troubles faced by both rich, and poor. But of course the stakes for maintaining a certain standard of living for the
            Blue Collar, laborer, the working Middle Class, have never
            been higher. As their chances of falling into the ranks of
            the poor, and severely impoverished, and remaining there
            for the remainder of their working lives, has not been greater
            since those days of the 1930’s. So, what has happened
            to these honest, industrious, and capable Americans?
            I think one way to tally the tolls, is to count the things that they have lost, while working as hard as they can. They’ve lost retirement plans. Plans, that over the years, had been promised in lieu of pay increases. Plans they never seen a dime of. Because, the law allowed that money to be rolled into the net worth of the company. And the new owners
            had no obligation to honor promises, the former owners
            had made. The years of working for less, cannot be refunded.
            The subject of fairness we are told, has no place in the free market. If he could have sold his skills, and labor for more,
            he should have done so. That corporate was not in the fairness, business. If he wanted parity, he should join the Communist Party, and leave immediately for the U.S.S.R.
            Or, more likely, they said nothing. At least, he had health
            insurance. It came in handy, when the oldest boy broke
            his arm playing little league baseball. And, the job he was proud to have, did require this stoop move, over, and over.
            Eventually, back surgery could not be avoided. Now, they
            called him down to the office, and said the insurance rates,
            because of older employees, with health problems, were
            going thru the roof. No, they couldn’t fire him, but he took
            his two month severance pay, and went home anyway.
            Because, once they single you out. He’s seen it before, with
            this new outfit. Multiply this times a million. Times 10 million.
            Times 40 years. Times the homes lost, marriages broke,
            under the strain, and the pride a person loses, when they
            do something they had always promised themselves they
            would never do. Ask their government for help. Tally that
            up. And see if on balance, it all works out, fair, and square.
            Chalk it up to the political demagoguery, of divide, and conquer, if you choose. But, it’s bigger than that. It’s
            bigger than soak, or punish the rich. It’s about sacrificing a
            a way of life, to increase the already spectacular bottom
            lines. It’s about, not just lying down, to be run over, because
            some people are uncomfortable talking about inequities.
            And what happens when, year after year. Millionaire politicians, talk to millionaire lobbyists, about the billionaire’s concerns, until the system is so skewed out of balance,
            there is no Middle anymore. And no America, we would recognize either. So is it so wrong to ask? Hey! So who’s representing me nowadays?

          12. montanabill May 15, 2013

            Now tell the story of an average man who got an idea, scrounged for money from friends and relatives, or simply put another mortgage on his house to finance putting his idea to work. First it was just him, then he made enough by working 18 hour days, 7 days a week to be able to hire an employee. He kept working 18/7, no vacations, but he was able to not only add benefits for the first employee, but was able to add more employees as the business grew. After several years, he was finally able to start taking an occasional day off. By making good decisions and hiring good people, the business kept growing. After 20 years, it now had hundreds of employees, all making good salaries with health care and retirement funds. He was now a well-to-do individual. But since he had been successful and was now rich, he was demonized for ‘not doing his fair share’.

          13. charleo1 May 15, 2013

            I think right there, is where you’ve come to a complete
            misunderstanding about what Liberals, or those Lefties
            are saying, about wealth. Or how most people would think
            of a such a guy, as you describe. Self made men, and
            women, who have an idea, and do all those things, and
            become a success, are highly admired, and well thought of.
            So, it’s not from a position of envy And it’s not about one
            individual. It’s really is about the collective action of a
            small group, in comparison with the rest of the Country.
            Use their wealth, and the access, and influence it gives
            them, to skew the system, tilt the table, however one puts
            it. And just as surely as anything, if given enough pressure
            on a constant basis, in a particular direction, will bend in
            that direction. Now, if that happens to be a Country’s
            economy. And that continues until a small number at the
            top, has 70% of the money, and the other 90% are
            making due on the 30%, and the economy is sick because
            of it. What should be done? If the wealthy consider a
            conversation like that demonizing them. I think they are
            very thin skinned. And, I don’t recall the back, and forth
            getting ugly, until the economy tanked, and the T-Party
            started with their BS. About how lazy the people were.
            And how there was this deal they had with Democrats.
            We’ll keep voting, if you keep the welfare checks coming.
            I mean, come on! Didn’t their Mothers tell them, people
            with any class, don’t kick other people when their down?
            But, my point here is, the economy, the structure of the
            economy, is getting wildly out of balance. And, to get back
            to your hard working businessman. The economy as it is,
            makes his success even harder to achieve. Because the
            special interest money that build the system we all labor
            in. And the politicians that do their bidding, let the big
            money guys run roughshod over the small owners.
            For example. Have you noticed as you travel, just how
            much one town, or city, looks like all the rest? Big money
            caused that. If you’re Wal-Mart, and sell hardware, you’re
            not cheering if a Mom, and Pop opens up a hardware shop
            across the street. But, if you’re Wal-Mart, you’ll eventually
            crush them anyway. Right? But, would it be better for the
            Country, if there were more Mom, and Pop’s, and less
            Wal-Marts? You may feel differently, A lot of people do.
            But, it seems we were all better off 50 years ago, than
            the majority of us are today.

          14. montanabill May 16, 2013

            As I have stated before, the left’s ‘solution’ to the problem a few people skewing things is poison to the vast number of similar people who are not skewing the system. Envision putting Round-up on your whole yard just to kill one weed. ACA is a perfect example. In order to supposedly provide affordable healthcare to a few million, a bill was created that made healthcare a lot more expensive for a couple of hundred million and at the same time that it added a few benefits, e.g. portability, coverage for pre-existing conditions, it is additionally creating provider shortages and lower quality healthcare for all. Same with taxes. Instead of getting the budget under control, a bill of goods was sold that claimed everything would be okay if we simply forced the rich to pay a little more. That was nonsense on its face. The result is that people like me who use company generated money to grow and create jobs, now have significantly higher healthcare costs, higher costs for insuring new regulation compliance and, of course, less after tax money for expansion. Ergo, far lower new job creation than previous years. You might think that the economy is coming back by looking at the stock market. For your personal safety, I hope you don’t believe it. As soon as Bernanke quits printing money, the market will dive.

          15. Michael Kollmorgen May 13, 2013

            When the top 10% of our society owns 70% of our nation’s wealth, and where 90% of its population have to struggle with the left over 30% of its wealth, what can we expect is going to happen?

          16. plc97477 May 12, 2013

            You are very self centered to think we care.

          17. idamag May 12, 2013

            And self centered to feel that if it didn’t affect him, then to hell with those it did affect.

          18. montanabill May 13, 2013

            You might not care, but you could probably learn a lesson.

          19. Molly Brett May 11, 2013

            Bush’s 2003 Housing Initiative was passed by a Republican controlled House, after that subprimes exploded. BTW, Bush bailed out Wall St.

          20. RobertCHastings May 12, 2013

            Regardless of what we allmay think and say, nothing will deter bill from his belief in the efficacy of the conservative cant.

          21. idamag May 12, 2013

            Yes, he did. I remember watching the entire thing on Cspan.

          22. RobertCHastings May 12, 2013

            And Friedman’s garbage-in-garbage-out economics that led this country in recession after recession after 1981 has done a lot better, hasn’t it? “Trickle Down Econ.” just does not work, it has been demonstrated time after time after time that when the wealthy get the spoils, the spoils remain with the wealthy. Contrary to conservative assertions, the idea that the wealthy are the “job creators” simply has not been proven.

          23. idamag May 12, 2013

            It didn’t work when Reagan tried it and Reagan at least was smart enough that if it don’t work don’t do it.

          24. RobertCHastings May 12, 2013

            Reagan made the tax cuts for the wealthy, just like W did. However, Reagan understood that his tax cuts were too big and raised taxes, several times, during his eight years in office. Too bad W didn’t take a lesson or two from him.

          25. montanabill May 13, 2013

            If you have ever had a job, it was either created by someone with money or built with money from investors. That is trickle down. Even a government job is created by the taxes derived from those people. Wise up.

          26. RobertCHastings May 13, 2013

            Corporations in this country over the past six short years have amassed and are hoarding $1.45T (as in trillion) that they should be using to create the jobs that you say this kind of wealth does. Why don’t you wise up? Government jobs, from soldiers to garbage collectors to teachers, definitely are supported by tax revenues, and without those jobs there would be no need for the government to collect taxes, would there? So, why don’t we just eliminate all those jobs, and, in the process, eliminate the need for government? Ain’t gonna happen, because were the government to foldup shop and close the doors, I think even you could figure out what the result would be. Your definition of “trickle down” is grossly misrepresentative of Reagan’s, demonstrating clearly that you are little more than a shill.

          27. Michael Kollmorgen May 13, 2013

            Studies have shown time after time, when tax dollars are poured into an economy, it boosts the economy up 3-fold by greater spending by the population spending more of their money.

            Reduce tax spending, you also reduce tax collection and the economy starts to deterioration from people not spending money.

            Sorry, but we can’t have it both ways. It don’t work that way.

          28. montanabill May 15, 2013

            Always the cry of ‘firing policement, firemen, et al but never any problem with monstrous buildings in Washington packed with ten’s of thousands of bureaucrats doing very little nor outrage over spending for endless frivolous items and projects.
            Have you ever asked yourself why corporations are not spending money they have ‘hoarded’? Corporations are designed to expand and they obviously have money, so why aren’t they spending that money? My guess is that you already know the answers but won’t face it because it put a shadow on your political philosophy.

          29. RobertCHastings May 15, 2013

            The simple question is “why are they sitting on it?” Since you don’t want to share your wisdom, which I must therefore assume is nonexistent, there could be simple explanations, or there could be more complex ones. Whatever the explanation is, it eludes me why they would continue to sit on this money in the face of calls for “the job makers” to act. Corporations and the wealthy are the job makers, aren’t they? That is what “you people” continue to say, in spite of proof to the contrary. The mere fact that they are sitting on it is proof sufficient that the theory of trickle-down-economics is nothing more than an urban myth, and wealth is not what creates jobs (since several million jobs have been created by the private sector WITHOUT that $1.45T. However, I am sure the other folks on this site would just love to hear your answer.

          30. montanabill May 16, 2013

            Companies don’t exist to create jobs. They exist for one reason and one reason only, to make a profit. We have an economy that is very threatening to business. This government has added significant new costs, new regulations and taxes. Successful people are demonized. Government’s spending debt and deficits are bombs waiting to go off. Government is printing money (which is the driver of the current stock market) that will eventually explode into inflation. Lenders can make no profit by lending, so why lend? If you had savings, would you be out blowing it right now? Or would you be just a little cautious?
            You claim several million jobs have been created? What kind of jobs? Enough jobs to put a dent in the 15 million under and unemployed? Who created those jobs, a poor man?

            Now matter how much you despise the trickle down idea, only the most basic of bush economies do not operate on trickle down, so understand it and use your knowledge to prosper.

          31. RobertCHastings May 16, 2013

            So you agree with Ryan’s economics which he bases upon Ayn Rand’s philosophy of selfishness. No wonder we live in what Time magazine refers to as the “MeMe Me Me” generation.

          32. montanabill May 17, 2013

            Come back when you understand economics and capitalism.

          33. RobertCHastings May 17, 2013

            That’s right, issue a cute little rejoinder when you have nothing else to offer. Ryan has already credited Ayn Rand with his economic philosophy, which is based upon, simply, selfishness, the satisfaction entirely of the self. That has nothing to do with capitalism OR economics, just satisfying onesself.
            Reagan himself stated what his take was on granting large tax cuts to the wealthy, creating a “trickle-down” effect that would lead to massive job-creation and bring about no need for the government in job creation. As so many economists have said, it hasn’t worked that way in thirty years, and it can’t, because the large majority of tax relief granted to the wealthy goes into their bank accounts to make them(and no one else) money. The wealthy are not the job creators. And any economist who thinks that the government has no place in job creation has no idea whereof he speaks. Capitalism does not operate in this country the way you think it does, although you are welcome to differ with that opinion, or any other opinion I have expressed, as I have the same freedom regarding your pronouncements.

          34. Michael Kollmorgen May 13, 2013

            Yea, but remember this;

            If it wasn’t for the worker, the owner of a company wouldn’t be able make a Thimble.

        2. RobertCHastings May 12, 2013

          Simple Economics101 course would readily validate what Charleo1 stated.

          1. montanabill May 13, 2013

            Not in the economics courses I took at various universities, which, admittedly were not in the northeast or Chicago.

      1. montanabill May 11, 2013

        It is kind of neat that the Treasury can print money to buy Treasury IOU’s.

    3. Madelaine Ayers Henne May 11, 2013

      Geez, can we say living in the past! What proof do you need but figures?? You just don’t like the President! I’m betting I’m older than you and an Independent and this Congress and House in particular are the worst I have ever seen!!

      1. montanabill May 11, 2013

        I have nothing against the President, except that he is totally unqualified by either experience or education for the job in which he finds himself. His down playing of personal responsibility and encouragement of ‘spread the wealth via government’ has never worked anywhere during my life time, which dates back to Roosevelt’s second term.
        This House is the only thing that is keeping this country from dissolving into abject poverty, a result of the failure to unleash American business and spending as if there will never be a day that it has to be repaid.

        1. mrivera1119 May 11, 2013

          Was Dubya qualified?

          1. montanabill May 13, 2013

            I didn’t think so even though he had real experience running a very large state. If you remember, the other choice was a gas bag who has proven he eats pretty well too.

        2. Independent1 May 11, 2013

          “The house is the only thing that is keeping this country from dissolving into abject poverty”!! WHAT A BUNCH OF HORSESHIT!!! YOU ARE A BLITHERING IDIOT!! GO BURY YOUR HEAD IN THE SAND GOOFBALL!!!

        3. idamag May 12, 2013

          And he is a Democrat.

      2. plc97477 May 12, 2013

        I would be willing to bet you are probably more intelligent also.

      3. idamag May 12, 2013

        Me, too. I’ve been around the block a few times and this is the worst congress I can remember.

  2. clarenceswinney May 10, 2013

    I voted all D except for Sheriff.
    I Asked for a review. 100% were R.
    I contacted D hdg to investigate. Found no wrong?
    Blarney—–Programed that after X number of votes all will be R on a vote.
    1 of 10—1 0f 25 or????????
    A major Ohio praper exit polls had always been accurate
    Kerry by 16 in it.
    Bush won by 16.
    Doebold President had told him “I guarantee you Ohio”
    Where are our law enforcement agents?
    10 Banks have a Monopoly over about 7000 Banks.
    Carry 80% of all deposits.
    10 Big Oil control our Oil
    10 control our Health Care Insurance
    10 control TV
    10 will control our major newsprint when Koch buys Chicago Tribune.
    3 Control Beer Distribution.
    1 Controls BJ in White House
    20,000 Lobbyists Buy my vote.
    Top 10% own 73% Net Wealth–83% Financial Wealth–43% Individual Income-
    Pay 18% Tax Rate.
    1 family has more wealth than 90% of families
    We Rank in OECD nations
    #1–largest percent of workers earn lowest wages–44M get minimum wage
    #2–Least Tax on Corporations as % GDP
    #3 Least Taxed nation As % GDP
    #4 on Inequality
    In bottom 5 in 1980
    PLutocracy Folks. No question.
    They bought our Congress

    1. Scott Ladd May 11, 2013

      you haven’t got the brains God gave an ass!

      1. Madelaine Ayers Henne May 11, 2013

        Scott Ladd -Says who – you – a economically deficit GOP?

      2. Fairplay4 May 11, 2013

        Resorting to abuse shows what a high caliber human you are.

        1. idamag May 12, 2013

          It shows he cannot compete with Clarence, intellectually.

      3. plc97477 May 12, 2013

        You would know since you are one.

        1. idamag May 12, 2013

          Please don’t insult the assess of the world.

    2. idamag May 12, 2013

      Don’t forget they had to pull some Diebold machines in Ohio during 2004.

  3. Jimmy Rustles May 10, 2013

    To actually agree with anything on this list you must be blinded by the communist, anti-patritoic, racist ways the Democrartic party is handling things.

    1. Madelaine Ayers Henne May 11, 2013

      Racist???? ROFL!!! The House is full of the most racist men I have ever seen and are so out in front about it!

    2. adriancrutch May 11, 2013


  4. Tasine May 11, 2013

    The Republicans who are in trouble are those who disregarded their constituents pleas to CUT SPENDING. You can throw up all the figures you can find, and they will all be pointless. Americans are sick to death of DC’s waste of Americans’ hard earned money; whether wasted by a Democrat or a Republican matters NOT to taxpaying voters. None of this had to come to pass. A half way intelligent 5th grader could have done a better job managing the country than has every one who has attempted it in the last century – IF that 5th grader had had the education children of the l9th century had. For decades we have been falling, and DC keeps telling us all is well. Problem is, the public KNOWS all in NOT well, and the bozos in DC are OUR employees – time they realized that and quit acting like little kings and queens, get their act together, knock off all this wasteful spending, and do THEIR share to get this country back on track. Everyone knows that Obama has chosen to make cuts that will hurt the public the most in order to make the republican politicians look bad. His problem? There is no republican who can possibly look as bad as Obama.

    1. Madelaine Ayers Henne May 11, 2013

      Oh I can think of many, many Repubs who look way worse than any President I can think of and they are all looney tunes!!

      1. Tasine May 11, 2013

        Please, name a few for us and the reasons you say they look worse, but be aware that I know more democrats than just the harridans Clinton and Obama. Make your strongest case, please.

        1. johninPCFL May 11, 2013

          Rand Paul: Businesses should be allowed to discriminate if they want to.
          Rick Perry: Texas should secede because they don’t like Federal programs.
          Mitt Romney: Medical care is a right, unless you don’t live in Massachussetts.
          Bobby Jindal: Federal spending is way too high, where’s the rest of the Katrina aid?
          Michelle Bachmann: The founding fathers fought to eliminate slavery. (Well, except for Jefferson and Washington I guess.)

        2. idamag May 12, 2013

          Darrell Issa, first day in office, will prove the President was born in Kenya.
          Michelle Bachmann, The senate if full of traitors who should be investigated.
          Santorum, all forms of birth control should be outlawed as it is against his religion.
          How about the Texas congressman who apologized to BP? Christine O’Donnell, masturbation should be made illegal. (Hmmm, wonder how she intended to enforce that one.)
          The list can go on and on and don’t forget the anatomical trapdoor that prevents rape or the divine rape.

      2. Barbara Morgan May 12, 2013

        Madelaine, we have another payed troll on here. Doesn’t Tasine post read like so many that we thought were paid Republican posters. Tasine will learn as the others have that we know our facts and see how the Republican-Tea party doesn’t care if Our Country is destroyed so long as they make President Obama look bad.

        1. angelsinca May 13, 2013

          Delusional paranoia.

      3. idamag May 12, 2013

        Some of them make Bush look like Einstein.

    2. R502112 May 11, 2013

      Then its time for a third party……….

      1. plc97477 May 12, 2013

        We have one it is called the tea party. See how much good that did.

        1. R502112 May 12, 2013

          WE? YOU have one called the TEA party, i don’t affiliate myself with that party. I will agree that they are no good, they are an extention of the GOP extreme which are only beholden to the corporate rich. I was refering to other than the two party system (Dem,Rep) that they only answer to US citizens and the Constitution and remove any lobbist/Donors corruption that have infilltrated the political system. Remember? for the people,by the people…..

      2. idamag May 12, 2013

        It is time for no parties.

        1. R502112 May 12, 2013

          if your happy with that, good for you….that just what they want from obedient sheep (baabaa)…keep on believing it. you will smarten up one day. The founding fathers predicted this…when will you be convinced that neither one of them care?

          1. idamag May 13, 2013

            To “smarten up” you need to have reading comprehension skills. And with good reading skills comes comprehensive writing so people can understand what you said. BTW your is a possessive pronoun. Your house, your car, etc, means those things belong to you. I suppose you really meant the contraction for you are in your first sentence. You’re.

      3. Michael Kollmorgen May 12, 2013

        Ross Perot tried to start a Third Party. It didn’t work.

        Though everything he said, came true.

        1. R502112 May 12, 2013

          Only because people are just either not getting the word or they are satified with the way things are or don’t care. If we do nothing, they win. Both parties are the same two headed monster, niether care for their constituents. How can anyone ignore that?

          1. Michael Kollmorgen May 12, 2013

            I totally agree.

            Other than a full-fledged revolution that will result in a complete change of government and the way we are governed, I see no solution.

            As long as we have our current form of government, we’re always going to be pitted one against the other. This is how the top 10% like it. And, that’s how they keep us, as people, divided.

            And, this was how our country was designed to operate from the start.

            People today have become way too accepting of the Status Quo. If the same thing were to occur 100+ years ago, there would be mass demonstrations galore. People would have never tolerated it in our great grandparents generation.

            Yes, I wonder too, how can anyone ignore it?

    3. Melvin Miller May 11, 2013

      There is not one Republican in the entire party who can hold a candle to the President. These ignorant talking points are just not gonna go far with the majority of voters. If you wish to remain in the dark and believe that the President caused the sequester, go right ahead, there are many more in the dark with you, just not enough. The Republican party could have put a brake on the pain being caused by the sequester anytime they chose. Instead, they hate the President so much and did not wish him to succeed in office, they allowed this sequester to go through.

      1. angelsinca May 13, 2013

        oh please. If you are going to pretend that republicans are the ONLY players in the budget wars, you probably believe the democrat concerted effort to make those cuts as painful as possible, is the fault of the gop as well. BOTH parties agreed to the sequester. But is it seems the Dems and the president couldn’t resist the temptation to continue the increased spending without the increased revenue to support it. Grow up.

      2. angelsinca May 13, 2013

        “There is not one Republican in the entire party who can hold a candle to the President.”
        Very true, as it applies to willful deceit and reckless abandon.

        1. Melvin Miller May 15, 2013

          You continue to be one of the blind led by the blind. I don’t mean blind as in physical impairment, I mean it purely in the sense that you are not knowledgeable about the truth, so how can you speak to it?

          1. angelsinca May 16, 2013

            Would prefer to be blind than seeing the world as a distorted fantasy world, and then convincing myself that’s the way it’s supposed to be.

    4. mrivera1119 May 11, 2013

      Talking about breaking with reality… Point proved.

    5. RobertCHastings May 12, 2013

      And what is spending going to do that the Republicans disapprove of? It is goingto result in the wealthy having to pay more to the upkeep of the government. Istillthink we should reutrn to the taxation levels that were in place during the Eisenhower administration – 90% top rate for the wealthiest. Kennedy’s big mistake was in reducing that to 70%. Over the past thirty years, there has been a GREAT redistribution of wealth, fromthe poor and middle class to the wealthy! Statistics support this. Just look at the spread between the wages of a company president and his hourly employees today compared with what it was thirty years ago. And that is only ONE facet of the gap. Government deregulation, under both Rep. and Dem., has helped to widen the gap and distribute middle class wealth upward, leaving the middle class behind. Those of you who are of the generation born during or after WWII can remember when we could easily buy a house, take the family out to dinner, take a vacation, buy a car, all on our 8 – 10 thou per year. While what we make has risen greatly, what we can do with it is woefully reduced. And if you think that is a step in the right direction, keep voting Republican because it will only get worse.

      1. Independent1 May 12, 2013

        Couldn’t agree more! Great post! Reducing the tax rate below 70+ percent as Reagan did has really turned the wealthy into nothing but an enormous group of whiners!! As you pointed out, when it was around 90% for years before and under Eisenhower, everyone just took it as – that’s the way it is, and they made the best of it. Unfortunately, reducing it to around 70% during Kennedy’s and Johnson’s terms didn’t help make the country any more prosperous but it sure started making it far more difficult for ‘ordinary folks’ to get by – that’s really when families started needing two people working to make ends meet. And then when Reagan reduced it into the 30s, along with demonizing unions and making the wealthy think that they were a privileged class (by firing the air traffic controllers and letting business folks know that working people didn’t really need to be cared about any more – if the President can do it why can’t we) it’s been down hill ever since with companies caring far more for their bottom line and over rewarding management at the expense of the everyday worker. JFK got the ball rolling in distributing the wealth upward and Reagan really made it snowball.

    6. Michael Kollmorgen May 12, 2013

      This, this post, I entirely agree with.

      But, be aware, the most damage we are experiencing is not from the Federal Branch of our government.

      The most damage is being done by our local and state legislators.

      If you sit down and really think about it, all the taxes, hidden taxes, fees, levies we pay for on a local and state level, it would probably dwarf our federal taxes.

      And, I’m not even going to go into each of the 50 state’s laws, regulations, etc. We are lawing, taxing and legislating ourselves to extinction on a local and state level.

      The Federal Government is a drop in a bucket compared to what each individual state is doing to us.

  5. weneedrubio May 11, 2013

    The budget, even due to the sequester, has still never gone down in real terms. Everything you all are talking about are cuts to the growth not actual spending. Please get your heads out of your arces, spending is up 47% since Obama took office, to say that this is wise is ignorant in the extreme. The highest paid people in the world are now from Washington DC, if you think that is not telling you are insane.

    1. Trina LC Sonnenberg May 11, 2013

      The President took a pay cut. Congress should do the same. Congress should participate in Social Security. They want to cut it because it does not affect them.

    2. adriancrutch May 11, 2013

      WE NEED RUBIO? FOR WHAT? Nice job you got there!

    3. johninPCFL May 11, 2013

      Yes, more people have retired since Obama took office. Discretionary spending (spending not dictated by social security, medicaid, and medicare) has been reduced since GWB was in office. Of course, the military still draws its pay (who started those wars?) and spending has been via bills passed by Congress using CRs (which means they’re discounts leveraged from the previous spending.) Who controls Congress? Oh, yeah. The Teabaggers control Congress. So, who controls spending? Yeah, that’s right. It’s the Teabaggers.

  6. Trina LC Sonnenberg May 11, 2013

    So why do we still have a republican party? Let’s get them out of office already. Quit voting for the bastards.

    1. plc97477 May 12, 2013

      Great idea. I hope we see some of that in 2014.

    2. Michael Kollmorgen May 12, 2013

      You have to remember, there are still a lot of people in this country so dumb (usually republicans), they’d walk into a brick wall and not even notice it.

      That’s not saying much for their intelligence level.

    3. charleo1 May 12, 2013

      Amen that! When all is said and done. The best thing we can do
      for our Children, our Country, and ourselves, is vote the bastards out!

  7. disqus_EqeNAgbWTC May 11, 2013

    The party of “No” republicans have brought this country down starting with GW Bush. We can only hope that Americans vote them and the Tea Party out of office so that we can get back to the road of recovery. If they don’t get voted out, we can surely expect things to get much worse and our kids are going to be the victims of their hate for President Obama.

    1. robertblair3174 May 12, 2013

      I think you might have missed a couple. This mess didn’t start with W. Most of the policies that started it were put in place (Or the legal precedents set) by the Reagan Administration

  8. JDavidS May 11, 2013

    By far the most blatant assault on our sensibilities, and economic recovery, is to have given any credence to a moron by the name of Paul Ryan. Here’s an idiot who couldn’t balance a $5 budget with a $10 bill in one hand and a calculator in the other. Paul Ryan is so bloody stupid I sincerely doubt that he could spell “dog” even if you spotted him the “d” and the “o”.

    1. Tasine May 11, 2013

      Er, WHAT economic recovery would that be? We are not in and never were in economic recovery, regardless what the clowns in democrat suits have told you. Do some research that does not include democrat talking points and you may learn some things. BTW – I am NOT a republican – quit the party because they were such a bunch of pansies letting the progs roll over on them all the time. Don’t forget that you are not the ONLY citizens in America.

      1. JDavidS May 11, 2013

        Skippy…I’m going to assume you have the ability to read. Simply read stats. Perhaps you should do some research and stop the pseudo-intellectal bullshit. Then perhaps you could learn. Or do you chose to suck in bullshit fed to you by the likes of Ryan and the Tea Party Clowns? Compare now to the end of Dubyas’ presidency… Notice any sort of up-tick? THAT would be the economic recovery. Try to keep up with the tour…

      2. Independent1 May 11, 2013

        I see, the fact that the stock market has hit levels never seen before isn’t a sign the economy is better?? The fact that more jobs have been created in the past 6 months than were created in almost 2 years while Bush was in office isn’t a sign that the economy is recovering?? The fact that consumer confidence has it levels that haven’t been seen since about 2006/2007 isn’t a sign that the economy is getting better?? The fact that home prices are up over 15% in many areas and foreclosures are now back to more normal levels isn’t a sign that the economy is getting better?? Yup!! Just keep your head where the sun will never shine and you’ll be sure to not notice that the economy is getting better. Dumbcoff!!!!

        1. montanabill May 13, 2013

          You should be rushing to put every cent you’ve got in market. As an progressive economist, you’ll do well.

          I did notice you didn’t compare current job creation with Bush’s record after 9/11. But, hey, it is best to be selective of our comparisons.

          1. RobertCHastings May 13, 2013

            Whatever jobs Bush MAY have created after 9/11 evaporated after the middle of 2007.

      3. RobertCHastings May 12, 2013

        I hate to say it, but hundredsof respectedeconomists around the globe would disagree with you. The US is in a recovery, although Europe may
        not be, and even Japan is showing signs ofemerging from their two-decade long stagnation, while China just keeps plugging away near double digit growth almost every year. There are more people at work (and fewer looking for work because they are employed) than four years ago, the Dow and Nasdaq have hit new highs, new home construction and sales are jumping while foreclosures are rapidly dropping (partly due to the new openness to restructuring), the domestic car industry is once again selling more cars here than their foreign competitors. And not a bit of this can be credited to the Republicans or Tea Party. Read Fortune,The Wall Street Journal, or whatever HONEST periodical you wish and the story will be the same – the US is in recovery from the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. And that, once again, because of the DEMOCRATIC party. Hey, it isn’t just my opinion, it is established fact (unless you listen to what your whining conservatives buds are telling you). Face it, they don’t like the black man in the White House and they will do whatever is necessary to make sure he does not succeed, even if it means the collapse of this country.

      4. plc97477 May 12, 2013

        We are not the only citizens in America but it is looking more all the time like we are the only sane ones.

        1. cumiadom May 12, 2013

          The only commies you mean

          1. idamag May 26, 2013

            So, being a highly educated person who graduated summa cum laude from Harvard, you tend to use facts instead of name calling.

          2. cumiadom May 27, 2013

            The facts are that they are communists

      5. Michael Kollmorgen May 12, 2013

        I suppose all the statistics pointing to a recovery don’t mean anything to you. All indications are that the economy is picking up, stock market is skyrocketing, unemployment is going down, housing prices are appreciating, not depreciating..

        It may take a long time to fully recover from the damage Bush 2 did. But, at least its a good start.

      6. charleo1 May 12, 2013

        You claim the economy has never recovered.
        Some claim the Civil War has never ended.
        So, how do those who have left the Republican
        Party, because it’s too Liberal, wish to be

    2. plc97477 May 12, 2013

      You seem to have him pegged. Thank you for the laugh.

    3. montanabill May 13, 2013

      And your credentials are ….?

      1. JDavidS May 13, 2013

        Common sense and the ability to correctly add and subtract, which is certainly more than moron Ryan and, if you believe him, you.

        1. montanabill May 15, 2013

          But your ‘common sense’ and ‘ability to correctly add and subtract’ don’t give you any pause with the current administration.

          1. JDavidS May 16, 2013

            Perhaps. But it puts me light-years ahead of half-wit Ryan and his equally as dense fellow GOP simpletons.

  9. Andrew Rei May 11, 2013

    (Sarcasm flowing like a raging river) You mean to tell me that the AFAP (American Fascist Aristocrats Party, aka, the GOP/Republicans) are corrupt, fascist, aristocratic and traitorous bastards? Nooooo, really?!? (sarcasm ends)
    If you’re an AFAP “moderate”, I have no sympathy for you whatsoever. I’m a Non-Affiliated voter (since the state in which I live began recognizing the Independent Party in 2007; before that, I was an Independent). Several dozen other Indies/Non-Affiliateds and I tried telling you “moderate” dumbasses to stop voting for the AFAP more than a year before the November elections. WE WARNED YOU THAT THIS WOULD HAPPEN! WE told you that the traitorous activity by the AFAP Cons and Baggers would continue or worsen if you voted these traitorous bastards back into office, but you voted for them, anyway.
    And, for you AFAP “moderates” who decided to stay home rather than voting for the real GOP moderates of yore today, Democrats, I have this message for you: Bishop Desmond Tutu once said, “if you remain neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor…”. So, while you didn’t actually vote for the AFAP, you effectively chose their side with your neutrality.
    If you’re a Bad Lib (Libertarian), with your three philosophies of “everyone for themselves”, “extreme fiscal conservatism” and “radical social liberalism”, you’re no better than the AFAP, at all. In Bishop Tutu’s scenario, your “everyone for themselves” philosophy is a position of neutrality. And don’t give me this BS about “people choosing to form groups and alliances” invalidating “everyone for themselves”….that’s just a pathetically stupid argument. Essentially, Bad Libs are AFAP members with bongs. STFU already about “freedom” and being better than the AFAP. You aren’t.

    1. plc97477 May 12, 2013

      It is said that libertarians are just rebubs that like sex and illegal drugs.

    2. idamag May 12, 2013

      I am against political parties. They are dividing this nation and destroying our democracy. However, one faction is much more destructive than the other.

      1. Michael Kollmorgen May 12, 2013

        If I had my way, I’d wipe out all political affiliations.

        I’d also ban all mention of any religious affiliations while either campaigning or in office. Anyone mentioning it would be banned from either running for office or being in office after elected.

  10. Tasine May 11, 2013


    Rand Paul: Businesses should be allowed to discriminate if they want to.
    Rick Perry: Texas should secede because they don’t like Federal programs.
    Mitt Romney: Medical care is a right, unless you don’t live in Massachussetts.
    Bobby Jindal: Federal spending is way too high, where’s the rest of the Katrina aid?
    Michelle Bachmann: The founding fathers fought to eliminate slavery. (Well, except for Jefferson and Washington I guess.)

    Talk about the impossible dream! Like all progs, however, his premise is wrong in every case. Dems don’t like businesses and drive them away with massive regulations, dictates, etc. In effect what the dems drive away are JOBS, which they them crybaby about. If jobs are needed, it requires businesses to provide them. IOW, think twice what you are yelling about. We conservatives have told you over and over and over that repeating the same mistakes will NOT produce positive results, but you don’t possess basic logic, and you allow your greed to override your minimum brain cells. That is NOT conservatives’ fault. Government provided jobs do not promote growth – they promote stagnation. Taxpayers have to pay for those jobs without any benefit coming back to incentivise them. I don’t find John in PCFL here as I was led to believe I would find him, but hopefully he can find this response. Obama went out of his way to utilize the various stimuli in ways hurtful to the economy AND to the Americans who are hurting in an effort to turn them against the conservatives. Why shouldn’t he do that? With his lofo his voters it works EVERY TIME.

    1. charleo1 May 11, 2013

      Kinda got the cart before the horse, don’t you? Correct me, but I
      thought it was the customer, with money in his pocket that created
      the need for a business. And businesses didn’t create jobs. They
      employ people. Which is entirely different than creating jobs. A job
      is created when the customer buys the product, or service. The only
      reason that business exists at all, or the employees have a job, is
      that intersection of the customer, his needs, and desires, and his
      ability to pay. That’s it. And in this respect, Conservatives have lousy
      policies. Policies that encourage low wages, and shrink demand.
      Policies that make it a necessity that Gov’t step in, and make up
      that difference between the low wages Conservatives promote,
      and what is the minimal requirements of decency. Below which no
      person can morally be ask to exist. That’s it. That’s the bottom line.
      But, it doesn’t grow economies. It doesn’t expand the customer base.
      What it does do, is promote instability. And serves to take huge amounts
      of capital out of circulation. Where it sets, and sits, patiently awaiting
      that investment opportunity that will never come fruition, because the
      millions of customers that might have been clients, but for the fact,
      the same Conservative policies that funneled the majority of wealth
      to the top of the economic structure, has also caused the proliferate
      unemployment, that’s driven down the wages. If Republicans wanted
      a strong economy here, they would welcome the working person’s
      ability to collectively bargain for a better wage. Dead aganist it.
      Even when the richest 400 people have more wealth, than the bottom
      50%. You look at the situation, and declare the bottom to be greedy.
      That’s a problem. People sold a bill of goods. Walk around so,
      cocksure of themselves. When all around them, the foundation they
      are standing on, crumbles and falls away. As they cheer for the ocean,
      that will soon inundate them. Being none the wiser.

      1. Tasine May 11, 2013

        Of course you think the customer makes the business. That is what your “leaders” in the progressive party tell you because that is what the unions want people to believe. Show me where you can buy a TV if no one invents them, no one builds a factory to build them, and no store opens to sell them.

        1. Independent1 May 11, 2013

          Charle just gave you one of the best descriptions of how starting a thriving business works that I’ve read in a long time and you, like virtually every Republican today, has so much tunnel vision that you can’t even recognize the truth when you read or hear it.

          And I’ll guarantee you that for every TV that was invented there were 500 other inventions that went NOWHERE!!! because there wasn’t a CUSTOMER that wanted to buy what was invented!!!

          And by the way, show me an inventor that ever created something and made a fortune from it that didn’t require that there was electricity, or roads, or an internet or some other medium outside of their control by which he or she could sell that magic invention and get it to market???? NO ONE IN RECENT HISTORY HAS CREATED WEALTH ON THEIR OWN WITHOUT RELYING ON WHAT SOMEONE ELSE HAD CREATED IN ORDER TO BUILD THAT WEALTH!!!!!!!! YOU DIDN’T BUILD THAT BY YOURSELF EVER!!!!!!

        2. Independent1 May 11, 2013

          For every TV invention that has paid off, there have been hundreds of inventions that never turned out BECAUSE THERE WASN’T A CUSTOMER!! You can invent anything you want but if there isn’t a customer to buy it, you’re not making any money and your invention isn’t worth the effort you put into it. Charle just gave you one of the best descriiptions of how building an economy really works and because you have the typical tunnel vision of a GOP lover, you can’t understand the truth when you hear it. Really sad!!!

        3. charleo1 May 11, 2013

          And your leaders tell you, what? Businesses are these
          magic places, where jobs are created, and customers are
          superfluous? No, you tell me how a business sells anything
          to a customer who has no money to pay for it. “My leaders,”
          don’t need to tell me this. Most of us have enough common
          sense to know, if everybody is walking around with empty
          pockets, that business is going to slide. And, that factory is going to be shutting down. Let me tell you something. I was a salesman for a good portion of my successful career. And, I
          considered my position more important than the bosses’.
          Because, until I sold something. Until a customer said yes,
          I’m going to take one of those, or five barrels of that,
          nobody made any money. The factory didn’t move any
          inventory. The truck driver had nothing to deliver. The
          accountants had nothing to count. And, so the entire process
          minus customers, becomes a useless waste of both money, and time. That’s probably not what your leaders led you to believe. I know what they told you. Just lower taxes, and get rid of regulations, viola, the jobs will just come gushing out!

        4. Barbara Morgan May 12, 2013

          You are either a paid poster or not very smart. Someone has to want the product and have the money to buy it in order for someone to invest in building a factory and so on. If there is no demand for a product no factory is built. When working people aren’t working or not being paid a fair wage there is no demand for a product the factory closes and more people are out of work.

          1. idamag May 12, 2013

            When the inventor comes up with a fabulous idea, most of them need backers. They have to convince the money moguls that their product is a good investment. Then the money mogul usually conducts a market study. And if it shows there will be customers, the money is there. The customer has dictated the product.

          2. Barbara Morgan May 12, 2013

            My reply wasn’t to you. It was to Tasine, who is a new poster so it seems and a paid one that. I knew who it works and your explantion to him or her was clear but their thinking didn’t seem to clear so I tried to put in words he or she would understand.

        5. idamag May 12, 2013

          You see things a little simple. The law of supply is demand. When the market was saturated with Radios, it was to increase the demand that caused Farnworth to invent the television.

    2. idamag May 12, 2013

      So for starters, in doing away with regulations, let’s do away with the FDA. If you don’t know there is rat poop in your tuna, it won’t hurt you. If a fertilizer plant explodes in Texas and historically they had several OSHA violations, well we fixed OSHA didn’t we? Me made them impotent. Those 14people that died, wasn’t me so it wasn’t important.

  11. R502112 May 11, 2013

    it really amazes me that people continuosly still vote for these liars and cheats. Obtuse people continue to vote against their own interest because they are stupid to believe thier rhetorical BS time after time………when will they learn?

  12. Dominick Vila May 11, 2013

    The challenges President Obama faced on Inauguration day, were compounded by economic policies designed to project an illusion of economic chaos to improve their chances of winning the White House in 2012. Instead of reflecting on what happened and changing strategies to suggest they were part of the economic progress that is evident throughout the USA, the GOP strategy intensified their goal to, again, project an impression of economic Armaghedon at a time when the DOW is at record highs, unemployment is going down, hiring signs can be seen everywhere, new construction is picking up, house prices are going up, foreclosures and bankruptcies are down to normal levels, and hope has been restored. They failed to convince mainstream Americans that they were at the edge of an economic cliff in 2012, and they will fail again in 2016. Hopefully Democrats will remain focused on economic improvement, and will continue to advertise the message of hope and confidence that contributed to President Obama’s re-election. If they do, 2016 will be a walk in the park.

  13. novenator May 11, 2013

    This is deliberate, although even I’m surprised how long the right wing has continued to sabotage recovery. I really thought after the 2012 spanking they would have learned their lesson that crippling economic recovery for partisan gain is a bad political strategy. I guess Republicans don’t learn.

    1. mrivera1119 May 11, 2013

      Republicans have lost all touch with reality and we all know the medical term for that.

      1. angelsinca May 13, 2013

        Got crazy? Re-voting for a president that failed to deliver what he promised in the first term sounds a lot more serious than just wishful thinking.

    2. Tasine May 11, 2013

      Get off the RECOVERY schtick. Everyone with a brain knows nothing has been done re recovery and no one will – the shape we are in is NOT an accident. Ask your dem leaders.

      1. Independent1 May 11, 2013

        As spoken by a nitwit with his head so far up his behind he couldn’t see the sun if his life depended on it!! MORON!!!!!!!!!

  14. howa4x May 11, 2013

    They put their hatred of Obama over the good of the country. They didn’t want him to have a win so they made the American people loose. The republicans are lucky they have the tea party with them. A group that is moronic enough to believe anything the republicans tell them with out checking the facts. They are also a group that can be counted on by the GOP to vocally demonstrate and vote against their own economic interest every time. Even that of their children’s. You just can’t make this stuff up.

    1. Tasine May 11, 2013

      Unlike the Democrats who showed so much respect for George Bush while we were in a war. The Democrats are too dainty to not respect President Bush, eh?

      1. Independent1 May 11, 2013

        Are you accustomed to respecting a President that is directly and indirectly responsible for the fact that more than 8,000 Americans are dead?? Sorry but I’m not!!!

      2. plc97477 May 12, 2013

        I believe everyone earns respect. baby bush did not earn my respect.

        1. angelsinca May 13, 2013

          Oh no, there’s one vote for the Obama. Oh, he can’t run again? Too bad

      3. Michael Kollmorgen May 12, 2013

        Bush 2 deserves no respect from me as a man. I respect the office, but not the man.

        And, that Smirk he always had. He’d of been the perfect 6th or 7th Three Stooge. Moe would have been proud to have him in his comedy act.

      4. charleo1 May 12, 2013

        There are wars worth fighting. And then, there was Iraq.
        No President is perfect. But, they must be held to account.
        There were a lot of Democrats that protested another war.
        With a Democratic President in the White House. He was
        driven from office over Vietnam. So, there is not as much
        hypocrisy, and intellectual dishonesty, as you claim.

      5. glebec May 12, 2013

        The Dems were too damn dainty during the Bush years. They thought they were being bipartisan. In reality they came to a nuclear war (the GOP) carrying only plastic utensils and doilies.

  15. Jack Wormer May 12, 2013

    Gown-ups with balls admit error and set out to make corrections.
    Grown-ups without balls wreck the playpen, pee in the sink, kick over the lunch table, and when that doesn’t do the trick, set fire to the classroom and start kicking their moms ‘n dads – RIGHT, Mitchie, Johnny, Eric, Paulie, and your fellow bullies Rush, Annie, Karl?

  16. angelsinca May 13, 2013

    Sounds like a fine plan; submit numerous ridiculous budget proposals to congress that are summarily dismissed by BOTH parties and then blame just ONE party for defaulting into sequester mode.

  17. Budjob May 17, 2013

    As long as the no balls bastards in congress permit the oil companies to gouge the American public,WE WILL NEVER HAVE ANYTHING RESEMBLING A RECOVERY! Obama needs to nationalize the oil industry and REGULATE IT!!!


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.