Type to search

End Poverty? Reduce Inequality? What Republicans Must Do First

Editor's Blog Memo Pad Politics

End Poverty? Reduce Inequality? What Republicans Must Do First

Mitt Romney speaks to fellow Republicans at a dinner during the Republican National Committee's Annual Winter Meeting aboard the USS Midway on January 16, 2015 in San Diego, California (AFP/Sandy Huffaker)

The latest fad among would-be Republican presidential contenders is to proclaim their deep commitment to fighting poverty and inequality – which sounds as plausible as a promise by McDonald’s to abolish greasy food.

Decades of abuse of the nation’s poor and working families, which reached a crescendo in Mitt Romney’s “47 percent” campaign in 2012, hasn’t left much space for Republicans to follow the public morality of Pope Francis. Yet for the moment at least, they seem to think that they must.

They also seem to believe that reminiscing about bread-bag overshoes, like Senator Joni Ernst, or jeering the wealth of the Clintons, like RNC chair Reince Priebus, will somehow transform them into Franciscan populists. But such delusional ploys only make them look ridiculous.

So in the gracious spirit of the pontiff, who told us that even atheists can be saved, let’s help our Republican brothers and sisters.

Actually, there is a very easy way for people like Romney, his former running mate Rep. Paul Ryan, Gov. Chris Christie, Senator Marco Rubio, Rick Santorum, and every kindred right-wing politician to start reforming themselves. First, they just have to stop doing almost everything they’ve done for the past 10 or 20 years.

Just stop.

Stop smooching the behind of every predatory billionaire who shows up with an open checkbook and a loud opinion, from the Koch brothers and Paul Singer to Jerry Jones and Sheldon Adelson.

Stop pretending that the best way to reduce inequality – or poverty – is to lavish more trillions of tax breaks on those very same billionaires, as the infamously plutocratic Ryan budget would. Do they really think every blustering donor at the very top of the income scale needs another million dollars? Stop defending capital gains loopholes, offshore accounts, and all the other scams that rig the game for the likes of Romney.

Stop snatching bread from the mouths of small children and their mothers, with gratuitous cuts to the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance and WIC programs, as if that would appreciably reduce the federal deficit — or be worth the moral cost even if it did. The Ryan budget proposes to reduce food stamps by 20 percent or more, which would mean either terminating benefits for millions or reducing benefits below their already meager level. (It would be interesting to see how the Wisconsin Republican and bodybuilder got by on $1.40 per meal.)

Stop ripping up unemployment checks for families whose lack of remunerative work Republicans have always blamed on Barack Obama, not them. Unemployment insurance kept at least 2.5 million Americans, including hundreds of thousands of kids, above the poverty line in recent years. If joblessness truly isn’t the workers’ fault, why decimate them and their children?

Stop rejecting Medicaid, the literal lifeline for poor Americans who have no other health coverage. And stop “repealing” the Affordable Care Act, whose actual repeal would cruelly end coverage for tens of millions of Americans – and in some cases, end their lives.

Stop undermining Medicare and Social Security, the two most successful anti-poverty programs in the nation’s history, which have vastly reduced the impoverishment and early mortality of elderly Americans. And stop telling voters that the endless attempts to cut, privatize, block grant, and otherwise diminish those programs is how you intend to “save” them.

Stop legislating cutbacks in Pell Grants, federal student loans, and other assistance to young people from modest backgrounds — whose educational advancement lifts them toward greater financial security and independence. Anyone who honestly cares about reducing inequality supports aid for higher education.

And please stop mouthing so much meaningless, self-flattering rhetoric on this vital issue — as Romney did when he assured the Republican National Committee that “Republican principles” will “break the cycle of poverty.”

Sorry, but that hasn’t been true under any Republican administration for the past hundred years. Instead, Republicans should consider the unpleasant but undeniable fact that unemployment and poverty have increased every time a president of their party occupied the White House.

Then, by all means, they should get back to us with those “conservative” plans to end poverty. Someone might even believe it.

Joe Conason

A highly experienced journalist, author and editor, Joe Conason is the editor-in-chief of The National Memo, founded in July 2011. He was formerly the executive editor of the New York Observer, where he wrote a popular political column for many years. His columns are distributed by Creators Syndicate and his reporting and writing have appeared in many publications around the world, including the New York Times, the Washington Post, The New Yorker, The New Republic, The Nation, and Harpers.

Since November 2006, he has served as editor of The Investigative Fund, a nonprofit journalism center, where he has assigned and edited dozens of award-winning articles and broadcasts. He is also the author of two New York Times bestselling books, The Hunting of the President (St. Martins Press, 2000) and Big Lies: The Right-Wing Propaganda Machine and How It Distorts the Truth (St. Martins Press, 2003).

Currently he is working on a new book about former President Bill Clinton's life and work since leaving the White House in 2001. He is a frequent guest on radio and television, including MSNBC's Morning Joe, and lives in New York City with his wife and two children.

  • 1


  1. Dominick Vila January 27, 2015

    The sudden Republican shift from referring to calls to save the middle class, the poor, and achieve a semblance of financial equality in American as evidence of class warfare and communism, to becoming the centerpiece of their 2016 strategy is not ridiculous. It is a sign of frustration and desperation.
    Their sudden conversion may sound acceptable for those who gather in the land of bread-wrap solutions to listen to Sarah’s incoherent diatribes, but it is going to take a lot more than that to convince mainstream Americans, especially those from progressive states of the honesty and commitment they suddenly proclaim. The only thing I find comical is their efforts to portray Mitt 47% Romney as a populist. Here is a word of unsolicited advice, let Mitt be Mittens.

    1. mike January 27, 2015

      You sure are wasting your time on Mitt bashing. He will not be a candidate in 2016. Nor will Palin.
      If the dems really wanted to help the poor and struggling they would stop spending.
      This country owes Trillions in debt and Entitlements and within a few(less in 20 years) every penny of revenue will go to debt and entitlements. Not a penny for any other department. By 2024, nine short years, 85% of budget will be Mandatory spending.
      You can play the class warfare game all you want but you on the left are the real perpetrators(republicans not totally innocent) of our demise as a viable country. Spend and tax, Spend and tax. What we heard last week in SOTU was more Tax and spend and class warfare.

      We are sitting with 71 Trillion in debt, liabilities, and unfinanced obligations as of 2013. A short fall that is 92% of combined net worth US households and non-profit organizations.
      As of January 8 2015 our debt, 103% of GDP, 540% of annual Fed. revenues.
      And all the democrats want is more money to spend. Spending that will only be more deleterious for this country.
      But it is all about power, nothing about what is best for the country. The left wants the low info people to just keep voting for them, so they can have the free stuff. One of these days they will wake up and see how you on the left have screwed them.

      1. charleo1 January 27, 2015

        I love the chimera of unfunded debt, trotted out by the fear mongering misinformers, as proof positive the gov. debt has run amuck. As most of those scary unfunded liabilities are contained in the Medicare/Medicaid programs, and the Department of Defense and Homeland Security apparatus. And if one is willing to extrapolate long enough, the Social Security program itself. What is, for example the long term liabilities of radical, and budget busting tax cuts for the upper 1/2 of 1%? Say over the next 40 years? If this down the rat hole with a vengeance agenda by the Right against the American workers, is perpetrated in the same manner as the last 40? Let me tell you what financial analysts, and retirement investment planners are saying about those American households you cite. That 90% of them today, have no appreciable savings. That more than half of Americans retiring today have less than $15.000 in personal savings. With most of them retiring with mortgages, and Social Security making up the majority of the expected income. My question is how long before we put these austerity A-Holes back under the rocks they crawled out of some 40 years ago? When people’s jobs paid for their security. Their retirements were secure, their health benefits guaranteed, and the banks didn’t need zero interest to keep the economy from falling in the crapper.

        1. mike January 27, 2015

          Why am I not surprised at your post. It shows just how far your head is where the sun doesn’t shine.
          So lets get this straight.
          Debt is not at 103% of GDP? Today!!
          There is not 71+ Trillion in debt, liabilities and unfunded obligations?
          7.8 Trillion liabilities not counted in nat. debt, including fed employees retirement, accounts payable, environmental/disposal liabilities. No?
          23.8 Trillion obligations for SS participants above and beyond projected revenues, payrolls benefits, taxes.No?
          27.3 obligation for Medicare participants above and beyond projected revenues above and beyond revenues. No?

          Go back under the rock!!

          1. Wrily January 27, 2015

            Spend and cut taxes is what we have had for forty plus years.

            Raise taxes Back to where they were in the fifties and make it retroactive to cover the free ride the wealthy have had at America’s expense for forty plus years then the balance sheet would look pretty good.

          2. mike January 27, 2015

            Such a silly post I see from you.
            We need pro-growth tax reform, not Obama’s Buffet rule, which doesn’t raise very much revenue or does anything to create jobs.
            Back to the fifties, Really??
            Few economist want to go back to the 50’s, because it wasn’t that Golden, real tax rates had many loopholes and actually produced less revenue than todays lower rates,but probably most important we are no longer the dominant industrial producer as we were back then.

          3. jmprint January 27, 2015

            Republicans Pro-growth will kill our environment, and sever families, it will not help the economy. We are enjoying an economic recovery because of president Obama’s initiatives. We just don’t want to go back to the 2007-2008 era.

          4. mike January 27, 2015

            What a load of Bull on environment and family.
            And I bet you think the gas prices are down because of Obama policies. LOL!!!

          5. jmprint January 27, 2015

            No we can thank the Saudis for that.

          6. mike January 27, 2015

            You really are brain dead. It is a combination of less demand world wide and the increased production from the US. We are importing less. All this expanded productions is from the State and private land nothing because of the fed. govt.

          7. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

            YEP. She IS brain dead.
            Glad you noticed.

          8. CrankyToo January 28, 2015

            One wingding lies, and the next one swears to it. Jmprint is correct. The current glut is courtesy of the Saudis, who are poking their fingers in Opec’s eye by refusing to slow production in the face of lower demand. It ain’t rocket surgery – except to you knuckleheads.

          9. Louis Allen January 28, 2015

            It is a COMBINATION of the factors stated by mike and (to a lesser extent) what the Saudis are doing.
            Even “wingdings” (love the word) like jmprint and you can understand that.
            Cranky: I MIGHT be a wingding, I might be, …. but remember, … it takes one to know one ! LOL !!!

          10. CrankyToo January 28, 2015

            Absolutely right.

          11. Dominick Vila January 27, 2015

            Hey Mike, do you remember what the GOP was saying five years ago when gas prices were inching up towards the all time record established in July 2008? Just in case you forgot, a chorus of predictions anticipating gas prices were going to exceed $5 a gallon AS A RESULT OF PRESIDENT OBAMA’S POLICIES could be heard from every Republican quarter.
            I am glad you guys finally had the honesty to admit that U.S. Presidents have little influence in gas price fluctuations. There are several reasons for the dramatic drop in gas prices, ranging from lower demand from China and Western Europe, to OPEC’s refusal to lower production levels to the dismay of Venezuela’s President Maduro and, to a lesser extent, market speculation and more energy efficient vehicles. The main reason for these fluctuations is the law of supply and demand.

          12. mike January 27, 2015

            If Obama had had his way he would have taxed and regulate the carbon industry out of business. Oh, wait he did do it to the coal industry.
            Obama has no influence since he has basically restricted production on Fed. Lands, but State and private land is booming. What little Feds.produce is declining every year.
            And we are demanding less because we are producing more and that is effecting prices. You seem to want to ignore that part of the equation.

          13. CrankyToo January 28, 2015

            I guess this is one of those areas where you wingdings actually prefer MORE government involvement. Huh? And I thought you were only interested in vaginas…

          14. mike January 28, 2015

            More silliness from the silly one I see.

          15. Wrily January 27, 2015

            I am entitled to my opinion. You are not entitled to your lies. It has not been spend and tax, it has been spend and cut taxes for the wealthy, and it has not worked.

          16. mike January 27, 2015

            “It has not been tax and spend”, what a load of horse manure. Now how many wealthy people are there in US?? How many million?? 5,10 million??


          17. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

            “I am entitled to my opinion. You are not entitled to your lies.” Why, pray tell, do you waste your (valuable, I presume) time answering this IDIOT “Wrily” ?

          18. mike January 27, 2015

            When I have the time I enjoy watching them twist themselves into pretzels.

          19. dtgraham January 27, 2015

            For starters, the term unfunded liabilities is wrong. This is not like a contractual private pension plan. SS and Medicare benefits can be altered and governments can raise dedicated taxes to cover any projected shortfall. These are future obligations but they’re not liabilities like the national debt. In fact, by law, both programs are not allowed to pay out more than they take in so the assumption is that some future remedial action will be taken in some form if needed. It’s not like the nation is facing bankruptcy over senior’s pensions and health care.

            Did you ever notice how the right only applies the term unfunded liabilities to programs that are paid for with a dedicated tax and never to areas like the Pentagon which come out of general revenues instead, which is an absolutely huge part of every budget by the way. Why not project military spending into the next 50-100 years and see the scary number that you’ll come up with?

            The term unfunded liabilities is just a scare tactic used by detractors of SS and Medicare. It is extremely misleading to report future obligation costs as far into the future as they do without putting them into context by describing what share of the economy they represent…and that’s the game that’s played. In effect, you’re yelling trillions in a crowded theatre. You’re failing to scale the “liabilities” by the size of the economy. The net present value of the SS and Medicare shortfalls over the 75 year horizon are in the trillions yes, but as a share of the future economy, which also grows over those same years, they’re around 1%. The actual value assigned to the gap is widely debated and can differ substantially because it’s dependent on so many variables over such a long period of time. Actuaries do the best they can.

            The point is, not including future GDP estimates in future program cost estimates is useless and dangerously misleading because the size of the numbers creates a comparative fallacy. The additional resources needed to meet projected Medicare expenditures over the next 75 years represent only 5.8% of the present value of projected GDP over the same period. Putting side-by-side the 75 year obligations estimate with the current GDP size is like determining your salary based on the cost of living in 1935.

            Incidentally, the SS gap could be fixed tomorrow by simply raising the taxable income ceiling. Do you really want the United States to be the only advanced developed nation with no pensions or health care for it’s senior citizens. Can you name another rich nation that doesn’t do this? You can’t, and few of them have the federal debt to GDP ratio of the U.S. because they choose to pay for things with adequate levels of taxation.

          20. latebloomingrandma January 27, 2015

            Thank you for your reasoned remarks.

          21. dtgraham January 27, 2015

            You’re welcome latebloomin. Thank you for the kind words.

          22. Dominick Vila January 27, 2015

            Excellent post. BTW, the Dod budget since 9/11 has grown from $316.2B in FY01 to $575B in FY15. The DoD expects it to grow by 6.3% in FY16.

          23. dtgraham January 27, 2015

            Thanks Dom. There’s some bread bags for ’em.

          24. Dominick Vila January 27, 2015

            As you said, the SS “problem” could be fixed by raising the current $118.500 contribution cap to, say, $200K. Using the SS and MEDICARE obligations to project an illusion of fiscal irresponsibility highlights how devoid of honesty and how desperate the GOP is to deflect attention from their reliance on deficit spending, accumulation of debt, and their attempts to undermine or, preferably, destroy social programs.

          25. mike January 27, 2015

            I find it interesting the SS Trustees us the words “Unfunded Obligations”.


            Raise dedicated taxes from the American people, Right???
            As I said the left will spend and spend, tax and tax and in the end the country is broke.
            At this time SS is having to get monies(71 billon) from general revenues in 2013 to pay participants which blows your remark about being ” not allowed to pay out more than they take in.”
            As I have said before tax and tax and tax.

          26. jmprint January 27, 2015

            Mike, the right will give tax breaks to the rich and expect to meet the budget by raising sales tax. Guess who has to carry that load? Republicans are going to tax, and tax the middle class, how do you think Kansas is going to rebound?

          27. mike January 27, 2015

            I see your head is still where the sun doesn’t shine.
            Better keep your day job that fortune telling gig is gong nowhere.

          28. charleo1 January 27, 2015

            We seen this in 2010, when Governors Rick Scott (R.FL.) And Scott Walker (R.WI.) Already facing depression era State budgets. Only saved from bankruptcy by the stimulus bill. However, once in office, (both in the first terms,) proceeded immediately to turn their respective lean budgets into a crisis. They each did this by literally giving away 100s of millions of dollars to the most profitable corporations in the State. Creating jobs? It didn’t. Then, their unstoppable Republican Legislatures, preceded to give a 50% tax cut across the board to the corporate set. Many who had of course funded their maiden campaigns. Then, laid off in Fl. 600,000 teachers, as equal number of maintenance personal, cancelled school repairs, cut
            salaries of fire, and police. And withheld Federal monies to our single community hospital here in Miami, and tried, (but failed,) to put the place up for
            sale! Then the fees started. Fees doubled for drivers
            license, contractor’s license, business licenses, on tags, for tolls on the highways, court costs, the local gov. had to raise property taxes, and sell bonds, and the cost of a semester of college at our State Schools went up nearly 50%. As they failed to escape the austerity ax imposed on the citizens of FL. And the economy didn’t improve only by, and not until, the general improvement seen throughout the Country. For which Mr. Scott proudly took credit. The GOP Con Game writ large!!!

          29. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

            Please forgive jmprint’s usual mental fog.
            She doesn’t know that sales taxes are STATE (and NOT federal) taxes.

          30. jmprint January 28, 2015

            Mike; You don’t speak for me, you don’t know what I know. I have paid enough sales tax to know what I’m talking about. I have filled out several Sales tax forms, 941, 940, 1102 too know the difference.

          31. dtgraham January 27, 2015

            I don’t find it interesting at all. That’s exactly what I said. They’re obligations, not liabilities. A liability is something covered by law. An obligation is just something that you’re expected to do but it’s not actually required. There is something called a contingent liability where corporations establish a fund for the possibility of some future event occurring, if that makes you feel any better. That still doesn’t mean they actually owe money though. It’s just a paper thing.

            As to the general revenues deal, that’s a common mistake and one made on purpose by the right wing media I’m sure. SS used to be strictly pay-as-you-go. That changed in 1983 when Congress raised payroll taxes to build up a cushion for the boomer onslaught. For nearly 3 decades after that the system took in far more revenue than it paid out in benefits. The surplus was invested in special non-tradeable treasury bonds, with interest credited to the system’s two trust funds (one for old-age and survivor and the other for disability payments). Some characterize that as the government borrowing or dipping into general revenues, but the system is in essentially the same position as any other investor who buys treasuries.

            Tax and tax and tax huh. Here’s a small sampler breakdown of some other countries and their tax revenues taken in as a percentage of GDP: (all of the other more developed countries are similar)

            New Zealand—34.5%

            The United States taxation revenues represent only 26.9% of the economy, or GDP. That is the lowest of any of the wealthier nations and Obama hasn’t changed that.

          32. Dominick Vila January 27, 2015

            Great post, once again. Unfortunately, those who are desperately trying to deflect attention from their tendency to rely on deficit spending and out of control accumulation of debt will continue to find cheap shots to deny the obvious. Thank you for the concise and clear analysis of facts, particularly as it pertains to Social Security.

          33. dtgraham January 27, 2015

            I was honoured to. I used to respond to Republican posters much more often when I first started reading the National Memo, than I do now. I think mike is a capable guy and a cut above most of the others, but they just repeat right wing media talking point mantras that are clearly wrong and, in many cases, don’t even make any sense. At least mike gives me something reasonable to argue. For the others, trying to argue that Obama isn’t actually a satanic Muslim Antichrist who’s the son of a werewolf, is a little tougher.

          34. Dominick Vila January 27, 2015

            I agree. I felt the same way a few years ago when I debated various topics topics with a conservative poster that used the acronym MontanaBill. Even though we disagreed, I actually enjoyed discussing issues with him. I share your opinion of most of the others pseudo conservatives. They actually sound and act like a bunch of immature bullies consumed by hatred. Seldom, if ever, do they say anything worth responding to.

          35. mike January 27, 2015

            Nice try!!
            A liability is a present obligation from an entity arising from past events, leaving it little or no discretion to avoid settlement.
            You can parse the words as much as you want but payment will come due. In this case it is unfunded.
            “Just a paper thing”, no wonder we are in this mess.
            You left out “producing money”.

            You seem to think there is an unending amount of money. Debt will continue to rise and at some point there will be nothing left.


            71 billion added to deficit, which is added debt, each year because of lack of revenues coming in SS.

          36. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

            Regarding dtgraham’s “pie-in-the-sky” theories, Reagan said it best:
            “The problem with our liberal friends is not that they do not know anything, but that they know so much that just ain’t so.”

          37. dtgraham January 28, 2015

            From my experiences on this website Louis, the problem with our conservative friends really does seem to be that they “do not know anything.”

          38. dtgraham January 28, 2015

            —When you have no discretion to avoid settlements in any way from past events (without deferral or restructuring), that’s a liability. When you do, that’s an obligation. The United States government has the discretion to reduce benefits or increase taxes on it’s future SS and Medicare settlements. Therefore it’s an obligation, and the payment and revenue structure don’t necessarily come do or become implemented at any given time.

            —“Just a paper thing” refers to corporations establishing a contingency liability fund on their balance sheets to deal with the possibility of losing lawsuits mostly. It was just a loose analogy to cut you some slack.

            —I don’t know what “producing money” means.

            —No, I don’t think that there’s an unending amount of money, and debt definitely does not have to continue to rise.

            —The accumulated deficit each year has nothing whatsoever to do with lack of revenues coming in to SS. In the shorter run, SS payments are covered. It’s a function of a longer term structural deficit having to do with offshore tax avoidance, inadequate tax rates, and tax inversions.

          39. mike January 28, 2015

            I should have used the expression “printing money” which the Fed has been doing to the tune 4 Trillion dollars to prop up the economy.
            As i said earlier, the monies which you claim are mere obligations still have to be paid, with what?? What product does the fed. govt. produce to pay for these liabilities/obligations?
            Debt will continue to rise at this juncture. Obama won’t touch the mitigating factors nor will congress. Obama just wants the class warfare mantra heard.
            As to SS short fall not being part of deficit is just plain wrong. Before 2010 SS Trust had a surplus and that went into the general fund and in return the Trust received SS bonds, a treasury obligation to repay + interest. Since 2010 they are being redeemed which means the monies are coming from the general fund. In order to pay these monies the treasury has to borrow to make the transfer to SS Trust. Ergo, the deficit has been increased by the SS short fall.
            As I said before you can parse the two words all you want but monies must be found to pay the American citizens.


          40. dtgraham January 29, 2015

            Those monies that are coming from the general fund should never have been put into the general fund in the first place. Those were SS surplus funds. When the bonds were redeemed, that’s just a transfer back to the SS trust funds from the general fund. Any borrowing that the treasury made in order to transfer those funds back to the SS trust fund can hardly be said to increase the budget deficit. It’s just an inter-governmental transfer.

            Social security is prohibited from spending money beyond what it has in it’s trust fund. It can’t lawfully contribute to the federal budget deficit since every penny that it pays out must have come through taxes raised from the program or the interest garnered from the bonds held by the trust fund.

            You’re probably talking about the recent exception to this rule where there was a lot of lost payroll tax revenue due to the 2 percentage point reduction in the SS payroll tax over two years called the payroll tax holiday. This was negotiated with the GOP in 2010 when the Dems had all 3 branches of government, and Obama needed to have his head examined for ever agreeing to it. There was money credited to the trust fund from general revenues to offset the loss, which did add to the budget deficit. However, apart from that special 2 year exception SS is prohibited from adding to the deficit under the more narrow legalistic on-budget sense of the law.

            Given that, there has become a slight long-term funding gap in social security. The 2011 report of the trustees of the SS trust fund projects that the fund and interest earnings from it will suffice to cover all benefit payments until 2036, and even then the fund would hardly be empty. The report projects that tax revenues will still cover approximately 75% of promised benefits until 2085. That’s an easy fix and I’m in the unified budget theory camp on that because to me, pensions and health care for seniors should also be an inter-generational transfer of wealth and not just a dedicated self-financing program. In the end, the old need to be taken care of and you finance it however you finance it. Countries do it in different ways. The alternative is to put granny out on an ice flow and send her off. Outside of the poorest of the third world, who’s doing that?

          41. mike January 29, 2015

            I believe you are off base and quite frankly not accurate.
            Can SS contribute to the federal deficit??
            It can, if you’re looking at a unified federal budget. By law, SS isn’t considered part of the federal budget since it has dedicated funding. But it can be useful to consider the federal government as a whole, including off–budget programs like SS. If you do, SS surplus or deficit contributes to the unified federal budget surplus or deficit.
            The bonds/IOU’s have been redeemed since 2010 and monies can only come from one place, the tax revenues for that year. Therefore, they are part of the deficit. Last year 77 Billion was needed to cover payments to retirees because of SS short fall in revenues.
            You can play the inter-government transfer all you want but the monies come from only one source, tax revenues.
            SS started at 42-1 and is now down to 2.8-1, it is not sustainable without changes.

            Thanks for that outdated 2011 report, I gave you the latest.

          42. dtgraham January 29, 2015

            Nope, wrong again. The special issue U.S. treasury securities held by the trust funds haven’t been redeemed yet because they haven’t needed to be. Yes, the average annual cash flow deficit is around 77 billion, but the interest earned on social security’s trust fund assets has been and will be sufficient to cover that shortfall until about 2020. At that point they’ll need to be redeemed to provide sufficient cash to cover benefits.

            Social security’s trust fund reserves will be exhausted by around 2033. If absolutely nothing is done, SS would still be able to pay 77% of scheduled annual benefits after 2033, declining to 72% by 2088.

            Expressed in relation to the GDP, the annual cost of SS benefits is expected to increase from 4.9% of GDP in 2014 to 6.2% in 2035, and then decline to 6.0% in 2050 and remain at about that level through 2088. The 75 year actuarial deficit was estimated in 2014 to be 2.88% of taxable payroll. If this isn’t looking unsustainable to you, you’d be right.

            The 2014 social security trustees report states that SS would remain solvent throughout the 75 year projection period if the combined employee-employer payroll tax rate was immediately raised by 2.83 percentage points from the current rate of 12.4% to 15.23%.

            If no action at all is taken until the trust funds are exhausted in 2033, then the following change at that point would keep the program solvent for the 75 year period: raise the combined employee-employer payroll tax rate from the current 12.4% to 16.6% in 2033 and to 17.7% by 2088.

            Yes, some adjustments will have to be made but they’re relatively minor. Social Security is eminently sustainable.

          43. mike January 29, 2015

            Here’s two articles that shoots down only interest.

            Mother Jones no less is stating bonds being cashed in

          44. dtgraham January 31, 2015

            Getting back to you a little late. Life called on Friday. “The SS trustees report on the status of SS funds in 2014” that I looked at had the redemption of bonds as being necessary only in 2020, not earlier. No matter, because when you’re down to arguing about a 5 year window on precisely when treasury bonds will be redeemed, it doesn’t make a material change. The payroll tax fix outlined in the report would have only the smallest of alterations to it in order to account for a couple of years difference in redemption, meaning the lifespan of the bonds’ ability to cover the gap in payroll tax financing of benefit payments.

            The bigger question is whether the SS trust fund represents savings that don’t warrant a need to raise taxes by 2020 or not? It really depends on how you look at it and you raise an interesting question. For example, if the redeemed bonds are paid for by other borrowing, then you could view the trust fund as just one of many potential lenders to the federal government. If you use that point of view, then replacing the trust as a lender because it is recalling it’s loan doesn’t mean that the money was spent but rather just that the lenders have shifted. The real past economic savings of the trust is that borrowing from other sources was decreased due to intragovernmental debt financing of the general fund through the issuance of treasuries to the SS trust fund. An added bonus is that the debt incurred was only debt that the country owes to itself and didn’t represent the kind of liability that outside source borrowing would have.

            Hence the debt to the SS trust fund when the bonds are redeemed is simply replaced with debt to a different lender. That scenario would increase the tax burden on future generations only if two things happen: the interest rate is higher on the new debt AND government revenues don’t increase sufficiently either through taxes or economic growth.

            There is another way to deal with SS bond redemption. The government can monetize trust fund obligations by transferring the treasuries held by the trust fund onto the federal reserve balance sheet. The bonds would become assets on the Fed’s balance sheet and the Fed would create money to purchase the bonds from the government. Under that scenario the bonds would be converted into cash which would then be used by the government to cover the SS payroll tax payments gap. The downside is that would likely lead to inflation, as it would inflate the money supply without increasing the amount of goods and services produced by the economy as a whole.

            The problem as I see it, always comes down to the fact that the United States is so badly hamstrung by it’s lack of tax revenues. Look at the U.S. tax revenues on a per capita basis or as a share of GDP and then compare that to the G20. Decades of tax cutting have taken their toll and that was the goal all along of the political right. Create an artificial crisis and then yell about the unsustainability of the social programs that you want to get rid of. However the military always needs to have “adequate funding” as the Heritage Foundation proudly exclaimed on one of it’s website stories (I read ’em all).

          45. mike February 2, 2015

            Thank for your thoughtful post.
            It is a mess and getting worse. I see Washington continuing to ignore and pushing it down the road.
            We don’t have a tax revenue problem we have a spending problem.
            As I have read where bonds are being redeemed and others not. What I know is that to cover the SS short fall, the monies are coming out of the General fund and that affects the deficit. Even though it is called a Trust it really is just an Account, with no value except the full faith and credit of the fed. govt.
            To pay off these bonds it will be necessary to Borrow, Tax, or print money.

          46. dtgraham February 5, 2015

            Thanks mike. It’s been good debating you on this. I think we did this a couple of years ago when we argued just how legitimate Bill Clinton’s budget surpluses were given the peculiarities of governmental fund accounting.

            You’ve made me reconsider things like the Social Security Act prohibiting “prefunding” by investment in equities or corporate bonds. It had something to do with avoiding large swings in the treasuries market. If they would’ve put the extra FICA taxes into low growth but stable investment vehicles in the private sector in the first place, we wouldn’t be having this argument.

            The only thing I would add here is that due to the historically low inflation rates since 2009, the idea of monetizing the Social Security trust fund treasury bond debt has some merit as a one-off event under the current circumstances. Obviously printing money out of thin air is rarely a good idea, but it may make some sense here.

          47. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

            Don’t get mad at charleo1. He is, as are the majority of the unthinking Leftists on this site, a DUMBASS.

          48. jmprint January 27, 2015

            But you are better at it.

          49. Carolyn1520 January 27, 2015

            Don’t waste your time on Tweedle Dumb and Tweedle Dumber. All you’ll get is circular arguments and sophomoric insults. Both are very basic and dichotomous thinkers, when they think at all. Most of what they say is reaction based on feelings and fear.
            One may be a sock puppet of the other as most of what they say sounds the same. But tin that regard, they always have at least one person who agrees with them. 🙂

          50. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

            Paraphrasing you: Don’t waste your time on jmprint. She does not understand your posts.
            Also, funnnnyyy how you say that most of what conservatives say is reaction based “on feelings and fear.”
            “Feelings”, as opposed to FACTS and plain common sense is what ” leftist, socialist, dirty hippie, tree hugging, educated liberals” (YOUR words, dear !) are all about.

          51. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

            jmprint, honey:
            But I wasn’t the one OBTUSE enough not to understand Carolyn’s very simple (wrong, but simple still) post.
            You were, sweetie.

          52. charleo1 January 27, 2015

            Your house, (if you have one under that rock,) is an unfunded liability. Unless you can pay it off tomorrow. So the idea of extrapolating debt, with no increase in revenues, is the Right Wing’s tactic for scaring chowder heads into cutting their own throat. You know, those useful tools, who think funding the gov, is like sitting around the kitchen table, and balancing a checkbook? And who believes funding the military can actually be called discretionary in this day, and time, in this Country? When Obama, the, “Great Appeaser,” purposed allocating 47% of this so called, “discretionary spending,” about 800 billion for The Pentagon in fiscal 2013. The GOP accused him of trying to gut the military, to fund his Socialist agenda. Where in the Right Wing, that translates to a few misplaced crumbs for the struggling average work a day American. Your comment on extrapolated debt, was like the GOP. Stupid, and wrong.

        2. Carolyn1520 January 27, 2015

          Pearls before swine as evidenced by the responses of the uninformed.

          1. jmprint January 27, 2015

            Are you looking in the mirror? Are you informed? Do you enjoy voting? DO you enjoy having rights as a women? Do you enjoy your free country?

          2. Carolyn1520 January 27, 2015

            What’s your point?

          3. jmprint January 27, 2015

            Didn’t know which side you were coming from, didn’t understand your post.

          4. Carolyn1520 January 27, 2015

            I didn’t make it clear. The responses to his post indicated they either didn’t understand it or are just too old and brain washed for it to resonate.
            Let me assure you, I’m one of those leftist, socialist, dirty hippie, tree hugging, educated liberals. 🙂

          5. plc97477 January 27, 2015

            Hey! me too.

          6. Carolyn1520 January 27, 2015

            Kindred spirit.

          7. jmprint January 28, 2015

            Thanks Carolyn. What a blessing.

          8. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

            But OF COURSE you did not understand her post !
            And she was so polite that she never called you an idiot.
            Instead, she said: “I didn’t make it clear.”
            Carolyn, it WAS as clear as clean water.

      2. Jambi January 27, 2015

        See Charleo1…read and think about it

        1. CrankyToo January 27, 2015

          You’re wasting your time; Mike’s another dead horse.

          1. mike January 27, 2015

            LOL!!! The only brain dead person is you!!!
            Prove my numbers wrong.

          2. CrankyToo January 27, 2015

            One could make a career out of proving you wrong, And in the end, it would have been a waste of time; like kicking a dead horse. You’re obviously way too firmly entrenched in your wingding ideology.

          3. mike January 27, 2015

            Now that’s funny!! If you could you would, just to prove your superiority.
            No, you are one of unenlightened.

          4. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

            “One could make a career out of proving you wrong, And in the end, it would have been a waste of time.”
            ANOTHER cop-out.
            They do not have the facts on their side. Plain and simple.

        2. mike January 27, 2015

          Are you talking about his comments on Unfunded liabilities?
          If so, you want me to “read and think about” his comments in which he put DOD and Homeland Security in Mandatory Spending. You want me to think about a mans statement that doesn’t know the difference between Mandatory Spending and Discretionary Spending?
          You want me to take your advice, when I know you are also so uninformed.
          I don’t think so!!!!

      3. Hgeyer January 27, 2015

        Low information voters vote for republicans! THAT is why republicans are so anti-education….. Keep them stupid and they will vote for the very people that are destroying any chance of them lifting themselves up!

        1. mike January 27, 2015

          I don’t think so! If that was the case the dems would have been out in force protecting the policies of Obama in mid-terms. In stead the right were better informed and knew his policies were bad.

        2. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

          Hgeyer: Low information (or, better, NO information) voters (complete ignoramuses) vote for democrats.

          1. Hgeyer January 28, 2015

            I believe you are confused! It wasn’t democrats that voted for that idiot Romney or Sarah Palin or Sharon Angle or Michele Bachmann Or ANY of those NO BRAIN, NO KNOWLEDGE idiots!

          2. Hgeyer January 28, 2015

            Republicans, in the last election, voted to raise their states minimum wages and then elected people to office that want to eliminate the minimum wage all together! The sign of truly NO INFORMATION VOTERS!

          3. Louis Allen January 28, 2015

            Hgeyer, you dummy:
            That’s PRECISELY what I said: “Low information idiots vote democrat.” !! Voters that voted for Romney were NOT democrats (you said it yourself, dummy); they were smart Republicans and Independents.

          4. Hgeyer January 28, 2015

            Sorry, but if you aren’t part of the 2% a vote for Romney is one of the stupidest things a human could do! And lately it seems as if “smart” and republican or independent is a seriously flagrant oxymoron! For one, why would the NRA support a person that signed an assault rifle ban into law over someone that never signed ANY anti gun law EVER? LOW INFORMATION VOTERS! Why did republicans pick Bush Jr. , a draft dodging national guard deserter over a decorated war hero? LOW INFORMATION VOTERS! Wake up BEFORE your party finishes the destruction of our middle class!

          5. Louis Allen January 28, 2015

            For the last time, in very simple terms so that even you can understand it. LOW INFORMATION VOTERS are DemocRats !!
            1) Why did DemocRats pick Obammy, a marijuana (and God knows what else) smoking socialist trained under Saul Alinsky’s precepts?
            2) Why did DemocRats pick Obammy, an obscure (VERY obscure) first-term US Senator who did not distinguish himself in any way until the 2004 keynote address at the Dems Convention?
            3) Why did DemocRats pick Obammy, a mysterious (in every sense of the word) person who HAS NEVER AGREED TO RELEASE HIS ACADEMIC RECORDS while at Harvard and Columbia?
            4) Why did DemocRats forgive Obammy for LYING THROUGH HIS TEETH about “If you like your doctor, you can KEEP your doctor”??
            5) Why are DemocRat MORONS like you willing to put up with Nancy “The Ugly Witch” Pelosi’s ABOMINABLE statement “I guess we are going to have to wait until we approve it to see what’s in it.”??
            6) Why are DemocRats willing to put this complete IDIOT, Joe “The Clown” Biden ” a heartbeat away” from the Presidency ??
            7) Why are DemocRats not angry at this CRETIN Chris Matthew (MSNBC) who gets “a chill up [his] spine everytime [he] speaks about Obama” ??
            And so on, and so forth.
            WHY??!! BECAUSE IDIOTS LIKE YOU ARE LOW INFORMATION VOTERS, that’s why, you dumbass.

          6. Hgeyer January 28, 2015

            Rant as you will…. What you should ask yourself is, “Why does the republican party always put BIGGER idiots on the ticket?” You have nothing to stand on especial your pathetic remark about Biden! After that brainless vegetable of a woman you ran for VP! Wow, and a president giving out inaccurate information like Bush senior,” Watch my lips! No new taxes!”. Bush Jr.’s lies about Iraq? Nixon’s, “I’m not a crook!” If you’re stupid enough to think we have EVER had a president that doesn’t lie or that ANY of the bills that EVER go through congress are EVER read by the representative, it explains just WHY you vote republican……. NO INFORMATION! And you have the guts to call someone else a dumba*s ? Ever ask yourself about why Romney didn’t want anybody seeing his old tax returns like all other presidential candidates? Or his record at Bain Capital? Or Bush’s records from when he “went missing” from the national guard?

          7. Louis Allen January 28, 2015

            But of course, to a patently unqualified voter like yourself, Biden is brilliant !!
            In your feeble mind, everybody lies but Reps are uninformed while Dems are informed.
            Just the type of “logic” that characterizes you lefties.
            Common sense somehow always eludes you.

          8. Hgeyer January 29, 2015

            Compared to Palin and Bachmann Biden IS a genius! So keep voting for people that campaign and pass laws against your best interests. If THAT is what YOU call common sense you should buy a dictionary…. and read it!

          9. Louis Allen January 29, 2015

            H: Biden can not be a genius even compared to a granite rock.
            I repeat: Common sense somehow always eludes you lefties.
            LOL !!

          10. Hgeyer January 29, 2015

            In 2016 put that rock on the ticket for vice president! It would be a big improvement over anyone republicans have put on the ballot in decades….

          11. Louis Allen January 29, 2015

            Ha, ha, ha, haaa!! You ARE funny!!
            … if he’s such a “genius”, why don’t you guys nominate him for the vice-presidency or, better yet, for President ??
            LOL !!!

      4. Hgeyer January 27, 2015

        More government welfare for the wealthy than the poor…

        1. mike January 27, 2015

          Refute my numbers!!!
          The real danger to ALL Americans is the direction of spending and what it will do to this country.
          Would love to see your source.

          1. Wrily January 27, 2015

            No one needs to refute your numbers. They are not credible because you are not credible. You forfeited your credibility when you started calling people names. Your opinion is welcome, but your attitude is out of place. They may like the vitriol over at Newsmax or The Washington Times, but it doesn’t wash here.

          2. mike January 27, 2015

            What a cop-out!!!
            If you could you would!!!
            Please save me all your PC, I have been called everything in the book and so get over it.

          3. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

            You said it. What a cop-out !
            “No one needs to refute your numbers. They are not credible because you are not credible.” – Plain PATHETIC from a PATHETIC poster.

          4. mike January 27, 2015

            Is she Eleanor’s roommate??

      5. jmprint January 27, 2015

        Mike, so what is it that the democrats are spending all those trillions of dollars on, that the republicans are not? And what is it that the republicans gain in passing laws that benefit the Kock Brothers ONLY. So if cutting taxes to the rich corporations as was done in Kansas, and it practically sank them, why is it a good thing for Americans like me and you?

        1. mike January 27, 2015

          Refute the trillions in obligations that are unfunded.
          Prove to all of us that the debt and entitlements will not take every penny of revenue in less than 20 years or 85% by 2024 or even better yet that it represents 62% now.

          1. jmprint January 27, 2015

            And then you will answer my questions?

          2. mike January 27, 2015

            You will use any excuse not to answer the obvious.

          3. jmprint January 27, 2015


          4. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

            She won’t because:
            a) she can’t;
            b) she does not have the FACTS (something lefties like her HATE) on her side.

      6. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

        I will repeat the last part of your post because it contains several “gems” worth repeating (although most of the posters on this Soros’ TNM site are too obtuse to understand, Dom Vila being a notable exception to that, …. most of the time):

        “Spending that will only be more deleterious for this country.
        But it
        is all about power, nothing about what is best for the country. The left
        wants the low info people to just keep voting for them, so they can
        have the free stuff. One of these days they will wake up and see how you
        on the left have screwed them.”

        1. jmprint January 27, 2015

          The only thing you are right about is that there are a lot of low informed people, if they were informed they would all be voting for democrats. But do tell us how we were screwed. I like details.

          1. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

            j dear:
            Listen to yourself.
            Sweetie, the “low informed” people ALREADY voted for the democRats ! TWICE !! LOL !!

        2. Budjob January 27, 2015

          Louie,I would assume that by reading the trash that you are posting,that,the best part of you ran down yo Mommas leg! Have a somewhat unpleasant day dickweed!

          1. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

            You are funny, BUTTjob, as dumb as a box of nails, but funny still ….
            And your hatefulness comes through, …. very clearfully. Hate towards the truth and towards the (few) people that defend it on this site that USED to be yours only, stupid lefties.
            Have a somewhat unpleasant day yourself, dickhead !

          2. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

            You are funnnyyy, BUTTjob, a stinkin’ slob and a dickhead but funny still.

      7. Dominick Vila January 27, 2015

        I agree on one thing, neither Romney nor Palin will win the GOP nomination. The same goes for Christie, Cruz, and Rubio. Paul will get a few votes, Huckabee will probably be among the finalists, and Jeb has a fair chance to win, but I expect a last minute entry with a better chance of getting the support of both the GOP establishment and the Tea Party.
        It takes nerve for the party that has relied on deficit spending, accumulation of debt, and using subterfuges such as unfunded liabilities to make the deficits look more benign that they were, to talk about Democrats spending when one created a surplus and the incumbent reduced the deficits by 2/3.
        Raising the capital gains tax to Reagan era levels would produce the revenues needed to make community college affordable for young Americans who currently cannot afford it. Raising the minimum wage would allow millions of Americans to put food on the table, and would increase their disposable income, which would help the economy. Investing in infrastructure is, at the moment, the only tangible short term solution to help middle class Americans displaced by outsourcing and automation.
        The fact that the GOP continues to insist on trickle down economics, in spite of the horrendous evidence of past attempts, confirms the lack of vision and honesty of the not so Grand Old Party.

        1. mike January 27, 2015

          Dom, how many are at or below minimum wage? 5 Million, !0 million? What is the break down in age 50% above 25?
          Until you know the numbers save me all this crap about putting food on the table.

          Better yet, how about getting the govt. off the backs of the business community and let them get the economy growing, which means more jobs.
          You on the left want to tax and spend, control the everyday lives Americans. Make them all wards of the state.
          We are in downward spiral economically and all you and your ilk want are more people obligated to the state.

          1. jmprint January 27, 2015

            Both Bush’s tried it, it didn’t work. Who wants to keep bouncing of the wall, not me. Controlling people lives is what the republican are good at. They want to dictate religion and family matters. And you have it wrong we are in an upward rise from the economic disaster that you guys want to go back to.

          2. mike January 27, 2015

            Still delusional I see.

          3. jmprint January 27, 2015

            Nope just seeing realty.

          4. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

            Yep. Still delusional. Never stopped being exactly that.

          5. charleo1 January 27, 2015

            Ah yes, Another Winger who thinks the guy that built
            the store created the job. And the customer is no more than an afterthought to the process. That flocks to buy the merchandize, with pockets full of fairy dust money, when the regulations allow it all to become cheap pieces of crap.

          6. mike January 27, 2015

            Another one of your deficient comment I see.

          7. charleo1 January 28, 2015

            My comment is deficient. But it goes to the heart of the debate between one faction that holds the best solution to economic growth, is further rigging a system that already heaps huge sums of wealth on the small percentage at the top, at the expense of the larger consumer economy below. This is pure poison to an economy where 90% of expansion, directly depends on purchase, and consumption. And the results of pursuing these policies over the course of the last few decades, have been absolutely predictable. The already wealthy and empowered have become much more wealthy, and powerful, coming to control an ever larger, and expanding percentage of the total wealth in the economy. This resultant, and ever increasing inequity does two things, neither of them good. First, the concentration of wealth prohibits adequate capital circulation, cutting demand, leading to job loss. While contractions in the public job sector, produce labor glut, lower wages, a disintegrating tax base, and deteriorating infrastructure, due to cuts in public investment. Along with increases in demand for gov, services. Requiring either tax increases, or increases of the public debt. Which brings us the second consequence of having 84% of the wealth controlled by the top 20% of those with the most
            influence to affect public policy. Their interests become nearly diametrically in opposition to the interests of those other 80% struggling to make a living in an anemic, capital starved larger economy.
            The 80% desire growth, and investment. While the
            money at the top is looking for preservation. Lower
            taxes, fewer restrictions on foreign investments, and of course, fewer regulations. Which truth be told, they have received in abundance. But at what cost to the Country? To a very over extended gov.? As it has had to bail out a deregulated financial sector, Or deal with the devastation in the larger economy, directly caused by the intentionally warped, and wrongheaded policies, emanating out of this powerful, wealthy minority, that now sits astride our economy, and governmental institutions.

          8. mike January 28, 2015

            All those words and nothing said. Just more diarrhea of the brain.

          9. charleo1 January 28, 2015

            Little you know eh, Mike? Once you get past all that Right Wing drivel, and vacuous talking points, you got nothing but insults. Look, why don’t you try and use that noodle once in while? Go back over my comment, or other here. And you tell me where the assertions made are not correct. Or, why yours are. Using real facts, or general trends in the economy, that support the major points the Right tries to make on their economic policies. On the direction of the re-distribution of wealth. Is it up, or down the income scale? The reason, or reasons for strong private investment in foreign economies, as opposed to the lack of investment in the domestic one? Or, why the Right suddenly believes paying down long term debt is of greater importance than modernizing our aging infrastructure here? Cutting public investment in R&D? Opposing expansion of educational opportunities? Just as we face an ever more competitive global environment? And why is it, over the past few decades, have we have developed both a wage, and employment/ under employment crisis in the economy? And how, if it does, all that relates, and coincides directly with the increasing income gap between the super rich, and everyone else. If we assume they are subject to the same rules, and regulations, and taxes as everyone else. Then, why are they running away from the vast majority in terms of wealth, and property at such a rapid rate That’s if their wealth is actually being pilfered from them at such injurious levels? Just how then, is this not impoverishing them?

          10. mike January 28, 2015

            Why should I go back over your comments.
            As like this post of yours, your posts have been all words and little substance. Gobbly Goop and nothing more.
            Lets take one of your comments yesterday. You didn’t even know the difference between Mandatory and Discretionary spending. You put DOD and DHS in the Mandatory category. So,why should I pay any attention to anything else you say.


          11. charleo1 January 29, 2015

            I don’t believe that’s the reason at all, Mike. I really don’t. I think the reason you refuse to actually engage, is you’re afraid the obvious, fundamental facts don’t support you, and you might have to learn some things that would completely upend everything you’re so fond, and comfortable with believing about economic matters. I also realize something else. That not all Right Wing adherents support the ideology due to their blatant proclivity for rigging the economy in favor of the rich. As that
            is only one part of the charm. They also tend to be
            extremely authoritarian, irreverent, and disdainful
            when it comes to Blacks, and other minority’s Civil Rights. Which is popular with young White men,
            and older White Southerners, who believe Right Wing policies would reestablish their advantage, over Blacks, and Latinos. Which they see the Left
            as being responsible for taking away. And so see Left Wingers concerns of about wealth inequality, stagnant wages, the lack of affordable healthcare, and the support of higher taxes on the segment of the population that’s benefiting the most from the rigging. As just more of the same policy of giving away what used to belong to them, their birthright. To the inferior, slothful, and undeserving, as a outright bribe for their less than legitimate vote. What they called in 1968 the, “Southern Strategy,” that had millions of former Southern Democrats voting for Nixon, and electing thousands of Right Wing politicians throughout the Old Confederate South. And survives to this day. Further supporting my conclusion, that Conservative Right economics are not economic policies at all, but political ones. That serve to advance the steady decline in the standards of living, and financial security, for millions of those same White Southerners. Who support them against their own best interests for reasons having nothing whatsoever to do with economics.

          12. mike January 29, 2015

            Thanks for the good morning laugh!!

            More words, more gobbly goop, more waste of words.
            Just more of nothing.

          13. charleo1 January 29, 2015

            Yes, really Mike! Much like Dorothy Parker said, “You can lead a whore to culture, but you can’t make him think.” I can’t even goad you into defending your rat hole economics.

          14. mike January 29, 2015

            Still enjoying a good laugh at your expense!!!

          15. charleo1 January 29, 2015

            Well, good. Nothing like entertaining a useful idiot.
            So says the Cons.

          16. mike January 29, 2015

            Keep trying!!!! More deficit thinking on your part.

          17. charleo1 January 30, 2015

            “Deficits don’t matter.” To supply siders. Remember?

          18. mike January 30, 2015

            You are right, your thoughts are so lame and rambling they don’t matter.
            Very few have the ability to use so many words and say nothing.

          19. Dominick Vila January 27, 2015

            According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, among those paid by the
            hour, 1.6 million Americans earned the prevailing federal minimum wage last year.
            The issue is not how many, but the fact that no American should earn a minimum wage that is substantially lower than the minimum wage in most industrialized nations, and that a minimum wage more representative of our GDP would increase disposable income and spending, which would in turn stimulate economic growth.

            As for workers earning less than our ridiculous minimum wage we have, the only ones that come to mind are illegal immigrants doing farm work.
            Our goal should be to match or surpass other industrialized nations to improve the standard of living of all our citizens, rather than emulate Bangladesh or Guatemala.
            Bear in mind that 20 states, most of them Blue states, already raised the minimum wage, and that some companies, such as Aetna, raised it voluntarily to $16 an hour to attract qualified applicants and lower attrition. The GOP is out of step with reality on this one, and you know it.

          20. mike January 27, 2015

            What you have ignored again is the fact that close to 64% minimum wage workers are under 25 years of age, working part time, going to school, etc..
            Estimates are around 8 billion dollars added to a 18 trillion dollar economy.
            When did illegals become citizens??

          21. Dominick Vila January 28, 2015

            Thank you for admitting that your denials about the economic growth and job creation record of the last few years, based in part by highlighting the fact that many of the jobs created are part time jobs, is a meaningless statistic. You are 100% correct, a large percentage of those working part time are high school and college students. There are also a lot of mothers who work part time while their children are in day care to help make ends meet. This is not a negative, it is something that has been with us for many years, and that will remain in place for many years to come. It helps those who for a variety of reasons cannot work full time, and it helps employers keep cost down and profit.
            Proposals to create full time jobs, such as investment in infrastructure, are designed to help those who can and are seeking full time employment, but cannot find it. Free community college education addresses the latter.
            When did illegal immigrants become citizens? When President Reagan granted them amnesty.

          22. mike January 28, 2015

            Only you could get growth and job creation out of what I said.
            “Meaningless statistic” is just plain baloney.
            Nice try!!!
            Now Now there you go again!! You said. “As for workers earning…………………….only ones that come to mind are illegals immigrants doing farm work”, you then gone on to say to improve living standard all citizens. So are you saying illegals do not fit in that category?
            As you socialist all want is freebies for everyone. No skin in the game for their education, just more govt. in every aspect of our lives. This is just plain class warfare. Why not loans??

          23. Dominick Vila January 28, 2015

            Our labor laws, as currently written, do not extend minimum wage privileges to farm hands.
            If the government (at all levels) do not provide the resources needed to ensure our young have the education needed to succeed, who do you think should do it?
            Making community college free will not solve all our problems, but it is a step in the right direction. Obviously, the ones ultimately responsible for our well being and the achievement of our personal goals is us. The only things the government can do is provide the tools needed to succeed.

          24. mike January 28, 2015

            What resources are not being provide by the govt. to the young? Loans are available, Right?? What specifically is being denied?
            I keep forgetting you are the Cradle to Grave guys. Government, Government, Government.

          25. Dominick Vila January 28, 2015

            Are you comparing an AA to a graveyard?
            Yes, loans are available, and according to some so are rich parents, unfortunately not everybody is so fortunate and not everybody can afford paying for those loans, when earnings are insufficient to pay back the loan.

          26. mike January 28, 2015

            You seem to have that selective memory going again.
            I find it interesting the 529’s Obama wanted to end sure got reversed when he realized the majority of savings accounts were from the middle class(70%).

            What resources are being denied?? Answer the question.

          27. Dominick Vila January 28, 2015

            Resources – access to a community college education – has never been, and is not, being denied. What the GOP refuses to consider is a proposal to make community college tuition free. Essentially, making it an extension of public school High School education. The intent is to help students who cannot afford the tuition charged by community colleges in most states, and at the same time ensure our workforce is better prepared to qualify for jobs that are currently going to foreign professionals.
            Why does the GOP object to help middle class and poor students get the education they need to succeed? Answer the question.

          28. mike January 28, 2015

            At it again I see!!
            You said “if govt do not provide the resources…..”
            One more time, name the resources being denied!!!
            Why? it is one more unnecessary govt. program. Just more spending meaning more debt., at least with loans there is skin in the game with repayment.
            Numbers show it won’t work, also.
            This is just more posturing by Obama and charges education in the form of debt, for future generations of taxpayers, rather than changes it.
            As with any govt. program this programs tuition cost will rise and the program will increase and more debt will be added.
            If they want an education they can get a loan and have some responsibility for their lives.

          29. Dominick Vila January 28, 2015

            The resources I referenced in my post referred to the financial support needed to encourage middle class and poor students to attend college.
            For the GOP everything is about dollars and cents. Social responsibility means absolutely nothing for you guys. The concept of ensuring our country is intellectually ready to compete on the world stage comes to a screeching halt for those who only think about themselves and don’t care about anyone else…while using those who don’t qualify for good jobs and who have no choice but to apply for part time, low paying jobs, as evidence of economic failure. Do you have a better solution to solve this problem, besides incurring debt that most young people cannot afford, or relying on wealthy parents that most Americans don’t have?

          30. mike January 28, 2015

            No, it is about debt, that is unsustainable and if not addressed will be the demise of a once great country and world leader. Shortly China will be determining our future and that is not good.
            Neither party is innocent for this pending crisis.
            As you continue to push, only Big Govt. is the answer for all things. It is not, it is ineffective, corrupt, wasteful, etc.. all controlled by unelected bureaucrats, who could care less. Ex: VA. IRS
            You believe that hard work doesn’t exist any more, I disagree. You want a bunch of lemmings walking in lock step. You except loss of freedom, I don’t.
            How did my Dad, a young man forced at age 14(little education) after his Dad died, to be the bread winner and he worked his butt off and ended up a self made man.
            Save me the crap, if these young people want to success it will because they wanted it bad enough. If they want to grow they will accept debt to reach their goals.

          31. Dominick Vila January 28, 2015

            I believe that hard work doesn’t exist anymore? What a load of crap! Do you have a problem with English comprehension? I have acknowledged, time and again, that ultimately it is incumbent on us to do what it takes to succeed, and that includes working hard, having solid work ethics, being responsible, understanding and accepting the consequences of our decisions, and paying for what we need and use.
            I don’t believe the government is the answer to all our ills, but I am convinced that, lacking an alternative, our government can play a role in helping us achieve our goals and overcome obstacles that we can’t do by ourselves.

          32. mike January 28, 2015

            It is called tough love. Get off your a$$ and quit expecting hand outs from the govt..
            No, you are a Big Govt. guy and that wants to take everything from the successful and give it to the lazy. You are a democrat, you vote democrat and you post on a left wing site. DUH!!!
            You could care less about debt and deficit but love to give handouts.
            Obama’s posturing is all class warfare and you are an enabler, and all in for it. Which by the way is all crap.

          33. Dominick Vila January 28, 2015

            I worked 44 years before I retired. Was never unemployed. Paid taxes my whole life, and never depended on the government for sustenance.
            Yes, I am a Democrat, and I generally voice Democratic views. Interestingly, one of the reasons I reject Republican orthodoxy is because of their reliance on deficit spending, their propensity to borrow and accumulate debt, because of the irresponsible tax breaks, subsidies, and loopholes they protect and promote, and because of their obsession with trickle down economics, which has proven time and again to be an abject failure. As a fiscal conservative, I consider the GOP the epitome of fiscal irresponsibility, and their record in this regard supports my conclusion.

          34. mike January 28, 2015

            Sorry, but that was a load of horse manure. You a fiscal conservative that’s a good one. There isn’t a program you don’t like or one you would eliminate. You would have the govt. run our lives, our businesses, and regulate the crap out of us.
            You believe in piling debt upon debt with little concern who pays for it down the road. You begrudge the 1% and demand more of their monies to pay for the freebies. The 1 percent that pay 35% of income tax revenue but you want more. Heck the top 20% pay 85% of the taxes.
            You sir are no Fiscal Conservative. A Fiscal Conservative wants lower levels of spending, lower taxes, and lower govt. debt. You don’t fit one of the criteria for a Fiscal Conservative.You could care less about deficits.

          35. Dominick Vila January 29, 2015

            I consider your interpretation of conservatism evidence of irresponsibility. For me, conservatism means paying for what we need and benefit from, eliminating deficit spending, living within our means, avoiding having to borrow, and making sure we don’t incur debt. Paying lower taxes by not funding social programs such as Social Security, MEDICARE, and the Affordable Care Act adequately is the epitome of social irresponsibility. For me, helping seniors, the poor, and making sure our most vulnerable citizens live with a modicum of comfort and can achieve their personal goals is a human responsibility, not a luxury or frivolous spending. I admit that there are government programs I would modify, including welfare/food stamps, which I would limit to a few months, while recipients seek employment.
            For me, proposals such as raising the minimum wage, free community college education, and investment in infrastructure, have nothing to do with conservatism or liberalism. I consider them short and long term solutions needed to strengthen our ability to compete, stimulate our economy, and make jobs available to those who have been left behind.
            Making sure we have more money in our pockets to buy the latest gadget Made in China has nothing to do with conservatism, it is plain irresponsible.

          36. mike January 29, 2015

            Irresponsible!!! Really!!!
            More crock from you.
            You said you were a Fiscal Conservative which by definition is far from your interpretation.
            As I said, you are a big govt guy not interested in how much debt is being added and with little interest in how it is to be paid for.
            You give one department to modify, big deal.
            The programs you list only add to the debt, except Min. wage.
            You want us to able to compete, but you are a big union guy, which makes us less competitive. Stimulate the economy but are happy with all the massive regulations that have been imposed by Obama to slow our growth down.
            Dom, you are so far from being a Fiscal Conservative it is almost laughable and your ideas ring Hollow by almost every standard of a Fiscal Conservative.

          37. Dominick Vila January 29, 2015

            Take a look at the record, and come back and tell us which political party has the best record on spending and accumulation of debt.
            For members of Reagan’s party, the President responsible for the largest increases in deficit spending and accumulation of debt in history as a result of his irresponsible tax breaks and trickle down theory – aka voodoo economics – to preach fiscal conservatism is like getting a lesson on fire prevention from an arsonist.
            After 40 years in the Federal Government, I recognize that there is waste, and that steps should be taken to reduce government spending. Welfare was an example of what can be done to achieve that. Raising the debt ceiling 18 times in 8 years is not a solution, it is a train wreck. As for the Unions, my relationship with them stems from bargaining unit negotiations representing the corporation I worked for. I recognize, however, that without union representation the segment of our workforce that sought organized labor representation would not have gotten a fraction of what they got. Not because we couldn’t afford it, but because lower compensation and benefits meant higher earnings and higher dividends for us.

          38. mike January 29, 2015

            40 years a govt. employee gives you a perspective on the private sector, Right!!
            So the Fed. Govt. is a corporation? You said negotiating with unions representing a corporation is a interesting use of words.
            You love to bash Reagan but you just keep ignoring who controlled the House all those years or the Senate and its role during the Reagan years.
            Did or did not the Democrats control the House all 8 years Reagan. Did or Did not the Democrats control the senate Reagan’s last two years.
            But it is all Reagan’s fault, Right???

            Typical for you and your ilk, lie and distort.

          39. Dominick Vila January 29, 2015

            I never said I worked for the government. I said I spent 40 years at NASA…as a contractor working for a large U.S. corporation.

          40. mike January 29, 2015

            You said “40 years in the Federal Government” you didn’t specify that you weren’t an employee of the govt.. Typical of your distortion of facts.

            You sure are ignoring the fact the Reagan years were controlled by the Democratic Party in the House and years the Senate controlled by the left. Lie when it doesn’t fit your agenda.

            Just another nail in the coffin proving you are a intellectually dishonest person.

          41. Dominick Vila January 29, 2015

            I have been posting in this forum for about 5 years, and have acknowledged the fact that I was a Federal government contractor on numerous occasions. I don’t have to post reminders for whomever is posting under Karl Rove’s “Mike” monicker.
            Yes, Ronald Reagan enjoyed the support of Tip O’Neill on many issues, and he did have to deal with a Democratic controlled Senate during his last two years in office, but that does not mean he did not champion trickle down, did not champion irresponsible tax reductions, and be responsible for the largest increases in deficits as a percentage of GDP, and for the largest increases in the national debt as a result of increases in government spending (mostly defense and tax breaks for the wealthy) at a time when he reduced government revenues.
            Since you believe Executive Branch policies and actions are influenced by who controlled Congress, I guess you believe your party should take full responsibility for 9/11, for the deregulation that led to the abuses that culminated in the worst recession since the Great Depression, and all the misery that millions of Americans have endured. Right?
            Not surprising for a member of a party that believes Oliver North was responsible for Iran Contra, that the cut and run in Lebanon was ordered by a boogeyman, that arming death squads in El Salvador and Colombia were spontaneous natural calamities, or that Grenada and Nicaragua were poised to launch a Chiquita banana onslaught on the USA.

          42. mike January 29, 2015

            Kare Rove’s “Mike”, now that is hilarious.
            As to your employment, you said “worked in the Fed.government” never have I seen you state specifically that you were a employed by a contractor. If you had said you worked for a contractor with a Fed contract that would have made sense. “In the Federal government” is a straight distortion of the fact. Like you were involved in the inner workings of the fed. govt., or officially part of the govt.. Which you weren’t.

            And that doesn’t mean that Democrats are not responsible for the budget during the Reagan years. On Reagan, Right??
            The House is responsible for origination of Revenue Bills, ergo, a democratic house is responsible for all those dastardly bills signed by Reagan. Give me a break!!!

            Now you really have me laughing to the rest of your post. By your reasoning since Clinton/Reno changed the banking standards by which people qualified for a mortgage then he is at fault for the meltdown, is that correct?
            Nice try though.

            You can play all the gimmick games you want but when you take debt dollar increase to GDP dollars by the following, it puts in perspective.
            Take dollar amount of the debt increase divided by the dollar amount of GDP at the end of their terms (in the case of Obama thru 9-2014)
            Reagan would be at 21% ratio.
            Bush 41 would be at 16%
            Clinton at 12%
            Bush 43 at 34%
            Obama at 44% (9-2014)
            All these are pikers compared to F. Roosevelt-1000% and Wilson-700%.
            You can play this semantics game all want but when put into perspective your argument has very little ground.
            Reagan’s 1.9 trillion is nothing compared to Obama’s 8 trillion. suffice it to say it isn’t fair but it was your argument.

      8. dtgraham January 27, 2015

        mike, tax and spend is the last thing it is. The average percentage increase in federal spending per year under Obama has been the lowest of any President over the last 60 years at 1.4% for the raw number, and -0.1% for the adjusted for inflation number which is behind only Eisenhower at -0.5%. The problem is that federal revenues haven’t been keeping up with spending due to the struggling national economy (until lately) and the continuation of the vast majority of the Bush tax cuts. That latter item is just huge in my opinion. If you think it isn’t, remember Clinton’s small surplus budgets in the 90’s after the across the board tax increases of the 1993 Budget and Reconciliation Act.

        The collapse of 2009 also boosted spending for programs like food stamps and Medicaid for quite a while. As well, the ageing of the baby boomers have driven a rise in entitlement spending and lastly, the stimulus added to the debt. That’s just Keynesian economics though and was badly needed given the situation at the time. When the private sector contracts that badly, you just can’t do nothing. Governments around the world had their own stimulus packages, including even Germany, if you remember at the time. Canada was one of the countries hit the least by the crisis due to it’s unique banking regulations, but even they rolled out a stimulus package which produced a budgetary deficit after 11 consecutive years of surplus budgets from the mid nineties to the mid 2000’s. However, that stimulus was never criticized or seriously debated even though Canada needed it far less than the U.S. at the time.

        Obama’s budget deficits are at least coming down every year, and are now under 500 billion the last I heard. Some economists now project the possibility of a balanced budget by his last fiscal year, which is remarkable given the revenues that he’s had to work with. I’ll believe that when I see it and I don’t put much hope in that at all. It’s a sign though of what he has been able to accomplish and how far he’s come.

        1. mike January 27, 2015

          Deficits going back up says CBO and others.


          Obama said last Tuesday things are rolling and Happy Days are Here Again.

          1. jmprint January 27, 2015

            Well of course they will it’s republican majority now.

          2. dtgraham January 27, 2015

            That’s possible. We’ll have to see. jmprint has a point. Republican control is always associated with deficit financing. They’re the debt party from what I can see.

          3. mike January 27, 2015

            What’s possible??? Rising debt and deficits?
            “We’ll have to see.” Stay in denial it fits you.

          4. dtgraham January 28, 2015

            You’re carrying on as though not having a crystal ball is admitting to some form of fiscal denial. At the moment, collapsing oil prices are dictating fiscal prudence to both petro states and reasonably mixed economies alike.

          5. mike January 28, 2015

            And you are acting like debt and deficit will just disappear or go down on their own. ACA will cost between 2015-2019(CBO) 570 Billion but we were told he would not affect the deficit at all.

            Remember: Obama, “I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits.”
            And you will wait and see if debt and deficits go up, now that is funny!!!

  2. Eleanore Whitaker January 27, 2015

    Look, for nearly 5 decades, the GOP men have been attempting a pyramidal scheme that can’t work. What the GOP men want is the government to implement the same type of corporate structure that their Koch, Walton and Adelson cronies use to keep control: One man at the top, a board of directors who sit in private conference rooms deciding the fate of their employees and how to squeeze more tax subsidies and exemptions from those employees as taxpayers and consumers.

    It’s really funny now watching a Bush appointed US Attorney and NJ Governor having to do an end run around the obvious fact that his policies have worsened, not bettered, his state.

    The GOP men like to pound away with the same old, tired out idea that if you use tax dollars to keep big businesses in business, that’s ALL that’s needed for a stable economy. This just shows how utterly “ignernt” they really are.

    Did they actually believe the Man at the Top of that Corporate pyramid planned to give up his life of excess and luxury and not reach even further for more?

    So now we come down to it, don’t we? The Middle Class is all but vaporized by massive debt and at any moment, bankruptcy. The 1% is living high on the hog and the GOP is still ready to sacrifice the Middle Class to help the 1% stay wealthy.

    Shouldn’t the job of keeping a business in existence be the job of the Guy at the top and not taxpayers? Shouldn’t the job of keeping one’s wealth be that individual’s business and not that of 99% of the taxpayers?

    The GOP have always failed in their attempts at mass takeover…even now that the ball is in their court…they will fail.

    1. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

      Eleanore, sweetie:
      You should never allow your sexual dislike of men (which is more and more obvious throughout your vitriolic post) to translate into your expressing yourself like this. Tsk, tsk, tsk…
      Your (ever more obvious) “modus operandi” is to write loooong (boring, and full of “holes”) posts so as to “hide” your ignorance.
      Get a life (without me), Lenore.
      I’m NOT coming back.

      1. jmprint January 27, 2015

        Louis darling, if she wasn’t making a comment directed you, why are you so offensive and jealous?

        1. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

          jmprint, sweetie:
          1) Because she is a man-hater.
          2) Because she is an ignoramus posing as somebody who knows a lot.
          3) Because you should MYOB.
          Thank you darling.

          1. jmprint January 27, 2015

            3) You make it my business, when I read your post. 1) She loves men, as long as they are not like YOU.
            2) If you read her post and you claim you do, you would know that she is very informative and does her research. Guess that’s what bothers male chauvinist.

      2. cpbis January 27, 2015

        Folks, please stop responding to this individual. I will from now on. He is truly a “sick” person. I dealt with such people for over 31 years in my profession and he (“sweetie”?) is condescending, ill-mannered and will never understand!

        1. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

          “Condescending” you say?
          What about “Louis darling” from that other idiot, jmprint (see below)?
          To you liberals and lefties “down” is up, “good” is bad, “bad” is good, “broke” is prosperous and “smart” is Biden !
          The reason why you request your fellow ignoramuses on this site to “please stop responding” to me is that you do not possess the intellectual wherewithal to deny/counteract my common sense arguments and thus “prove” that I am totally loonie.
          I gather that you were a psychiatrist or psychologist for “over 31 years”; if so, your utter CONTEMPT for the “sick” people you treated (“I dealt with such people…”) comes through LOUD and CLEAR, buddy (here I go, condescending again !)
          And, for that, …. SHAME ON YOU, cpbis, whoever you are.

      3. Budjob January 27, 2015

        Louie,You could probably warm up to a lot of people provided you were cremated with thm!

        1. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

          “Cremated with them”? Wow!
          Your inference is so obvious.
          And then you stupid leftists claim that conservatives are hateful people (I know, I know, it was a joke and a figure of speech, warming up while being cremated, ha, ha, sooo funny).
          You are truly a BUTT job.
          YOU burn in hell, you CRETIN.

  3. halslater January 27, 2015

    We need to replicate this message and turn it into the sort of drumbeat the right-wingers use to persuade people who cannot take the time to learn the real facts. A clear link to GOP’s complete failure to produce a solid economy. Where are we at now, in those 5 decades, 50-60 million jobs under Democratic presidents and 24 million under Republican presidents with both having about the same time in office? But using their drums, the GOP has the general public thinking the Republicans are good for the economy.

    We need a simple bumper sticker like:
    Nixon/Ford ended with a recession, Reagan/Bush ended with a recession and Bush Jr. ended with a Depression. Stop electing Republicans.

  4. paulyz January 27, 2015

    Let’s face the facts, Trillions have been spent by Socialists over the decades to fight poverty, one program after another. What were the results? Even more poverty & dependency on even More spending & programs. Look how much poverty, food stamps, unemployment & “income inequality” have grown just under Obama. A healthy economy & healthy business climate to keep jobs here creates wealth and a middle-class life for most. Just like it was a generation ago.

    1. Jambi January 27, 2015

      See halslater and Charleo1 … read and think about it…

      1. CrankyToo January 27, 2015

        You’re kicking a dead horse.

        1. plc97477 January 27, 2015

          I thought something was smelling a little strong.

    2. jakenhyde January 27, 2015

      Many of those programs grew under Obama because he inherited the abysmal economic mess that was left by Dubya and his minions.
      Open your eyes.

      1. jmprint January 27, 2015

        Even if he opens his eyes, those rose color glasses keep him from seeing reality.

    3. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

      paulyz: Remember that for idiots like “jakenhyde”, “Jambi” and “Cranky” (see above), it’s way too complex to understand your (so forever true) statement to the effect that:
      “A healthy economy & healthy business climate to keep jobs here creates wealth and a middle-class life for most.”
      With Obama and his idiots (there are so many of them), “free stuff” IS the way to prosperity and their life-long chimera of “equality”.
      Oh brother. What have we become?

      1. cpbis January 27, 2015

        Oh for God’s sakes…..you have a major problem!

        1. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

          Please add “cpbis” to the list of idiots that already includes “jakenhyde”, “Jambi” and “Cranky”.

          “cpbis” YOU have a major problem which is that you do NOT possess the intellectual wherewithal to even comment (much less contradict) “paulyz” statement that: “A healthy economy & healthy business climate to keep jobs here creates wealth and a middle-class life for most.”
          I DARE you to comment. If you don’t, you’ll have confirmed that you are only capable of repeating the talking points given to you by Joe “The Con-Man” Conason and his ilk.

          1. cpbis January 28, 2015

            WOW! You dare me? Typical response! You have no idea who I am or what I have accomplished over the years so do not call me or others “idiots”. I served my country in the military, was appointed by a Republican to 3 state committees, spoke around the country to as large an audience as near 1500, received national awards and much more. None of the aforementioned was involving politics. Your typical of the Tea Party enthusiasts who continually “attack” those who disagree and do so on a personal nature. You are not an American. You do not have the understanding of our values or the right of all Americans to have their say in a civil manner. Please save any response for I will not read it anyway for I am well aware of what it may hold. My best to you but please stop being so angry and hateful for life is to short. I will thank you for your understanding!

          2. Louis Allen January 28, 2015

            WOW, cpbis!!
            1) How typical of you liberals that you have no problem with saying things like “… people would warm up to you, but only if you are CREMATED along with them” (YOUR WORDS, you coward !!); but, how typical also that, when somebody confronts you with your (so obvious) stupidity and cowardice, then you immediately back off by saying (also typically): “Please save any response for I will not read it anyway for I am well aware of what it may hold.” How PATHETIC can you get !!
            2) I couldn’t care less whether you read and/or answer this response.
            3) You won’t (because you can’t) answer, or even comment on, my statement to the effect that:
            “A healthy economy & healthy business climate to keep jobs here creates wealth and a middle-class life for most.”
            4) If what you say is true (about having served in the military, and having being appointed by a REPUBLICAN to “3 state committees”), it would mean that you were once an intelligent and decent man.
            5) Regarding your claim that you “spoke around the country to as large an audience as near 1500, received national awards and much more.”, I think it’s pure, unadulterated bullshit and I could not care less.
            6) Lastly, even though I am unaffected by your (so feeble) claim that I am not an American, I am more of a REAL AMERICAN than you will EVER be, you ignoramus.

    4. jmprint January 27, 2015

      I don’t have a figure, but I would estimate millions of people that have been on assistance in some manner have prevailed and are now productive citizens, helping the economy. The illegals were here a generation ago. Poverty was here a generation ago. And the world keeps turning, and will as long as America is for the people, by the people and not the corporations. Without people corporations are NOTHING!

    5. Eleanore Whitaker January 27, 2015

      paulyz…When you have some men in the US who believe they are “entitled” to wealth they can get only through tax subsidies their own employees pay in payroll tax deductions, how would anyone expect an end to poverty?

      Yes..do look at how much poverty, food stamps, unemployment ande income inequality grew not under Obama but under your “conservative” president.

      Bush handed out a tax cut in 2004 that the GAO reported one year later increased the wealth of the 1% by 11%..Got an excuse for that?

      Did you think when you get a tax cut that the US bills still get paid? Or did you assume “someone else should pay all the taxes so you don’t have to?”

      Enough of your “HAVE” and “HAVE NOT” BS. A Walton heiress is No. 4 in the Top 10 of the US’s wealthiest. And we all know how she got that money…dirting employees with salaries and scams that are anything but affordable. Plantation mentality…No. 5 and 6 are 2 more plantation mentalities: Charles and David Koch.

      If you HAVES think you can just take, take, take and never give back for what the rest of us work for…give it up already. No American works with nothing to show for it. Maybe your rich butts do…but that never lasts. Where’s the Carnegie, Morgan or Vanderbilt fortunes today? Gone and living off federal tax dole outs to keep their mansions as museums. It’s not charity if you get something when you GIVE something.

      1. plc97477 January 27, 2015

        Maybe we should remind them of what happened to louis and antonette.

        1. Eleanore Whitaker January 28, 2015

          I so agree. The GOP has created a huge disconnect between “of the people, FOR the people, BY the people by using billionaire campaign contributions to get re-elected as career politicians and Big Business cronies. Then, it’s on to the House or Senate where they suddenly go deaf to the will of the people, considering only the newest members of the “people” according to the Supreme Court: Corporations.

          Here’s an example of GOP wasteful spending. To date, there have been 8, count ’em, 8 investigations into Benghazi. Yesterday, the newest committee headed by some drawling, swaggering red state lunatic named “Gowdy” asks a question of a “witness” the GOP hand selected and then when that witness didn’t answer the way the GOP tyrants wanted, Gowdy interrupted every half sentence out of the “witness’s” mouth. This is disgusting.

          I have a great idea. Let’s make Gowdy do the repetition of his mouthing off and bullying using that tactic in Clockwork Orange where the perp had to view himself over and over and over until he couldn’t take anymore.

          To prove what bullies the GOP is, they high handedly leave out the Dems in the committee meetings as was clearly stated to their faces by the CA rep, Marchez. She let ’em have it. So what did the next GOP tyrant do? Switches topics and starts in all over again with the same BS Gowdy tried to force the witnesses to admit. They’ve got nothing. They ARE nothing and they will continue to BE nothing when they act like they are little boys going through the Terrible Twos.

          They are, as Marchez told them, looking for a mythical “unicorn” that doesn’t exist…at taxpayer expense. Then they complain about the national debt?

  5. Hgeyer January 27, 2015

    So I guess the GOP’s plan NOW is to reverse everything they have done since Reagan in order to now help the middle class? It might be too little too late….. Boehner just said “NO” to raising the minimum wage, “NO” to closing loopholes for the wealthy and “NO” to helping our youth get an education…. So much for ANY help from republicans in helping solve the inequality problem!

    1. jmprint January 27, 2015

      Yeah but he said yes to keeping congress in womens’ panties and yes to destroying our water and air, oh and let’s not forget about our freedom to carry guns with no restrictions. So the religious zealots and Kock Brothers, gun fanatics are happy, and well that should keep america safe, healthy and nourished with high hopes of surviving with cracked home and diseases.

  6. Fairplay4 January 27, 2015

    The GOP plans to abolish poverty by giving tax breaks to the super rich who own yachts, businesses that pay minimum wages, run down tenement apartments, and suppress efforts to improve education and health care.

    1. latebloomingrandma January 27, 2015

      There could be good jobs cleaning those yachts. A trickle down job.

      1. Fairplay4 January 27, 2015

        Really good paying jobs. Maybe just as good as shoe shine boys.

  7. EaglesGlen January 27, 2015

    End poverty? Easy answer, Respect Americans by deporting all illegal aliens and get about 7.5 million jobs back to Americans.

    1. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

      That’s OBVIOUS to you and me, …. but NOT to idiots like Joe “The Con-Man” Conason.
      P.S. – Although “poverty” will be with us forever because so many people, given an equal opportunity (which is what, along with increasing the size of the “pie”, we should be striving for as a society), will fumble and drop “the ball” because their stupidity and/or their lazyness.
      …. but these concepts/precepts are wayyy too “deep” for these stupid Leftists ….

      1. jmprint January 27, 2015

        If there was equality 52% wouldn’t have voted for the president. Yes poverty will be with us forever, but it is stupid for you republicans to think that is ok for the Kock brothers to own our government. You guys cry communism, but are working hard to get it there.

        The only jobs that make a difference in our society are the jobs that the corporate world give to foreigners, yes there education is better then ours, that is why it is important to educate America, otherwise job sourcing will continue and that’s where the real bucks are.

        Unless you think that the jobs the waitress at the mexican restaurants, the ladies cleaning the motel rooms or the ditches being dug are the jobs that your wanting to get back, to keep unemployment down.

        You stupid republicans need to get a grip, and see reality for what it really is.

        1. Kurt CPI January 27, 2015

          Coming from the center, I see so many things wrong with both of your perspectives. Louis Allen asserts that undocumented workers are responsible for American unemployment. Where that’s true on a very small scale, it represents only a tiny fraction of the problem.
          On the other hand, jmprint thinks the poor quality of American education is responsible for outsourcing? Again, not even close to the primary cause.
          Outsourcing is done because of favorable tax treatment and low cost labor on foreign soil, coupled with “Free Trade”, which enables foreign produced “American” products to be imported without penalty.

          The reason this conflict of interest is allowed to exist is because we permit the corporate financing of political campaigns (citizens united). Those with the most to gain pay to get the politicians elected who will best serve their interests rather than the interests of the general population.

          1. jmprint January 27, 2015

            Outsourcing of technical jobs is because America does not have the work force that is desired from our college graduates. I am talking about well paid jobs not minimum wage jobs. Those are the ones that hurt America more then the ones lost to the illegals trying to better themselves. I’m not stupid I know folk like Romney like to take advantage of the poor Asian labor because it’s cheap. Kurt why do you think I’m against the republicans allowing the Kock’s to buy our country. Why is it for sale?

          2. Kurt CPI January 27, 2015

            Why is it for sale, indeed?

          3. jmprint January 28, 2015


    2. Wrily January 27, 2015

      Tell that to the brothers Koch.

    3. Carolyn1520 January 27, 2015

      Yes because all the jobs we lost were jobs “the illegals” took. Sigh.

    4. Budjob January 27, 2015

      Glen,And which farm conglomerate would you prefer to work on harvesting lettuce? Or just maybe you could work your way UP the ladder and pick peaches!

      1. CPAinNewYork January 28, 2015

        If the money is there in the form of a competitive wage, working on a farm is acceptable. Nineteenth century farmers were an integral part of the development of America. They’ve been replaced by the refuse of our Latin American neighbors.

        1. Budjob January 28, 2015

          CPA,One other thing you posted as you referred to our Latin American neighbors as “refuse”.Whether you want to believe otherwise fuckstick,THEY ARE HUMAN BEINGS!!

          1. CPAinNewYork January 28, 2015

            They are people who are not wanted by even their own countries. Mexico is annoyed because we keep sending their illegals back to them.

            When people aren’t wanted by their own government, I’d say that government has “refused” them. Consequently, they are “refuse.” It’s too bad that your sensibilities are offended by that term, but regardless of your sensibilities, the term is accurate.

        2. Budjob January 28, 2015

          REFUSE??REFUSE!!?What are you an ordained racist?They are people!!

    5. James Bagley January 27, 2015

      So what are you waiting for? You may as well go back to Europe now. Real Americans could respect that.

    6. Independent1 January 28, 2015

      Sorry, but getting rid of illegals will actually destroy jobs in at least a couple ways: 1) immigrants, including illegals, run more than 30% of the most effective small businesses in America and 2) immigrants do jobs that native-born Americans SIMPLY WILL NOT DO.

      1) Therefore, getting rid of illegals, which will quite likely also result in getting rid of legals – because many times they’re family: will result in destroying thousands of small businesses across America. The CBO has projected that illegal immigrants with the spending they do in our economy and with the small businesses they run, are keeping about 8 million native-born Americans working. So getting rid of 7.5 million illegals could wipe out 8 million native-born Americans their jobs.

      And 2) immigrants do work in farms, construction ,motels, hotels that Americans either refuse to do, or absolutely will not do unless you pay the 2-3 times what the immigrants are making.
      When Alabama tried implementing the most strict immigration law in the nation several years ago, within 6 months of the law becoming effective, hundreds of businesses across Alabama threatened to either leave the state or go out of business because they could not find native-born Americans to do the job. (And that was after Alabama tried to use prisoners to do the jobs the immigrants were doing but the prisoners either refused to do the work or the companies said they wouldn’t work like the immigrants did and therefore were useless.)

      And that doesn’t even take into account the the CBO also projects that 55-70% of illegals pay income taxes (billions of dollars in income taxes which would be lost) and they also contribute over 12 billion/yr to Social Security, a program which they don’t qualify for because they don’t have SS numbers under which to build up quarters for future benefits. So their contributions are extending the life of SS; and the same goes for Medicaire – illegals contribute billions to Medicare which they also don’t qualify for.

      And all that doesn’t include that a good bit of the dramatic decline over the past 2 decades in America’s crime rate is the result that immigrants in general, and illegals in particular, are FAR LESS LIKELY to become involved in crime than native born Americans – about 5 times less likely.

      And all that also doesn’t include that it’s only immigrants, including illegals who have kept the American population from declining over the past several decades. New arrivals in America from countries not familiar with contraceptives, and also because illegals are so poor most of them can’t afford contraceptives. And one of the main reasons America is about the only country recently that has been doing well economically, is somewhat related to the fact that America is the only industrialized nation on the planet with a population that is not declining.

      1. CPAinNewYork January 28, 2015

        Baloney! Getting rid of the illegals will force American businessmen to increase the wages they pay and enforcement of the wage and hours laws will subject those who pay off the books to prosecution.

        1. Independent1 January 28, 2015

          As usual CPA you’re letting racism cloud your judgement. Not only did the strict Alabama law create worker shortages across the state for jobs that companies COULD NOT find replacements for even during a devastating economy – it created some major problems for people it wasn’t even intended for – and almost resulted in some foreign corporations like Mercedes Benz moving out of Alabama because of the NEGATIVE VIBES the law created with ALL FOREIGNERS!!

          See these excerpts from an MSNBC article:

          Car Crash

          It took just six weeks after HB 56 went into effect for state legislators to start having second thoughts about their actions.

          On November 16, 2011, police in Tuscaloosa stopped a driver for not having the proper tag on his rental car. Normally, this would have been a minor citation. But the driver did not have a license on him, only a German ID card, and that triggered what was supposed to be HB 56’s most powerful weapon against illegal immigration. Under the law, police were now required to arrest the man, haul him to court, and detain him until federal immigration authorities determined his fate, no matter how long that took.

          As it turned out, the driver was an executive at Mercedes-Benz. The European car giant was one of several foreign auto companies in the state whose plants provide thousands of much-needed jobs.

          The incident was soon followed by another traffic arrest involving a Japanese Honda worker. Together, the auto blow-ups sparked an outcry from the business community, who feared companies would pull out of the state. Pouring salt on the wound, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch ran an editorial inviting Mercedes to move their operations to the “Show-Me State” instead of the “Show me your papers” state.

          More unintended consequences emerged, this time from the religious community. Churches complained the law’s ban on providing aid to undocumented immigrants could criminalize everything from soup kitchens to Spanish-language Sunday services.

          “They were going to change Bible school into border patrol,” Scott Douglas, executive director of Greater Birmingham Ministries, told msnbc. “We had fewer Spanish-speaking congregants coming to our organization for help.”
          You can read more about the Alabama strict immigration law fiasco here. The clown show went on and on in the wrong direction. Just an example of what would happen COUNTRY WIDE IN AMERICA – if anti-immigration nitwits were to get their way:


          1. CPAinNewYork January 28, 2015

            These “examples” that you provide have nothing to do with the eleven million illegals living in the United States. A poor effort on your part.

          2. Independent1 January 28, 2015

            What kind of nonsense is that?? This was legislation trying to get rid of a chunck of those 11 million that were living in Alabama!! What planet are you living on???? And not only did thousands ofl illegals flee the state of Alabama so did thousands of legal immigrants who basically said: If you don’t want some of my family and friends to live in Alabama – I don’t want to live here either. It became a mass exodus of immigrants. Exactly what would happen in the entire country if idiots like you created legislation that started a mass deportation.

            And speaking about mass deportation, your tunnelvision brain does realize doesn’t it that even if a mass deportation was enacted that it would take 10 plus years to even get half of them deported because the most who can be deported each year considering the mechanics of deportation is a round 400,000. You realize that right???? Get a life!! And do something other than hate immigrants!!

          3. CPAinNewYork January 29, 2015

            You’re missing the point. Getting the illegals out of the United States diesn’t require deportation. What we must do is to make staying here so painful for them that they’ll clamor to leave.

            Faced with incarceration in outdoor camps in places like Alaska in the winter is a very effective way to convince the illegals that they really oughta wanna be some place that’s warmer, like Mexico.

            It’s really a shame that we have people like you in America: devoid of imagination and with intellects limited to substituting profanity for reason. Very disappointing.

          4. Independent1 January 29, 2015

            In other words, you’re such a sadistic racist that not only would you intentionally inflict pain on undocumented immigrants, you’d be willing to do that while potentionaly setting up our country for another Great Recession or possibly even depression.

            Because if those threats you mentioned actually did encourage millions of immigrants to flee, undocumented as well as documented, the loss of the economic benefit that even the CBO estimates they’re contributing to America, would most like result in the loss of 10 plus million jobs (not only the jobs the immigrants were doing but also the8 plus million that their small businesses are now employing of native born Americans).

            Our government would also lose billions in income tax revenues, billions in monies now being poured into Social Security and Medicare; the bankruptcy of thoousands of businesses that now depend on the cheap immigrant labor and on and on.

            It’s you that’s got tunnelvision and can’t see the forest for the trees!! As even the has noted, UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS ARE PROVIDING A FAR GREATER ECONOMIC BENEFIT TO AMERICA THAN THEY ARE VER COSTING IT!!

            In 2013, even the red state of Texas had to admit that undocumented immigrants boosted its economy by them contributing over 18 billion dollars to its economy!! Wake up!! You’re being a categorical IDIOT!!!

          5. CPAinNewYork January 29, 2015

            You’re economically naive or you’re a businessman who is enjoying the fruits of paying his employees off the books. Then again, you may be just an ignorant redneck who has a fifth grade education and believes whatever the radical right tells him.

            Kicking out the illegals will cause no economic loss to the United States. It will cause loss to the slimeballs who are gaming the system by hiring people off the books so that they can get out of incurring payroll taxes. It will also hurt the Hispanic politicians who want to increase their political power by enfranchising the illegal crap and their anchor babies.

            Don’t worry about the fleeing illegals. They can and will be replaced by Americans who can again find work at fair wages and who will pay their taxes.

          6. Independent1 January 29, 2015

            Sorry, but you’re wrong again. The CBO projects that 55-70% of illegals ALREADY PAY PAYROLL TAXES!! BILLIONS EACH YEAR AND ADD 12 PLUS BILLION TO SOCIAL SECURITY!!

            And native-born Americans WILL NOT do the vast majority of jobs that immigrants are doing today. When Alabama companies were struggling 6 weeks after Alabama’s disastrous strictest immigration bill in the nation took effect – and produce was rotting in the fields across the state; Alabama sent prisoners out into the fields and other jobs to try and stem the loses these companies were incurring.

            In less than 2 weeks, companies across the state told the state: Keep your prisoners in the prisons: THE WON’T do 1/2 the work that the immigrants were doing AND THEY’RE NOT HELPING US!!!


            It’s impossible to carry on an intelligent conversation with someone who is so bigoted and racist that they refuse to accept the truth!!!!!!


          7. Independent1 January 29, 2015

            You realize right, that it’s immigrants, documented and undocumented that have been doing VIRTUALLY ALL the menial labor in America since WWII. That during WWII because so many men were in our military, and so many women were working in factories to support the war effort, that the U.S. intentionally imported millions of immigrants to work in the fields and do jobs that there simply weren’t enough American workers to do.

            And that since WWII, shifting menial jobs to immigrants has just expanded as native-born Americans were taught as they grew up to work toward doing better things!! So given that when growing up, we were all taught that we could achieve better things, it’s ingrained in most native-born Americans to shun doing the vast majority of work that immigrants have been doing for 70 plus years; NO MATTER HOW MUCH IT PAYS!!!





          8. Independent1 January 29, 2015

            And keep this in mind, America is virtually the only free-society industrialized nation on the planet right now that actually has a growing economy; an economy that’s actually adding jobs. In virtually all of Europe and even Russia, the economies are in recession. And why? Because unlike in America, the populations of virtually all these countries is declining. Therefore, it’s tough for them to produce new jobs when there are fewer customers year over year coming in to buy something or use their service.

            So when you anti-immigrant bigots keep pushing to chase all the undocumented immigrants out of America, keep in mind that you’re asking for America to expel THE ONLY GROUP WITH IN AMERICA WHICH HAS A BIRTH RATE ABOVE THE REPLACEMENT LEVEL OF 2.1 KIDS PER FAMILY!!

            That’s right, it’s only immigrants, that are reproducing themselves fast enough to keep America’s population growing – along with new immigrants who migrate to America. But for the most part, these new immigrants only keep up reproducing at a rate over 2.1/family until the immigrant women learn about and are able to afford contraceptives. And once they realize they can control how often they have babies, the birth rate of even most immigrant families falls below 2 kids/family and if too many of them do that, even America’s population will start to decline.

            And think about it, if 318 million people will support say 4,000 McDonald’s; it’s clear that should our population fall to say 310 million – a lot of McDonald’s are going to have to close. And that applies to every business – including CPAs.

            So keep all that in mind as you sit there wishing that a large part of America’s population which is possibly even keeping you working (if you are); suddenly disappears.

          9. CPAinNewYork January 29, 2015

            Where do you get your “facts” out of the wastpaper basket?

            There’s no relationship between countries whose economies are in recession and the flow of illegals into or out of those countries. All you’re doing is to make up facts to bolster your ultra liberal biases.

            If the economies are not growing on their own, an influx of human detritus from neighboring countries isn’t going to help. If anything, the illegals will make things worse, because they will work for next to nothing, increase crime, put increased pressure on public facilities such as school systems and welfare programs and in general lower the area’s level of living.

            There is nothing good about the illegals.

          10. Independent1 January 29, 2015

            Your reading comprehension is pretty abysmal isn’t it?? I never said anything about other countries economies being impacted by the flow of immigrants.

            What I said was: virtually every other industrialized nations’ economies on the planet is being negatively impacted BECAUSE THEIR POPULATIONS ARE DECLINING!!!!!!!!!




            GOOD BYE!! I’m done trying to reason with a racist bigot determined to not believe THE TRUTH!!!!!!

          11. CPAinNewYork January 29, 2015

            I guess you’re not handling your eighties very well. You’re believing what you want to believe. So, Eisenhower was an “independent”? The GOP had to “con” him into becoming a Republican?

            If my memory serves me right, I don’t believe that Eisenhower voted before becoming the 1952 Republican candidate, so he probably wasn’t affiliated with any party, but his conservative background certainly indicates that he was a Republican sympathizer.

            Actually, he was a poor president, except for the interstate highway system, which he made his signature presidential accomplishment. He had difficulty thinking on his feet, which is why his news conferences were disasters. He would verbally stumble around trying to answer questions. When he went to Paris, Khrushchev crapped all over him publicly when Gary Powers’ U2 was shot down over the Soviet Union and Eisenhower foolishly tried to “man up” by admitting that he had authorized the flights.

            George Marshall made him the SHAEF commander because he recognized Eisenhower’s social skills, which he deemed desirable for keeping the American and British commanders from each other’s throats.

            Anyway, I’m glad that you’re not going to respond to me anymore. You come over to me as an opinionated, obscene old jackass who thinks that everyone should adopt his point of view. If I had to guess, I’d say that you’re either a retired senior career military officer or a large firm executive. Both of those types have ego problems.

          12. Louis Allen January 29, 2015

            CPA: Look who is claiming the validity of these “examples”:
            a) Dependent1, who claims Ike was a Democrat;
            b) his “un-impeachable” (ahem…) source is none other than the paradigm of journalistic integrity: MSNBC ….
            Oh brother.

  8. FireBaron January 27, 2015

    The last time a Republican President gave a damn about the average Americans was a guy from Abilene, who lead “the Greatest Generation” to victory in Europe. The last one before him was a rich New Yorker who became a cowboy, then lead troops on a charge against the Spaniards.

    Not exactly a great populist track record.

  9. Kurt CPI January 27, 2015

    It all sounds so easy. Just give people free money, housing, healthcare, retirement, higher education. Too bad somebody has to pay for all that free stuff. I don’t believe that even the Clintons or the Romneys can afford that.

    1. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

      Yes, Kurt: But remember that “common sense” is the “least common” of the senses to these Leftist idiots who are stuck in their own utopias of “fairness”, “equality” (all of us equally poor?), “diversity” (just for diversity’s sake !), and “access” (even if you do not qualify).

      1. jmprint January 27, 2015

        Especially in the republican world, there is no common sense.

        1. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

          ha, ha, haa! That’s funny, jmprint, coming from the leftists like you:
          a) about whom Gruber said that you were too stupid (was he correct !!);
          b) who never responded to Pelosi’s ABOMINATION “We’ll have to pass it so that we get to know what’s in it”. WHAT IDIOTS !!
          c) who accepted (because it came straight from “The Great Prevaricator” himself) that it was ok to lie about “If you like your doctor ….”
          WHAT IDIOTS !!

          1. jmprint January 27, 2015

            I’m glad I could bring some humor to your FU life I don’t care what Gruber said, I wasn’t listening to him. I want all Americans to be able to have access to insurance, not just the privileged. I lost a sister with breast cancer, because she was self employed and couldn’t afford to see the doctor. We have seem what’s in it an we like it, so get over it. And keeping you doctor on any plan is not guaranteed with any insurance, so keep tooting your horn, make do difference. IDIOT

          2. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

            jmprint: The fact that you “don’t care” what Gruber said about MORONS like you does not change the fact that his perception of you and what he said about you was CORRECT, babe !
            Of course, what happened to your sister was tragically unfortunate, but that does not mean that Obamacare is the right remedy or is good for society. In due time people that were in favor of this “quasi-socialistic” law will come to recognize that it does way more harm than the problems it “solves”.
            As for me being an IDIOT, …. you might be right, but it takes one to know one !

          3. Independent1 January 28, 2015

            You seem to totally forget that when Gruber appeared before Congress he apologized for having made comments that he WAS IN NO WAY QUALIFIED TO MAKE!!

            And you apparently haven’t read many of the articles which report on the fact that Mr. Gruber has been grossly wrong in many of forecasts that he made with respect to many health related issues in states across the nation outside of ACA.

            Fact is that ACA has already been credited with saving more than 75,000 Americans their lives by greatly reducing the readmission rates in hospitals across the country.

            Readmissions deaths from illnesses contracted while people were in the hospital have come down by over 50,000 people over the past 4 years because ACA forced hospitals to clean up their act in hospital cleanliness and in insuring that patients got the right treatment.

            And more than 20 thousands more have been saved because they’ve had insurance for the 1st time in their lives and gotten treatment for illnesses that would have been fatal. Some of that also coming from the fact that ACA has encouraged far more people to actually go to the doctor – the percent of people putting that off has also declined.

            And with saving hospitals across the nation more than 5.7 Billion dollars in reduced health care costs that needed reimbursement due to a dramatic reduction in the number of unisureds that these hospitals have had to treat.

            Such that those reduced reimbursements for the drop in uninsureds is saving states (taxpayers) across the nation millions and billions of dollars in reduced monies the states don’t have to feed hospitals for the care they had been providing for people who couldn’t afford to pay for the care they’ve gotten.

            And ACA has been helping boost the economy by freeing up money in families that had been holding back from spending, or actually stashing money away in fear of encountering an expensive medical problem – because they’ve now gotten insurance and feel freer to go out and buy things. In fact, the meager plus side of our economy during the the 1st quarter of 2014 was attributed to just tha.

            And in some states, ACA is actually creating jobs. For example, in the red state of Arizona, Arizona State University has projected that because Jan Brewer pushed the GOP legislature to expand Medicaid: 15,000 news jobs should be created by 2016 and freeing up thousands of Arizonians from having to hold back from spending, should inject 2.8 billion dollars into the Arizona economy in the 1st 3 years ACA. is effective.

            So Gruber has been clearly WRONG IN ALL HIS IDIOTIC STATEMENTS. ACA related subidies taxpayers are paying to insure low income insureds are being paid back by saving thousands of people’s lives, increasing the profits of many hospitals by reducing the costs they were incurring for people they had to treat as readmissions, and by drastically cutting down on the uninsured rates; and in addition by saving states (taxpayers) millions in reimbursements they don’t have to pay to hospitals. ACA is a WIN WIN all the way around!!!!!

          4. awakenaustin January 27, 2015

            Why don’t they ever hire trolls who have anything even remotely interesting or even clever to say?
            They certainly did not hire you for the depth of your thought and your mastery of the English language.

          5. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

            Awaken to the facts:
            a) nobody “hired” me;
            b) the “depth of my thought” and my “mastery of the English language” are way superior to yours.

            Please explain, from your point of view, and if you feel that you will not make a fool of yourself, buddy, your objections to this statement:
            “The ONLY way to reduce (not eliminate, mind you!) “inequality” legitimately is by: a) Increasing the size of
            the “pie”; b) Striving (remember, as in “the PURSUIT of
            happiness”?) for equal OPPORTUNITY, NOT equal RESULTS (because some people,
            given equal opportunities, will “run with the ball” more than others).”
            I dare you.

          6. awakenaustin January 27, 2015

            Do you double -dog dare me?

          7. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

            yep. ok.
            Go ahead; explain your objections to the statement.

      2. cpbis January 27, 2015

        Sir, you are what is wrong with our society. Stop your manner of responding which is only to attack personally. Talk policy and ways to improve our system. You are entitled to your opinions based on facts but do not constantly attack others by name calling and ridiculous comments. We get enough of that already. It solves absolutely nothing except to get others angry (at you).

        1. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

          No cpbis, YOU are what is wrong with our society.
          To you, and to people like you, it is “ridiculous” that somebody might have the “gall” to say that you leftists are stuck in your utopias of “fairness”, “equality” (all of us equally poor!!?), “diversity”
          (just for diversity’s sake !), and “access” (even if you do not qualify).
          What really, really pisses off you and people like you on this site is that, until recently, you had this forum all to yourselves and you would constantly congratulate each other for your postings (“Well said !”, “Could not have said it better myself !”, “Could not agree with you more!” “Stick it to the crazy right wing conservatives!”, etc., etc., ad nauseam), but NOW, thanks to some very smart (and brave !) people like “mike”, “bikejedi”, kenndeb”, “Kurt CPI”, “EaglesGlen”, “paulyz” and some others, your heretofore BLAND site has been enriched (at long last) with SMART people.
          If all this makes you, and others like you, “angry” at me, I could NOT care less.
          Go suck your thumb and SULK.

          1. Budjob January 27, 2015

            Louie,You sir,evidently have a PBS mind,living in an MTV world!

          2. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

            Buddy, you, sir, evidently have a FOB (Full Of Bull) mind, living in your LSD world !

          3. Wrily January 27, 2015

            Who could be angry with you Louis? We’re all to busy laughing at you to be angry. Thanks for not hording all the entertainment over there at the RWNJ circle jerk rags.

          4. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

            It’s OK, buddy ! You can laugh to your heart’s desire. It’s all a matter of timing:
            you and “all” here are “too (not “to”, you dummy) busy” laughing at me NOW, and I was “too busy” laughing at what happened to all of you lefties last November. I will also be “too busy” laughing at you lefties come November 2016.
            And “angry” you say? I am not angry at anybody and I don’t think anybody, other than this other libturd “cpbis”, is angry at me.
            Keep laughing, Wrily. I already did and will do it again, VERY WRILY. LOL !!!

          5. jmprint January 27, 2015

            Then why are your boys using the fairness equality line now? Your list of payed trolls doesn’t impress anybody. Parrots and puppets, lovely! Sounds like you are the only one that is pissed, hopefully the wind isn’t blowing.

          6. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

            1) Remember that using the word “boys” is a no-no to you leftists that worry so much about political correctness.
            2) If what you mean is that (some) Republican candidates have spoken about “reducing” inequality, consider that the ONLY way to do that legitimately is by: a) Increasing the size of the “pie”; b) Striving (remember, jmprint, as in “the PURSUIT of happiness”?) for equal OPPORTUNITY, NOT equal RESULTS (because as I stated before, a statement apparently well over your head, some people, given equal opportunities, will “run with the ball” more than others).
            3) If any Republican candidate forgets items a and b above, then that would be evidence that he/she is willing to say ANYTHING to get votes (just like Hillary).
            4) If you want to have a look at REAL paid trolls, look at yourself in the mirror, jm.

          7. jmprint January 27, 2015

            They are boys, if you act like a boy then you are called a boy.

          8. Louis Allen January 27, 2015

            Biden and Pelosi will come down and wash that dirty mouth of yours with soap.
            jm: If you act like a moron then you are called a moron.

          9. CPAinNewYork January 29, 2015

            Diversity is baloney. The most stable societies are those that are ethnically and culturally similar. In those societies there is little to no discrimination along ethnic lines because most people are the same.

            Diversity is an invention cooked up by liberals, especially minority group liberals, to make a mixed society look desirable. Mixed societies are inherently unstable, because the ethnic majority always subjugates the ethnic minorites.

      3. highpckts January 29, 2015

        You are the problem with that thinking!

    2. cpbis January 27, 2015

      If you look at history every Republican administration for the past 100 years has left a deficit except for Eisenhower. Every Democratic administration has left a surplus, even Carter, though it was a meager .01 percent. The largest deficits left by the GOP was under Reagan then the worst ever under the last Bush. Take economics 101. We cannot achieve balance budgets by continually allowing the minimum wage to drop. It is already at the level of over 25 years. To even get close to the 1980 minimum you would have to jump to $15. Seattle has done that and is now flourishing. Small businesses are adding employees and so on. Parts of California have gone to over $10 an hour and is thriving now. We cannot allow the middle class to continue it’s downward cucle. We are close to the same economic situation that existed in the 1860’s/1870’s when 4 people had more money than all others combined. Result was our first depression. Henry Ford ended it by raising employees salaries. That proved to be the beginning of our middle class. There are innumerable example throughout history that could get us out of the economic doldrums we face today. The GOP plans have put us in this predicament and I could list several examples but I would need to much space. Stop attacking and start thinking and communicating intelligently and with some decorum. Enough of the personal
      attacks stemming from Tea Party enthusiasts.

      1. Independent1 January 28, 2015

        And Eisenhower wasn’t a Republican – so you can keep it to Every Republican administration. Eisenhower was an Independent, if anything, and would quite likely have run on the Democrat ticket if Truman didn’t insist on running for a 2nd term. The GOP wooed Ike into running on the Republican ticket by promising him that it wouldn’t cost him a cent and reminding him that he really wasn’t a big fan of Truman’s.

        But although, Ike didn’t leave big deficits – the fact he was even tighter in his budgets than many Republicans may have been resulted in the fact that Ike leads all presidents in office at least since 1900 in having the most recessions occur during his 8 years – 3 of them. America suffered in recession for more than 3 1/2 years out of Ike’s 8 years in office.

        And not only are Republicans bad for running up debt, they’re also bad for the stock market, partly because they have a propensity for allowing economies to fall into recessions and even depressions. Of the 20 recessions/depressions America has suffered through since 1901 – 17 of them occurred during Republican presidencies and that includes all 3 depressions.

        1. CPAinNewYork January 29, 2015

          Eisenhower was a Republican, despite what feeble-minded Independent1 says.

          Independent1 will say anything to win an argument.

    3. awakenaustin January 27, 2015

      How come you folks always attack the argument that no one made?
      No answer for the question asked! No problem! Just answer a different question!

      1. Kurt CPI January 27, 2015

        Did you even read the article? Conason’s entire point is that Republicans need to find a way to give away more if they really want to “End Poverty” and “Reduce Inequality”. He makes no mention of how these things should be paid for. You can’t get something for nothing. Either you earn what you get or someone else earns it for you.

        1. Insinnergy January 27, 2015

          Re-read the article you muppet.

        2. Wrily January 27, 2015

          I think Conason’s point is that the Republicans talking about ending poverty and reducing inequality are just blowing smoke.

          1. Kurt CPI January 27, 2015

            Sure, but other than raising the minimum wage, he offers only tax-financed “solutions” as suggested counter measures. I don’t think for a minute that corporate tax breaks, free trade, and legislation that transfers more of the wealth to the already wealthy is a good thing. I just want to hear some sensible alternatives to raising taxes and spending more to shore up the problems. Instead, how about some economically sound ideas on how to stimulate growth and productivity that can produce an environment that supports a strong middle class? Giving away more tax dollars (mostly from working-class taxpayers) surely helps no one in the long term.

          2. Wrily January 27, 2015

            I’d like to hear some sensible alternatives, too.

            When your car is the ditch the tow truck driver deserves to get paid. The question is: do you pay him, because it’s your car, or should the billionaire that ran you off the road in the first place pay?

          3. highpckts January 29, 2015

            Really? Is that even a question? We aren’t advocating that the wealthy pay more, just get rid of all the “perks” tax abatements and loop holes so they are paying their “fair” share! What is wrong with that? I don’t care if they are wealthy. Just pay what you owe!

          4. highpckts January 29, 2015

            Exactly!! Just like they always do! No concrete plans, no formula, no nothing, just talking points to win an election!

        3. awakenaustin January 27, 2015

          No! His point was, if you aren’t going to help, then stay the hell out of the way. Or, if you aren’t going to help, then quit preventing others from trying to help.

          Taxes are the price one pays for civilization.

          Liberals are interested in civilization, you are interested in barbarism. It is a Hobbesian dystopia you desire and advocate. One where one is concerned only with what he can get for himself and not with the conditions or circumstances of others. (With apologies to the author) One that is nasty, mean, “brutish and short.”
          You write this drivel in a vain effort to find a moral justification for your greed and your lack of regard for others.

          1. Kurt CPI January 28, 2015

            Wow, from my two or three posts you’ve discovered my motivations, made conclusions about things that nothing in any of my posts have even mentioned. You must be psychic. The problem with the liberals and the conservatives is that they both refuse to look at the waves they cause on the opposite side of the pond. Since this is a liberal perspective article, my response is of course going to be toward that perspective. By implementing more taxes (on the rich, corporations, etc.) you push more business offshore. Politicians – yes, liberal politicians including the President – support free trade which makes this possible. Taxation of corporations has to be accompanied by reforms that take away incentives to leave. I never said the rich should get richer as you suggest or that people should be abandoned to homelessness if they lose their jobs. I just said that it’s irresponsible to spend without a long-term plan to have the sustained revenue to support the spending. It’s plain common sense. Try reading the content of peoples posts instead of all the non-existent stuff between the lines.

        4. charleo1 January 29, 2015

          You’re right Kurt. These things like basic healthcare, education, and secure retirements must be paid for. And, they use to be paid for to an overwhelming extent by the salaries, of the workers themselves. Usually the man went to his job, whether it was selling shoes, Maytags, or making automobiles, his salary paid for his family’s healthcare, the kids education, bought the family home, the company paid his retirement, and the top income tax was 90%. And that paid for the military, and enormously beneficial infrastructure projects, like the interstate highway system, satellite technology, the micro chip, and medical research. Then, the rigging started. Tax rates on the top 1% dropped, along with revenue for the big projects. Suddenly, after all the tremendous gains realized because of our of our space program to go to the Moon, and beyond. Were cancelled in favor of a space station. Workers, instead of raises, were handed larger personal deductions, and tax income credits. And their retirement plans were phased out in favor of IRAs. Pension plans could now be bought out from under workers and liquidated. Suddenly Mom had to hand her children a house key before she went to work to make ends meet. While the average CEOs pay jumped from 300% of the average worker’s pay, to 3000% of the average. Corporate profits, and the Stock Market soared on frothy speculation, as retirement plans now only survived in Union Shops. Which the Right Wing politicians quickly went to work eliminating, with “Right to Work,” Laws. Eliminating the worker’s seat at the economic table. Capital Gains were again slashed under Reagan by half. Government revenues continued to fall along with worker’s salaries, until we went from being the World’s largest creditor Nation, to the World’s most indebted Nation, in a span of only six years. But the greed freaks were ecstatic, but not satisfied. Now to the big agenda. Rolling back FDR, and Johnson, and bring the good old days, of the late 1800s, and early 20th century. Where the poor were also marginalized, and demonized as lazy, dependent minded, and wholly unworthy of nothing but company script. And now the question is, who pays for all this? Who gets the bill? Or, the wealthy elite could just decide for us who should go without? That way their tax cuts are protected. And there’s more money in the public coffers to pay for things that benefit them. And, the wages would come more in line with Asia’s. Where workers make in a month, what the minimum wage American now makes in a day. Now wouldn’t that be freedom enhancing, job growth?

          1. Kurt CPI January 30, 2015

            OK, I agree with all of that. But you’re only looking at it from one perspective. Capital gains tax reductions surely benefited wealthy stockholders. But what about the working guy who has spent a lifetime of sacrifice to build up a retirement based on equities. Now we’re going to take 50, 75, 90% of that? It’ll create a new class of dependents out of what was up to that point, a class of taxpayers. A million dollars ain’t what is was in the early 60’s. In fact, it’s closer to 10 million dollars in today’s terms. There’d have to be a big adjustment in who pays those rates.
            The other part is the soaring cost of healthcare. Arguably, technology is just as critical to modern life as healthcare. But technology prices are affordable by working-class households because there is market competition. Government (medicare, medicaid, now Obamacare) pays for close to 80% of medical expenses (80% of expenditures are on seniors). That removes that market from competition. If you and I were paying for that stuff out of pocket, it would cost wayyy less. Need some support? Go look at the retail price of drugs in countries where government isn’t the chief provider. 10 cents on the dollar or less in some cases.
            The point is, it’s not a simple matter of taxing and spending. The underlying causes are government hypocrisy, greed, pork, favortism, back door deals, etc. Until we reign in the people in power nothing will change.

          2. charleo1 January 30, 2015

            You make some good points. And I made some unrealistic ones, at this point. But my main point is, the super wealthy, and multi-nationals actually gain from a recession. As they have the diversity, and financial wherewithal to not only withstand deep recessionary periods of long duration. But they gain from them, As weaker competitors fail, they gain market share, they also wrangle tax breaks and subsidies from gov. (GE for example.) And the market itself comes out the other side with less competition for wages, prices and quality, than before. There is no doubt the latest recession has re-set the wages downward, and narrowed the competition for the consumer’s business in almost any sector I can think of. And set what the financial community are calling a new normal, going forward. Personally I believe the gov. should control the healthcare for the Nation. The prices, the quality, the
            delivery, everything. For the same reason it controls air, and water quality. it should control medical health standards, as a matter of National security. I realize in some’s eyes that makes me a Communist.
            But here’s the way I reluctantly get there. First, and foremost, healthcare is by no stretch a commodity in which consumers have a choice to buy, or not to buy. In this County, that’s only a matter of who’s money is being used for the purchase. And, when one adds into that, the closed, rigged, and profit motivated insurance cos. providers, drug cos. labs, and profit motivated doctors. With the Fed. Gov, standing behind the entire thing, as the payor of last resort. As our bought out politicians are placed into the role of holding the purse strings, and riding herd over the mess. You’re going to have the kind of problems we see. Were you aware, Major League Baseball, and the Health Insurance Corporations are
            the only two businesses deemed exempt from Fed. Anti-Trust Laws? Meaning they may get together, and collude on prices, premiums, and payouts to providers. And the law prohibiting the Fed. to bargain for lower prices for drugs, didn’t get into the Medicare Prescription Bill all by itself. Nor did the idea to increase the number of insured, by simply having the Fed pay the premiums for those not able to afford them themselves, become the basis for Obamacare, as being the only possible healthcare reform, happen in a vacuum. Where good public policy always wins the day against the lobbyists. In fact, in Washington or anywhere else in this Country, it almost never does.

          3. Kurt CPI January 30, 2015


  10. 788eddie January 27, 2015

    Thanks, Mr. Conason, for this commentary. You were spot-on.

    And I’m a registered Republican. And I’m white. And I’m fairly well-off.

  11. Sloan Bashinsky January 27, 2015

    Hey, Joe Conason – You left out all the trillions of US dollars wasted on stupid, ruinous foreign American wars, which, my recollection, heaps of liberal Democrats in Congress approved, so as not to be confused with doves and lose votes from patriotic Americans, most of whom were some brand of Christian, saved, they said, by a man who himself told his followers to forego an eye for and eye and a tooth for a tooth, and to resist not one who does evil, and to turn the other cheek, and to do good to and pray for those who persecuted them. Meaning, Joe, at the top of my list for the Christian Republicans, and for the Christian Democrats, and for the their Christian counterparts other political religions in America, is, if they supported the US wars in Vietnam, Central America, the Caribbean, Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan, or elsewhere, they publicly and with real contrition and true remorse resign from the Christian religion.

    1. CPAinNewYork January 28, 2015

      Your rambling essay has ittle focus, except that you don’t like Christians, who you equate with war mongers. That’s an interesting point of view, because one of the most vocal groups in America, the Jewish community, openly advocates our going to war with Iran.

      Their purpose is to protect Israel, supposedly our staunch ally in the Middle East. Of course, the idea is to get the “stupid Christians” in America to agree to do the heavy lifting for Israel. If you doubt me on this, pay close attention to what the Israeli Prime Minister says when he addresses Congress. Listen hard for his references to the need for America to take the lead in attacking Iran.

      1. Sloan Bashinsky January 28, 2015

        Rambling essay? My essays are a lot longer, and I think maybe you missed the point, and probably the Christain targets will want to miss the point, if they read it.

        The Persian Gulf War, to liberate Kuwait and to protect US access to its oil, was to protect Israel ? The invasion of Iraq, to get its oil, was to protect Israel? The invasion of Afghanistan, to secure a route to the natural gas fields to the east, was to protect Israel?

        Don’t fret, I’m not on Israel’s side. I told a lot of people right after 9/11, that USA should get out of the Middle East altogether, and stop all USA aid to Israel, and let Israel and Islam work it out, or fight it out, and in that way learn which of them are God’s chosen people. I kept telling people that. I told people that just the other day.

        And that America made the incredibly stupid blunder of going into a world war with Islam, which outnumbers Americans, what, around 4-1? Yeah, I know lots of Americans don’t see it that way, but that’s what American went and did.

        I had hoped President Obama would end the 2 G.W. Bush, Inc. wars pronto, and then would steer clear of that region. I did not vote for Obama, though. In fact, I told everyone I knew that he was a chameleon, and he would be as bad as G.W. Bush, or worse.

        Then, Obama gets elected and is awarded the Nobel Peace Prize because of the color of his skin, with which I have no problem, nor with his father being Muslim. But I had a huge problem with him being awarded the Peace Prize when he was continuing his predecessor’s two wars. And I had a much bigger problem with him accepting the Peace Prize, when he was waging those two wars.

        Barack Obama and G.W. Bush say they are Christians. That’s where I felt they should be confronted. And their predecessors. And American Christians who backed them.

        Conason is right. America needs to get out of the war business. Not holding my breath, though.

        That’s not an essay either. My essays are longer 🙂

        1. CPAinNewYork January 28, 2015

          All we need from the Middle East is to buy oil from the Muslims. That does not take a military presence. The so-called need for a military presence emerged at the same time that the American Jewish community started clamoring for it. They started clamoring for it because they want to protect Israel.

          They don’t care about the United States aside from what they perceive is our obligation to Israel. They have done this through money: political contributions to AIPAC.

          By the clever use of money, the American Jewish community, while comprising less than two percent of the American population, is commanding our foreign policy. This will eventually lead us to war, because the Muslims hate the Jews and will do anything to destroy them. Because our crooked politicians have sold us out ot Israel, the Muslims hate all Americans.

          1. Sloan Bashinsky January 28, 2015

            The war is already here, and America keeps poking it.

            I recall Ross Perot going on Larry King’s show after Iraq took Kuwait, and begged
            the first President George Bush not to take military action. Perot said he was not afraid to fight, he had gone with mercenaries he had hired to rescue his own people from Iran. He said he also used to do business with Arabs, and no matter how hard he tried to do okay, he got skinned, so he stopped doing business with them. He said, they don’t think like us. And, they fight among themselves, then they go into a tent and make up and come out arm in arm, until they get into another squabble, and back into the tent, and then back out arm in arm. Regardless, as you wrote, of who has Kuwait, that oil will be sold to America, Perot said. And, he said specifically to American troops, not one of their lives were worth saving Kuwait from Iraq. Then, that President Bush goes on national television and says he cannot let the American way of life be threatened. It was not about Kuwait, or its people being liberated from Iraq. It was about Kuwait’s oil.

            Antipathy between Islam and Israel dates back to Abraham sending Hagar and Ishmael into the wilderness, in Genesis, which also is in the Muslim Scriptures. And that God told Abraham Ismael’s seed would become a great nation, too, like Isaac’s seed, and Islam’s seed would cause Isaac’s seed trouble. Ishmael’s seed became Islam. Isaac’s seed became Judaism and Christendom. Islam views Ishmael as the promised son, and itself as the Chosen People, and what is playing out now as what God told Abraham would play out.

            So much good could be done in America with all that money America spends on wars.

    2. highpckts January 29, 2015

      Will you leave “religion” out of the equation? Can’t we discuss anything that is good for this countyry without someone always bringing up religion! It has nothing to do with governing. All you need to do a decent job is to have some maturity, a conscience and common sense which seems to be severly lacking in most politicians and especially the crazy “RIGHT’!!

      1. Sloan Bashinsky January 29, 2015

        Actually, I brought up America’s stupid, ruinous trillion$$$-wasting wars, which Conason and his other readers breezed right by as if that economics kindergarten class was either off limits or invisible; and I gave American political leaders, who claim Jesus saved them, hell for starting and backing those ruinous national soul-shredding wars. Same for Americans who backed and still back those leaders, are you one such American?
        The only way I know to confront them is by putting them opposed to their Lord and Savior. Any other approach is a waste of time, and even that approach may be a waste of time.
        It’s either insanity or demonic possession, you pick, which drives American wars.
        As for what is going awry inside America’s borders, the same issues are in play. No fix there, either,
        absent an Act of God, or a species/planet extinction threat, such as a giant asteroid striking the planet. But then, perhaps ETs will do the deed, and end the pestilence (humans).
        Meanwhile, I’d love to see America operate differently at home and abroad. It will have to start, though, by America stops minding everyone else’s business outside America, and by tending to its own business inside of America, which will be a seriously unfun adventure. So much more fun to mind everyone else’s business, and for some Americans, that’s really lucrative, sort of rhymes with Lucifer.

        1. highpckts January 29, 2015

          I can’t disagree but my premise is that most if not all the strife in this country and abroad is caused by religious zealots who think that God only speaks to them and they, by God,will make damned sure we abide by their beliefs!

          1. Sloan Bashinsky January 29, 2015

            Yep, and I thought that was what I was trying to get at in my comments. Besides having taken a B.A. in Economics in college, and then getting 2 law degrees, the regular one and a masters in taxation, and working in business and then practicing law, I had the unfortunate, or fortunate, experience of later in life being apprehended, captured, owned, run and otherwise messed with by angels, who call themselves Jesus, Michael and Magdalene Melchizedek, and, I swan, they seem to have a pretty dim view of how religious people are running America, and of how many American Christians, Catholics, etc. and members of other religious sects, including the political parties, go about things. In differing degrees, that dim view extends overseas to other countries and religions and people therein. Leaves me in a peculiar position, and shapes my perspective a bit different, and gets me lots of funny looks and remarks :-). Good thing where I live is an insane asylum where all the inmates are allowed to run loose pretty much – Key West 🙂

  12. Insinnergy January 27, 2015

    Trickle down Economics and austerity-style cuts, the linchpins of twits like Norquist and Ryan, don’t work, have never worked, and from a scholar’s (and a common sense perspective) will never work. Just ask Sam Brownback, or every Republican president ever.

    Minimum wage increases, free education (or cheaper) and, in general, the style of economic management now coined as “Middle Class Economics” passes the common sense test, works in multiple countries around the world, and has been field tested to an extent by Democrat Presidents on multiple occasions, resulting in surpluses.

    I think the toughest part of Republicans beginning to abandon “Trickle down” Economics is that it’s the only economic approach that ‘rewards’ those who have money (with even more money), and at the same time satisfies their obvious desire to punish the poor as unworthy and unwilling to work hard enough.

    Any other economic theory tends (in their view) to ‘punish’ those who have money and ‘give handouts’ to the unworthy.
    This is a very self-centred and un-American view of the country.
    Apparently only the worthy, monied people are real Americans.

    1. atc333 January 29, 2015

      All anyone has to do is study the Reagan, Bush I and Bush II administrations, tax rates, deficit creation, and wealth redistribution during each of those administrations, as well as the past 6 years of GOP block and stall during the Obama Administration, and it becomes painfully obvious that the GOP’s allegiance to its failed economic theories of trickle down economics and deregulation, is painfully misplaced, unless of course it is a deliberate attempt on the GOP’s part to turn this nation into the worlds largest Oligarchy, in which case they are well on their way to total victory.
      Somehow, the GOP has failed to understand that the Middle class is the engine that once drove our economy, Good paying jobs, a fair living minimum wage, equal pay for equal work, and investing in job creation considering that the top 2% have only invested in their own wealth accumulations is all part of rebuilding our economy. Unfortunately, the GOP is against all of the above.

      Strange how Republicans before Reagan did not have a problem with an effective progressive tax that kept deficits down, and grew the economy. allowing it to invest in keeping America’s economy, and military the strongest in the world.

  13. Whatmeworry January 27, 2015

    The solution is easy. Time for everyone to either start pushing the wagon or give up their vote. The day of being able to raid another Americans bank account needs to end.
    Once everyone has skin in the game the spending nonsense will end

    1. Wrily January 27, 2015

      The guys with the most gold in the wagon should be pushing the most; it needs to be proportionate.

      1. Whatmeworry January 27, 2015

        That would be the republican hacks

        1. Wrily January 27, 2015

          Or, maybe those folks that bought and paid for those hacks.

          1. Whatmeworry January 27, 2015

            Thats simple…the corporate republican Illuminati

      2. Whatmeworry January 27, 2015

        They already do the issue is the 47% who are also riding

      3. Whatmeworry January 28, 2015

        They already dont the issue is the 47% who are not riding

        1. Daniel Max Ketter January 28, 2015

          Its about time the military quits riding and becomes taxpayers, along with paying into their health care golden parachute pensions just like assembly line workers and state/fed employees.

    2. Eleanore Whitaker January 30, 2015

      Okay, boy genius…tell us. How does a young man or woman whose parents had to refinance their home so their kids could go to college “get skin in the game?” You are so full of BS. It’s coming out of any of the possible orifices on your face.

      Your kind love to soften the guilt you all have for the corruption you pull off with price gouging on housing, clothing, and food. Then, you want “skin in the game?” When your kind are the ones cannabalizing the rest of us?

      Gee..let’s all do what Whatsies posted…Let’s all GET OUR Skin in HIS game…so..the next time a rich asshat wants another tax subsidies, tell him to get his skin in the game.

      The word “game” is the clue to just how corrupt men like Whatsies think the world should be. To them, it’s all a game of winners and losers…not humans with children who deserve a future. Slime balls with no testicles.

      1. Whatmeworry January 31, 2015

        HUH??? Its called a job.Big difference between a some one wanting some of their tax $$ back and a freeloader wanting a free ride. Its not the Republicans that have loaded every new born with a debt load of $150,000 the day they arrive.

        1. Daniel Max Ketter January 31, 2015

          A wise american would invest some of that income tax return into their local union. Support your trade union and it will support you!

          1. Eleanore Whitaker February 2, 2015

            If it comes down to it, it may be that unions are the last bastion of Americans who won’t tolerate anymore of their rights being taken from them.

            I always laugh when the CONS bitch and whine how union employees are paid too much. Well sure they are…after all, the CONs hire cheap foreign workers offshore they pay $11 a month in wages. By American standards, the same asshat employers in the US who are ripping off taxpayers by taking tens of billions every year in tax subsidies and paying less than any individual American worker does in federal taxes, they would love to force employees to work for $11 a month. Their beak noses are all hot to turn the US into a third world country while they lap up the foi gras and caviar.

        2. Eleanore Whitaker February 1, 2015

          Yes…It IS the GOP that loaded every new born with debt. GWB…Arbusto Oil…$12 million bankruptcy dumped on taxpayers…His brothers Jeb and Neil (of the Silverado S&L Bailout Daddy Conconted Fame) both dumped more than $2 million in bankruptcy for that Florida Federal Savings Bank they couldn’t manage. OH gee…looks like dumping bankruptcies on taxpayers is a “Bush thing.”

          Alaska, TX, OK and ND…all taking every year more tens of billions in Federal tax subsidies for a relic oil industry that should have gone bust 50 years ago.

          But, the one I especially love? The Ken Starr, Karl Rove, Eric Prince, Ralph Reed, “GET Clinton” Whitewater BS that cost us taxpayers $12 million and resulted in the same BS that your ISSA and Gowdy Benghazi Witchhunt is….8 investigations at taxpayer cost at approximately $12 million a pop? Let’s not forget the cost of the Gingrichian and Boehnerian Government shutdowns…Alaska’s fishing industry pitched a bitch when they lost nearly $200 million because your asshat GOP bulls and cows decided to “sequester.”

          You Republican dipshits just don’t get it. When you obstruct the normal flow of government, YOU SOBS are the cause of the deficits year after year after year.

          How much did rescuing the southern rebels after the Civil War cost the North? How much did the needless war in Iraq cost? Not to mention the cost in human life…but why should dipshits like you care about human life when all you want is to play God? Try again jerk bird…..I may not be a math genius but I know when asshats and dipshits are wasting MY tax dollars. How about that 50% of the Exxon Valdez spill fine Bush dumped on taxpayers in 2007…Just where the hell do you think that money comes from? Red states? Yeah..right. It was blue states who bailed out the idiots of the red states during the Great Depression who brought on their disasterous farming practices. It was the blue states who will also help these largely red states pay for their Agri Insurance with a cost of $200 billion in 2015…Math..not your red state okee doke strong points. Thank God there are blue states with top notch schools. You dipshits of the right are about as math savvy as a pig with a “betcha” wearing lipstick. Time for you to grow more corn or milk you cows for cheese….like they do in KS, OK and WI.

          1. Whatmeworry February 1, 2015

            WHATTTTT?? This debt has all been generated in the past 6 years you know the colored guy barak

          2. Daniel Max Ketter February 1, 2015

            GW Bush reduced our debt by making a carrier landing and declared the war against terrorism was over??

          3. Eleanore Whitaker February 2, 2015

            You’d better worry. If you think that cheese eater from WI Walker or that Okee Doke dipshit Huckabuck…have an icecube’s chance in hell of winning in 2016, think again. As I recall, your Koch asshats were quite pissed that they spent $2 million on the GOP in 2012 and tah dah…….the American voters saw to it, that $2 million was a huge waste of their money.

          4. Whatmeworry February 3, 2015

            Hilary s damaged goods name 1 single accomplishment

          5. Eleanore Whitaker February 4, 2015

            Boehner is also damaged goods. So is McConnell…what’s your point? That a man like you can go for the jugular with a woman and say “she’s” damaged good but no guy is? Get off your BS macho man routine.

            I can name hundreds of Hillary’s accomplishments. So can women in Turkey, India and third world countries where she fought for an end to female genital mutilation and women’s rights to vote.

            I can also state that to date, no pair of US GOP testicles serving as Secy. of State was as traveled in their jobs as HIllary Clinton. Suck it up joi boi…She WILL be president. Shrink those balls down to size. Walking around with elephantiasis means dragging those overloaded balls.

          6. Whatmeworry February 4, 2015

            Your right Hilary traveled a LOTTTTT. but it was SHOPPING. Seriusly your claiming she had an impact on genial mutilation??? The only genitals she mutilated were Vince Fosters and Bill’s

          7. Daniel Max Ketter February 5, 2015

            Genital mutulaion? Absolutely no comment! I’m rather minuscule there, making it rather hard to hit the ole target with the catheter without a magnifying glass.

          8. Eleanore Whitaker February 5, 2015

            You only prove your limited political knowledge and intelligence with posts like this. First of all, I can prove and shove in that fat face of yours all of the countries where Hillary has traveled fulfilling her duties as Secy of State. Eat her dust you little turd.

            As for Vince Foster and Bill…Vince Foster was known to have had 2 breakdowns long before he was ever part of WhiteWater…and if that’s the only BS you can puke up, you’re proving how desperate a little freak of nature you are. Go join ISIS. I hear they love guys like you who can’t stand females in positions of authority.

          9. Whatmeworry February 5, 2015

            Ignorance is my best quality

          10. Eleanore Whitaker February 5, 2015

            I don’t believe you are “ignorant.” I do believe you are fetchingly cunning. I was unwittingly thrust my entire life into a man’s world I often felt was stacking the cards against me. But, take heart. I have always been envious of how men get away with things they would never allow women to. The Good Old Boys Network’s Double Standard.

            I find most men with intelligence fascinating to the max. I also know gamers when I see and hear them. Your sly little games are not missed by a woman who knows keenly how to play the “man’s game” the man’s way. This, I do, to the utter bewilderment of men who expect little me to be a wind-up doll with no brains.

          11. Whatmeworry February 5, 2015

            No, I’m really ignorant. I failed special education

          12. Whatmeworry February 6, 2015

            Your typical left wing kool aid drinker. Since when is Traveling the key job function of the Sec of State?? Looks like you are just as obtuse as she is.
            ISIS loves fat women with 1 eyebrow standing by their man. Sounds like you and Hilary fit that bill perfectly

          13. <whatmeworry is Dan M Ketter February 6, 2015

            Dan Ketter is rather fat himself!

          14. Eleanore Whitaker February 7, 2015

            Traveling HAS to be a key function of the job of Secy of State. You need a refresher course in the duties of the SofS? Looks like you are a jealous little jerk who struts, drawls and swaggers his peacock feather on his DogPatch porch.

            I weigh 128 lbs. I was a professional, dancer and choreographer while you were still in your diapers asshat.

            I went on to bigger and better things when you were in your short pants.

            Self-haters like you fool no one. You are so miserable that you don’t like being miserable by yourselves. So you invite others to your misery parties and play your hater boy games.

            Time you grew up and acted like a real man and not McMommy little sugar pants.

          15. <whatmeworry is Dan M Ketter February 7, 2015

            He’s a web addicted pervert in his late 60s, way too old to grow up and be a real man. At nearly 275 lbs, DANielle is only going to grow “out” and keep getting fatter and fatter and fatter, outgrowing his food stained collection of grey t-shirts.

          16. Eleanore Whitaker February 8, 2015

            What you post is true. Those who hate themselves most seem to live in some bizarre dimension of misery they can’t remain in alone. Inevitably, they want to share that misery with anyone vulnerable enough to fall for it.

            There’s a very basic reason for the kind of obesity not due to metabolic reasons: self-loathing.

            In today’s world, a lot of obesity is not due to metabolism. It’s due to the need to feel engorged. They don’t eat because they are hungry. They eat because of fear and self-loathing. These are basically people who can’t identify those inbred fears well enough to see how self-destructive obesity is. So, they grouse, complain, whine and walk around like engorged balloons who hate what they’ve turned themselves into. All we can do is pity their inability to possess self-control and self-discipline the rest of us find relatively simple to do.

            I cannot imagine how the morbidly obese can live encased in hundreds of pounds of fat and become totally immobile. I think I’d rather be cast in cement.

          17. <whatmeworry is Dan M Ketter February 8, 2015

            You just explained “Dan/whatmeworry” Him calling someone fat is the pot calling the tea kett(er) black.

          18. Whatmeworry February 7, 2015

            Sorry your confusing activity with accomplishment. Just look who Hilary met with 3rd or 4th level clerks nothing more. Where are the treaties? where are the coalitions? where are the trade agreements??
            Other than buying stuff for her home she did nothing else.
            Weighed 128 LBS?? Must have been a weight lifter since your too fat to be on any stage and dancing unless it was Mama Cass.
            Its a shame that rather than being objective in your analysis your a partisan. Either a lesbian or Barak is your messiah. Either way thank goodness that there are so few of your ilk

          19. <whatmeworry is Dan M Ketter February 7, 2015

            Dan Ketter is so fat when he steps on the scale it says, “No live stock please.”

          20. Eleanore Whitaker February 8, 2015

            No. I am not confusing anything with anything. That’s only YOUR take on everything any who disagrees with you posts.

            I weighed 98 lbs for the first 17 years of my life. After bringing two children into the world (an accomplishment you can’t EVER hope for), I still maintain a weight of 128 lbs.

            First of all, at a very early age I was a farmer’s daughter. What we ate come from my Dad’s own hands and it was always fresh and devoid of pollutants.

            I’m 128 lbs at 4’10”. I was a professional dancer before my 15th birthday and a dance educator at age 17, owning the first of my own dance studios with 150 students to start.

            Barack Obama is MY president. As such, he gives up 8 years of his life he COULD have spent on personal financial gain. Unlike you right wing jerks, he spends nearly every waking minute working for the people of his country. You don’t. You bitch, complain, rail against anything that is common sense and then expect all of the sane human American patriots to fall for your BS.

            So…do tell us…What’s YOUR excuse for existence? Stuffing your face like a pig?

          21. <whatmeworry is Dan M Ketter February 8, 2015

            Sad Dans got nothing to do in his final years except collect disability and medicaid from the taxpayers and troll the internet pretending to be conservative bigot toward all except white trash like himself?

          22. Whatmeworry February 8, 2015

            I think I saw your studios… Are they the ones called Jelly Bellies??
            Gave up 8 years of his life? He is unaccomplished and quota lawyer. He would never have made 1 nickel in the profession that’s why he ran for office.
            I can claim without any compuncture that being 4’10 is hardly anything that I would want any woman to mimic

          23. <whatmeworry is Dan M Ketter February 9, 2015

            Fat DANielle Ketter and his fugly old bat Linda at it again!

          24. Eleanore Whitaker February 9, 2015

            I retired from dance. I last had my own studio in 1980. I returned to work in private industry but taught at Rutgers for 12 years.

            Do you usually have fantasies? I’d see a pyschiatrist about that.

            President Obama has thus far give up 6 1/2 years of his personal life and time and that of his family. The only thing you know how to “give” is more food in your fat face.

            It’s too bad you can’t have yourself committed to a mental institution. People like you are too dangerous to be in front of a computer. Do you kiss Julian Asange’s butt too? How about joining ISIS? I understand that they love sickos like you.

          25. Whatmeworry February 9, 2015

            Sorry barak is a life member off ISIS so he makes sure any real American won’t be admitted. You on the other hand could qualify with your body hidden with a Kimono and 1 eyebrow but fail the virginity test

          26. <whatmeworry is Dan M Ketter February 9, 2015

            Dan Ketter is a fat overweight scumbag in my book.

          27. Eleanore Whitaker February 10, 2015

            I’m sorry you lost your mental faculties at birth. Can we haul your butt into court and make you prove that the President is remotely, in any way, connected to ISIS? That just just what a stupendous buffoon you are. Encased in all that fat, stuffing your face with all manner of feces and you can judge someone else? You must really, really hate yourself. You look in the mirror and you see a tub of lard? Tell you what fat boy. Get on a tread mill. You’ll likely have a massive coronary and end up a mental cripple.

          28. Whatmeworry February 10, 2015

            It’s not hard Barak along with Kerry funded, supplied and trained ISIS at secrete camps in Jordan.. WHY??? He was manically focused on toppling Assad he didn’t care how.
            No different than he is now in toppling Netanyahu in Israel

          29. <whatmeworry is Dan M Ketter February 11, 2015

            Dan, please shave linda’s unibrow, and get a dentist to look at her fangs.

          30. Eleanore Whitaker February 11, 2015

            You really have gone off the deep end of your mental illness. Just yesterday, on the BBC, I listened to an interview with the Jordanian Prince regarding ISIS. He stated in no uncertain terms that Jordan would deal with ISIS separately from the US. He also stated that the US has only supplied drones and that Jordan, not the US was responsible for taking out 2 top ISIS leaders just this past week.

            As for Netanyahu, is he now the GOP Senator from the State of Israel?

            You are a moron. No US president can interfere with a candidate of a foreign country directly prior to an election. That is what our President’s Chief advisor stated.

            You’d be first to bitch if the President sidled up to Netanyahu and the Israeli voters took issue with that kind of American influence. Asshats like you need to be seen to and altered.

          31. <whatmeworry is Dan M Ketter February 11, 2015

            Fat boy dan was dropped on his head at birth. Worked a couple of years for Ford, then collected disability instead of going back to work.

          32. <whatmeworry is Dan M Ketter February 10, 2015

            My wife linda has one eyebrow and enough hair under her lip for a mustache???

          33. <whatmeworry is Dan M Ketter February 9, 2015

            whatmeworry (real name dan ketter) is a troll and scumbag child pervert who lives in Williamsburg VA. Anybody who would molest their grandkids is a piece of garbage in my book.

          34. <whatmeworry is Dan M Ketter February 7, 2015

            Dan Ketter is so fat, that Williamsburg VA gave him his own area code.

          35. <whatmeworry is Dan M Ketter February 6, 2015

            Here’s your bigot troll. At 67, ole Dan has nothing to do but troll posters and surf porn sites. Hope his wife Linda don’t find out.

          36. Whatmeworry February 5, 2015

            I plead ignorance

          37. Whatmeworry February 5, 2015

            Your right Hilary traveled a LOTTTTT. but it was BUSINESS. Seriusly yourclaiming she had an impact on genial mutilation??? The only genitals
            she mutilated were mine and Bill’s

          38. Whatmeworry February 5, 2015

            Hilary s not damaged goods with many single accomplishments

          39. Whatmeworry February 1, 2015

            WHATTTTT?? This debt has all been generated in the past 6 years you know the white colored guy bush

          40. Eleanore Whitaker February 2, 2015

            Really? Gee, that’s funny. When GWB left office, the entire mortgage banking system was dead on its ears and YOUR GOP decided to demand a TARP (Troubled Assets my butt…Troubled Greedheads is more like it) which to this date still is not paid off.

            Funny too how YOUR GOP VP Cheney handed Halliburton a no-bid contract for a war in Iraq that had yet to be declared officially and that by 2009 amassed a $350 billion profit.

            Sorry liar boy. But you don’t get to dump your GOP needless wars and war debts on this president. Act like a man and stop trying to throw this president under a bus. He didn’t create the hundreds of billions in debt for Iraq nor did he fudge up TARP that has NO return on interest. ARRA which IS this president’s success did. All of the ARRA bank loans are paid up.

            Why aren’t the TARP ones? Or are you too much of a coward to admit that?

            There may be some Daisy Maes in your okee doke DogPatch state who fall for your lies and BS. I know I can prove in a court of law your lies. You can’t.

            But then, isn’t that just what the GOP bulls and cows always do? They’ve spent 5 decades plus always trying to prove a negative. Go live in your GOP la la land asshat. Your credibility is about as honorable as Madoff’s.

          41. Whatmeworry February 2, 2015

            My gop can be knuckleheads at times

      2. Whatmeworry January 31, 2015

        HUH??? Its called a job.BIG difference between a some one stealing some of their tax $$ back and a freeloader wanting a free ride. Its the Republicans that have loaded every new born with a debt load of $150,000
        the day they arrive.

  14. Whatmeworry January 27, 2015

    The solution is easy. Time for everyone to either stop pushing the
    wagon and give up their vote. The day of being able to raid another
    Americans bank account doesn’t need to end.
    Once everyone has skinned in the game the spending nonsense will end

  15. charleo1 January 28, 2015

    Tuesday, February 10, 2004 – Page updated at 12:00 A.M.
    Bush report: Sending jobs overseas helps U.S.
    By Seattle Times wire services

    WASHINGTON — The movement of American factory jobs and white-collar work to other countries is part of a positive transformation that will enrich the U.S. economy over time, even if it causes short-term pain and dislocation, the Bush administration said yesterday.

    The embrace of foreign “outsourcing,” an accelerating trend that has contributed to U.S. job losses in recent years and has become an issue in the 2004 elections, is contained in the president’s annual report to Congress on the U.S. economy.

    “Outsourcing is just a new way of doing international trade,” said N. Gregory Mankiw, chairman of Bush’s Council of Economic Advisors, which prepared the report. “More things are tradable than were tradable in the past. And that’s a good thing.”

    The report, which predicts the nation will reverse a three-year employment slide by creating 2.6 million jobs in 2004, is part of an effort by the administration to highlight signs that the recovery is picking up speed. Bush’s economic stewardship has become a central issue in the presidential campaign.

    In his message to Congress yesterday, Bush said the economy “is strong and getting stronger,” thanks in part to his tax cuts and other economic programs. He said the nation had survived a stock-market meltdown, recession, terrorist attacks, corporate scandals and war in Afghanistan and Iraq, and it was finally beginning to enjoy “a mounting prosperity that will reach every corner of America.”

    “Just in case we forget what Party we’re really talking about here.” charleo1

  16. paulyz January 28, 2015

    The wealth of others didn’t have anything to do with my “pursuit of happiness”. I had an average paying job, saved my money, & eventually built the home of my dreams. I also sacrificed to send my children to parochial schools while still paying for public schools, without any help from the government. Most people try to get more in life. Others blame someone else for their conditions.

    1. Eleanore Whitaker January 28, 2015

      Oh yes it does my fine right wing attack dog. When you can’t EARN your wealth without relying on MY tax dollars in subsidies. We all have average paying jobs in the Middle Class. Stop patting yourself on your back while you omit who paid for your college education, who paid for your elementary and high school education and who also paid for your cushy comfy childhood.

      I paid NJ’s 2nd highest in the nation school taxes 5 years before either of my 2 kids attended school. Why? Because we bought our home in 1966 when I was 19 years old. I paid school taxes for the past 34 years since my last child LEFT school.

      So smart mouth, before you go around blowharding your way through life, millions of seniors have paid for you and your family’s schools and infrastructure. Time for you to pop that balloon sized ego.

      You get help from the government and my tax dollars every time you take your gas guzzler out on MY taxed roads.

      I blame your snot nosed attitude on the greed in our society for one reason: your inability to admit you didn’t earn that income without help. Did your wife contribute to your household income? I did. Did your kids use my school taxes to get their education?

      No billionaire earned his wealth without the help of his employees who are also HIS taxpayers contributing to HIS tax subsidies and then filling in gaps when HE doesn’t pay his fair share and got a tax cut in 23001, 2004, 2008 and 2009.

      When a guy like you acts as if you are the ONLY man in the country who has to pay his fair share, you prove what a greedy Twerpie Generation HAVE you are. BS someone else..It’s not computing.

      1. paulyz January 29, 2015

        Apparently your knee-jerk hatred for opposing & truthful comments blinded you rendering you incapable of even understanding my comments. I certainly didn’t have a cushy childhood, 6 kids & my dad worked his tail off. I worked at a restaurant, saved for technical school. Paid the entire cost, & didn’t even get the job I trained for because of affirmative action quotas. I also live in Wis. Which has some of the highest taxes in the Country.
        Once again, the wealth of others never hindered me, but Socialist Federal Government policies did.

        1. Eleanore Whitaker January 29, 2015

          I don’t waste my time on hate like you do. I am also old enough now to see things with far more perspective than you can at your tender little youthful age..as your posts indicate.

          You live in Wisconsin? It figures…Another midwesterner who thinks that because your cheese is the only possible job creation and progress, it must be that way elsewhere.

          A guy like you couldn’t EVER make it in one of the most developed, progressive areas of the country: The northeast.

          The wealth of others hinders all of us when we work and are paid and then part of that pay pays off corporations who don’t need our tax revenues.

          For a cheesehead, your post is proof enough that a guy like Scott Walker needs to get out of WI more often and try to face life in states like NY, NJ, CT, MA and VT. These are the highest taxed states in the country and the ROI ends up in states like yours.

          Every one of these states gets a return of 65 cents on average for every $1 we pay. Your state? $1.40 on average for every $1 you pay…Which states are supporting YOUR?

          Charles and David Koch do not need one dime in tax subsidies..Yet righties like you want us to continue to keep them in business using our tax dollars. Don’t they teach your WI cheeseheads economics in high school?

          1. paulyz January 29, 2015

            Don’t forget Wisconsin beer with the cheese. By the way, Wis. is quite a Blue State, luckily we have Gov. Walker. Oh, you forgot to mention the Billions of George Soros.

          2. Eleanore Whitaker January 30, 2015

            Live in NY or NJ…WI isn’t one of the highest taxes. WI gets $1.88 for every $1 it pays in federal taxes. NJ gets .62 cents. Don’t you dare try to lie and say WI is heavily taxed. If it is, it isn’t going into the federal kitty.

            Every state in the northeast gets back less than the $1 we pay. NJ and NY have to raise state taxes just so WI can get their $1.88 for every dollar they pay.

            Your conservatism is a miserable failure..WI makes cuts where it is least necessary: infrastructure and education. The education level of WI is equal to that of other red states …okee dokes full of cheese and booze. Maybe, it’s time you Fat Gut, Great White Angry Middle Aged, Going Bald Shaven headed males get off your butts and work as hard as people in the northeast do.

            By the way, of the top ten biggest collectors of welfare, only one is a blue state, Maine. Shove it pallie.

          3. Louis Allen January 30, 2015

            Copying Lenore:

            A smart guy like you should find it in his heart to forgive this half-wit, Lenore, my ex-wife (she will die before she admits to that!!), who, after you CLEARLY explained that “I also sacrificed to
            send my children to parochial schools while still
            paying for public schools, without any help from the government.”, still asks: “Did your kids use my school taxes to get their education?”
            She is the “you-didn’t-build-that” Obama sycophant type (sooo many on this cesspool of Lefties), bless her soul.
            She never recovered her (originally quite meager) common sense after I divorced her; and now she claims, among other fantasies, that SHE has paid for everybody’s education.
            I recommended psychiatric help (because it really pains me how she makes a fool of herself with her
            mindless rantings), … but she won’t listen because I am a man and “all men are bad”.
            I apologize in her name.
            P.S. – paulyz: Did you notice (typical of these liberal, CRAZY leftists) that she comes up with made-up numbers and then, in her next post (her next crazy rant) she forgets what those numbers were and makes up NEW ones?
            1st post: “Your state? [It gets] $1.40 on average for every $1 you pay…”
            2nd crazy post: “… just so WI can get their $1.88 for every dollar they pay.”
            Poor post-post-post-post-post-post menopausic woman …. LOL !!!!

          4. Eleanore Whitaker January 31, 2015

            I submitted your post to a friend of mine who is a clinical pyschologist. His verdict after reading your rant? Sociopathic narcissist.

            You didn’t build that. Not if you had one other employee helping you. Sorry…that’s a fact. You don’t get to keep ALL profits when you had help earning them. It’s called profit sharing obligation. Get a life. You’re a pathetic loser.

          5. Louis Allen January 31, 2015

            Tell your imaginary “clinical psychologist” (NOT “pyschologist”, you dumbass !!) “friend” (you, dear, have NO friends left) that he can go eat cake.
            It’s so sad, Lenore, that after 33 years being a conservative and listening to/practicing reason, you have become a truly pathetic socialist, men-hating, bitch.

          6. Insinnergy February 22, 2015

            Well ain’t you a real charmer.
            I notice that almost every post is commentary and opinion. Fact free… just the way the GOP likes it.
            How about you wander off before you read something your limited intellect can’t handle and your brain cell pops.

          7. Louis Allen February 22, 2015

            Insinnergy, you with the crazy, stupid name (insinnergy ??!!):
            You are what so many of your crazy leftist/liberal/socialistic/Obama unconditional “friends” on this cesspool of liberal naive “opinions” call a “troll”; you are posting an obtuse (just like your mind) comment to a post I wrote TWENTY TWO (22 !!!) DAYS AGO!!! That’s the perfect definition of a “troll”.

            FYI, I was answering some of the rants of my ex-wife, Lenore Whitaker, who happens to be so out of her (small) mind, that she signs herself as “Eleanore” when her real name is Lenore.
            Actually, it’s none of your business, so butt out.
            It’s between (ex, thank God!) husband and wife.
            Stay out of it, unless this mental case of a man-hater actually ASKED you to intervene in her favor, in which case, ….. stay out of it anyway.

          8. Louis Allen January 30, 2015


            Did you notice (typical of these liberal, CRAZY leftists) that
            she comes up with made-up numbers and then, in her next post (her next
            crazy rant) she forgets what those numbers were and makes up NEW ones?
            1st post: “Your state? [It gets] $1.40 on average for every $1 you pay…”
            2nd crazy post (see below): “… just so WI can get their $1.88 for every dollar they pay.”
            Poor post-post-post-post-post-post menopausic woman …. LOL !!!!

        2. highpckts January 29, 2015

          You know talking to someone like you that has only one view of the world is a complete waste of time! Enjoy your well earned income”without any government help” and live in your fantasy worlds and stay off these boards!

          1. Louis Allen January 30, 2015

            high: Stay out of this. “paulyz” is a very smart guy, and you, buddy, are as dumb as a box of nails …
            LOL !!!

    2. Louis Allen January 28, 2015

      A smart guy like you should find it in his heart to forgive this half-wit, Lenore, my ex-wife (she will die before she admits to that!!), who, after you CLEARLY explained that “I also sacrificed to send my children to parochial schools while still
      paying for public schools, without any help from the government.”, still asks: “Did your kids use my school taxes to get their education?”
      She is the “you-didn’t-build-that” Obama sycophant type (sooo many on this cesspool of Lefties), bless her soul.
      She never recovered her (originally quite meager) common sense after I divorced her; and now she claims, among other fantasies, that SHE has paid for everybody’s education.
      I recommended psychiatric help (because it really pains me how she makes a fool of herself with her mindless rantings), … but she won’t listen because I am a man and “all men are bad”.
      I apologize in her name.

      1. paulyz January 29, 2015

        I really feel for you man, to have had to deal with someone like her. Must have been living hell. Glad you are free from that.

        1. Louis Allen January 30, 2015

          You can say THAT again ….

    3. highpckts January 29, 2015

      Well aren’t you special!! There are lot of people that for circumstances beyond their control, aren’t so special! Give it a rest about the pulling yourself up by the bootstraps and come into the real world! Everything is not black and white!

      1. paulyz January 29, 2015

        No, not at all special, just showing how the wealth of others doesn’t have anything to do with a person’s success. Give the war on wealth a rest, quit making excuses, & try to learn that a large, powerful, controlling Fed. Gov. isn’t the solution, it is the problem. It was by gradual saving & sacrifice that I did OK, not at all wealthy, & in spite of Gov. obstacles.

        1. highpckts January 29, 2015

          So do tell me how the Overwhelming government stifled you in the least little bit! Taxes? Healthcare? Infrastructure? Regulations? What? Without government we would slide into anarchy and please don’t say we are already there! Then I will totally doubt your intelligence.

          1. paulyz January 29, 2015

            Who said we don’t need government? The Left calls Conservative Americans anti-government, untrue , we want limited & Constitutional government that doesn’t overspend to buy votes & is unresponsive to most Citizens. The Left likes to call us anti-immigrant, when we are very much for Legal Immigration, but opposed to the government allowing Illegal entering. They can’t seem to separate the difference between the two.

          2. highpckts January 30, 2015

            First of all if you know ANYTHING about the bill the President is proposing, It is only allowing the people who were born here before something like 2005 an easier chance to become citizens. It is NOT across the board amnesty! He is not “opening” the borders to every immigrant!! Secondly, the only ones who want to “privatize everything, including SS, which by the way I payed into all my working life, is the GOP and, by examples known, privatizing doesn’t work! Someone always gets greedy and suddenly the funds are gone! Third, you go ahead and tell me how compassionate the GOP is when you would repeal any insurance other than private for kids and seniors, when they want to cut ANY help to people down on their luck and cut food stamps for kids, One in five kids go hungary and live in poverty in this country! You don’t see any pain in this country!! If you did there would be no problem raising the minimum wage to match inflation levels! You are stuck on “big Government” and “no new taxes”! It doesn’t matter what for, except for the military of course. So don’t tell me how compassionate you are when every word out of the rights mouth is cut, cut, cut and no new taxes, which is the price of living in a compassionate, civilized country. You just keep cutting to healthcare, education, wages and soon we will be considered a third world country!! You don’t get exceptional without investments!!

          3. dpaano February 9, 2015

            WHO BUYS VOTES???? I think it’s the lobbyists who line the pockets of our politicians! As for immigration…where did your ancestors come from and how did they get here? I know mine came through Ellis Island and were poor. They were able to make do and pull themselves up, but they didn’t have today’s GOP to drive them down! As for your last sentence….are you REALLY expecting us to believe any of that BS!!!

    4. dpaano February 9, 2015

      Yeah, that’s the problem with the GOP….it’s always Me, Me, Me, and what ME has done and not what you can do for others not so fortunate. I’m sure they don’t care about what you did to get where you’re at…..they’d like to be able to do the same, I’m sure! But, they don’t have the luxury of having an “average paying job” and being able to “built the house of their dreams.” They can’t afford to send their children to private schools….and public ones are pitiful!! Of course they’re going to blame someone for their condition….alot of it isn’t their faults!

  17. paulyz January 29, 2015

    The 2nd. Paragraph of this post mentions the morality of Pope Francis, but fails to mention that Pope Francis is completely opposed to abortion & supports the sanctity of LIFE. Quite a quandary for pick & choose Liberals, that adjust their principles to s their ideology.

    1. dpaano February 9, 2015

      Pauly: If the Republicans would get out of women’s uteri and start concentrating on the REAL problems that we have…we MIGHT get things done! They are so determined to make women second class citizens that they can’t seem to do anything else….haven’t they heard of the idea of doing more than one thing at a time?

  18. Steven Meeks February 2, 2015

    Here we find yet another lie from our resident marxist agitator: http://youtu.be/TyTelRaoBAI?t=13s

  19. dpaano February 9, 2015

    Well said!


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.