Type to search

Long Before Hillary Decides For 2016, Scandal Trolls Are Coming Back

Memo Pad Politics

Long Before Hillary Decides For 2016, Scandal Trolls Are Coming Back


By all accounts, Hillary Rodham Clinton has not yet decided whether to seek the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination. But the prospect of her candidacy, combined with her undeniable popularity, is agitating certain commentators so deeply that they simply cannot withhold their bile.

Consider the reaction of David Frum, a former Bush White House aide who often writes for the Daily Beast/Newsweek, CNN and other outlets about his dissatisfaction with the Republican Party. Frum can be both candid and thoughtful, although his latest attempt to justify the deceptive campaign leading up to the disastrous Iraq occupation seemed weak and inappropriate, even a bit cowardly.

Like so many conservatives of his cohort, Frum was no foreign policy expert. He made his right-wing bones in relentless “scandal” attacks on the Clinton presidency, eagerly appearing on television to spout the daily stream of angry nonsense.  Unlike some who participated in that long, nasty jihad,  he still has not accepted the national verdict on the Clintons.

Sounding today like a manic concern troll, Frum writes worriedly that her candidacy would “reopen embarrassing ethical disputes” from her years as First Lady. “One particular quarrel that a Hillary Clinton nomination would bring forward is the quarrel over the ethical standards of the Clinton White House — and, maybe even more, of the Clintons’ post-White House careers.”  Evidently Frum thinks that Bill Clinton shouldn’t have earned millions delivering speeches while his wife served as Secretary of State – neglecting to mention that the Obama White House carefully vetted every dollar he had earned before sending her nomination to the Senate.

Such insinuations — devoid of any factual basis or reporting effort – reflect the customary intellectual standards of the old Clinton crazies. The obvious purpose is to evoke a shadow of scandal, without fulfilling the burden of a serious accusation.

At this point, someone will inevitably wag a finger and mention “Lewinsky.” And true, there was Monica Lewinsky. Guilty of an extramarital affair that he attempted to conceal, Bill Clinton paid a heavy price for his impulsive misconduct. And despite an astonishing torrent of accusations, including every conceivable crime, he was guilty of nothing more.

As for Hillary, every allegation against her — from Whitewater to “Filegate” to “Travelgate,” and so on — simply evaporated under tens of millions of dollars worth of prosecutorial scrutiny. It is easy to forget that Kenneth Starr, the Republican-appointed special prosecutor, and his successor Robert Ray, spent upwards of $50 million on their pointless investigations, victimizing many wholly innocent Arkansans.

The investigation’s moral denouement came in February, 1997 – following Clinton’s second inauguration – when Starr announced that he would resign to pursue a sinecure at right-wing-funded Pepperdine University. He had confided to gullible reporters only weeks earlier that he was about to indict Hillary Clinton, but the obvious truth was that his effort to derail the Democrat’s re-election had failed.

This was one of the most disgraceful episodes in the history of American law enforcement and jurisprudence, with an “independent counsel” extending and expanding a hollow probe for blatantly partisan purposes.  More honest journalistic veterans of the anti-Clinton crusade have looked back on their participation with regret.

But just as we can expect to hear repeated justifications of the horror of Iraq, so we can anticipate more of the same old scandal slime, if and when Hillary runs. Based on past performance — as Frum might say — that won’t intimidate her or her husband.

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 April 3, 2013

    Hearing a Republican complain about a private citizen making money because his wife was a Cabinet member has got to be one of the most bizarre and funniest political claims ever. Somebody should remind Mr. Frum that in addition to knowing how to make money, Bill Clinton has also devoted much of his time to charitable causes and, as a result, he is one of the most admired and respected former U.S. Presidents in the world. Interestingly, the same goes for Jimmy Carter. Admittedly, neither spend too much time parachuting, playing golf, or hiding in Texas for fear of being charged for crimes against humanity.
    If the GOP strategy for 2016 is focused on the record of ex-Presidents, all I have to say is bring it on!
    Clinton-Warren 2016

    1. CPAinNewYork April 3, 2013

      I don’t think that Hilary Clinton will make a good president, because she was knee-deep in the Whitewater scandal and is tainted by Vince Foster’s death. She’s a crass opportunist. When Foster died, she and her secretary rushed to Foster’s office to clean out his files.

      Further, I think that Foster was murdered and that the entire Clinton menagerie was involved: “Dead men don’t talk.” She reminds me of Evita Peron.

      Finally, there seems to be an unfortunate history of bad things, like death, happening to people who cross the Clintons.

      1. HGB April 3, 2013

        All refuted and laid to rest. Now let’s talk about Iraq and the needless waste of blood and treasure, all because of Republicans disinformation and outright lies.

        1. CPAinNewYork April 3, 2013

          Ok, let’s talk about the Republicans. I think that the republican Party is filled with extremist scumbags that have blood on their hands from starting wars based on lies. I’d like to see Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and the other neocon pieces of dirt tried and convicted for crimes against humanity.

          I also think that Hilary Clinton is a grossly overrated political sleazebag who was knee-deep in the Whitewater scandal. I think the same of her husband, who is such a weak individual that he can’t keep his pants zipped up. Her publicists keep saying that she did a great job as senator from New York and as Secretary of State, but I’ve yet to hear any specific examples of that great job.

          Our biggest international problems lie in the Mideast and Asia. I don’t think that any leaders in those areas, including those governing our “great ally” Israel, will pay any attention to her.

          1. I agree 100% again. Spot on. Clintons are both jive ass’s.

        2. Yes, refuted just like the kennedy’s assassination, right?

          Oh, and we still are not in a depression yet either, right.

          1. plc97477 April 3, 2013

            Oh now you are saying she killed Kennedy also.

      2. elw April 3, 2013

        Of course you have zero proof of any of your accusations.

        1. And what do you have to refute them?

          Have another glass of that Kool-Aid.

          1. elw April 3, 2013

            In this Country – you are innocent until proven guilty. The buden is on the you. Try reading the Constitution, not that people like you care about it.

          2. Inthenameofliberty April 4, 2013

            ??? Both sides have shredded the Constitution. Both. Try and tell me otherwise, give me examples why I should believe otherwise.

      3. idamag April 3, 2013

        That was never proven. When Governor Clinton ratified the Civil Rights Act, in Arkansas, there was a particularly virulent group that spend a lot of money trying to hurt him.

      4. cpa, you are spot on as usual.

      5. plc97477 April 3, 2013

        And she wanders around after dark to find brains to eat.

      6. disqus_Ut1U34e38K April 5, 2013


        1. CPAinNewYork April 5, 2013

          Are you referring to the time that Hilary cried during the run-up to the 2008 nomination? Her crocodile tears really impressed me. Seeing that buffoon Boehner cry was bad enough, but the president crying?

    2. elw April 3, 2013

      The Conservatives are on the way for winning this years prize for the most hippocritical and ironic statements of the year. I guess that is what happen when you do not have much in the way of truth or ideas to offer the voters.

      1. idamag April 3, 2013

        How about Sanford, using taxpayer money to fly to South America and see his mistress? He told everyone he was hiking. Then, so crude, as to get on television to rub salt in his wife’s wound by calling his mistress his soul mate. Okay, we are not condemning him for being a Republican. We are condemning the constituency that voted him a winner in the primaries this week.

        1. plc97477 April 3, 2013

          Don’t condemn them too much he still gets to go against Elizabeth.

    3. Jim Myers April 3, 2013

      Dominick –

      You nearly always add thoughtful comments to this blog.


    4. BDC_57 April 3, 2013

      Very well said

    5. Lovefacts April 3, 2013

      I agree with everything you said, Dominick, except for Warren. She’ll do more good in the Senate than at the WH as a Veep. If Hiliary runs, she needs someone from the Ohio, PA, Michigan, Wis., VA, or FL as her veep.

      1. plc97477 April 3, 2013

        Yes. I agree. There is no place I would rather see her than right there on the banking commitee

  2. Clinton supported most all of bush’s policies.

    That is the biggest obstacle she will have to overcome.

    That and being a member of the cabinet of our “lazy” President.

    bernie sanders 2016

    1. diverdown48 April 3, 2013


      1. Independent1 April 3, 2013

        You got that right!

    2. TheSkalawag929 April 3, 2013

      “Clinton supported most all of bush’s policies.”
      You sound as though you’re saying that as if Bush’s policies were a bad thing. I guess you’re finally seen the light.

    3. David L. Allison April 3, 2013

      Your initial assertion is another simple case of false equivalency though I would love to see Bernie Sanders as either President or Vice President or even Majority Leader. Then we would have a progressive in the Executive Office or a leader with a spine, guts and heart in the Senate.

      1. idamag April 3, 2013

        Bernie Sanders would be good.

      2. plc97477 April 3, 2013

        I like it. Bernie Sanders for president. Not that he has much chance but I can dream.

    4. idamag April 3, 2013

      Her falling for the WMD crap is her bad and because she voted for war does not mean she supported the bush policies.

  3. old_blu April 3, 2013

    I don’t think Clinton will have any problem with any of the unfounded accusations that will be thrown at her, and you know there will be plenty, just like they are still throwing at President Obama. (that are also unfounded).

    Clinton/———- 2016

    1. Scott Ladd April 3, 2013

      I’m just guessing here, but you must be a liberal. Meaning, you can’t read.

      1. Independent1 April 3, 2013

        That’s better than be a conservative these days which means you’re on the wrong side of everything!!

        1. neeceoooo April 3, 2013

          Amen to that

        2. old_blu April 3, 2013

          Good morning Independent, : ))
          I think Scott likes being not right, and I don’t mean he’s wrong he’s just ain’t right.

          1. Independent1 April 3, 2013

            Good morning old_blu! Thanks for the smile. Boy, on some of the threads the overly righties are really out in force this morning. I don’t have a big problem with the moderate righties, but the right-wing wackos really get to me.

          2. BDC_57 April 3, 2013

            like the tea party extremists

          3. Canistercook April 3, 2013

            Guess there is nothing extreme these days about living off someone else’s work effort! It’s becoming the normal!

          4. idamag April 3, 2013

            That is what multi-national corporations do.

          5. Canistercook April 3, 2013

            So I guess you think it is right for everyone to do it. Perhaps that is what is destroying America today.

          6. lana ward April 3, 2013

            That is what Obama voters do–he’s the food stamp President

          7. Inthenameofliberty April 4, 2013

            Now, now, if we all are to get along then this type of post won’t work. I am not a fan of the presidents of the last 12.5years, but we all need to compromise.

          8. Bill April 3, 2013

            Isn’t it time for the GOP to come up with some other talking point, that one is worn out !!!

          9. Canistercook April 3, 2013

            Not if one looks at the rise in food stamps and other entitlements recently.

          10. plc97477 April 3, 2013

            Probably more ways than one.

      2. neeceoooo April 3, 2013

        I hate to disappoint you but many studies, Psychology Today, Brock University and Science Daily all conclude that liberals are more intelligent than conservatives.

        1. awakenaustin April 3, 2013

          Damn, I knew there was a reason I was a liberal. Add to that being on the right (as in correct) side of history and there just isn’t any downside.(smile)

          1. neeceoooo April 3, 2013

            Thanks for the smile.

          2. lana ward April 3, 2013

            Liberals have been the downfall of America!

        2. montanabill April 3, 2013

          I would guess that the National Memo would also support that assertion and that it would be heartily supported by the New York Times. No bias here, move on. Just one question, based on the assertion, is it fair to assume that liberals are smarter simply because they endorse using someone else’s money in an attempt to create their vision of a utopian society?

          1. TheSkalawag929 April 3, 2013

            No. We just appear to be smarter because of who we are being compared to.

          2. montanabill April 3, 2013

            The world is governed
            more by appearance than realities so that it is fully as necessary to
            seem to know something as to know it.

            Daniel Webster

          3. TheSkalawag929 April 3, 2013

            Yes and republicans are stuck on seeming to know more so than actually knowing.

          4. Inthenameofliberty April 4, 2013

            And here we go again. Democrats hate Republicans and Republicans hate Democrats. Adults are the biggest children on the face of this planet.

            Do you have kids? Do you enjoy making fun of a political party the same way a child bullies a classmate?

            Sure seems like the adults that post on this site have forgotten manners. It’s almost as if it’s ok to be ignorant and nasty once you get into cyber space.

            Again, I’ll include myself as well. I’m no saint. But I get a kick out of watching the no-compromise and ‘I am better than you’ attitude on the memo. It’s so reassuring to realize that our country will implode because we will not learn to be respectful and just get along.

          5. TheSkalawag929 April 5, 2013

            Inthenameofliberty yes here we go again.

            As a Democrat I don’t hate Republicans. I do, however, dislike people who spout lies and disinformation and get upset when I call them out on it.

            Yes I do enjoy making fun of people who are willfully stupid. I especially enjoy it when even though they are presented with truth and facts they still cling to their ideological talking points as if they were handed down from on high. I don’t consider my retorts to be bulling. I see them as standing my ground refusing to be bullied.

            I taught my kids to treat others with respect but not to kowtow to someone just because they are bigger than they are. I taught them not to be afraid to stand up for what they believe in because if you don’t stand for something you’ll fall for everything. I give as much respect as I get. If you give me no respect then you can rest assured you will get none respect in return.

          6. Inthenameofliberty April 5, 2013

            I thank you for your courteous and honest response. Your tact is greatly appreciated. And I agree with your points. I suppose I did not follow the thread closely enough to realize that you felt you were being disrespected. Sorry.

          7. TheSkalawag929 April 5, 2013

            Thank you for your concern for civility.

            You are right in that if we all acted more civilly toward each other we would be better able to solve our problems without resorting to vitriolic discourse and violence.

            Have a great weekend. 🙂

          8. Inthenameofliberty April 5, 2013

            And you, the same.

          9. idamag April 3, 2013

            Like MIchelle Bauchman and Darrel Issa.

          10. TheSkalawag929 April 3, 2013

            And Louis Gomert and Don Young.

          11. montanabill April 3, 2013

            And Alan Grayson, Debbie What’serName Schultz and Corrine Brown.

          12. TheSkalawag929 April 3, 2013

            And Rick “Oops” Perry and Todd “Legal Rape” Akin

          13. montanabill April 3, 2013

            Rather that simply add more names to the list for both sides, and there are plenty of each, I would rather point out that most of our elected officials are there because they couldn’t get real jobs.

          14. old_blu April 3, 2013

            Damn bill that would be a long list and you are right again. (it’s starting to become a habit with you)

          15. TheSkalawag929 April 3, 2013

            Sorry montanabill that may be true for your side of the aisle but Democrats tend to elect people to office that promote the good of the country over the craziness of ideology.

          16. montanabill April 4, 2013

            Apparently you have a sense of humor.

          17. montanabill April 3, 2013

            Amending that: “because they are B.S. artists, who couldn’t get real jobs.” No exclusions for the exaltedness of the position.

          18. TheSkalawag929 April 3, 2013

            That’s true for republicans.
            Now that being said what does it say for the people that elect them?

          19. lana ward April 3, 2013

            Welfare sponge!

          20. montanabill April 3, 2013

            I thought sure someone would compare them to great thinkers like Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden.

          21. Inthenameofliberty April 4, 2013

            That was a good one! I needed a good laugh!

          22. plc97477 April 3, 2013

            Good one.

          23. TheSkalawag929 April 3, 2013

            Thanks. 🙂

          24. neeceoooo April 3, 2013

            I think your assertion that “liberals assume they are smarter because they endorse using someone else money in an attempt to create utopia” is most certainly someone opinion and we both know that opinions are like belly buttons, everyone has one. And yes, you could say that the majority of the notes posted here and on other blogs are “opinions”.

          25. tobyspeeks April 3, 2013

            I can’t answer your question, but I can tell some conservatives are stupid by the way they stereotype all liberals into some big pot of lazy welfare recipients. That is not only stupid, it’s incredibly ignorant and since I know for fact you have no way of knowing what you’re talking about it proves you’re only parroting what the hate filled greedy conservatives on the boob tube tell you.

          26. montanabill April 3, 2013

            Suppose you tell me exactly what it is that liberals are doing or want to do that doesn’t require someone else to pay for it.

          27. Independent1 April 4, 2013

            Someone else to pay for it?? And what does that mean?? Are you trying to give us the standard GOP nonsence that Dems are trying to overttax people for the benefit they’re getting by living in America?? And if they’re doing that (overcharging rich people for the opportunities being in America affords them), how is it that America’s current max tax rate is still in real terms one of the lowest on the planet for any truely industrialized nation?? Huh!!

            And if the claims you keep making about raising taxes is going to keep people from creating businesses and jobs, how in Hell did America survive from after the collapse of the stock market in 1929 through the start of the most disasterous presidency in American history, 1982, with a maximu tax rate that never fell below 70%??? HUH!!
            Your arguments about over taxation are so much garbage that it wants to make me vomit. President Disaster lowered the 70% tax rate to 50% then 38.5%, then to 28% with all the time the economy dumbing down- Bush Sr. raised it back to 31% but it wasn’t until Clinton raised it back to 39% and started paying for the things America needed in order to prosper that the economy really soared. And when Bush lowered it back to 35% the economy muddled along for 6 years (my retirement fund did nothing in the market) until it finally tanked because of his mismanagement. When are YOU going to wise up???

          28. montanabill April 4, 2013

            Right after you learn some real history.

          29. Inthenameofliberty April 4, 2013

            Right back at you.

          30. tobyspeeks April 6, 2013

            Right back at me? Ouch. One of than many differences between you and I is I say “some,” you “all.” Your hate of “everyone” not like you will eventually eat up up inside. Ask your doctor about it.

          31. Inthenameofliberty April 7, 2013

            Do I say all? If that is the case, I do agree that should change. I don’t hate people. I hate hypocrisy.

          32. lana ward April 3, 2013

            LOVE IT!! 🙂

          33. Independent1 April 4, 2013

            No bill, numerous studies have proven that the average IQ of liberals is higher than conservatives: liberals have much more open minds and are willing to challenge the unknown. Conservatives by nature or more cautious and therefore much slower to accept changes in their environments – new concepts – they’re more wedded to old ways. Remember, that’s on average and not necessarily true for all conservatives. Many conservatives are previous liberals who became wealthy and misguidedly thinking that voting in conservatives who are really only hellbent on syphoning money from the needy into alrealdy wealthy’s pockets, would help them retain their wealth and therefore switched to being conservative. So these conservatives who were prior liberals would obviously be the smarter of the conservative group

          34. montanabill April 4, 2013

            If it makes you happy to believe that nonsense, then by all means, smile.

          35. Independent1 April 4, 2013

            So the results of several studies you can look up on line are nonsense. Well keep on living in denial on virtually everything you believe. You’ve created for yourself a mindset that’s so full of holes that it wouldn’t even serve as a sieve. I’ll believe a number of studies I read before I ever believe the nonsense that you spew.

          36. montanabill April 4, 2013

            Source of the studies tell you anything.

          37. Inthenameofliberty April 4, 2013

            he has a point, though.

          38. montanabill April 4, 2013

            And he has a point because several very liberal sources did a survey? When I see the same results coming from the Heritage Foundation or at least an organization without a political agenda, I will take notice.

          39. Inthenameofliberty April 5, 2013

            I will check out the Heritage Foundation. Is someone going to tell me that is politically skewed, conservative website? Funny, there are not a lot of true, unbiased reporters out there anymore, are there? I enjoyed reading recently that one of the major networks got knocked down for being liberally biased. No one wants to talk about that. I was pretty shocked that a non-biased source reported on it.

          40. montanabill April 5, 2013

            Yes, Heritage is conservative foundation. My point was that just because a bunch of liberals come up with a study that says liberals are smarter than conservatives is hardly any more valid that the same number of conservatives coming up with studies that show conservatives are smarter than liberals. For example, the man-on-the-street interviews of liberal New Yorkers, if called a study, would quickly put doubt on the studies the liberal sites came up with.

          41. Inthenameofliberty April 4, 2013

            There is some truth to that statement.

        3. Canistercook April 3, 2013

          Odd isn’t it that the Conservatives are richer, not living on entitlements paid by others and mostly self supporting isn’t it!

          1. old_blu April 3, 2013

            No what’s odd is the red states take more federal dollars than the blue states, and they pay in the least, now that’s odd.

          2. BDC_57 April 3, 2013

            The red states have more welfare people than the blue states witch have more jobs than the red states.

          3. Inthenameofliberty April 4, 2013

            Hmmmmm. I am wondering and hope you might tell me, why I have been
            reading that the states with the lowest unemployment numbers are also
            the states that are considered to be the most conservative? What you just wrote is not entirely accurate. I have researched databases online that have no political party affiliation, whatsoever. And they do not agree with what you just wrote. Funny, how people can skew numbers to be whatever they want them to be? Isn’t it?

          4. Barbara Morgan April 8, 2013

            I live in one of the red states and he isn’t wrong there is higher unemployment in the red states and the pay is much lower also. Like some are always accussing the President of lying about what is going on in regards to employment numbers Republican governors do not report the whole truth about how people are unemployed in their states and how many have just stopped looking for job because there are no jobs to be had. Unlike governors in Blue state the red state governors do not go looking for businesses to try and talk them into relocating to their states, they just sit around and wait for the businessses to come to them. That doesn’t work very well

          5. Inthenameofliberty April 8, 2013

            I am sorry to learn that. I live in a very Democratic leaning state. Business after business has gone belly up. Foreclosures everywhere. It’s very devestating.

          6. Inthenameofliberty April 4, 2013

            Hmmmmm. I am wondering and hope you might tell me, why I have been reading that the states with the lowest unemployment numbers are also the states that are considered to be the most conservative?

          7. old_blu April 4, 2013

            I think that has more to do with where the industry goes or is, like ND and SD with all the minning going on right now. And in reality it’s about a 50/50 split, this is a list of the top 10 states I found with a google search for having lowest unemployment. In the order I found them.
            1. IA. blue
            2. MN. blue
            3. WY. red
            4. KS. red
            5. HI. blue
            6. VT. blue
            7. NH. blue
            8. NE. red
            9. SD. red
            10. ND. red

          8. idamag April 3, 2013

            You are just reinforcing some of the posts above. The states that take more from the government than they put in, are red states. Mississippi for instance.

          9. Canistercook April 3, 2013

            So do you know the reason? Are they bankrupt like many California cities. That’s good brainwashing information for the stupid I guess!

          10. old_blu April 3, 2013

            That is on a state and city level completely different.

          11. Canistercook April 3, 2013

            Not really, some states have a heavier number of groups that are not self supporting and don’t even bother to vote their entitlement pocket book. Obama & Bush allowed the illegals to qualify for food stamps.

          12. lana ward April 3, 2013

            States with Republican Govs. are doing MUCH better than those with dem Govs.!!!! That’s a fact!!

          13. Karen Green April 3, 2013

            It is not a fact. Please check out your statement,not from a biased site and post your link. By the way what do you mean by “much better?” Certainly not health wise. I have a degree in math and do like facts.

          14. lana ward April 3, 2013

            It is a fact. People are migrating to the conservative states. I sure hope it’s not the liberals moving to them!!!!

          15. Inthenameofliberty April 4, 2013

            Well, there is some truth to it. Did you not read the Forbes report? Blue / Democratic states are at the top of the debt list.So if you like facts, there is nothing to stop you from googling as follows: States by political parties and debt. Have fun reading. It was no fun for me. It’s not supposed to be about political party and who is more wrong and who is more right. We’re supposed to be fixing problems, not pointing fingers. It’s not happening as far as I can see. And you automatically assumed that lana ward was wrong. How ironic, since this time lana ward was correct.

          16. old_blu April 4, 2013

            You do know that realclearpolitics and Frobes are in bed together right? Makes them kind of a bias source. IMO Also I know anyone can find facts to back up anything they say if they look hard and long enough.

          17. Inthenameofliberty April 5, 2013

            Are they in bed together? Oops. I was not aware. Which is why I do like coming to this site to find out more. There are things I would not learn otherwise. Have a good day.

          18. plc97477 April 3, 2013

            Not really but I’m sure you would like to think so.

          19. lana ward April 3, 2013

            People are migrating to the conservative states. I sure hope they aren’t liberals!!! Ruin those states too!!!!

          20. Barbara Morgan April 8, 2013

            I normally would not reply but your lie about States with Republicans are doing better is an out and lie and you need to be called on that. My state has a Republican governor and both chambers are controlled by Republicans and the state is the worst condition that it has ever been So are all the states that surround my state and have Republican Governors, they don’t try to get companies to move to their state so people can get a job , matter of fact the Republican governor in my state even did away with the department that would go and try to get businessed to relocate here. The new businesses that have come to the state sense January 2011 are businesses that the former governor,( he was a democrat,) got to agree to move here before he left office. So turn off your computer, it is way past meds time, you know your keepers will be angry when they find out you have been on thecomputer.

          21. lana ward April 8, 2013

            You said your state had a dem Gov. before this Gov. you have now?? This Gov is having to clean up the garbage the dem Gov. left, and that takes awhile to do!! In Mich, Grandmole just about destroyed my state and Snyder is bringing us back, slowly but surely. Anything dems touch becomes disaster. So you’re not calling me out on anything, lady!

          22. Inthenameofliberty April 4, 2013

            Hmmm – that is not entirely true. Did you go and do the research yourself??? I did. And you are not correct. It is a toss up. Go read the numbers on the Federal Websites yourself. Research it.

          23. neeceoooo April 3, 2013

            Conservatives take more, whether it is theirs to take or not because they are the greedy group. Rich conservatives are just greedy and could care less who they walk on to get what they want.

          24. Canistercook April 3, 2013

            What you say is being said by those destroying our economy and will discourage the entrepreneurs from coming here to provide jobs. That is why we are fast becoming a third world nation and more like Greece every day.

          25. old_blu April 3, 2013

            Canister you are talking the same trickle down crap that hasn’t worked yet all it did was provide jobs in other countries like China not here. It has been going on for years that way if it actually provided jobs for Americans as you say we wouldn’t have a problem, we would be chest high in jobs, but it didn’t work like they thought and I was behind it, I thought it sounded good at first too.

          26. Canistercook April 3, 2013

            Not correct. I live in Silicon Valley and we are booming but that is because the entrepreneurs like the climate but not the taxes. They employ lot of people who also like the climate. However some are threatening to go overseas because of high taxes.

          27. tobyspeeks April 3, 2013

            I’m not very informed on Silicon Valley but, I did read an article about what your speaking of not long ago. In it I read that for years the big players have been threatening the same old thing but none of them ever seem to leave. It was said that climate had a lot to do with it.

          28. CPAinNewYork April 3, 2013

            I think that any business that moves its operations offshore should be deprived of the tax benefits of sheltered foreign income.

          29. tobyspeeks April 4, 2013

            That’s sound CPA critique! I applaud you!

          30. old_blu April 4, 2013

            I completly agree with you on that, I think they should be punished for going off shore and rewarded for opening up on our own soil.

          31. Canistercook April 4, 2013

            Then they leave altogether so there is no benefit.

          32. CPAinNewYork April 4, 2013

            Let them move permanently. We’ll give the benefits to American firms, which enable them to compete effectively with the permanent expats.

          33. Canistercook April 3, 2013

            A few have left and the ball players are making their homes in Florida or Texas, but most need to stay because they work here and the climate is great. A small 3 bedroom home in this area is over a million and the rich are building palaces up in the hillsides. I know because a relatives does their foundation engineering! Guess my mother was right tho, the rich get rich and the poor get children!

          34. old_blu April 3, 2013

            Do you think those are local taxes that do that or federal taxes? I see them giving tax breaks all the time to corporations on a federal level, I don’t know how it is where you are I live in the NW.

          35. Canistercook April 3, 2013

            I don’t know exactly, I don’t think we are being properly informed as taxpayers, but some people in California are paying 60% of some of the dollars they earn while people like Romney and Buffet pay around 25% in Federal and State taxes. Tax breaks going to some corporations are justified while others are not. Just wish we knew all the true facts. The average working taxpayer is the patsy in our society no matter who is in power. The left wing buys votes with entitlement promises and the right wing buys votes with tax breaks for some groups. We do not have good government! That is our problem. No matter who runs for office the biased individuals will tear them apart so decent people won’t run.

          36. old_blu April 3, 2013

            I don’t disagree with what you say although I voted democrat last time it wasn’t because of entitlements, I run a small auto repair shop and work 11 hours a day to keep it going so entitlements don’t mean that much to me.

          37. Canistercook April 3, 2013

            We need more independents who will not let either side brain wash us with false and slanted information. You sound like a hard working responsible individual.

          38. CPAinNewYork April 3, 2013

            I didn’t like NAFTA from the time it was proposed. It just seemed like a one-way deal for countries whose populations don’t like Americans: Mexico and Canada.

            As things have turned out, it’s been a sellout of America by the rich and for what? We’ve given a gift to our rich and to the Mexicans, who hate our guts and to the Canadians, who don’t like us at all. A subtle difference that means nothing. When NAFTA was implemented, a bunch of our scumbag business people promptly moved their operations to Mexico and Canada.

          39. Canistercook April 4, 2013

            Yes but we need to compete in the world market. People forget how much we sell to other countries.

          40. CPAinNewYork April 4, 2013

            Not as much as they sell to us. Of course, some of it is our own fault, e.g. the lousy cars that Detroit produced on purpose eventually caused American consumers to opt for foreign cars.

          41. plc97477 April 3, 2013

            I am glad you found your way.

          42. tobyspeeks April 3, 2013

            Destroying our economy? That ship done sailed! It happened way back in 2007-8. What a convenient memory you have. Another wonderful example of your type rewriting history.

          43. lana ward April 3, 2013

            It was Obama and the dems that forced banks to give loans to those who couldn’t pay it back. That’s what started this whole mess.–And now Obama wants to give loans to poor people again!!! He’s a Fuc**** Fool!!

          44. BDC_57 April 3, 2013

            no it wasn’t the obama and dem. It was deregulation of the banks that started this and illegal practices of the banks.

          45. lana ward April 3, 2013

            Ckeck out a young Obama as an Acorn Attorney SUING the banks to make subprime loans. It’s toward the end of the clip. YouTube–“How the dems caused the financial crisis”—-And now Obama wants these loans given again!!!!!!!

          46. Inthenameofliberty April 4, 2013

            Not sure why you got so many thumbs down for posting the truth. I spent hundreds of hours watching Mr Obama on you tube. hundreds. Then I realized my mistake of voting for him in the first election. yet, I can’t help but believe that McCain would have been a bigger mistake. I want a libertarian to run my country.

          47. Independent1 April 5, 2013

            When are truely gullible folks like you and Lana going to wise up to the fact that those Youtube videos of Obama are not heavily video-shopped creations of right-wing wackos that are trying to discredit Obama. You guys sure prove there’s a sucker born every minute.

          48. Inthenameofliberty April 5, 2013

            Hmm. So you are saying that replays of national news stations such as NBC, CBS and MSNBC are really videoshopped creations? ALL of them? Hmm. So the Obama ridiculing Bush for his spending – that wasn’t him? And the Obama promising to label GMO’s – that wasn’t him? And the Obam promising transparency and open doors to the media – that wasn’t him? Really? Truly? The stuff of right-wing wakos, eh? Really? Lana may go over the top, but she’s no different in her (his) approach than your wonderful FW who cusses at everyone who does not agree with her opinion. They both could take some courses in civlity and get their points across just as well. Right-wing wacko, left-wing wacko. Seems like they are the same to me. Both believing blindly in a cause and forgiving their favorite guy of transgressions because deep down in their wee little hearts they truly believe that their guy has their best interests at heart. And that is the biggest joke of all. Man, that was not very nice of me. Guess I am just a middle of the road wacko then.

          49. Independent1 April 5, 2013

            You apparently don’t read any better than you seem to compehend: My comment began: When are truely gullible folks like you and Lana going to wise up to the fact that those Youtube videos of Obama are not heavily video-shopped: Did you not see YOUTUBE VIDEOS??? Why are you bringing up NBC, CBS, MSNBC etc?? I said nothing about videos on mainline news outlets. What you and Lana had originally commented on was YOUTUBE – You had said: I spent hundreds of hours watching Mr. Obama on YOUTUBE – which only goes to prove my statement: A sucker is born every minute; the videos of Obama saying things he never said and doing things he never did are all videoshopped. So stop watching nonsense videos on YOUTUBE!!!
            Now with respect to the clips of Obama on mainline news outlets, are you trying to suggest that Obama doesn’t have a right to criticize Bush for spending 5.6 trillion of deficits during his 8 years in office and then saddling him with a budget that has 1.6 trillion more that he’s being forced to try and cut down??? If so, you’re just plan unfathomable with ytour nonsense. You don’t have even a clue as to what is right.
            so I’m not even going to pay one ounce of attention to you either – just like with Lana.

          50. Inthenameofliberty April 6, 2013

            Ok, I suppose I was not clear enough. You do understand that it is perfectly acceptable for videos to be posted of television shows and news coverage epidsodes and live video of people speaking? yes, I am being sarcastic. Because it is really really easy to watch videos of televions news broadcasts on you tube because people upload them everyday. There’s only so much you can do to change what Mr Obama says [if one is trying to edit him falsely] at speaking engadements that people post – he speaks nice and slow (this is NOT a detriment, btw) so I would know what he’s saying with the mute button on because it’s easy to read his lips. Sure, Obama can criticize Bush. It’s easy to do. But hypocrisy – that’s just ridiculous. Before Obama came into office he criticized Bush for so MANY of the same things that Obama is also now doing. That is the pinnacle of hypocrisy. Why in the world you accept that as being ok, I can not fathom.

            Sure, you don’t need to bother to listen to me.

            Go on believing that every vidoe on you tube, with his face forward, his mouth in plain view, and him speaking, is video shopped. Hypocrisy at it’s best.

            There’s a fool born every minute. Seems like I must not be the only one, then.

          51. Canistercook April 4, 2013

            No Clinton and Barney Frank were more responsible for the mortgage mess but Obama wants to redistribute the wealth and punish people for success. We have entered the era of socialism.

          52. Canistercook April 3, 2013

            The world economy changed and went south in 2008, but Russia and China are weathering the storm better than Europe and the U.S.A. We are entering a new world market and we had better get off our butts and learn how to produce at reasonable cost or we will be another Mexico. Immigration should change to ‘what can you do for the country’ not what can the country do for you! Both Canada and Australia follow that line and they are doing well. We need leaders that will attack the world marketing not fool around with anti-abortion, gay marriage, planned parenthood clinics etc. China is laughing all the way to the bank!

          53. Independent1 April 3, 2013

            Is that right?? Is that why 8 of the 10 states with the most people living below the poverty level are all RED STATES? And why 15 of the 18 states that drag the most welfare dollars from Washington are all RED STATES?? Just because maybe more than 50% of the greediest people in America, like the Koches, the Waltons, the Trumps, and on and on are Conservatives, doesn’t mean that conservatives don’t also drag the bottom as the most welfare sucking group in the nation. Oh yes! I forgot to mention that the 8 states in America that send the most tax dollars to Washington and get the least welfare dollars back for the taxes they pay (basically supporting the nation) are all BLUE STATES!!! known to you as LIBERAL states!!!

          54. Canistercook April 3, 2013

            Do you have the facts from a reliable source that will back up your statistics. I would be very interested in seeing them, or are your facts what the left wing feeds you?

          55. Inthenameofliberty April 4, 2013

            Go read the 24/7 Wall Street report and look at the whole picture.

          56. Independent1 April 3, 2013

            Your comments about conservatives are not true – maybe only with respect to the conservatives who get wealthy enough to reach the 1-2%. Most conservative states are sparsely populated poorer states with a lot of their people living below the poverty level; And since they’ve elected republican legislators who have cut budgets and state services, a lot of red states have lots of people on welfare and food stamps. I tried to find more current tables than the one I may have used when I sent you the other comments and am having trouble locating more up to date ones – my previous ones may have been from 3-4 years back. But here is a fairly current list from StateMaster dot com of the states with the highest percent of people living below the poverty level:

            1. MS 11. OK

            2. LA 12.NC

            3. NM 13. GA

            4. DC 14. TN

            5. AR 14 ID

            6. WV 16. AZ

            7. KY 16. MT

            8. TX 16. NY

            9. AL 19. OR

            10. SC 20. CA
            I tried making two columns – which didn’t come out too good.
            You can see here that the RED STATES dominate the list.
            When I locate the table I had earlier on the welfare dollars/tax dollars paid I’ll pass it along.

            And not only do red states rank poorly for poverty, they rank poorly on a large number of socially important measures, like they rank very low with respect to education , crime, number of people who vote, law enforcement stats, etc. etc.

          57. Canistercook April 4, 2013

            70% of white men don’t all live in Red states!

          58. Independent1 April 4, 2013

            What has 70% of white men not living in Red states have to do with what we’re discussing? You seem to have this misguided notion that Red States are run more efficiently because they boast about balancing their budgets. Well do you know how they do that? By cutting state budgets and services to the point that they throw hundreds of thousands of their residents onto welfare; and do you know that many red states actually do the same thing as Walmart, knowing that they’re creating a welfare population, the first thing they do when someone applies for help is teach them how to fill out forms to apply for federal governmet welfare (and by the way – welfare IS NOT AN ENTITLEMENT!! SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE ARE ENTITLEMENTS!!0 Welfare is Medicaid, SSI and other state aid programs. When I find the correct site with the study, you’ll find that the states that get back more money in welfare from Washington than they pay in taxes are predominately red states.

            Let me give you just some facts on one of the biggest welfare sucking red states in the nation TEXAS: ·
            Texas is 49th in the country in tax revenues collected per capita and 50th in revenues spent. It’s 44th in tax progressivity, which means it collects most of its taxes from working people and it comes in 50th in the percent of its population that have a HS diploma. It ranks 46th in the overall SAT scores it’s students get on entrance exams; and 49th in what it pays its teachers. It ranks dead last (50th) in having the most people without health insurance and also dead last in the number of children covered by insurance. And 49th in the support it provides to women & children in the WIC program, and it leads the nation in teenage births. It ranks 8th in the nation in the number of people living in poverty and 50th with regard to the affordability of homeowners insurance. And Texas comes in 3rd in the nation in the number of public officials that are convicted for a crime; while being dead last in the percent of voters who turn out for elections. It’s 46th in the hourly earnings of its workers and 48th in the payout of worker’s comp benefits. Texas is also rated as having the most polluted environment in the country because of all the oils spills and polluted air from oil refineries and coal fired power plants.

            Not a pretty picture is it??? Really amazes me that so many people are flocking cluelessly to this state in disrepair. In following George Bush who started the ruination of Texas Rick Perry has really done a disasterous job of further destroying the state. As the writer of the article I just extracted some figures from just above for you said: if Texas really seceded from the Union, it would collapse upon itself very quickly; which is true for not only Texas but virtually every Red State in the country. You can find numerous articles on the internet where research has shown that its the Blue States in America that are supporting the country.

          59. Canistercook April 4, 2013

            Perhaps that is because Californians are now taxed at the rate of 62% on dollars earned by them! Guess they could go to France where they would be taxed 75%. Rural areas have more low income people and they have been encouraged to apply for all the welfare programs! They used to grow their food – now they use food stamps at the grocery store.

          60. Independent1 April 4, 2013

            Sorry, I don’t believe that Californians are paying an effective tax rate of 62% given all the tax deductions and loopholes that people have to write down their taxes. The best I know, European countries don’t have the numerous tax expemptions America does in its tax codes. But besides that, what does that have to do with anything. Do you realize that from the time of the stock market crash in 1929 through when Reagan lowered taxes to 50%, that for those 50 or so years, the US tax rate never fell below 70% and for a good portion of the time it was over 90%, even hitting 94% for 2 years. And somehow companies and people managed and the country grew – the rate was even 91% during Eisenhower’s 8 years. And by the way, if they moved to France, not only would they have to pay the 75% income tax rate, but like virtually every other European country, they would also have to pay a Value Added Tax of 17.6% making their effective tax rate 92.6%. So they may want to rethink moving there.

            Just for your info, here’s a table of European tax rates (and I’m sure some of these countries have province, county or whatever they call it taxes on top of the income and vat rates) so the rates you see here may not be the max taxes people pay in each country:

            Income Tax Rates
            Of Most European Countries
            And their Value Added Taxes

            Austria – 50% + 20%
            Bulgaria -10% + 20%
            Croatia – 40% + 25%
            Cyprus – 35% + 17%
            Czech Rep – 15% + 21%
            Denmark – 55.4% + 25%
            Estonia – 21% + 20%
            Finland – 53% + 24%
            France – 75% + 17.6%
            Germany – 45% + 19%
            Georgia – 12% + 19%
            Greece – 45% + 23%
            Hungary – 16% + 27%
            Ireland – 41% -+ 23%
            Italy – 45% + 21%
            Latvia – 23% + 21%
            Liechtenstein – 17.89% + 8%
            Luxembourg – 38.95% +15%
            Malta – 35% + 18%
            Netherlands – 52% + 21%
            Norway – 54.3% + 25%
            Poland – 32% + 23%
            Portugal – 46>5% + 23%
            Romania + 16% + 24%
            Russia – 13% + 18%
            Slovakia – 19% + 20%
            Slovenia – 41% + 20%
            Spain – 52% + 21%
            Sweden – 56.6% + 25%
            Switzerland – 45.5% + 8%
            Turkey 35% + 18%
            Ukraine – 17% + 20%
            United Kingdom – 45% + 20%
            U.S. – 39.6% – numerous tax deductions/loopholes

            And I’ll guarantee you the vast majority of these countries don’t offer the advantages people have of living in America.

          61. Canistercook April 4, 2013

            Wish I could find all those loopholes and deductions? The value added tax is a good way to tax as it taxes only luxuries like the Tesla and $1000 pocket books I recently saw advertised. At a certain limit of income Californians are being taxed 39.5% Federal, 13.1% State income tax, 1% mental health tax, Property taxes, etc., etc. I hear the cries of tax the rich but not all the rich have tax sheltered incomes like Buffet and Romney. If you don’t buy luxury items you are not taxed! I don’t need a $1,000 pocket book but perhaps Paris Hilton does!

          62. Independent1 April 4, 2013

            If you can’t find tax loopholes and deductions to get your effective income tax rate below 20-25% you need a better tax professional. And if you think the VAT in Europe is only applied to “true luxury items” your greatly mistaken. In Britain for example, basically the only purchases excluded from the VAT are food purchased for the household (not bought to eat out) and kids clothing are the only exclusiong. All other items are either charged the 20% VAT or a reduced 5% vat: and a cake with chocolate frosting gets charged the 20%. When my wife an I visted Prince Edward Island some years back, virtually everything we purchased got hit by their maximum VAT tax (including our room rate). And if you even remotely believe that the two fake income tax returns that Romney created for the election truely represents what he’s been paying in income taxes – you’re totally delusional. He made those up to show a rate of between 10-15% just so most Americans wouldn’t want to run him out of the country for being such a greedy sleasebag. And I say that, because he’s gone about making millions of dollars for himself at the expense of hundreds of thousands of American workers. He and his Bainlike cohorts have destroyed and shipped more American jobs overseas than any of our countries trade agreements have ever done. And what’s sad about it all is that Romney has pocketed millions while leaving thousands upon thousands of older Americans with either very reduced or no pensions to make the last years of their lives a little easier.

          63. Canistercook April 4, 2013

            As an ex Brit I know the VAT in the U.K. does not apply to medical items, food bought anywhere, and children’s clothing under a certain size. I don’t know much about Prince Edward Island but that is not the U.K. Was that 20% charge tax or service? Romney’s returns were not fake but like many including Buffet he sure knows how to use the Loopholes and tax free bonds. Believe me if they were fake they would have jumped all over him. Apple, Google, General Motors, Ford, etc., etc., all are producing overseas and parts for our San Francisco Bay Bridge were produced in China. Like most CEO’s, politicians and government workers, ‘Commissioners’ etc., they all fill their pockets but Romney is a better individual than many of them and on top of that he is not a sleazy lawyer! Many fine individuals who could be good leaders fail to run because they are attacked and called cheats and liars if they change their minds but its Ok for a left winger to have a change of mind. Sad how brain washed so many people have become. Small wonder our county is on its way downhill. It was the foundation of a corporate world that produced the ‘almighty dollar’ that is about to become the ‘sinking peso’

          64. Inthenameofliberty April 4, 2013

            Romney doesn’t work anymore. His effective tax rate is what it’s supposed to be in dividends / interests collected. Not anymore than that.
            I’m not promoting him or defending any wrongs he’s done. I am merely pointing out that when you retire and live off YOUR dividends, then you will pay the same rate of tax as Romney is.

            Or am I wrong about the current government tax rate on dividends?

          65. Canistercook April 4, 2013

            You are right. Also you can invest your savings in tax free government bonds.

          66. Inthenameofliberty April 5, 2013

            Thank you for the response. Tax free government bonds………not such a good idea, now is it?

          67. Canistercook April 4, 2013

            Try living there and making a lot of money and you may then believe it!

          68. Independent1 April 4, 2013

            If there are people in California who are earning so much money that a tax consultant can’t figure out how to get their effective tax rate well below 62%, then they’re living on 5-10 times or more money than 90% of Americans are struggling to live on and I’m sorry, they get no sympathy from me.

          69. Canistercook April 5, 2013

            Sure and some of those 90% live in Oakland or Chicago and it is a struggle to know how to get your next gun and /or fix.

          70. Inthenameofliberty April 4, 2013

            Are you trying to say that Blue States pay more taxes? Ok – Forbes put out an article in 2010 entitled as follows: In Pictures: Bluest States Spilling the Most Red Ink.
            So, if more Democratic-leaning states have more debt, how exactly it is a GOOD thing that ‘they are supporting the country?’ They are not balancing their own budgets, yet I am supposed to believe that they are the single reason why life in America is great? There’s always more to it than one set of numbers.

            Allow me to shift to something more current: November, 2012. The 24/7 Wall Street wrote a piece on State Finances. Very interesting results. I will try to be brief.

            The top 5 best states, with the best GDP and lowest debt are as follows:

            North Dakota, Wyoming, Nebraska, Utah and Iowa.

            [They have Republican Governors, and Republican members of their State Senate and House of Reps.]

            The bottom five, or the most poorly run states, are an interesting blend:

            New Jersey: Republican Governor, Democratic State/House.
            Arizona: All Republican Leadership.
            Illinois: All Democratic Leadership.
            Rhode Island: Independent Governor, Democratic State/House.
            California: All Democratic Leadership.

            My own, very very democratic-voting state was in the middle of the pack for it’s ability to maintain its finances.

            And you are trying to tell me that is good?

            I don’t particularly care about Texas today. I just found out that my Democratically leaning state is nowhere near the best in maintaining its finances. No wonder my family is being overwhelmed by taxes. Their giving our tax money away to other people and can not even be bothered to keep a BALANCED budget.

            You know what – maybe our political leaders should be required to have advances degrees in finance defore they are allowed to run for office. Because most of them don’t seem to have a clue.

          71. idamag April 5, 2013

            I think the KKK person was trying to make a point that it is minorities that take welfare. My state, Idaho, is one of the red states and we have very few minorities.

          72. Independent1 April 4, 2013

            You’ve made this comment in several places which is not true and I’ve shown you that the VAST MAJORITY of conservatives are the poorest of Americans. More than 15 of the 20 poorest states in America (those with wth largest percent of their populations living below the poverty level are either conservative states run by the GOP or are states that voted for Obama last year but are also run by the GOP like Maine, New Mexico and maybe another. The only reason that a higher percent of the 1-2% vote conservative, is because they’ve become narcissistic (with love for themselves and their wealth) and think the GOP is going to help them keep more of that wealth. It’s not necessarily because they themselves are concervative – in fact, if any of them woke up and realized that the GOP is in a way really underemining their wealth, they’d vote them out in a heartbeat. That is assuming that any of them had their wealth invested in the American stock market.

            Do you realize that if you had invested 10,000 in the stock market just after the crash in 1929 and then tracked its performance from then until 2005 (when the study was done), and calculated how much your 10,000 had grown during Democrat Vs Republican presidencies; that during the 40 years of Dem presidents your 10,000 would have grown to over 300,000 (at an almost 10% average annual rate), whereas during the 35 years of GOP presidencies it would have grown to only 11,700 dollars (at an average dismal rate of .4%). GOP presidencies are not only disasterous to our debts (Reagan and the 2 Bushes are responsible for more than 90% of it), also GOP presidents are rarely in office without eventually creating a recession or depression with their failed policies and job growth during their terms is also disasterous: Obama created more jobs in the 1st 3 years of his presidency than Bush jr. created in 8, and Bush sr’s jop creation was even more dismal than his son’s. Republicans know absolutely nothing about running a federal government – the only thing they know how to do is get legislation passed that separates more money from middleclass taxpayers while putting it into the pockets of thosewho already have more money than they deserve – like the Koch Bros, the Walton heirs and overly rich Casino owners.

          73. Canistercook April 4, 2013

            Guess you have forgotten it was the Black and Hispanic vote that elected Obama!

          74. Inthenameofliberty April 4, 2013

            You did not give him the websites. I have looked at many websites. And it is certainly not as clear cut as what you are asserting.

            For heavens sake, I’ve now been on websites that show some of the Democratic states have a Republicans-lead Executive Branch that is responsible for their finances, and vice versa. So who cares what the leaning of the state is – it’s the people in control of the purse strings that keep a state running smartly. So, there is always more to the picture than what is on the surface.

            Kinda like an ice berg – but if you don’t look and research it yourself, then you’re a victim of being spoon fed exactly what your party wants you to know. And nothing more. Which is why I can’t stand politics anymore. People see what they want to see and don’t research what they’ve been told. Numbers can be skewed to paint a pretty picture for either side. Yet people hate Republicans. Why? People hate Democrats. Why?

        4. idamag April 3, 2013

          And judging from some of the right wing radical talk, you might be right.

          1. neeceoooo April 3, 2013

            As Bobby Jindal said (referring to the republican party), “we have to stop being the stupid party”

          2. plc97477 April 3, 2013

            I wonder when they are going to start.

          3. Independent1 April 3, 2013

            I’m not sure that’s possible. What are they going to use for brains?

        5. CPAinNewYork April 5, 2013

          Brock University? Where is that located, Canada? Brock was an English general in the War of 1812.

        6. Canistercook April 5, 2013

          Did the Democrats pay fr those studies? I hope so!

      3. old_blu April 3, 2013

        And you must be a real smart Repuke to come up with an argument like that.
        And yes I am A liberal and very proud of it.

        1. neeceoooo April 3, 2013

          It took a long time to come up with the remark and good morning to you.

          1. old_blu April 3, 2013

            Yeah most of the time I’m faster but I had travel time from home to work.
            And good morning to you.

        2. lana ward April 3, 2013

          Years and years of liberal policies have destroyed our country

          1. Inthenameofliberty April 4, 2013

            not entirely true.

      4. elw April 3, 2013

        You must be a Conservative, meaning you believe every lie that comes out the right wing fantasy zone.

        1. BDC_57 April 3, 2013

          they lie so much you don’t if they telling the true or not

          1. plc97477 April 3, 2013

            They lie so much they have started believing their lies.

        2. BDC_57 April 3, 2013

          Yeah Rush limpdick is his hero

        3. Inthenameofliberty April 4, 2013

          And here is another problem. Both sides lies, so is it really necessary to act like you believe every Democrat is right and every Republican is wrong? Just asking, because I actually enjoy hearing both sides of the current arguments / posts from the left and the right. Posts such as this detract from my enjoyment.

          And just show why this country is not likely to be great again.

          1. elw April 4, 2013

            Than don’t read them, it was not written to you.

          2. Inthenameofliberty April 5, 2013

            I see. That is quite an answer. Quite telling in its simplicity.

      5. dslocum April 3, 2013

        And you, apparently, are totally lacking in critical thinking skills, Scott. It seems to be the GOP norm these days. Do some fact checking. The GOP is running on propaganda these days.

        1. Inthenameofliberty April 4, 2013

          Unlike the Democratic party, which would never do that.
          Both sides do it. So why the antagonism?

      6. idamag April 3, 2013

        And, your reasoning is…? Is it because old-blu said something that was against your preconceptions? You know what is wrong with this country? Parties. Parties with strong ideologues. They divide this country so that no solutions can be had. And you, my belligerent friend, are part of the problem.

      7. idamag April 3, 2013

        And your reasoning is…? Is it because Old-blu said something that does not agree with your preconceptions? You know what is wrong with this country? It is parties. Parties that divide and never reach agreements. It is like the Martins and the Coys . It is “I gotta be right” fighting.

        1. lana ward April 3, 2013

          The Hatfields and the McCoys

          1. old_blu April 3, 2013

            It’s a song.

            1) Gather round me children, while I tell a story
            Of the mountains in the days
            when guns was law.
            When two families got disputin’
            It was sure to end
            in shootin’
            So just listen close, I’ll tell you what I saw.

            2) Oh, the Martins and the
            They was reckless mountain boys,
            And they took up family feudin’
            when they’d meet.
            They would shoot each other quicker
            Than it took your
            eye to flicker;
            They could knock a squirrel’s eye out at ninety feet.

        2. Inthenameofliberty April 4, 2013

          I know what you meant to say.
          I can not agree more. Many, many likes.

    2. Aside from the fact that Obama has accomplished nothing except furthering bush policies just as clinton furthered rayguns.

      both parties are the same. both supported by idiots.

      1. old_blu April 3, 2013

        And good morning to you as well NoBS.

        1. good morning back to you.

    3. Canistercook April 3, 2013

      To you it looks like both Clinton and Obama are ANGELS I guess!

      1. old_blu April 3, 2013

        And to you? What do they look like to you?

        1. Canistercook April 3, 2013

          Glib lawyers with big egos!

          1. old_blu April 3, 2013

            Do you or can you say anything nice about them?

          2. Canistercook April 3, 2013

            Obama is right on gun control but wrong on many other things. Clinton is just Bill Clinton’s wife and not a good candidate for running the country. I am not a brainwashed right of left winger. I am looking for a good experienced candidate.

          3. I cant, they have not done anything to deserve that.

          4. lana ward April 3, 2013

            Not yet

          5. tobyspeeks April 4, 2013

            So when everyone was happy in the 90’s… not anything good to say about that? Currently the markets have reached all time highs, nothing good to say about that either? I’m guessing you HATE everyone and everything because when people are prospering you hate it and when big business is prospering you hate it too. I love you, Lana!

          6. lana ward April 4, 2013

            Clinton worked with Republicans in the 90s. Obama won’t work with anyone. That bubble on the markets is going to burst. Our economy would be turning around if that sucessful Mormon businessman was in the WH. With half the people unemployed and on food stamps is pitiful!!! Obama sure is a sucess!!!!

          7. disqus_Ut1U34e38K April 5, 2013

            SHHHHH go back to sleep, you just see clearly when you are awake

          8. tobyspeeks April 6, 2013

            Obama has tried in vain to work with everyone. If your memory wasn’t so convenient and biased, you’d clearly remember Mitch McConnell’s remark minutes after Obama being sworn in in 2008. It went something like “our only priority is to make Obama a one term president.” Who’s not working with who?

          9. lana ward April 6, 2013

            Obama won’t work with any Republican. If he can’t have everything his way, he blames Republicans, says they won’t work with him. Mitch McConnell wanted him to be a one term President because his policies are destroying our country. Wake up!! Obama is a LIAR and a fraud. Eveything he says is a lie!!!! Everything!

          10. Inthenameofliberty April 4, 2013

            I was mostly a fan of Clinton. I voted for him, and at the time could have cared less about his indiscretion. As I am older now, I can no longer give the man a pass for cheating on his wife. Who knows how many woman he was actually with – we will never know for sure. But, he tried to bring our nation together IMO. I don’t recall him being a divisive president.

        2. lana ward April 3, 2013

          Communist and communist

    4. lana ward April 3, 2013

      The last thing we need is another communist in our WH!!!

  4. itsfun April 3, 2013

    Just politics as usual folks. Look at what the left is saying about the good doctor, Senator Rubio, Paul Ryan, and anyone else they fear will run for President.

    1. Independent1 April 3, 2013

      What the left is saying? So the truth bothers you does it?? Too bad!! You’re going to hear more of it, because even us independents are tired of worthless human beings.

      1. itsfun April 3, 2013

        What the heck are you talking about? Just making the point that both sides will be throwing stones for the next 4 years. If you are so quick to jump to conclusions you may be one of the worthless human beings you are accusing others of being!

        1. Actually, he is an asshole.

        2. Independent1 April 3, 2013

          What am I talking about?? You were obviously alluding to what you think are inappropriate comments being said these days about Rubio and Ryan, when everything that you’ve been hearing is nothing but the truth about both of these worthless human beings who are nothing but self-indulgent idiots. And whether you like it or not, a lot more of the truth is going to be said about them before a clueless individual like Rubio even ever thinks about making a run for president in 2016.

      2. TheSkalawag929 April 3, 2013

        Right on target Independent1.

      3. Canistercook April 3, 2013

        Is there really someone out there that could please all. I doubt it so the dirty attacks will continue from all sides I guess.

      4. cspanjunkie April 4, 2013

        Fear not, Mr. “INDEPENDENT”,
        In addition to the unborn, OBAMACARE is forcing the healthcare industry to classify other groups of American citizens as “worthless.” See below. BTW, conservatives consider ‘worthless human beings’ an oxymoron…
        you f–kin’ moron.
        “If we treated the patients receiving the most expensive drugs, we’d be out of business in six months to a year,” said Jeff Vacirca, chief executive of North Shore Hematology Oncology Associates in New York. “The drugs we’re going to lose money on we’re not going to administer right now.”

        After an emergency meeting Tuesday, Vacirca’s clinics decided that they would no longer see one-third of their 16,000 Medicare patients.

        1. Independent1 April 4, 2013

          Sorry, but this comment from an obviously profit-driven medical provider only proves one of the points I was making that in my mind make people worthless humans – this Hematology Oncology Associates is putting MONEY above helping people proven by the statement ” The drugs we’re going to lose money on we’re not going to administer right now.”
          And by the way – these are the kinds of people that God would classify as worthless also: that’s why he left thousands of them dead in the desert when he lead his people out of Egypt.

          1. cspanjunkie April 4, 2013

            …”these are the kinds of people that God would classify as worthless also: that’s why he left thousands of them dead in the desert when he lead his people out of Egypt.” (non sequitur)

            Reading God’s mind? Geez! Anyway, if He deemed them worthless why in the hell would He care enough to ‘lead them out of Egypt’?

            …”it’s the patients they’re treating that would be paying for the drugs. Pure nonsense…”

            Understand this: Medicare subsidizes drug treatments for seniors. Apparently, Obamacare is reducing drug reimbursements to ALL acute treatment facilities.

            “…an obviously profit-driven medical provider only proves one of the points I was making that in my mind make people worthless humans…”

            You doctor is a profit-driven medical provider, as is your dentist and Phiedeoux’s vet. The next time you have an abscess, call the office, tell them you want an appointment with that money-sucking ‘worthless human-being’. Say, “Don’t bother administering pain-killer because it was probably purchased with profits sucked from other patients such as myself.”
            Thank you, Independent1, for sharing your thoughts. I hope neither you nor any of your senior-loved-ones will depend on Medicare to help pay an acute-care facility for life-saving cancer-drug infusions.
            Good luck.

          2. Independent1 April 4, 2013

            You don’t read the bible much do you? God lea the Jews out of Egypt to test their loyalty to him; why do you think it took him 40 years to lead them to the Promised Land? When they proved time and time again that they cared more about themselves by doing things like throwing wild parties and building a golden idol, he destroyed thousands of them. Why did he do that? I think because they proved to be worthless to him – you can decide on that for yourself.
            And the reduced drug subsidies have nothing to do with Medicare – people with Medicare pay for their insurance and have to purchase supplemental coverage to cover the expenses of some medications and the such – so the reduced subsidies ARE NOT a good reason why that provider is not giving them expensive drugs that THEY WOULD HAVE TO PAY FOR. The reduced drug subsidies only impact people who provide healthcare for MEDICAID patients – lower income people who are given coverage by the states through Medicaid. (Remember – Social Security and Medicare are entitlements because since we pay for them we are ENTITLED to get them. Whereas Medicaid, SSI and some other state benefits are WELFARE.)

          3. cspanjunkie April 4, 2013

            No cost to Medicare?

            Looking for a Way to Reduce Medicare Spending? Look No Further than Part D

            By Douglas Schoen

            According to a recent survey, the program has a 90 percent approval rating and, unique among major federal programs enacted in recent years, will actually cost less-$334 billion less- than original estimates. Even better, improved access to drugs appears to be saving costs elsewhere: The Congressional Budget Office found every one percent increase in prescriptions filled results in a .20 percent decrease in spending in Medicare.

            “When they proved time and time again that they cared more about themselves by doing things like throwing wild parties and building a golden idol, he destroyed thousands of them. Why did he do that? I think it’s because they proved to be worthless to him…”

            My goodness, Mr. Independent, another non sequitur…

            How could God decide to smite the ‘worthless’ Jews when the Good Book says He created mankind in the image of Himself? Oh! I get it. Jews are not mankind.

            If you’re a Jew hater, crawl back under the loose outhouse floorboard you call home.

    2. idamag April 3, 2013

      So far, I haven’t heard anyone on the left calling Ryan or Rubio a Muslim or questioning his birth. People that are criticizing Ryan are criticizing his policies.

      1. itsfun April 3, 2013

        You haven’t been listening then. I have heard them both called idiot, fool. and so on. I saw a video of Michelle saying Obama was from Kenya. Maybe that is why some people question his birth. Maybe they question his birth because the “birth certificate” was printed on a laser printer. There were no laser printers when he was born. The whole point of my original post was to say there will be plenty of mud-slinging by both sides the next 4 years.

        1. idamag April 4, 2013

          You proved my point on who is using viral rhetoric.

  5. cspanjunkie April 3, 2013

    “More honest journalistic veterans of the anti-Clinton crusade have looked back on their participation with regret.”

    Honest journalistic veterans… Good one, Joe. And just what are your credentials? You waste your talent, bashing conservatives, while turning a blind-eye to the actions of the corrupt gang of dirt-bags comprising the executive branch. The nation may slide into depression, but you’ll be fine; your colleagues will be fine; the kings of Wall Street will be fine; ALL the legislators will be fine; and, you and your fellow pretenders, and the Obama machine, will have one more thing to blame on “W”.

    1. Independent1 April 3, 2013

      Fall into depression? Now that’s interesting coming from a lover of the party that’s king in creating depressions and recessions. Do you know that even during what has probably been the best GOP presidency since Teddy Roosevelt, that Eisenhower had the most recessions occur during his presidency than any president since the GOP created the 1930’s big depression? Yup, he had 3 of them. If you’re so enamored by recessions and depressions, you might be interested to learn that since WWII only one Republican president hasn’t had a recession start during his presidency – FORD. While four DEM presidents since WWII haven’t had a recession start: Kennedy, Johnson, Clinton and Obama. And certainly none of them has come as close to creating the second world-wide depression like Hoover did in the 30s like Bush jr did in 2007-2009. And Obama is going to drive America into a depression with the stock market at its highest point in decades, consumer confidence at its highest point in over 5 years, more jobs created in the past 3 months than Bush created in 2 years; wow!! Are you delerious!!

      You’re apparently down on the economy so you might even find the following facts of interest:

      Federal nondefense discretionary spending — all spending minus defense and entitlements — is on track to hit its lowest level as a share of GDP in more than 50 years, according to data from the Congressional Budget Office.

      (Wow! How is that?? The GOP keeps telling us that Obama is a big spender, how’s that?? Just another GOP lie!!)

      .The rise in domestic energy-production has already shaved $175 billion off our annual import bill compared with five years ago, according to energy analyst Daniel

      (Wow!, and to think Romulus and Remus insisted we weren’t doing enough with generating our own oil – how is that?? Just another GOP lie!!)

      . “U.S. oil production grew more in 2012 than in any year in the history of the domestic industry, which began in 1859,” writes Tom Fowler of The Wall Street

      (Now how’s that given the Mitt Romney (the king of snakeoil salesman kept insisting that Obama was allowing enough domestic oil drilling?? Just another GOP lie!!)

      . Last year, Franklin Templeton asked 1,000 investors whether the S&P 500 went up or down in 2009 and 2010. Sixty-six percent thought it went down in 2009, while
      48% said it declined in 2010. In reality, the index gained 26.5% in 2009 and
      15.1% in 2010.

      (Don’t you just hate those postive government policies (of Obama) that inspire the stock market and help millions of retired folks who depend on it to live better.)

      . Credit card debt as a percentage of GDP is now at the lowest level in two decades.

      (Who would have thunk that the economy has gotten so good that people have been able to pay down their credit cards at the best rate in decades!!)

      . We are used to hearing how much faster the earnings of the top 1% grow compared with everyone else’s, but we often forget that it used to be the other way around. From 1943 to 1980, the annual incomes of the bottom 90% of Americans doubled in real terms, while the average income of the top 1% grew just 23%, according to Robert Frank.
      (Guess who screwed up the trend of the middle classes incomes growing faster than the incomes of the wealthy?? You got it – the worst president in American history based on the misery that it’s obvious his failed policies have created over the passed 30 years – Ronald Reagan. His: trickle-down economics, his: tax cuts will spur the economy nonsense and him starting the practice of GOP presidents keeping 25-50% of their spending out of their budgets which has made him and the two Bushes responsible for 90% of our debts are what almost ruined America.)

      1. Hey dumbass, we have been in a depression since 2007.

        Pull your head out of your ass again.

        1. TheSkalawag929 April 3, 2013

          “Hey dumbass, we have been in a depression since 2007.”

          That would be during the last year of the Bush administration and before Obama was elected. Hey wait a minute. Are you blaming Bush?

        2. Independent1 April 3, 2013

          You never learn to you nobsartist – you know the name changes you’re using aren’t making you any smarter.

        3. Independent1 April 3, 2013

          Tell me nobsartist – when’s the last time you saw the stock market hit the highest level it’s been during a depression? Or when’s the last time consumer confidence hit the highest its been in more than 5 years during a depression? Or when’s the last time more jobs were created in 3 months than a previous president created in 2 years, during a depression?
          You’re obviously not even smart enough to know when a depression is happening and when it’s not.

          1. idamag April 3, 2013

            During the Bush years, I lost most of my retirement on the stock market.

          2. Independent1 April 3, 2013

            I lost a big chunk of mine too, especially since I was having to tap into it being retired. Fortunately, it’s recovered some over the past 4 years under Obama but it’s still down at least 20-30% from where it could have been if the Bush years weren’t such a drag on everything. Not only did Bush have the lowest job creation rate since the big depression (except for Bush Sr’s that was even a bit lower), the economy just muddled along for 8 years – the only spark it had was due to all the corrupt banking related activity that ended up in the housing bubble and financial debacle that almost totally ruined America.

          3. plc97477 April 3, 2013

            Almost ruined the entire world economy.

      2. cspanjunkie April 3, 2013

        Good grief Charlie Brown. What do you do all day, paste and clip DNC bullets responding to conservatives?
        Good for you. Apparently, you’ll be fine, too, when Obamacare bankrupts small business (in all 57 states) and hospitals warehouse seniors in wards. “Stock Market at its highest point.” Yep. And the Banks are sitting on trillions, and getting richer by the hour, thanks to the fed’s tit. Of course– The Fed’s independent; just don’t give me the malarkey that Treasury and OMB aren’t pulling the strings. With “W” it was too big to fail; with Obama’s Justice its too big to jail. The SOB’s are contriving some sort of “Action” group, comprised of ex-Obama operatives– operating outside the influence of, and not in partnership with, ALL Democratic party organizations. THAT, sir/madam, should give you, and anyone respecting our country’s institutions, cause for alarm. I suspect they have 2020 in their sites. BTW, I’m no “W” fan. The troubled Wall Street banks should have been permitted to die! We have, and had at the time, healthy regionals that could have been capitalized to meet the country’s banking operational requirements. But, what the hell. As Hilary said: “WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?”

        1. Independent1 April 3, 2013

          Boy are you sucking up all those GOP lies about Obamacare (ACA). You obviously missed the post further up in this thread which quotes a recent news article about Vermont establishing a healthinsurance exchange where a family of 4 earning 32,000/yr can buy health coverage for all memebers of the family for $45/month; And you’ve obviously missed the news that recent studies have shown that healthcare costs for 2011 and 12 rose at the slowest rates in 15 years; indicating that ACA has actually made healthcare cheaper today than had it not been enacted; and you obviously didn’t watch the exchange between Elizabeth Warren in a senate panel pointing out that for McDonald’s to provide healthcare to all their employees through ACA they would only have to raise the price of a $7.19 combo meal by 4 cents to cover all their costs – proving clearly that all this whinning by corporations is nothing but corporate coverup of the facts in trying to give the GOP some excuse for repealing ACA – a number of companies have alrealdy come out admitting they had grossly overestimated what the costs would be. All this indicates that you’re obviously not doing a very good job of staying up with the facts; but you’re doing a good job of spewing the lies and distortions you probably hear from Faux news and Rush Limpbag.

          1. cspanjunkie April 3, 2013

            Independent1… now there’s a moniker. “Independent”… ah, right. Anyway, what’s your beef? I watch Fox and listen to Rush; you listen to NPR and watch MatthewsSharptonNBC. That makes me pro-choice. How about that. 10-4

          2. plc97477 April 3, 2013

            Also makes you very misinformed.

          3. neeceoooo April 3, 2013

            and totally clueless…

          4. cspanjunkie April 3, 2013

            Perhaps. That’s the difference between us. Questioning one’s own assumptions is inconsistent with the liberal mentality. However, supercilious labeling (“very misinformed”) is a character trait ubiquitous in the liberal community.

          5. BDC_57 April 3, 2013

            He or She is related to Lana

          6. TheSkalawag929 April 3, 2013

            Facts to republicans are like water and a ducks’s back.

  6. David Turrentine April 3, 2013

    This is really good, because the more they put her name in front of people the easier it will be to elect her.

  7. R. DuFresne April 3, 2013

    You can almost smell GOP fear

    1. Jim Myers April 3, 2013


      Apocalypse Now.

      1. BDC_57 April 3, 2013

        Good one

      2. lana ward April 3, 2013

        Do you love the smell of Obamas smelly fly face. Dems are scared of Dr. Carson, the demonizing has started

    2. BDC_57 April 3, 2013

      Yeah they are scared because they don’t have any body smart to run against her.

    3. Independent1 April 3, 2013

      You know what I think is scaring the GOP a lot is that Obamacare (ACA) may turn out benefiting Americans more and costing a lot less than businesses have been putting on. Which if that happens, is going to make a lot of Americans wonder why the GOP spent so much time, effort and money trying to defeat it. It’s my feeling that if ACA turns out to be the true boon that I think it will be by giving millions more Americans the healthcare they deserve at a much lower cost, the GOP will have a hard time winning back the White House at least within the next decade plus. That’s why you’e seeing businesses way overblowing their estimates on what ACA will cost them in providing healthcare for their employees. For McDonald’s that would be adding 4 cents to the cost of one combo meal; and even for WalMart, it would probably only cost adding 1 cent to the price of 1/2 the products they sell.

      1. Inthenameofliberty April 4, 2013

        I am anxiously hoping that what you just said could actually be true.
        I am reserving judgment.

        I don’t agree with the ACA – but at this point I am reserving judgment.

    4. plc97477 April 3, 2013

      It is getting pretty noticeable isn’t it.

  8. labrown69 April 3, 2013

    ELIZABETH WARREN FOR PRESIDENT IN 2016 – To Hell with Hillary. She is just more of the same corruption and ineptitude that Obama has brought us. She is just more of the same corruption that her husband brought us when he brought every one of Ronald Reagan’s most destructive policies to fruition … NAFTA, GATT and the repeal of Glass Steagall leading to the total deregulation of the financial services industry and today’s total economic collapse. Are you people stupid?

    1. thats what i say also.

    2. TheSkalawag929 April 3, 2013

      It’s interesting how many republican ideas are handed down from on high when republicans put them forward but are the Devil’s spawn if a Democrat endorses them.

      1. labrown69 April 3, 2013

        Anyone who does not know by now that today’s total economic collapse, not just of the US but of the entire free world, is a direct result of excessive deregulation is a fool. I don’t care if you call it Republican or Democrat or a collaboration, it destroyed our economy and to view this in partisan terms detestable. The fact is Ronald Reagan pushed it, Phil Gramm wrote it and in 99 and 2000 Bill Clinton signed it leading to the financial destruction of AmeriKKKa.

        1. idamag April 3, 2013

          You are right about it being deregulation.

        2. TheSkalawag929 April 3, 2013

          “Anyone who does not know by now that today’s total economic collapse, not just of the US but of the entire free world, is a direct result of excessive deregulation is a fool. ”

          Liberals have been saying this for years while republicans continue to push for more deregulation. Even though Clinton signed it it doesn’t change the fact that it was and is a bad idea.

          1. Independent1 April 3, 2013

            Remember, Clinton may have signed it, but the bill repealing Glass/Segall was written by 3 Republicans: Gramm, Leach and Bliley. And more than 150 million dollars was spent by Republican related supports (a lot of money in that day) lobbying for its passage.

          2. TheSkalawag929 April 3, 2013

            You’re right. And even after nearly collapsing the country’s economy they’re still preaching the same loosing sermon.

          3. idamag April 4, 2013

            And, the repeal of Glass-Segall was the catalyst for the economic mess we are in.

          4. Funny, they couldnt have done it without democrat support.

          5. TheSkalawag929 April 3, 2013

            Still looking for that equivalence to make you feel better are you?.

  9. JDavidS April 3, 2013

    Frum, much like Krauthammer,Coulter, Hannity, O’Reilly, Limbaugh and all the rest of the right-wing talking heads, can’t be taken seriously. All they know are innuendo and unfounded accusations, slurs, outright lies and distortion. Not one of them would know unbiased, balanced journalism if it bit them on the ass…

    1. neither can obama

    2. Jim Myers April 3, 2013

      And yet, millions of people hang on every word they say.

      Amazing, isn’t it?

    3. Canistercook April 3, 2013

      Not at least if you were the reader! They sure had done a great brainwashing on you,

      1. JDavidS April 3, 2013

        Thanks for that nugget of information (?) , sunshine. Even though it makes absolutely no sense what-so-ever, I’ll treasure it always…or at least until I read the next nonsensical post.

        1. Canistercook April 3, 2013

          In your mind all who disagree with you are nonsensical, including the large percentage of people who voted for Romney in the last election. You do have a big ego!

          1. JDavidS April 3, 2013

            Do tell, sunshine… just how do you purport to know who or what I consider “nonsensical”? It would appear that it is you who has an over-inflated opinion of themselves, claiming to know what others think.

          2. tobyspeeks April 3, 2013

            When you have Romney telling a small group of millionaires that 47% of the population are leeches, that IS nonsensical. That’s a perfect example of what most of these other fox news minded talking heads tell their viewers on an hourly basis. That IS nonsensical. It’s not a matter of beliefs and opinions, it’s a matter of fact and fiction. Fox News talking heads and the Glen Becks and Rush Limbaughs specialize in sensationalism at whatever cost and to accomplish their goals and to stay high in the ratings is to be the most outrageous, the most nonsensical.

          3. Canistercook April 3, 2013

            He did not say that they were leeches, he said 47% +/- are on the government payroll and get some type of government check or handout which is a fact. If you check your facts you will find it is true. They are either government workers, getting food stamps, getting section 8 housing, getting social security checks, getting unemployment, getting medicaid, getting welfare, getting child care allowances, getting free head start, getting low cost student loans etc., etc. There is nothing fictional about it. It’s just that most people don’t want to hear the facts and you seem to be one of them. These programs are growing out of control. As long as you and others like you choose to keep your head in the sand and think people who quote facts you don’t like are sensationalists we are in trouble. Evaluating the facts is important to be an intelligent voter which is why I am an Independent!

          4. tobyspeeks April 4, 2013

            “Evaluating the facts is important to be an intelligent voter” Love how you boast about your independence. If you had any inkling of fact in your cranium you would accept Romney wasn’t referring to anyone collecting legitimate income from the government. He was preaching to the choir.

          5. Canistercook April 4, 2013

            Yes the choir who are working hard and picking up the bill for all the government programs.

          6. tobyspeeks April 4, 2013

            Crook, Have you ever collected unemployment or any other government subside? I’m a hard working DEMOCRAT who’s held a job for 28 years and counting. Can you say the same? You may be able, but your rhetoric is hate filled and full of ignorance!

          7. Canistercook April 4, 2013

            Never have collected anything from government, always relied on savings and beans and ; they are cheap! I’m a very hard working Independent! I only dislike those who fail to contribute their fair share to society but could and should. Have you ever thought where those youths running around with guns and cars in our inner cities are getting their daily bread, sneakers, cars and guns from these days! Government!

          8. Inthenameofliberty April 4, 2013

            You unfortunately have a very valid point. But I don’t think they will listen. If one takes away all the crimes committed by gangs and takes away gun related crimes, it would be obvious that there is no need for ‘gun control’. We need to make better youth, and then the problems of crime and murder would drastically decrease, don’t you think?
            Did you see the virtual president on gun control on you tube?

            I think it should be required viewing for every man and woman in our country.
            Sorry – I might have read a comment that you believe in gun control. I think that is closing the barn door after the horse has already escaped. imo.

          9. Canistercook April 4, 2013

            Unfortunately gun control will unarm the good guy not the bad guy. Hopefully though some of the guns out there will not be so lethal for so many.

          10. Inthenameofliberty April 5, 2013

            Agreed. Or maybe we adults will stop messing up the wonderful young minds we have been blessed to have enter our lives. What a wonderful world it could be.

          11. Inthenameofliberty April 4, 2013

            Be careful, we Independents are equally hated for commenting on this site!!!! lol.

          12. Canistercook April 4, 2013

            I know and there sure is a lot of hatred being spewed on this site.

          13. Inthenameofliberty April 5, 2013

            The sad thing is, it’s the same on every site I’ve managed to travel to. I, too, have written some pretty nasty things. It’s like we loose all civility when we’re anonymous on the net, no matter what the political affiliation.

      2. metrognome3830 April 3, 2013

        ?! You’re beginning to sound like Lana Ward.

        1. BDC_57 April 3, 2013

          They might be related lol

          1. metrognome3830 April 3, 2013

            That would be scary. I was sincerely hoping that Lana had no relatives.

    4. idamag April 3, 2013

      Journalism, not even close.

  10. Rick2101 April 3, 2013

    I am somewhat a cynic, when it comes to politics, I do not think America will elect another non-white male in 2016. I do believe Hillary would be an excellent
    president, if elected. Winning the Democratic nomination during the primary is not a guarantee, the mudsling within the party will be nothing compared to a national campaign where it will be a very desperate, and no holds barred attack on all of the Clinton baggage. All politicians have baggage but the Clinton name brings a very public life to the political table.

    I believe a Clinton run for the White House will cement every extreme right-wing group in America into a solid voting bloc with vast resources, committed on destroying her and putting all liberals in their place, which is under the conservative thumb.

    Perhaps going with a white male, not old Joe Biden, this time around might make for a smoother transition and a better chance to hold on to the White House. Pushing for the
    first female president right after the first black president will be too much for many Americans to handle, I am a cynic after all.

    As I said in the beginning, I believe she would make an excellent President so I truly hope I am wrong in thinking she cannot win in a national election for the White House.

    1. TheSkalawag929 April 3, 2013

      Rick2101 it doesn’t matter who the Democrats run in 2016. Republicans will have their excrement slingers out in full force.
      The good thing about that is that with each election loss they become less and less relevant and show themselves more and more for what they are. Passe’

      1. Rick2101 April 3, 2013

        I understand what you are saying and agree, as long as the Republican Party remains stagnant. If the moderates and the social liberal wing can rejuvenate or even reinvent the Republican Party, they might be able to convince ordinary Americans that they are not just the party of “NO”.

        The GOP of Lincoln and T. Roosevelt, the party of the little guy has been transformed into the party of and for Corporate America. Only money matters, the company comes first, and where employees become expendable liabilities at the first opportunity.

        1. TheSkalawag929 April 3, 2013

          I agree..

    2. Canistercook April 3, 2013

      She has a law degree like Obama. Perhaps someone meanwhile will step forward and run that has some experience in running a business, after all that is what is needed today and the USA is a ‘big business”. Right now we are losing our edge worrying about more entitlements!

      1. DezJimmar April 3, 2013

        W was a businessman. That worked out great didn’t it? Your idol, Ronald Reagan was not a businessman. Would you agree that his presidency was a total failure?

        1. Canistercook April 3, 2013

          No but he was smart enough to hire the right people and not his buddies.

          1. DezJimmar April 3, 2013

            LOL!!! ROTF!!!! LMAO!!! Hired the right people? Are you kidding? We went from surplus to historic deficits. The right people? The stock market tanked! Real estate tanked! Businesses tanked! Banks tanked! American citizens household income tanked! You, sir or maam, have very selective memory… or you are just an idiot. The right people? LOL!

          2. Canistercook April 3, 2013

            So did all the western world real estate markets. Just look back at who signed the privatization of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae which caused most of our problems but still left the American taxpayer on the hook because it pushed homes to unrealistic prices because nothing down loans were available to all! Barney Frank and Bill Clinton signed those bills and the taxpayers are now picking up the bills and bailing out Freddie and Fannie. Look it up and you won’t need memory! I would not call you an idiot, just another misinformed brainwashed voter.

          3. DezJimmar April 3, 2013

            Not just the western world, the eastern markets as well. The U.S. economy greatly influences the world markets. To a lare degree, we are the hand that rocks the financial cradle. I’m not saying that U.S.failures caused all of the world’s markets to fail, but it sure didn’t help. Thanks W!

          4. Canistercook April 3, 2013

            Yes but so few people realize what a terrible thing this was and that Democrats like Barney Frank and Clinton had their fingers in the deals. It made many buy expensive homes they could not afford, allowed many to take out mortgages and spend the money and pushed the price of homes through the roof. Now we are burdening the average working taxpayer with much of the loss. Few left wingers admit or understand who started this a ‘house for all’ scheme and the ‘chicken in every pot’ has come home to roost but on ones fellow responsible taxpayers. In 2006 I said it was a bubble being pushed by these government backed no down mortgage loans but those pushing the loans did not care because they were making money! Both Barney and Clinton get great retirement packages while we taxpayers pay the bills and pick up the pieces. There was a lot of blame to go around but the individuals we should blame are all living high on the hog unfortunately!

          5. DezJimmar April 3, 2013

            No, let’s blame Obama, because he is not a businessman. Let’s blame entitlements. Let’s blame Democrats. But, for God’s sake, don’t blame Republicans and their greedy, rich (1%), wall street friends. Don’t get me wrong, I agree Democrats had a hand in the implosion, but you can’t fairly say the current president is to blame because he is not a businessman. BTW, unqualified home buyers did not tank our economy either. The unqualified poor that you speak of makes up less than 10% of our economy.

          6. Canistercook April 3, 2013

            Don’t believe I ever said Obama was to blame for the fiscal crisis, but I believe it will take someone with something more than a LAW degree to pull us out of it. Poverty figures I see quote much higher figures than 10%, but 10% is a terrible figure. What is an ‘unqualified poor’?

          7. DezJimmar April 3, 2013

            Canistercook: First, I apologize for the “idiot” remark. Please accept. Second, thanks for the dialog. Cool. I still believe that W and his administration were the main culprit and direct cause of our disastrous economic situation. We probably will disagree on this, but I’m solid in this belief. No changing my mind. He was a very poor businessman and an even poorer president. I meant unqualified poor home purchasers. The wealth of the poorest 10% of Americans is less than 1% of all of the wealth of this country. There is no way this group could tank this country’s economy.

          8. Canistercook April 4, 2013

            Thanks for the apology. With the help of the unionized government workers and our politicians they could do a good job of it. We must get back to a productive society and not prop up people who could be self supporting. We have a lot of people who could work if they had to who are collecting support from government programs. We should help those really disabled but require them to be honest and not on drugs and booze.

          9. Inthenameofliberty April 4, 2013

            Why the thumbs down on his comment? Ah – the second sentence. I just realized. Well, who is disagreeing with the last part though? Made a lot of sense to me.
            There are good unions. Unfortunately, many have been taken over by power-grabbing individuals that now have their own personal agendas, and they are no longer speaking for those they are supposed to represent.

            How do I know?
            Because I have many, many friends in unions.
            What they tell me is frightening. Just unbelievable in some instances. And the members of the union have no power to stop it.
            Which is just wrong. Why be part of a union if the leadership won’t represent the people IN the union?

          10. Canistercook April 4, 2013

            Unions and companies need to work for the common good and when either side is unreasonable one has a problem, but government unions have no bottom line to meet so that is why they are out of control.

          11. Inthenameofliberty April 5, 2013


          12. Inthenameofliberty April 4, 2013

            Ron Paul tried to stop this. He was ignored as a crazy old man.
            Guess he wasn’t that crazy…..

          13. BDC_57 April 3, 2013

            yes that is what she is a idiot

      2. english_teacher April 3, 2013

        Governments and businesses are too different animals unless you’re talking about a dictatorship government. In order for our republic to function, consensus must be reached. Business doesn’t run on consensus. As for a president with experience running a business, the only two presidents who have been businessmen were the Bushes. The majority have been lawyers.

        As for entitlements, would you prefer that people starve to death and work as slaves if they can’t find jobs that pay a living wage? If you need food stamps because you don’t have enough to eat, it isn’t an entitlement. Let’s talk about some of the entitlements that big business is getting and we can have a discussion. Otherwise, you’re just bullying the weak.

        1. Canistercook April 3, 2013

          Too bad 60% of those on entitlements are obese isn’t it!

          1. english_teacher April 4, 2013

            Do you think it might have something to do with the quality of the food that those people are eating? Do you think that it might have something to do with the fact that it’s easier to get fast and snack food than good food? Of course not, it’s better to feel superior from a secure position than to understand that it’s not a simple question that those people are like that because they’re weak and they’re takers.

            That said, I’m not going to waste any more time with you. Enjoy your trolling because you’re not really interested in having a discussion.

          2. Canistercook April 4, 2013

            Unprocessed food is cheaper than the boxed and frozen stuff. Use beans, oatmeal, carrots and apples etc.

          3. Inthenameofliberty April 4, 2013

            People are inherently lazy. Taking the time to cook beans and veggies vs microwaving a box of GMO’s………people seem to pick the GMO’s every time.

            It costs pennies to grow your own food. Why aren’t more people doing that?? Laziness? Because no one has shown them how? Ignorance?

            My food bills are going down. And we eat healthier than ever. No cookies. No cakes. No candy.

            you are SO correct that many of the people on food stamps are obese. I can attest to it – I see it. I see it often. I don’t have facts, nor figures for english_teacher. Just what I see. This is not a race issue, either. This is a people issue. People just don’t seem to want to take the time to make healthy choices.

            And since people can indeed buy whatever they want with their food stamps (despite what idealists say) I don’t see their food choices getting any better.

            Cheap food, no nutritional value.

          4. Canistercook April 4, 2013

            And we have more and more people on food stamps!

          5. tobyspeeks April 4, 2013

            Crook is a paid troll. Ignore!

      3. Independent1 April 3, 2013

        Business experience is the last thing we need – Hoover, the Mitt Romney of his day proved that one time by leading America into a depression; Romney showed what another business man can do by not knowing the first thing about how a federal government works. Conservatives need to wise up to the fact that running a federal government is in NO WAY related to running a home or a business: it takes a very unique talent which no GOP president since Eisenhower has known the foggiest thing about how to do.

        1. Canistercook April 3, 2013

          Well I sure prefer someone who has run something instead of law schools and charity groups!

    3. neeceoooo April 3, 2013

      I have to agree with you on your analogy.

  11. Andrew Rei April 3, 2013

    NDFL (an acronym I invented 10 days ago meaning, “nearly dead from laughing”)…Although the GOP were successful in using this premature smear campaign to get Susan Rice to take her name off of consideration for Secretary of State and get Ashley Judd to decide not to run against Mitch McConnell, it will not work here. If anything, starting this smear campaign now will only cost the GOP candidate (whomever HE is) votes and strengthen Hillary’s chances of becoming the country’s first female President. Go ahead, GOP dumbasses…rage on…we never really insisted that you were intelligent, anyway.

    1. DezJimmar April 3, 2013

      NDFL… I like it,

  12. Bill April 3, 2013

    What more could you expect from the GOP, business as usual.

  13. Lovefacts April 3, 2013

    As if any of the thinking public cares. We heard about Whitewater for the eight years of the Clinton adminstration and nothing came of it. It’s the height of stupidity to think anyone except the hardcore T-party will care or be anything other than ticked-off at this being brought up again.

  14. dslocum April 3, 2013

    David Frum, and those of his ilk, bear a lot of responsibility for the demise of the Rebuplican Party. Scandal mongers never win in the long run. Fox News, Limbaugh, Rove, et al have spread hatred and propaganda in epidemic proportions for many years now. No good can come of it. The GOP is mired in the muck that feeds bottom feeders. But it will never sustain them. Unless the GOP can resurrect some spokesmen with integrity and a positive message, they will continue to disintegrate.

  15. tobyspeeks April 4, 2013

    50% tax rate for everyone and 99% of taxes collected must go to the homeland. If you don’t like it, move and pay a premium to import your crap. That goes for every other nation too. You want to slave labor, you will not get a bargain in the US. Why are we letting third wold countries dictate our wages?

  16. daniel bostdorf April 8, 2013

    In 2001…yes 2001…Joe Conason along with Gene Lyons wrote the definitive book on this subject: “The Hunting of the President: The Ten-Year Campaign to Destroy Bill and Hillary Clinton.”

    This is prerequisite reading to understand the many decades long right wing attempt to “trollitize” the argument against the Clintons. Particularly the iklk of David Frum.

    Great article!

  17. Ibsyboy April 29, 2013

    There are different kinds of mud to sling. Fact based and fictional.

    We have been treated to some of the worst fiction in America’s literary history.

    Obama the socialist, non American Muslim, liberal, the worst POTUS in history, Obama is taking your guns, Obama is a racist, Obama is gay, Obama failed all of his college courses but got a diploma because of the color of his skin.

    The Clinton era was like the great Russian literary explosion. 1000 page tomes about some mysterious reality only capable of existing in the mind of a truly unhappy person who has made his or her duty in life to bring down and unfairly demonize people because that is the new manner of behavior sanctioned by the Far Right. Their motto is : “How could it be a lie, _____________said it.” Fill in the blank with any Fox talking head, Rush Limbaugh, Beck, any one of the 1000s of lonely hearts clubs disguised as the Right Wing Blogosphere.


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.