Didn't she mean to say "if Democrats think I'm that dumb"....?

I doubt Republicans would care, one way or the other. After all, it's a convention.

Totally True, Thanx, Danny

Got to be kidding. We love Louise. Feisty, outspoken, progressive. No right-wing nut will unseat her in the Rochester area.

I am not a Lib or a Dem. Bill was not a bad POTUS he did lots of good for the USA. I know he did some bad things out side of the WH.I don't care if he got 20 BJs that don't make him a bad POTUS.

Romney-Ryan 2012

He became a bad POTUS when he received one of his BJs in the Oval Office, then he lied in the face of the American people, then lied under oath and then wasted the entire last year of his Presidency dragging-out an open and shut case for Impeachment.

I find it interesting that very few Obama supporters are posting here. That doesn't say much for his following.

Romney/Ryan 2012

I'll keep my money, my religion and my guns. You can keep the Change

Unfortunately, Obama can only run on Clinton's tenure as president, unless he wants to run on the bumpersticker "Osama is dead!!! It happened on my watch!". Even worse, the Dems are so invested in this guy they will, beyond reason, support him with everything they have. After that, the only thing left for Obama is to attack. He even said it himself.

“If You Don’t Have Any Fresh Ideas Then You Use Stale Tactics To Scare Voters. If You Don’t Have A Record To Run On Then You Paint Your Opponent As Someone People Should Run From” -Obama

This is for California Voters. Check your state for early vote-by-mail rules and registration.

GO TO: GottaVote.com

---

VOTE BY MAIL

California has early mail-in voting. Any registered voter can vote by a “vote-by-mail” ballot. Completed applications must be submitted by October 30, 2012and completed vote-by-mail ballots must be received by the elections official no later than the close of polls at 8:00 p.m. on Election Day.

You may return the vote-by-mail ballot in person to any polling place in your county or to the county elections office on Election Day. If, because of illness or physical disability, you are unable to return the ballot yourself, you may designate a spouse, child, parent, grandparent, grandchild, sibling, or a person residing in the same household to return the ballot to the elections official or the precinct board at any polling place within the jurisdiction.

For the latest information on where, when and how to vote early or absentee contact your County Election Office.

Maypo - yes, it says they need to be campaigning at home because that is what their GOP counterparts will be doing. That is ALL it says!

Obama/Biden 2012

Gee, maypo, I didn't see W at the Republican convention. That probably says a lot about the whole Republican campaign.

If the Republicans are so sure that Bush's policies are what are needed to pull us out of the recession he created (with those same policies), I just have one question:

Why is Bush hiding now?

You'd think the GOP is ashamed of him or something.

GWJr is doing what most respectible ex presidents would be doing. Keeping his nose @ home working for charities, and being an american. RealAmericansFirst???? Really? Just what do you call a real american??? Is a real american one that talks crap about our President or former Presidents? Or are you just another PAB that talks crap on everybody and everything? Just curious.... And reason why you aren't a corporation is every time you try, EPIC FAIL. (@everything)!

This only proves that Obama did not have a majority when he first took office. He always has this "Blue Dog Democrats" to deal with. By the way this is good, it shows diversity in the party.

Just that, Republicans keeps fibbing about he had a full majority and he got what wanted, is so wrong.

Barrack's biggest blunder was not giving Mitch'the witch'McConnell a good kick up the a**h@!& as suggested by Clint Eastwood.

The Republicans stuck together like Chinese white rice and refused to taste the beef-n-broccoli which was served with it.

Some has to be there to tell the truth. 3 1/2 years of NO,NO,NO,NO,NO,NO,NO,NO,NO doesn't say much about doing the Countries work. Why aren't we hearing those words of late??? Now its lie,lie,lie,lie, lie, after LIE!!!!!!

Everyone who is NOT earning in excess of $250k per annum votes for Romney/Ryan is a fool bent upon staying as poor as possible. Every woman who votes for Romney/Ryan should not complain when her life is not taken seriously thereafter since she has just handed over control of her body to some old white men she doesn't even know. If you want a job, move overseas because that's where Romney/Ryan sent them - did you know they support making ALL corporate profits earned overseas totally free from US taxes? And then there's Citizen's United which made those welfare-sucking corporations "persons".

Now tell me why someone making $250 MILLION dollars a year NEEDS a tax cut when he only paid 14% anyway?

@KayAllen........the crap about Republicans being against women is tired, boring and old! No Republican is going to reverse Roe vs. Wade! Democrats and Republicans use this as a political strategy but none have reversed it, it's just not going to happen! I'm sick of hearing Democrats are for woman.....Obamacare is going to put stress on woman just like it will men, because we CAN'T afford it! The only people it won't stress are the ones it's really for...the one's that won't pay a damned dime to it! That's who Obamacare is going to cover!!

I don't make anywhere near $250K a year, but I'm voting for Romney! Not because I agree with everything he says, but I do believe he will be better at recovering our economy! Obama has proven with the 3 1/2 years he's already had that he is clearly NOT the person for the job! Instead of helping the economy, he is putting laws into place that are going to handcuff this nation even further than it already is! Do I believe in some kind of health care reform, yes I do! But in no way do I think Obamacare is good for this country! It will cover those who don't work or pay taxes and are here illegaly, and kill the middle class in taxes to pay for those who don't pay their fare share! And that's what we know we'll be paying for with Obamacare, what else is in that 1200 page document that Democrats passed without reading???? That's right, we still don't know the whole picture of Obamacare, does anyone in government really know?

notafraidtoadmit:: Oh republithugs are for women? Since when? First thing when republithugs took over the house of representatives was to pass bills against abortion-- then 32 times after that. Does abortion affect men? No-- but the way to take care of that is to NEUTER all males at birth.

And the lard-ass republithug loudmouth, Rush Limburger, sticks his drugged-out self into it-- and the republithugs fall all over him.

And that fool Todd Akins thinks he knows about "legalized" rape-- and the republithugs fall all over him.

Oh, what about your savior George W Bush and his TWO unfunded wars? President Obama figured the cost of those two wars into his budgets. All GWBush's two unfunded wars cost us were thousands of lives of our American GIs. Or don't you care about our GIs?

Romney wants us to invade Iran. He just better not do it-- I value the life of my grandson over the life of Mutt Robme or his litter and their litters.

And your idea of who the ACA will cover-- those who don't work or pay taxes and are here illegially-- is the typical republithug idea. I worked (I'm retired now), I paid taxes and I have been legal longer than you have-- and you don't know of which you speak.

Grow up and learn something-- or are you too stupid to learn anything.

Obama Lies...Bubba and Sandra Fluke will be leading the parade with her birth control pills!

Collapsed by a community that is in full-on panic mode that the taxpayewr paid freebies come to a screetching halt in November.

This is rich!

PBS

You are right...some don't get it. If you are in any other group besides white older men who are, for the most part Christian, the GOP platform just isn't into you.

LIE!!! The house passed budgets and bills designed to prevent gay marriage, deny women healthcare, repeal the Affordable Care Act, AKA Obamacare, and a number of other idiotic things. What is the approval rating of the house right now??? NBC News/Wall St. Journal has it at 12%!!! The GOP is a JOKE!! Time for the Republicans to move back to the center, or just move out!

Afailed.. UMMM Perhaps because it takes more than 24 days to draft legislation, conduct hearings, schedule and conduct votes, send bills to the other chamber, reconcile the bills, re-pass the bills and finally forward them to the President for signature. The way our system works this is a time consuming process. Should it be? Perhaps not. Do I agree with it? Not always. Should the rules, particularly the Senate rules that allow for a fillibuster and thus usually require a 60% supermajority be changed. MOST DEFINATELY!

@WillieSmith and other Repub diehards...

The Republicans who post here always point to the fact that nothng has changed in the last 4 years. What I want to know is what is a reasonable time frame to fix what it took 8 years to create? This is a serious question that I'd like a responsible answer to. We "Americans" have this need for instant gratification even when the solution is inferior. What I have noticed, for large problems, it takes twice as long to fix 'em as it took to creat 'em. Do you really think that Romney could fix America's problem in less than 4 years? And if so, why oh why won't he tell us what his plans are? Does he get elected on faith alone? Remember that you dont pay a contractor to work on your house untill he reveals what he plans to do. I would never do something like that on faith.

Found it. Here ya go Willie:

Here is a time-line of the events after the 2008 election:

1. BALANCE BEFORE THE ELECTION. In 2007 – 2008 the balance in the Senate was 51-49 in favor of the Democrats. On top of that, there was a Republican president who would likely veto any legislation the Republicans didn’t like. Not exactly a super majority.

2. BIG GAIN IN 2008, BUT STILL NO SUPER MAJORITY. Coming out the 2008 election, the Democrats made big gains, but they didn’t immediately get a Super Majority. The Minnesota Senate race required a recount and was not undecided for more than six months. During that time, Norm Coleman was still sitting in the Senate and the Balance 59-41, still not a Super Majority.

3. KENNEDY GRAVELY ILL. Teddy Kennedy casts his last vote in April and leaves Washington for good around the first of May. Technically he could come back to Washington vote on a pressing issue, but in actual fact, he never returns, even to vote on the Sotomayor confirmation. That leaves the balance in the Senate 58-41, two votes away from a super majority.

4. STILL NO SUPER MAJORITY. In July, Al Frankin was finally declared the winner and was sworn in on July 7th, 2009, so the Democrats finally had a Super Majority of 60-40 six and one-half months into the year. However, by this point, Kennedy was unable to return to Washington even to participate in the Health Care debate, so it was only a technical super majority because Kennedy could no longer vote and the Senate does not allow proxies. Now the actual actual balance of voting members is 59-40 not enough to overcome a Republican filibuster.

5. SENATE IS IN RECESS. Even if Kennedy were able to vote, the Senate went into summer recess three weeks later, from August 7th to September 8th.

6. KENNEDY DIES. Six weeks later, on Aug 26, 2009 Teddy Kennedy died, putting the balance at 59-40. Now the Democrats don’t even have technical super majority.

7. FINALLY, A SUPER MAJORITY! Kennedy’s replacement was sworn in on September 25, 2009, finally making the majority 60-40, just enough for a super majority.

8. SENATE ADJOURNS. However the Senate adjourned for the year on October 9th, only providing 11 working days of super majority, from September 25th to October 9th.

8. SCOTT BROWN ELECTED. Scott Brown was elected in November of 2009. The Senate was not in session during November and December of 2009. The Senate was in session for 10 days in January, but Scott Brown was sworn into office on February 4th, so the Democrats only had 13 days of super majority in 2010.

Summary: The Democrats only had 24 days of Super Majority between 2008 and 2010.

Inshock, it took almost two decades for the Democrats, led by FDR, to undo what Mr Hoover did. Its going to take us almost as long this time to undo Mr Bush's fiasco.

I totally agree about the reublican/teaparty obstructionists, here in WI we have a very old former repub gov(tommy thompson) running with Tammy Baldwin, go Tammy and give a speech that WI can be proud of and show how tommy is not the same tommy we once knew, he is a teaparty now that he made his millions, and will only protect the wealthy and leave everyone else under the bus!

GO TAMMY!!!

Willie Smith, it is YOU that doesn't get it. Your statement has been debunked countless times. Look it up. Find something new to complain about.

The Republicans who post here always point to the fact that nothng has changed in the last 4 years. What I want to know is what is a reasonable time frame to fix what it took 8 years to create?

It always takes longer to rebuild than it does to destroy.

Dumbya and the GOP took the better part of a decade to ruin our country and our economy. It'll take quite some time to rebuild when that calamity named Dumbya gave us...

...and now, the right-wing wants us to put a whackadoo mormon cultist in the WH to inculcate the same republican garbage policies that brought us the Bush Recession. jesus h nipple, what stpuidity from the republicans!

An interesting question to ask is: Is there any correlation between the college-degree rate and the strength of the two political parties in the states?

I compared different state's college-degree rate (CDR) data for 1996 with the results of the 1996 presidential election for each state. (See table at end for votes in the 1996 election.) A correlation calculation yielded the following:

Correlation
Rate

Democrat vote
+0.223

Republican vote
-0.265

That is, the Democratic votes for the states had a 22% positive correlation with increasing CDR and the Republican votes had a 27% negative correlation. States with high college-degree rate vote more Democratic than Republican and vice versa.

EMDF9A - Here ya go.

Dontcha just love it when the GOP serves up that whiny garbage about "the Dems had a supermajority" and it was just "poor-little-powerless-GOP" for 2 whole years?

Remember the GOP threw up every roadblock, filibuster, dirty trick and secret hold they could think of so that EVERY bill had to have a 60-vote margin to pass.

So let's take a look at that big, bad "super-majority", shall we:

January 3, 2009 - 111^th Congress sworn in. 55 Democrats, 41 Republicans, 2 Independents, 2 vacant.

January 15, 2009 - Roland Burris sworn in to Barack Obama's seat. 56 Democrats, 41 Republicans, 2 Independents, 2 vacant.

April 30, 2009 – Arlen Specter changes parties. 57 Democrats, 40 Republicans, 2 Independents, 1 vacant.

July 7, 2009 – Al Franken seated. 58 Democrats, 40 Republicans, 2 Independents. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THE DEMOCRATS HAD A SHOT AT A 60-VOTE MAJORITY.

August 25, 2009 – Teddy Kennedy dies. Kennedy had missed 97% of the votes in 2009 and over 90% in the last half of 2008. 57 Democrats, 40 Republicans, 2 Independents, 1 vacant.

September 25, 2009 – Paul Kirk appointed to Teddy Kennedy's seat. 58 Democrats, 40 Republicans, 2 Independents. THIS IS THE SECOND TIME THE DEMOCRATS HAD A SHOT AT A 60-VOTE MAJORITY.

February 4, 2010 – Scott Brown sworn in to replace Paul Kirk. 57 Democrats, 41 Republicans, 2 Independents.

June 28, 2010 – Robert Byrd dies. Byrd had missed over 90% of the votes in 2010 and almost 50% in 2009 due to illness. 56 Democrats, 41 Republicans, 2 Independents, 1 vacant.

November 29, 2010 - Mark Kirk sworn in to replace Roland Burris. 56 Democrats, 42 Republicans, 2 Independents.

So that “huge, overwhelming super-majority”? It existed only for a total of 6 months AND only during two periods when Teddy Kennedy and/or Robert Byrd were unable to vote most of the time.

So what did the 111th Congress manage to accomplish?:

• January 29, 2009: Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, Pub.L. 111-2

• February 4, 2009: Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act (SCHIP), Pub.L. 111-3

• February 17, 2009: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), Pub.L. 111-5

• March 11, 2009: Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009, Pub.L. 111-8

• March 30, 2009: Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009, Pub.L. 111-11

• April 21, 2009: Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act, Pub.L. 111-13

• May 20, 2009: Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009, Pub.L. 111-21

• May 20, 2009: Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009, Pub.L. 111-22

• May 22, 2009: Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009, Pub.L. 111-23

• May 22, 2009: Credit CARD Act of 2009, Pub.L. 111-24

• June 22, 2009: Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, as Division A of Pub.L. 111-31

• June 24, 2009: Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2009 including the Car Allowance Rebate System (Cash for Clunkers), Pub.L. 111-32

• October 28, 2009: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010, including the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, Pub.L. 111-84

• November 6, 2009: Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act of 2009, Pub.L. 111-92

• December 16, 2009: Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2010, Pub.L. 111-117

• February 12, 2010: Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act, as Title I of Pub.L. 111-139

• March 4, 2010: Travel Promotion Act of 2009, as Section 9 of Pub.L. 111-145

• March 18, 2010: Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act, Pub.L. 111-147

• March 23, 2010: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Pub.L. 111-148

• March 30, 2010: Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, including the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act, Pub.L. 111-152

• May 5, 2010: Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111-163

• July 1, 2010: Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111-195

• July 21, 2010: Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, Pub.L. 111-203

• August 3, 2010: Fair Sentencing Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111-220

• August 10, 2010: SPEECH Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111-223

• September 27, 2010: Small Business Jobs and Credit Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111-240

• December 8, 2010: Claims Resolution Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111-291, H.R. 4783

• December 13, 2010: Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111-296, S. 3307

• December 17, 2010: Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111-312, H.R. 4853

• December 22, 2010: Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111-321, H.R. 2965

• January 2, 2011: James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111-347, H.R. 847

• January 4, 2011: Shark Conservation Act, Pub.L. 111-348, H.R. 81

• January 4, 2011: Food Safety and Modernization Act, Pub.L. 111-353, H.R. 2751

I think that we probably don't give the Dems in the last Congress enough credit for getting through what they did against the odds that were thrown up by the Party of No.

Didn't know there was such a thing as a "big name democrat"....I don't know any "big name republicans either...they all wipe their arse like anyone else, so what would make them "big name"....maybe the "big name " rats are leaving the ship early?

MUW - you're talking to yourself. Everyone else has you on "Ignore" now.

Myself included - goodbye!

MUW: I think the robo-voter (robo-collapser) is Cranky Old Bigot @8.44 it is obvious that he disapproves of the concept of Freedom of Speech or expression. He seems to believe that only what comes from his lips as worth listening to.

Rest assured oh smart one, I ask you how many republican congressman or women can you name that attended the RNC and showed their face?

Those no-show Dems are like rats jumping off a sinking ship.

Hmmm, why didn't George W. Bush or Dick "deficits don't matter" Cheney speak at the Republican convention?

Because the Republican ship already sank 4 years ago!

He is one of the freak side shows.

Michael Steele former RNC chair, also specifically NOT invited. Herman Cain not invited (can kind of see why there), but John Huntsman specifically told to go speak in New Orleans and not to attend the convention.

The Koch brothers have Tea Partied the GOP into full on Goldwater mode, but we're supposed to believe that Romney won't be beholden to the wing that actually wrote the Republican Platform? Or their monetary backers?

Am I the only one who watched Paul Ryan's speech and kept thinking "Eddie Haskell?"

The GOP convention was all smoke and mirrors.

Where's the PLAN, Mitt?

You know, the one that's magically going to create 12 million jobs?

Congress hasn't passed ONE jobs bill since the Republicans took the House in 2010.

You know, the Congress that was supposed to have a "laser-like focus on jobs"?

Everyone knows it's just talk to cover up the fact that they're working to give their corporate masters more power and American workers less.

Obama/Biden 2012
The only sane choice

I think Romney's waiting for the gold plates to appear in the desert and "reveal" to him his jobs plan.

MUW,

Ditto for you. Romney has Goldman Sachs as his biggest campaign contributor. Do you think his loweingr taxes, but increase defense spending and Medicare is anything different than what we have been getting the last 30+ years. We are officially $15 trillion in debt, and that doesn't include future liabilities. I doubt Romeny or Ryan have anything to deal with that. Also in 2015 the @!$%# hits the fan, as a full 50% of our debt comes due. Think Romney or Obama can do anything to forestall the disaster waiting for us? The electioin is a big @!$%#ing game to give you the illusion that you have a choice about the direction of the country.

300 Michael,

They are running against Bush. Tell me one damn thing that differentiates Romney from Bush? In terms of policy they are identical. More defense spending and stupid wars that will increase the debt, and calls to privatize SS, etc. Socialization of medicine and more attacks of our civil liberties are in store for us. IF you are single no kids like me, you should look in getting the hell out of dodge before it hits the fan. THe US of A is the last place you want to be when the collapse occurs. Everyone here basically is spoiled and doesn't know what rael harship is.

That's what passes for a "dissenting opinion" for you, Robert?

No wonder you have to watch FOX.

Have you seen Clint Eastwood's new movie preview. His convention speech has a direct correlation to his new character.

only if you are rich and their friend. Haven't you read the writing is on the wall...

gringo...I was surprised today when NBC said that tickets to both the convention and Obama's speech were still available and that they were busing people in for free for his speech so the arena was filled.

BYW..Sandra Fluke said on national TV numerous times she did not have the $9.00 for birth control pills (bet that made her parents REAL proud)...so is she being paid to be one of the main speakers at the DNC? She could use that money for birth control. Are all her expenses paid? Hmmmmmm

Anderson: At least he doesn't have to lie.

@anderson, just who are you to tell anyone to leave because they disagree with obama? I see you didn't leave when you found fault with bush!

Nice propaganda, seen it before. Tell me, if that statement were true, how do ANY Republicans win an office? Times up! It's because it's not true. Millions of Americans are out of work and cannot find jobs because of the criminal obstruction of the US Congress by Republicans and the Tea Party. Research it before you just start bleating dittohead talking points.

ok - President Obama is going forward, not back!! The deficit is rolling forward. The reduced funding for the military is rolling forward (Iran sent their congratulations and Thanks for that one), and let's tax the heck out of all those people who have money. Like a steamroller forward. Only the government should control the money. Silly Peasants...yours is not to reason why....yours is but to do and die. Don't worry. The administration is very inclusive. No one will go un-screwed.

Hillary is speaking.....By not attending the convention.....Seems funny that she is pre disposed in a country that has little to no bering on the US economy .....and it's not like she didn't know 6 months ago when the convention was going to be......She's ducking the embarisment of the affiliation with this president......She'll finish the job she started because she's not a quitter and we'll all se her show up in 2016

sdc,clark,

I would hope real Americans would ditch labels and work for the common good like our forefathers did.

When you are filled with so much hate, as the republicans are, there is little (if any) common ground to find.

If You Don’t Have Any Fresh Ideas Then You Use Stale Tactics To Scare Voters, If You Don’t Have A Record To Run On Then You Paint Your Opponent As Someone People Should Run From.-Obama

What regulations have been instilled by President Obama??????????????

He has not invited illegals, he has done a better job at deportation than any of his predecessors.

You are repeating MISINFORMATION.

Odd he's not running on that? Then why is he giving 18-30 yr olds the ability to stay in the country, and take jobs? Don't think I could get that kind of treatment sneaking in another country, especially Mexico. You need to stop YOUR misinformation.

Deporting children raised here, that are educated, speak english, is not the goal. They were not given a choice to immigrate and don't deserve to be deported without an opportunity to make good with their status legality.

What kind of heart does it take to deport these children????

From the Eastern tribe of Iwanaphaq Indians !she is honorary Chief of the sub tribe,Prevaricators!

All yall go call 211 and get some assistance just do not use an existing house or phone.

Why is everybody is getting collapsed?

It has to be embarrassing for so many Democratic politicians up for election to distance themselves from Obama. Signs of the times.

While many people are looking forward to hearing Bill Clinton speak, it's interesting that Clinton was successful in his reelection bid because he made a decision to 'move to the center and work with the Republicans in Congress', which resulted in many successful programs and Budget Surpluses, while Obama has made the opposite decision - refusing to work with the Republicans in the House and trying to demonize them instead.

It worked for Clinton - perhaps Obama should have listened to Clinton.

By the way - If Obama wins in 2012, it would make it almost impossible for Hillary to win in 2016 - Three straight Democrats would be unprecedented (except for FDR when someone could run for more than two terms). Since Hillary would be far better positioned to run against Romney in 2016, I wonder if Bill will try all that hard for Obama - especially since there is still some 'hostility' between them.

Yawn. I thought they already had the convention?

One common factor among those staying away from Charlotte: running in a state or congressional district where Obama isn’t hugely popular.

Wow, even his own base is ashamed to be seen in the same city as if. Looks like things are looking well for the incumbent...

This article is either the biggest pile of conservative propaganda ever. Or the author is Karl Rove. I live in a very conservative area and most people here are for Obama.

Republicans claim Obama is so bad but they never put a finger on things he has done to upset them. Usually they point to regulations and policies carried over from the Bush administration as reasons to hate Obama. Then they point to the debt and blame that on Obama when he has added less deficit spending since Eisenhower. He even presented plans to cut the deficit and start paying off the national debt. Yet the supposed saviors of America rejected these ideas. Then they blame the Democrats for not passing a budget when every budget that is submitted either democrat or Republican is DOA.

Obama is for the people and Romney is blowing smoke up your bums. Get a clue.

I hope the Democrats put Elizabeth Warren front and center. I would love to see the MSM focus on her and her ideas. Democrats aren't centrist, and Warren puts a face to the leftism they espouse. Plus, I think we can get her to give up something important with just a few dollars worth of beads, and maybe some fire water.

Wait a sec...less added deficit spending since Ike? Um, over $5 trillion in four years is less than anyone since Ike? Are you a chick trying to explain how it is you save so much money by buying loads of stuff on sale? Give me a break.

OKay, a few things Obama has done that makes him a crappy president. Obamacare. Dodd-Frank (btw, I know Congress had a hand in these too, but Obama did sign them). Leading from behind. The stimulus. Anti-religious policies (I'm an atheist, so don't pretend I am only upset because I'm religious). Failing to comprehend how more tuition help has increased tuition costs even more. Keystone. Far fewer exploration/drilling permits. Prohibiting off shore drilling in most areas. Bowing to the Saudi King. Arguing, on the one hand, we won't permit Iran to obtain nukes, while on the other hand arguing anyone who suggests military force is merely a hothead. Expanded EPA enforcement. Politicizing local matters, like the Beer Summit catastrophe.

I can continue if you want, but I suspect that either your head has exploded by now or you are now walking up and down the street screaming obscenities at mosquitoes.

http://www.factcheck.org/2012/06/obamas-spending-inferno-or-not/

Read the facts Rich. Blaming Obama for Republican mistakes is not a winning play.

Bush started the stimulus with Tarp and Reagan spent far more stimulus than Obama to fix a much tamer economic downturn.

Anti-religious policies? Name one.

Tuition has been going up before Obama took office. How does helping people afford college by keeping interest rates low make it more expensive? I would love to hear your obviously well thought out reasoning.

Far fewer exploration/drilling permits

Do I really need to give you the fact check on that one. Your lying.

Keystone was a destined for export pipeline from Canada. Right now the oil is distributed in the US from Illinois.

I can go on all day. You are severly mis-informed. No supprise.

I love it. You took the bait. Okay, so here's the problem with your logic...

The baseline used for the budget is Bush's last fiscal year budget, FY 2009, adding in TARP. But TARP, we are told by your ilk everytime the subject arises, has been PROFITABLE for the treasury. So we can't add in TARP, at least not in GAAP terms. That is, you can't charge $600 bn against Bush and then credit Mr. Obama with the profits (we are still modestly in the hole, btw), and in so doing increase the beginning baseline. It's bad accounting at best, political chicanery at worst.

Anyhow, the measure is over ADDED deficits. This could be looked at two ways, I think, fairly. One would be taking the baseline deficit and then measuring how much was added to it. When TARP is included then you can make the case that Mr. Obama hasn't increased spending much beyond what Bush had. But, like I explained, this is a pathetically dumb and unfair way to look at performance.

The second way would be to compare, even though we are talking deficit (which is the yearly component of debt), how much additional debt over baseline was added. In this way, Bush's WORST budget deficit was around $450 bn--a very bad number I would agree. But Mr. Obama's BEST has been about $1.2 trillion, or nearly three times larger. And this was the best number. And this also takes into account TARP "profits", or at least repayment of principal without interest (as in the case of the auto bailouts, which still leave us about $40 bn in the hole).

A third way to compare would be to measure performance over actual history. Mr. Obama did promise, did he not, to cut the yearly deficit in half by the end of his first term, and so instead of a $1.2 trillion or so deficit this year we should be looking at something about 1/5 as large.

The academic that did the research you are basing your pathetic claim on hasn't got a clue about GAAP, or about even non-GAAP federal budget accounting. And it was an attempt to get voters to not see what was evident in front of their eyes: Obama's starting debt was $10.7 trillion, and after one term it is $16 trillion this week. More than $5 trillion added in less than 4 years. Sorry, Republicans spent FAR too much, but this is Mr. Obama's fiscal fire. He's the president, and he should be held accountable. Will YOU hold him accountable?

Iran having nukes is not even an issue. North Korea got nukes under Bush and they did nothing. Iran can't even make a missile capable of hitting a target much less a ICBM. But Obama is far from a peace loving hippie. He is all for intervention, but just not repeating the same BS strategy that got us into the quagmire in Iraq.

Politicizing local matters, like the Beer Summit catastrophe

Hahaha, your the only one calling something like that a catastrophe.

Bush issued more regulations on drilling than Obama, in fact he issued more regulation period. Obama has opened up more than double the land for drilling than Bush and Reagan combined.

I won't even adress that pathetic attempt to distort the facts in your response at 27.11. Ill let the NY Times do it for me.

Well, I don't think it is proper to call TARP stimulus spending. I didn't agree with TARP, but I think those who did would characterize it more honestly than you as stabilizing the financial markets. Similar to what would be done by the Fed if there were bank runs. And as the money was mostly repaid, you can hardly call it stimulus. Maybe a bridge loan would be more analogous. Bush did have a stimulus package though, but much smaller compared to Mr. Obama.

Anti-religious policies. An easy one: Requiring religious institutions to hire people who openly oppose the religious institution. USSC ruling? 9-0 against our Idiot in Chief.

I agree tuition has been increasing, and long before Mr. Obama. For the same reasons in large part that he is causing it to go up too. You wonder why. Okay, time for Econ 101. Price (tuition) is found at the intersection of supply and demand. If you reduce the price of going to school by artificially decreasing the cost of loans that allow you to afford it, you get more people to willingly go to college. More people means more demand. More demand means prices go up, all other things equal. How did you get out of college without taking basic economics? I mean, this is SIMPLE stuff.

Yes, please fact check for yourself the massive DECREASE in permits awarded. Mr. Obama has made tha claim we are producing more oil, and this is true. But we are producing more oil on private lands, or from public land permits that predate Mr. Obama's tenure. Either way we can't credit Mr. Obama for the increase. Not unless you are prepared to argue Mr. Obama has lied and that oil can flow much more rapidly from permit to casing than the 5 to 10 years he previously claimed. If memory serves, the decrease in permits on public land (Mr. Obama's Interior Department doesn't control private lands) is 28%. The amount of available land to permit has shrunk by an even far larger proportion.

No, the delayed Keystone pipeline is not pumping oil to Illinois. An EXISTING Keystone pipeline, one that long predates Mr. Obama, does bring in Canadian oil to the USA. But whether the oil goes to the USA or not is irrelevant. Even if every drop of oil making it's way to Texas would have been required to remain in the USA it would have done exactly nothing to improve the price of crude and, in fact, would have made crude prices higher. Anytime trade is prohibited for artificial reasons costs will rise.

Nothing you wrote is correct. Which is why you are a liberal and I am not.

Dang. You know Mr. Obama is in trouble when even leftists are saying he's lying. See, Mr. Obama has said, and said it repeatedly, that the nuclear issue with Iran is of the utmost importance, and that Iran simply will not be allowed to obtain nuclear weapons. Whoda thunk I would agree with him on this point, and you would conclude he's either saber-rattling or a liar?

She has high cheek bones... That makes her an Indian....

Nancy implored for congress people to skip the convention and stay home and try to be reelected.

Damn, had to get to page 2 before I find a comment that wasn't collapsed. This is just plain sick.

Imagine how much lower our debt would be if WE COULD RAISE TAXES ON THE RICH AND FIX THE LOOPHOLES? People like Mitt should be paying 35% not 14%, and corporations should not be paying only 8%. Basic math says that if the upper percent pay most of the income taxes then the amount our government takes in would more then double.

I am so sick of hearing people cry about the fing debt. You all treat Regan like a God, but what did he do? Lowered taxes and increase the debt via spending and programs. Therefore, if Bush Jr. lowered the taxes why are you mad at Obama for increasing the debt. Lowering taxes WILL INCREASE THE DEBT, it is this magic thing called math. We have been UNDERPAYING FOR 30 YEARS and you wonder why the debt has gone up and up. It must be those lazy people that don't want to work 12 hour days, 6 days a week, 52 weeks a year for 1/1000 of what the CEO makes that must be the problem. They are not good enough slaves even though worker productivity is at the highest it has ever been.

Why not ask WHY OUR CONGRESS HAS NOT PASSED A NEW BUDGET IN HOW LONG? How did we lose our AAA credit rating, let me guess Obama had something to do with it... Considering how much Republicans have tried to stop everything he has tried to do, I am surprised we are doing as well as we are, but that is what happens with greedy people/addicts. They cannot stop themselves.

Maybe if people were not allowed to unnaturally acquire unlimited amounts of wealth people would actually pay their damn employees a fair wage and there would not be so many social programs needed to help people out. Rich people create the very problems they whine and cry about. It seems like they want serfs/slaves to worship them as if they were kings...lol.

There's a BIG difference between working or campaigning and JUST NOT BEING INVITED BECAUSE YOUR NOMINEE WANTS TO DISTANCE HIMSELF FROM YOU!!!

The ONE AND ONLY reason the REPUBLICANS don't like OBAMA is because hes BLACK. They wont say it but the (GOP) GRAND OLD PARTY is a bunch of ARCHIE BUNKER RACIST that don't want a BLACK man in charge ! LOOK how they've blocked everything that would have put AMERICA on the path of recovery. This is not accidental. Mitch McConnell and ERIC CANTOR have done everything including meeting in secret the night Obama was sworn in to make sure OBAMA was a 1 term president no matter what it cost the AMERICAN PEOPLE. These are the people who want us to trust them with the future of our COUNTRY!!

WE CANT GO BACK TO THE G.W.BUSH AND THE I"M A DICK CHENEY YEARS.

OBAMA / BIDEN 2012

...wow

Fracking Nuts "The ONE AND ONLY reason the REPUBLICANS don't like OBAMA is because hes BLACK."

If you check the record, it was the Republicans that voted for the Civil Rights act in far greater percentages than the Democrats. And who do you think fought against integration the most and was the party of the KKK - Democrats.

By the way - Abraham Lincoln was a Republican.

You might just want to think about your 'racist rants' and consider that Obama has just been a BIG FAILURE as President, which is why he probably won't be reelected.

Hi Tired,

I am not surprised by your post. It is the post of someone completely ignorant of economics and of our history. Ronald Reagan didn't decrease taxes, he decreased TAX RATES. You confuse one for the other. And during Reagan's tenure as president revenues to the federal treasury nearly doubled. That works out to around a 9% increase in tax receipts per year. But I would agree that not in every instance should tax rates be decreased.

It is possible, though we are far from it, to decrease taxes so far that basic functions of government, like national security, are put into jeopardy. And without the ability to protect American interests here and around the world, one of which is more international trade, then the economy will suffer, and with it so will tax receipts.

Personally, I support reducing the corporate tax rate to ZERO, and as part of the trade-off to get it done I would support (I do anyhow) the complete elimination of every business subsidy in the USA. No more farm price supports. No more Commerce Department marketing of California or Virginia wines in Europe. No more subsidies of any kind, including guaranteed loans, like the one guaranteed for Solyndra. It was capitalism that made the USA great, wealthy, and powerful, not government coddled business. So no more "too big to fail", no more stupid bailouts to automakers who aren't led by management bright enough to produce what people want at a price they are willing to pay. And, along with this, we must eliminate every tax subsidy from the government for people to buy one company's product over another, or just to buy one product over another.

I believe in economic liberty. You don't. This makes me a conservative/libertarian, not a liberal like you. And it means something even more profound: Even though I think your post is amazingly stupid, I think you are capable of dealing with the positive and negative consequences of your own actions, and altering your behavior in an appropriate way because of them. Of course, you could prove me wrong with your next post, but who doesn't like a challenge?

It has to be embarrassing for so many Democratic politicians up for election to distance themselves from Obama. Signs of the times.

Hmmm, why didn't George W. Bush or Dick "deficits don't matter" Cheney speak at the Republican convention? It has to be embarrassing when the party's last sitting president and vice-president were so inept that you don't want anyone to remember them!

But American voters remember. Ah, yes, we remember!

Hi EE,

I think your reply, but for the conclusion, has great merit. Politicians are out for themselves perhaps as much, or more, than they are out for their party. That was mildly facetious, btw. But no, we don't remember, and that is the problem. We are always demanding a "new" solution, or a "new" idea. News ALERT: There are no new solutions or new ideas. Everything that could ever possibly be tried has been tried, some of it in foreign nations, most of it right here in the USA.

This is my major problem with both parties, but for different reasons. I think Republicans don't know how to talk to voters in such a way as to create confidence among those voters, or enough of it anyhow, to accept the greatness of economic liberty despite its imperfections. Instead, Republicans pander to a lesser degree to voters, promising something for nothing. Like Mr. Romney's promise to make no defense cuts. Fine, but what if we are spending more than we need to defend against the threats we know and those we try to imagine? Can we cut defense then?

Not to leave liberals, like you, out of it, but you are even worse. Not only is your pandering divisive given you offer it by group, whether sex, or race, or class, or educational level, but the pandering is, in almost every case, far worse than your political opponents (which is why I will happily be voting for Mr. Romney--he is the best of the alternatives). But even worse, you predicate your pandering not on the idea of what the country COULD be, but rather what you think it SHOULD be. This fantasy world takes you and other liberals so far away from economic fundamentals that it is impossible for me to see how, under liberal control of government, we can ever succeed.

The bottom line comes down to each individual. Are you going to be one that relies on other people or the government to meet your needs or are you going to be one that provides for yourself? I would hope more of us can provide for ourselves. And of those that can provide for yourself, are you going to look out for only yourself or are you going to contribute to the needs of others? I hope that those that can will contribute to the needs of others by the best ways possible. The government is not the best way. The government waists more money in a day than any millionaire ever thought of.

Rich,

from the article you convieniently ignored.

in 2001, the Bush administration approved only 3,439 permits increasing slightly to 3,802 by 2003. It wasn’t until 2004 that Bush doubled the permits approved, but by they dropped dramatically back down to 4,579 in 2005.

In 2009 under President Obama, there were 4,487 oil drilling permits approved to drill on federal land and in 2010 there were 4,090 permits issued and finally by 2011 there were 4,244.

That should wrap up that question.

Secondly, for you arrogant reference to econ 101. Public schools are not for profit industries. They don't operate on the principle of supply and demand. They operate based on cost to demand. If demand is high they build more facilities and hire more teachers which may raise the price of education somewhat, but they don't gouge students based on higher demand. Many public universities build based on publicly funded grants and public money which further distributes the cost. As for private for profit universities, they may raise the price of tuition based on demand, but even they must compete with less expensive public universities. They too try not to out price their student base.

As for keystone maybe you should re-check your facts. From wiki,

The Keystone Pipeline System is a pipeline system to transport synthetic crude oil and diluted bitumen ("dilbit") from the Athabasca oil sands region in northeastern Alberta, Canada to multiple destinations in the United States, which include refineries in Illinois,

The gulf coast refineries are export destinations. The Canadian company will now try to build a pipeline to their coast if XL is not approved.

As for TARP, I am all for bailouts and stimulus. It worked under Reagan so why wouldn't it work now? Stimulus is the best way to increase demand, econ 101. By funneling money to middle class workers through government jobs and projects, working capitol is distributed back into the economy. This gives individuals the capitol necessary to buy products that they demand. Companies then hire more employees to meet the increasing demand which gives them capitol which allows them to buy products. And thus the economy grows.

When you take the position of the GOP and funnel working capitol to individuals with high net worth, what do they do? They sit on it, removing working potential from the economy. Since less capitol is in circulation individuals have less money to buy products and demand for them falls. This goes up the chain as companies lay off employees and reduce production to stay profitable. Milton Freedman was an idiot and trickle down Reaganomics Is a clear failure of a policy.