kiteman

I'm not sure who you should be disappointed in. If only 128,000,000 Americans work, either there were only about 8,000,000 of the Freeloaders you guys are always whining about that voted for President, as the latest tally I've found has it 65 million for Obama and 60 million for Romney. So if Obama won by getting a bunch of freeloaders to vote, it appears your 120 productive workers must've had better things to do than vote. By the way, there are only about 235 million Americans that are eligible to vote. About 72 million are under 18 and another 2.5 million are convicted felons that aren't allowed to vote. Using that figure Obama wins 27% to 25%, but if you use only the ones that voted, he wins 51-47. But back to the original point, it appears a good chunk of your 120,000,000 people that are worker bees, didn't feel it was important enough to vote. Or maybe they couldn't stomach either of the candidates....... But stick with your point, that if they don't agree with your point of view, they're bums. That'll keep you losing elections for the next 20 years.

Ok, then explain to me the spin..... Here's how I see it...... Thursday AM: Mitch McConnell brings a bill to the floor of the Senate to waive congressioal authority over the Debt Cieling (his idea from last year by the way, that now that Obama brings it up he doesn't like!). He thinks there is no way Harry Reid will bring it up for a vote. Thursday Afternoon: Harry Reid, after meeting with his caucus agrees to the vote that McConnell brought up. Immediately after that: McConnell says something to the effect that "items of this type of importance have always been subject to the 60 vote rule", thus fillibustering his own bill. If it had to have 60 votes, why didn't he say so in the AM when he brought it to the floor!??? Nice try!!! Mitch McConnell, first Senator to fillibuster his own request! Classic!

Dontlop, You can try to spin this any way you want to, but I guarantee you'll never find another video of someone fillibustering their own request. This is like going to a Vegas poker game, going all in, then when you see you've got the losing hand saying "I only meant to bet half my chips"........ You'd get laughed off the table! Only Mitch McConnell could pull something like this. If I was Harry Reid, I'd bring it up for a vote every day until the debt ceiling is solved. Make 'ol Mitch fillibuster his own bill every day!!! That's what you get for playing stupid partisan games when our country needs work to be done.

Senate Minority Leader, and obvious MENSA member, Mitch McConnell fillibusters his own request for a vote on legislation!!!! BWAAAAAA, HAAAAAAA, HAAAAAAAA, HAAAAAAAAA........ It doesn't get any better that this.! From the article: Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) introduced legislation to raise the debt ceiling on Thursday, apparently with the intent of showing that even Democrats would not support such a bill. However, McConnell’s plan backfired after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) called for a vote on the legislation, which would have given the president the authority to raise the federal debt ceiling on his own. The top Senate Republican was forced to filibuster his own bill. “What we have here is a case of Republicans here in the Senate once again not taking ‘yes’ for an answer,” Reid said, after McConnell announced his filibuster. “This morning the Republican leader asked consent to have a vote on this proposal, just now I told everyone we were willing to have that vote — up or down vote. Now the Republican leader objects to his own idea. So I guess we have a filibuster of his own bill, so I object.” http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/12/06/democrats-watch-in-awe-as-mcconnell-filibusters-himself/ McConnell tried to call out the Democrats and got schooled. How long do Republicans stick with him and Boehner as party leaders????? BTW, I used this link as it has the video in it. You can shoot down the source all you want, but the video speaks for itself! <br style="font-family: georgia, 'palatino linotype', palatino, 'times new roman', times, serif; line-height: 21px;">

How does a guy add $18 Trillion to a total debt of $16 Trillion and change? Your saying he came in with a surplus of $2 Trillion? Math Deaf! Also, if you look at the CBO predictions issued in January 2009, you'll see that the debt was projected to rise from $ 9.9Trillion (Actual) at the end of 2008 to $13.4 Trillion by the end of 2012. That's before Obama was sworn in and did anything. So it was going up based already based on any and all policies signed into law by George W. Bush. Debt was rising and was projected to rise to $16 Trillion by 2019. Did Obama add to it? Yep. But you can't hold W. harmless in this. The last budget he signed, and all the ones before that, had us on a track for rising debt. Here's the link if you'd like a little light reading on the projections. http://www.cbo.gov/s...-07-outlook.pdf

I have a feeling that they'll pay more attention to the polls that show about 69% of Americans feel there should be some kind of tax increase as part of the plan to avoid sequestration (either for everyone or for those making over $250K). Or maybe to the 51 % of Americans that feel marijuana should be decriminalized. Or the 48% of Americans that think that same sex couples should have the same rights as hetrosexual couples. There are tons of issues out there facing this administration and congress that are much more important than this. I did a little math on this earlier today, so far the petitions are up to about 460,000 signatures. That figure divided by the 241.3 million residents of these 34 states is 0.32% of the population of these states and about 0.15% of the overall population of the United State (nearly 309 million). Good place for everyone to vent, but not going anywhere.........

Yep, from a dealer you do, but gun shows? Not so much. So if the law read EVERY gun sale (just like every Vote) had to show ID and background check........ Second Amendent defenders would go bat sh*t crazy over that requirement as an infringment on their rights. And I'd agree. Nope, because statistics and investigations don't show this as being an issue. It's less than 1/10th of 1% of votes that are ever even considered for voter fraud. Do you think a person in this country is going to expose themselves to committing a felony, going to prison, and maybe being deported; to vote in our elections? Really????

Where did he promise to keep it open? He said if ther government can help support it and that he wants it to succeed and that as President he'd fight to help them. Where does he say "I promise if I get GM the money, they'll keep this open"? I don't read that in there. You guys take someone saying they want to do everything they can to keep these people's factory open to that being a promise to do so.

I don't go help her out because I live 14 hours away..... Shop somewhere else other than walmart and you won't get ID'd. See you can shoot holes in why she should get one and how easy it is and I can shoot holes in why she shouldn't need one. We could go round and round all day. BTW, can you point me to the part of the Constitution that shows I have to have an ID to vote? I bet if I suggested we require an ID and a background check for a gun purchase (another right listed in the constitution) you guys would give me a thousand reasons why you don't need one because the Constitution guarantees your right to own firearms. And I'd agree with you. So why do I need an ID to exercise my Constitutional right to vote? Aren't there more gun related crimes in this country than there are voter fraud crimes? Shouldn't we be cracking down on that crime also?

You "bet" they do??? You're arse must be gettting pretty big, because you're pulling a lot of stuff out of it. My grandmother has lived in the same town since 1949, the entire community knows who she is. She doesn't have to show ID at the pharmacy, since she taught the pharmacist in Sunday School. She doesn't live in a nursing home, she still has her own home. Dr? She's been going to the same doctor for over 20 years, I think they know who she is...... Even the specialists she goes to don't require it as a referal. And for the others on here saying you need an ID for cigarettes and booze. Really...... Tell me the last time someone in their 40's or 50's were ID'd for these items. Oh how I long for the days of moderation and acceptance in our great country......

I got an ID, I needed it for my job. So nice try....... But good work on assumptions...... However, my grandmother who's been voting in this country since 1946 does not. So you want to take away her vote? What ever happened to the moderate middle in this country? It appears we're either whacko right wing or lefty liberal now. No more Reagan Democrats or Moderate Republicans any more. Just complete lack of respect among fellow Americans. Of course that's why Independents now out number both Republicans and Democrats. Sooner or later there will be a set of leaders emerge from this "middle" in American politics. But until that happens, we're stuck with the two sets of crapola we have now.

Cris, I would expect nothing less..... You do realize you've submitted two different kinds of fraud. Example #1 is Voter Fraud, so you get a +1 for that. Example #2 is Voter REGISTRATION fraud, which will never, ever, be cleared up by voter ID bills. So -1 for that. Comparing registration fraud to voter fraud is not even close to the same thing. If you want to learn more about voter registration fraud, google Thadeus McCotter® from Michigan. He is losing his seat in the House of Representatives as he has been removed from the ballot in Michigan because he turned in hundreds of fraudulent signatures in order to qualify for the ballot. Voter ID bills would not have stopped this. So you've shown us one case of true voter fraud, performed by one person(or two). So that's a good reason to elminate hundreds of thousands of truly eligible voters from having their vote counted? Sounds to me like you're dropping a 500lb bomb on a wasps nest.

Where do you see propaganda and half truths? The link I posted was straight from the website of the Export Import Bank that was referenced in your link to the Wall Street Journal. Sue me for not taking Rupert's word for how the loan went down and going to the source of the loan to get the real facts. Let's look at your first paragraph with an emphasis on another part of it highlighted!!! Chairman and President Fred P. Hochberg and senior Ex-Im Bank officials are conducting a business-development mission in Brazil from July 29-31, 2009, to promote President Obama's trade policy and the availability of financing from Ex-Im Bank to support Brazil's purchases of U.S. goods and services. So you're saying you are against President Obama and the Ex-Im Bank promoting US Exports? You don't think this is a good idea? Without this funding these AMERICAN companies may not get the orders they need to keep the doors open. You're for a larger trade deficit by eliminating these exports? Gotcha ........ Did you not read the link I posted? Here's another little tidbit from it for you: OVER $300 MILLION EX-IM BANK CREDIT GUARANTEE SUPPORTS EXPORT SALES BY ABOUT 150 U.S. COMPANIES To date, Ex-Im Bank has approved a request from JP Morgan Chase, acting as lender, for a more than $300 million, medium-term guarantee. This facility was made operative on May 27, 2011 and is being used to finance the Petrobras's general purchases of U.S. manufactured oil and gas equipment and services. Here are some of the approximately 150 U.S. companies whose export sales are being supported by the Ex-Im Bank loan guarantee (partial listing): EX-IM BANK PROVIDES U.S. COMPANIES WITH A COMPETITVE EDGE IN AN INCREASINGLY AGGRESSIVE GLOBAL MARKETPLACE United States equipment and services for the petroleum industry are sought after by the world's leading companies because of their quality and reliability. To help U.S. companies win contracts in this industry, Ex-Im Bank is able to provide financing to a potential foreign customer. This financing is solely and exclusively for the purchase of U.S. goods or services and its use is contingent upon this requirement. With emerging markets in many areas of the globe, including Latin America, efforts by other nations to help their companies obtain export financing is growing. Therefore, when companies, like Petrobras, are in need of high-quality products and services, Ex-Im Bank increases the opportunities for U.S. businesses to win the contracts instead of their competitors around the world. Maybe you should try to educate yourself on the facts of the $2 billion. I never laid blame on anyone. I think this program is a good idea. It provides credit to international corporations to buy AMERICAN made products and services. What's your solution? Not give it to them and let them buy the Chinese financed and Chinese built equipment? Screw the fellow AMERICAN worker.

You should really do some more homework on this. Here is a link to the actual website of the Export Import Bank that approved the loans to Petrobus. http://www.exim.gov/brazil/petrobasfacts.cfm A couple of little tidbits from the site for your review: Charge: The U.S. government is giving away more than $2 billion in taxpayer dollars to Brazil's largest oil and gas company to drill for oil in Brazil. Fact: The Bank has established a $2 billion financing opportunity for Petrobras to use solely for the purchase of American-made goods and services. So far, Ex-Im has approved $300 million to finance Petrobras' purchase of U.S. oil and gas equipment and services. The funds go to American exporters as payment for their sales to the Petrobras. If Petrobras fails to award contracts to U.S. companies for the remaining amount, it will not access those dollars. Of note, the Bank is self-sustaining and no taxpayer dollars are involved. Charge: The loan to Petrobras represents a reversal of the Obama Administration's policies on off-shore drilling. Fact:There is no connection between federal policies on offshore drilling in U.S. waters and financing U.S. export sales for drilling by other countries. In fact, should Ex-Im Bank refuse to finance sales by U.S. companies it is likely that the sales will go instead to their foreign competitors. It is notable that the Bank's bipartisan Board of Directors unanimously approved the preliminary commitment to Petrobras on April 14, 2009, before any Obama appointees joined the Bank. In fact, at the time the Bank's Board consisted of three Republicans and two Democrats, all of whom were appointed by President George W. Bush. So, in summary, #1, Obama didn't commit $2 Billion to Brazil, the Export Import Bank, staffed by GWB appointees did. #2 These funds committed to Petrobus required them to buy AMERICAN made items for EXPORT to Brazil. This means it's employing AMERICAN workers to build these items and creating jobs. How would you do it differently?

Try going back to that thing you all love to rant and rave about, the Constitution. All spending bills originate in the House of Representatives. From there they must go to and pass the Senate. Once those two steps are complete, they go to the President for review and signature. You remember School House Rock don't you? I'm only a bill, stuck on Capital Hill. So until the House can do enough compromise to work on something that has a chance in the Senate and the Senate can get passed the 60 vote fillibuster rule to get to a vote on a budget, then maybe they can get a bill to the President. And by the way, the President has sent a budget to the Congress every year he's been there. Because the House and Senate can't agree on the colors on the American Flag right now, nothing gets done.

NO, it says more about the people that can't do 5 minutes of internet research to figure out that this doesn't apply to about 99.5% of the people selling their homes. Unless you have over $250,000 single or $500,000 married in AGI AND sell your house for a profit of over $250,000 single or $500,000 married, this tax has nothing to do with you.

I completely agree with you, the Donut Hole is a bad deal! It was closed with the Affordable Care Act. If ya'll elect R&R, and they repeal the ACA, guess what? Right back into the Donut Hole go current Medicare users. So for them to say that the Ryan Budget and the Repeal of the Affordable Care act won't effect current Medicare seniors is misleading at best and a lie at worst. Obama and the Democrats helped your parents with the Donut Hole. R&R want to throw them right back in it!

I don't think there is a politician out there that thinks Americans are smart enough to research what they say. They all say stuff that can be discovered in less than 10 minutes if it's true or not, but they don't care. They say it anyway hoping it'll stick to a few voters at a time. Once it's repeated often enough, it becomes truth. 21st Century politics created in the 1970's and 1980's, perfected by Karl Rove in the 1990's and 2000's, and now used by all in 2010's..........

Yeah, I posted on that thread too....... Showed how the statement I bolded above is also a little bit of lie also. Ryan's budget removes the "Donut Hole" for prescription medications for current Medicare enrollee's. So it does effect those currently on Medicare. You all need to research these guys. 5 minutes on the internet will debunk what they are saying. Just the same as you can do for the Democrats........

So if it's BS, show me where I'm wrong........ Here's your chance to dispell the myth and show us where my article is flawed and score some points for your candidate.

Flat out not true! The Ryan Budget, as passed by the House, would reopen the Medicare Prescription Plan "Donut Hole" immediately. This would cost seniors currently on Medicare up to $3000 extra every year if they had prescription drugs that ammounted to over $3600 annually. This loop hole was closed by the Affordable Care Act and is saving seniors money as we speak. Ryan eliminates the savings and effects seniors right now. http://mediamatters.org/research/2012/08/13/fox-spins-ryans-harmful-medicare-plan-as-safe-f/189308 And before you shoot the messenger of media matters, there are several links in this article to other sources that confirm the issue. Once again, these two don't think that America has the internet and can check what they say.

Ummmmmm....... Just so you know, the Ryan budget does the exact same thing! From the Miami Herald: President Obama he cut Medicare, Romney noted. “The president's idea, for instance, for Medicare was to cut it by $700 billion. That’s not the right answer,” Romney said. “We want to make sure that we preserve and protect Medicare.” But Romney’s criticism of the Medicare cuts also boomerangs on his newly chosen running mate, Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan, who implicitly voted for the same Medicare cuts as president Obama’s health plan known as ObamaCare. Under the 2011 Ryan plan bill approved by nearly every House Republican, ObamaCare would have been repealed almost entirely – except when it came to the Medicare reductions in future reimbursement rates to hospitals and drug and insurance companies. So Medicare’s bottom-line spending would have been about the same under ObamaCare or under what some are now calling RyanCare. Read more here: http://miamiherald.typepad.com/nakedpolitics/2012/08/romney-goes-on-offense-over-700-billion-in-medicare-cuts-will-it-be-a-boomerang-a-sword-or-a-shield.html#storylink=cpy So Romney and Ryan are out there wailing away about Obama cutting $700B from Medicare, but Mr. Ryan loved that cut so much that he left it in his budget !!!! They rail about the President doing something that they want to do! Are these two for real? Do they not think that most of America has the internet right now and can do some research. It took less than 24 hours after the 60 Minutes interview for this little gem to be debunked and thrown right back at them.

I agree that it's bloated and needs trimmed. But do you think that cutting entitlements will fix the problem? What about the military? Is that budget not bloated and inefficient? But I don't see anyone willing to take an axe to that. Then the Republicans would be howling like spider monkeys. And I know I'll get railed for this, but the USPS operated at a profit and did not need Federal assistance for years. Only when Congress passed some crazy law a few years ago that says they have to fund retirement out for 75 years (or something crazy) did it go into debt. No other department in the US Government has this requirement, so why does the USPS have it??? What if we told Congress they didn't get paid another nickel until thier pensions were funded for the next 75 years. How about defense, not another dime until all our current military get their healthcare and retirment funded for the next 75 years? So you're right, government is a joke and it starts in Congress. And let me ask you a question. If government is so inefficient and worthless, why does every single large corporation and industry pay millions of dollars each year lobbying our governement for handouts, tax credits, and support programs? For all the companies that say government is the problem, they all spend a ton of money to be in bed with it. Like a crack ***** sleeping with her pimp. Gotta get that fix.

You're right, there are a lot of ways special groups get taxed. All you crazy homeowners paying property taxes, all you drivers paying gas taxes, and the ones you mentioned. Maybe we could just reduce everyone to zero? Would that make you guys happy? Then we could borrow the billions for defense, clean water and food, roads and bridges, aviation? Or maybe we could just elimnate them. I'm sure that corporate America would have our needs at heart. Airlines can pay all the costs needed for air traffic control, oil companies can pay for the defense in the middle east to protect their shipments, corporate farming can pay for, well they'd pay for nothing because they wouldn't care about food saftey. Walmart and retail America would definitely pay to keep roads and bridges repaired so they can get all the goods to market, not sure about your neighborhod though. Maybe the oil companies would pay that too, because without roads there are no drivers and without drivers there is not gas...... hmmmm.... good idea. This plan is coming together. And I'm sure corporate America would band together to protect our borders. There's no way they want all these people streaming into the country that will work for 1/5th the cost of an American worker. And I'm sure big pharma will take up the war on drugs, they don't like the competition. Would that make you all happy? I think you're onto something. TAXES to ZERO in 2013! Start the ground roots efforts now. Congress will be all voluntary by 2016.

Yeah, brilliant! By the way, that would also repeal all the tax cuts that he put in place in the original stimulus and the continuation of the 2001 tax cuts he signed in December 2011. Republicans would never have the stones to raise taxes on EVERYONE in the country! Mr. King is the master of the Right Wing dog whistle!