The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email
Text Size

The Obama Watch

The One-Termer We’ve Been Waiting For

By on 8.4.11 @ 6:09AM

Unemployment and health costs are going up and Obama’s going down.

In February of 2009, President Obama went on the Today Show to discuss a variety of issues, including his plan to turn the economy around. When asked about the consequences of failure for his presidency, he replied with unusual frankness: “I will be held accountable.… If I don’t have this done in three years, then there’s going to be a one-term proposition.” The January 2009 unemployment rate had just been released a few days before that interview was broadcast, and it stood at 7.6 percent. Now, more than two and a half years later, the rate stands at 9.2 percent. Moreover, unemployment has only dipped below 9 percent in two of the past 26 months. This is the longest run of such rates since the Great Depression. In other words, Obama’s three years are nearly up and he most emphatically doesn’t “have this done.”

Even worse, an important driver of the dismal employment situation has been the President’s “signature achievement,” the ironically named Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). The law’s numerous new taxes and other disincentives for job creation, combined with the uncertainty over its ultimate fate in courts, began dragging the economy back down almost immediately after Obama signed it in March of 2010. During the first 16 months of Obama’s presidency, the economy was creating jobs at a reasonably healthy rate: “Between the recession’s low point in January 2009 and April 2010, net private sector job creation improved by 67,600 jobs a month.” Almost immediately following passage of Obamacare, however, monthly job creation flattened to less than 10 percent of that amount.

Is the assumption that PPACA prompted this slowdown in job growth a mere causal fallacy committed by right-wingers eager to damn “reform”? Not likely. While it is true that timing doesn’t necessarily imply causation, there is other evidence. Consider the case of Boston Scientific Corporation. Like all medical device manufacturers, Boston Scientific found itself on the receiving end of a large tax increase when Obamacare passed. What happens when the federal government adds to the cost of doing business for a particular industry by raising its taxes? The companies comprising that industry find a friendlier and cheaper place to do business. Boston Scientific has responded by reducing its workforce, particularly in Massachusetts, and is “investing $150 million and hiring 1,000 people in China.”

This shouldn’t be a surprise. In May of last year, the Massachusetts Medical Device Industry Council said that 90 percent of its members would be forced to cut back due to the new taxes imposed on them by Obamacare: “[The] companies say they’ll cut back on operational costs — and jobs — after a planned 2.3 percent tax on their products is implemented in 2013.” And the job losses have by no means been limited to medical device firms. One of the ways PPACA “saves” money is by reducing payments to hospitals, and health care workers across the country are paying the price. In April, Washington Hospital Center announced that it would lay off 200 workers. In June, Piedmont Healthcare of Atlanta said that it would eliminate 464 jobs. This pattern is being repeated over and over again all across the country.

And all of this damage was done despite the vociferous objections of the voters, who made it obvious in town halls, huge public demonstrations, and off-year elections that we wanted the Democrats to abandon their fixation on health care and focus on jobs. But the President and his congressional accomplices simply ignored us. In fact, President Obama insinuated in his 2010 State of the Union Address that the voters objected to Obamacare primarily because we just didn’t get it: “[T]his is a complex issue, and the longer it was debated, the more skeptical people became. I take my share of the blame for not explaining it more clearly to the American people.” Then, he and the Democrats on Capitol Hill rammed it down our throats, insisting that it was necessary to get the costs of American medical care under control.

Which bring us to the most galling irony of all — the Obama administration has now admitted that PPACA won’t reduce costs. Last month, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) issued a report showing that health care costs will rise faster with Obamacare in place than they would have in its absence: “CMS officials attributed the growth to an expansion of the insured population. Under the plan, an estimated 23 million Americans are expected to obtain insurance in 2014, largely through state-based exchanges and expanded Medicaid eligibility.” In other words, the President’s “signature achievement” actually exacerbates the main problem it was ostensibly designed to solve. Obamacare will “bend the cost curve” upward while expanding the unemployment rolls.

So, getting back to that 2009 interview on the Today Show, it’s pretty difficult to imagine that Obama will “have this done” by Election Day. Unemployment will still be high, and PPACA is the least popular entitlement in history. But will his prediction come true? Will he really be held accountable for sacrificing the recovery on the altar of government-run health care? Recent public opinion surveys suggest that he might. On July 29, Gallup reported that Obama’s job approval rating had dropped to an all time low of 40 percent. And this was a survey of “adults aged 18 and over.” His job approval numbers are doubtless even worse when only likely voters are surveyed. One can only hope that Obama is better at political prognostication than he is at being President.

About the Author

David Catron is a health care revenue cycle expert who has spent more than twenty years working for and consulting with hospitals and medical practices. He has an MBA from the University of Georgia and blogs at Health Care BS.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (418) |

The Bishop| 8.4.11 @ 6:16AM

It's hard to find another way to express it. This President is a turd in the punchbowl of the body politic. Happy Birthday you one-term dung cake.

jothepro| 8.4.11 @ 7:08AM

Ditto !!!!!

russel| 8.4.11 @ 11:35AM

Ditto's too . If this horrible experiment doesn't doom the socialists' , nothing will .

soljerblue| 8.4.11 @ 7:29PM

Let's hope it dooms the socialists before it dooms the country! When our Termite In Chief is finally out of office -- whenever that may be -- the damage he has already done will take years to fix. I shudder to think what we'll be left with if he lasts another term beyond this one.

john| 8.4.11 @ 1:33PM

MEGA DITTO

chuck| 8.4.11 @ 7:21AM

This is completely insulting! Even feces, when properly composted, is useful.

apnep| 8.4.11 @ 10:00AM

Hilarious, Chuck!!! To Bishop, hear hear!

Southern_Comment| 8.4.11 @ 7:58AM

Waste of a skin sack of crap? That's usually my description of him - oh well I describe all liberals that way - he's just another of the bunch, nothing special.

Teaghan| 8.4.11 @ 11:13AM

Accept that he's in charge of the punch bowl.

Jack in Wi.| 8.4.11 @ 11:22AM

All this about Obama is true and a lot more. But if we get a Bush, Romney, McCain etc. what's the point? We need a real revolution in this country and the only one leading it is Ron Paul. He has been right about foreign and domestic policy for 30 years.

kurgan| 8.4.11 @ 5:02PM

Jack,

I agree with what you say but please consider the totality of the situation that we're in.

Case 1, President Obama is re-elected, declares a public mandate and continues to spend the nation into fiscal oblivion. The day comes when the public sector and the welfare class can no longer be supported and hours later every urban center is in flames.

Arson is what the welfare class does when it isn't appeased.

Case 2, a Ron Paul is elected president and simply tells the truth to the public sector and the welfare class, "the nation can't afford you, you're going to have to tighten your belt just like everybody else" and shortly thereafter every urban center in the country is in flames.

The simple truth is that the United States of America has been pillaged by politicians, Democrat and Republican, pandering to their constituencies till the money is all gone.

Now, consider one more thing then I'll stop. When the USA is no longer the global cop, then the USA is out of the UN, NATO, Japan and South Korea. The middle East and so on. When there aren't five carrier battle groups on the prowl looking to take names and kick ass Jack, 'ol buddy, the planet earth will become a shooting gallery.

Take a good hard read at the middle third of the Book of Revelation in the Bible, it's coming as sure as politicians lie.

richard mcenroe | 8.4.11 @ 8:32PM

You keep saying "urban center in flames" like it's a bad thing.

darcy| 8.5.11 @ 1:47AM

To every cloud there's a silver lining, eh?

The silver lining I want to see is a people on their knees in repentance for the moral cesspool they've made of America by inviting -- by their silence, their willful ignorance, their greed, and their lust for power -- Communists in progressive garb to feast at the table of America's bounty and leave not a scrap of her former glory to future generations.

Pellingrino| 8.5.11 @ 4:20AM

Darcy, one can join the Texans and others this Saturday in Houston for a Day of Prayer. This is what we need. Refocus. Recommittment. Not just asking things of God our Father, no. Praising Him. Reading His word. And listening.

Please view this: http://texasndp.org/

Please join. Other cities and states need to do likewise.

kurgan| 8.5.11 @ 4:50AM

Richard,

I agree with your sentiment however there are a couple of bugs.

All, as in all, like every one of our transportation systems pass through major urban centers road, rail ship and air. Power generation for the most part is rural but transmission passes through major urban centers. Manufacturing and refining (what is left) is mostly concentrated in major urban centers.

Now, I as well as you can raise a garden and slaughter a hog or a yearling angus. I as well as you can put up garden produce, dry meat and hunt. Thing is your kid fell out of a tree and shattered an ankle. The ankle is going to require some real orthopedic surgery, plates and screws and the like. Or an old fashioned amputation. The place where this kind of surgery used to happed got burned flat a couple of years ago. Now what?

That's not to mention simple manufactured goods. Growing that garden with a sharp stick is going to be quite a chore. Now, I have a minor degree in metallurgy and have "apprenticed" with a couple of prominent gunsmiths. I can build a Jager or a Pennsylvania flint lock rifle from scratch. I'm descended from a line of Swiss blacksmiths. I can make you a hoe to use in your garden. Question is, how do I get the hoe to you?

Skippy| 8.6.11 @ 6:47PM

Such a descent into technological antiquity is highly unlikely.
If, as suggested, we have "urban centers in flames", it will take a certain show of force to convince the participants to go back to their burned-out homes, but go they will.
A revolution may be in the offing, but it need not be a bloodbath.
Keep your own street safe, like my pal did in LA during the Rodney King riots.
The night of the flames, he sat on his front step with a rifle, shotgun and pistol.
Eager participants beat feet when he stepped into the street as they drove near.
Urban parasites have little motivation to do...anything.
They will be easily quieted.
Permanently, if they choose.
Just stay armed and don't fret too much.
We should wait till the ballot is gone before we shift to the bullet.

Harry the Horrible| 8.4.11 @ 4:00PM

Call me a pessimist. People are underestimating this guy (or his puppeteers). We have not reached this point by accident.
I'll believe Obama is a one-termer when his successor is sworn in. Not before.

darcy| 8.5.11 @ 1:50AM

Here's the problem, Harry. If the same malignant puppeteers control the next president too, then what difference will it really make?

jolizoom| 8.4.11 @ 6:08PM

I would have said a turd in the toilet bowl.

Occam's Tool| 8.4.11 @ 8:30PM

No he isn't, Bishop. He's explosive diarrhea in the Punch Bowl.

Alan Brooks| 8.4.11 @ 9:43PM

Now you will not only run another McCain, you will this time elect him-- thanks for NOTHING in advance.

Alan Brooks| 8.4.11 @ 9:47PM

..."I'll believe Obama is a one-termer when his successor is sworn in."

Yes, his successor: another 2nd or 3rd rate ersatz Reagan. Again, thanks for nothing in advance; thanks for wasting 12 years with the Bushes; thanks for running ditzy old war vets in '96 and '08.

Grant| 8.5.11 @ 1:02AM

In the cesspool of life, all the really big chunks rise to the top.

old white guy| 8.5.11 @ 5:53AM

remember the turds that voted for him, they are still out there and just as stupid as they ever were.

shipley130| 8.7.11 @ 12:35PM

Another ditto. I'm glad we had a dung cake for president, because it really brought out all the other dung cake politicians. All the dung cakes were clinging together out in the open.

Intelligent Design| 8.4.11 @ 6:27AM

There is a massive loss of confidence, a sense among the public that the United States is doomed to economic mediocrity and erosion of our freedom. Obama and his Demo-Socialist allies have learned nothing from the collapse of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. In fact, they have tried to resurrect it. But in November 2012 the voters will heave Obama and more Senate Demo-Socialists into the garbage can of history.

Bob Grant| 8.4.11 @ 8:23AM

At this point economic mediocrity doesn't look so bad.

Nancy in NC| 8.4.11 @ 3:22PM

I so hope you're right, but there are so many idealogues out there voting for the Democrat party even if they ran Daffy Duck. Many of them don't know what Daffy stands for or who his running mate is, but it's not really important. They will vote that D no matter what, even if it is against their own self interest, and the Country be damned. I expect many are still waiting for their Obama stash to show up, and it's just lost in the mail. But the real useful idiots are those who embrace his class warfare mantra. They are certain the rich just don't pay their fair share regardless of how many statistics or facts one shows them.

With so many individuals that think the sun rises and sets in their rear ends, including Obeyme, I think we are doomed. John Adams said that a republic would only work in a moral or religious environment. Does anyone think that exists anymore?

George True| 8.4.11 @ 4:31PM

The exact quote: "The Constitution is intended for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the governance of any other."

Sheer eloquence from a giant of a man. And you may be right. We are in an era where half the people pay no tax while demanding the rich pay even more, and where people feel that because they exist and breathe, they have a right to free money and free health care paid for by others who get nothing for free. Truly moral and religious people do not think this way. We may very well be at the tipping point.

Adam| 8.5.11 @ 11:36AM

Half the people pay not income tax; stop spouting half truths to portray your preferred narrative. Ever heard of sales, state, property, gasoline, excise, etc. taxes?

If health care reform hadn't been hijacked by insurance companies, then there could be a reasonable public option a la Germany and the Netherlands that runs parallel to the private market.

And don't bring up religion, because more likely than not you mean YOUR particular brand of religion.

Agoraphobic Plumber| 8.5.11 @ 2:32PM

I think you have the wrong room. Daily Kos is down the hall, 2nd door on the (hard) left.

Adam| 8.5.11 @ 6:22PM

Oye pardon, I made the (hard) right, to the extreme!

I'm gonna leave this toss-off party and go toss off my boys in the Kos.

Pecos Pete| 8.4.11 @ 6:27AM

Obama should never have been a "first-termer" thus I have to wonder why anyone should conclude that he will be a "one-termer."

King O will campaign on class warfare issues pitting the rich against the poor. By November 2012 the economy will be even further in the ditch. Thus, the class warfare pitch will ring true with many voters.

Between now and November 2012 there will be so many budget and debt battles that many people will be driven to distraction. The MSM will promote calamity and catastrophe on a daily basis. And, we should not forget that the SEIU and organized labor (teachers' unions and public employee unions) will be contributing millions of dollars toward King O's reelection.

The war to defeat Obama is far from over, it has only just begun.

David W| 8.4.11 @ 8:26AM

I fear you are correct. not only will unions be shoveling cash into his re-election, the unions and the ACORN seedlings will be doing what they can to sway the election to their side (who knows, thanks to their efforts we may even see Ronald Reagan voting for Obama). Unfortunately I saw an "Obama 2012" sticker not long ago. Given the poor job I can't even begin to imagine what kind of person this is (the sticker appeared to be on a nice, new, relatively expensive car also - apparently they have too much money they don't really need).

JFGalt| 8.4.11 @ 12:26PM

The richest people in this country are Democrats and not Republicans despite what MSM tells us.

da monk| 8.4.11 @ 5:10PM

Mr. Galt: Show me a complete list comparing rich Democrats and rich Republicans

Al Adab| 8.4.11 @ 6:00PM

Is "rich" defined by net worth, liquid assets or something else. Then we could prepar a list. However with several percent of the American population having a net worth of over 1MM dollars it might get a bit long for this site.

Al Adab| 8.4.11 @ 6:01PM

BTW, that percentage may have changed somewhat today with the dow off over 500 and about 1500 in the last couple weeks. Lots of wealth lost.

beebop| 8.4.11 @ 6:41PM

When I see those bumper stickers, I wonder what it is that they find so appealing they want another serving of this shit sandwich?

Occam's Tool| 8.4.11 @ 8:31PM

It's the high fiber in the Shit Sandwich, Beebop. Adds to the texture.

Bob Grant| 8.4.11 @ 8:30AM

Excellent point. The only argument he has left is that conservatives are preventing a recovery by denying more stimulus spending. I'll be that within a year he will unroll some gigantic WPA-type stimulus plan.

" Aw baby, I wanna help ya out but those mean old TEA Baggers are holding up my final solution"

Republicans better have an answer for this or he might be able to pull this off.

Have you considered| 8.4.11 @ 10:31AM

I rarely watch TV new, even Fox, because I can't seem to not scream at the TV.

When channel surfing last night, I caught a bit on MSNBC regarding exactly this WPA tactic.

I don't remember who, but he specifically suggested that Obama float this possibility.

He said basically, Obama could say hey, we are going to hire 3mil of the unemployed to build roads and bridges, and we all know the Republicans will demonize it, so they will get painted as the mean, uncaring party, so this is the perfect campaign topic for Obama.

I of course found myself yelling at my poor TV again.

Bob Grant| 8.4.11 @ 11:38AM

I rarely watch news either and, yes, FOX news is equally annoying but for different reasons.

If you're looking for a good laugh watch Inspector America on History Channel. The whole show is based on this union-looking inspector who travels around the country searching for proof that our infrastructure is crumbling before our eyes and immediate action needs to happen ASAP!!. He claims hundreds of billions of dollars are needed immediately to make repairs or infrastructure Armageddon will pay us a visit.

The Obama fingerprints are all over it. So poorly disguised it's laughable. From the man on the street interviews (which, predictably, pander to certain demographics) to the not-so-subtle references to politicians who are favorable to the movement, it's pure propaganda. I'm waiting for Rachael Maddow to make an "impromptu" guest appearance.

I can just see this coming around the corner and as the employment number get more bleak, this will be appealing to many of the uninitiated. I just hope republicans/conservatives can devise their own "prosperity plan" to counter this.

Die Fledermaus| 8.4.11 @ 6:37PM

I always wonder who owns these cable channels. From you description it looks like the History Channel is owned by NBC or CBS.

Grzmlyk| 8.4.11 @ 9:14AM

Agreed, Pecos Pete.

I fear Obama will be coronated dictator for life.

The other day, while on the stair,
I met a president who wasn't there
He wasn't there again today
My god, can't we make him go away?

Would that he were JUST an empty suit. He's a malevolent force in the universe. He and his whole corrupt bunch are, in a word, evil.

Al Adab| 8.4.11 @ 11:39AM

GRZ:
There you go again with a dose of reality. Can't we all just live in LaLa land with the Left and get along. Apres moi le deluge'.

That said, the question is why are so many of our fellow citizens still of the belief that the Democart party is but one option for governing? By now it should be clear that they do not represent a viable alternative for directing this nation. Why do the "independants" pretend to consider the parties as though they both represent the best interests of the country?

Once again we experimented with central planning and central control and have found it wanting. The economic theory of the Left fails every time it is tried. Why must we subject ourselves every now and then to such abject failure in order to once again find our way? Those who fail to remember the past seem determined to repeat it.

Grzmlyk| 8.4.11 @ 12:11PM

Al Adab, I completely agree. But then again, I've always wondered why blacks vote so reliably Democrat when it is the Democrat party that has singlehandedly institutionalized racism, destroyed the black family and transformed this country into a tribal, bipolar, seething playground in which hate and resentment are actively fomented.

I also wonder why so many believe it is the right that is the party of violence (witness the latest smearing of conservatism by the mainstream media in the wake of the Anders Breivik mass killing. The guy was the PRODUCT of left-wing sacred cows: divorced parents, no father in his life and a socialist upbringing. Isn't that liberal nirvana?). It is always and invariably the left that becomes a mob, riots, burns, pillages, plunders and destroys. Look at any G-20 or IMF or WEF conclave - it's not conservatives smashing windows and hurling rocks at cops. It's not conservatives who are goons outside of polling places or union thugs intimidating honest people into handing over their money.

I also don't understand the power of the government to invoke the "make the rich pay their fair share" and the people - like automatons programmed for class warfare - all move en masse with pitchforks and torches against the very people who make this country work. And yet, somehow, each and every one of THE "social justice" seekers thinks they should be denied nothing, have no luxury withheld from them, in maintaining their cushy lifestyles.

I don't understand why leftists hate religion, and yet maintain the zeal of the converted, unshakeable in their faith despite empirical evidence to the contrary - in their own religion of global warming and/or Keynesianism.

I don't understand why the superrich are excoriated for their right-wing views when in fact the Democrat party is the home of the vast majority of Wall Street, Hollywood, Big Real Estate, the big chiefs in the transportation industry, big Pharma, Big Oil, Big Insurance, Big Media and the entire education infrastructure.

Why they looked at Obama and did not see the empty husk of a petulant, spoiled, ideologically blinkered, incompetent adolescent, which was eminently obvious to anyone who cared to take off their class-warfare/crony capitalist glasses the first time he spoke on national TV.

I don't understand why people don't look at the Democrat sex scandals, the influencers like Michael Moore, Matt Damon, Warren Buffett, Bill Maher and on and on - and don't see the yawning chasm between how they live and how they tell us we have to live.

I don't understand why so many people want to reject their own humanity and good sense in order to join the Progressive Cult, which is patently destructive, immoral and evil.

I don't understand why, no matter how many times socialism collapses in a heap of human misery, murder and corruption, people still think it is humanity's only shot at salvation.

I don't understand why so many people look at the world and perceive the opposite of what is.

But I do know this: it is the hubris that destroyed a once-great nation.

Al Adab| 8.4.11 @ 12:54PM

The Left hate religion because it posits a moral universe in opposition to their Faith in a manmade heaven on earth. They are more fundamentally "religious" that evanagelicals but their Faith lies in power, control and idols such as Choice, Tolerance, Gaia, Diversity and Welfare

Grzmlyk| 8.4.11 @ 1:32PM

I agree, Al Adab; what flabbergasts me is that they see, say, Christians as crazed fundamentalist zealots for whom faith supercedes science (oddly, they don't feel that way about Muslims), but they do not see that they themselves are crazed, fundamentalist zealots for whom faith supercedes science.

But yeah, it is the existence of an absolute morality that is anathema to them.

In its place, what they have created is the ultimate religion that elevates narcissim and platitudes to the status of godhead embodied in the worship of the self.

And salvation comes cheap for the liberal: All you have to do is regurgitate the litergy of shibboleths about diversity, multiculturalism, the rich paying their "fair share," tolerance, saving the planet, caring about the victims of American White Male oppression, yada yada yada, and the secular god of All Things Pop Culture smiles upon you for your beatific compassion.

You don't even half to lift a finger. Pretty sweet deal, eh?

And if you make the supreme sacrifice to the god of narcissism by insisting over and over again that one group of people you don't know give its hard-earned money to another group of people you don't know, you are automatically a saint.

Then you can go out and be greedy, selfish, boorish, thugish, profligate, promiscuous, irresponsible, larcenous, covetous, homicidal, whatever - you can do whatever your little heart desires because you have been inoculated from the repercussions of your behavior simply by spouting liberal orthodoxy verbatim.

Seems to me that, every time people have turned away from a supreme entity and worshipped their own succor, it hasn't ended well.

da monk| 8.4.11 @ 5:16PM

Al Adab: Why do you associate morals with religion. Do you have to be religous to have morals? Are you saying all those who are agnostics or atheists are immoral? Come on now be serious

Al Adab| 8.4.11 @ 5:57PM

Monk:
Oh come now. Re-read. The moral universe of the religious stands in opposition to the moral universe as perceived by the utopians who oppose religion.

Wester Civ has tried for 2500 years to create a secular morality. Stoics came closest but as of today none such has emerged.

Obviously that is not to say those opposed are immoral, only that their morality is one of relativism and perhaps (I said perhaps) founded on convienience rather than accepted protocals.

My point is that even the secular have Faith and worship. As I mentioned their idols are false. Have a great evening.

Occam's Tool| 8.4.11 @ 8:32PM

No, Monk, but secularists steal Judeo-Christian values to support a moral worldview. They take, but do not contribute, to the basic morality of a sane society.

darcy| 8.5.11 @ 2:08AM

Rather than stealing Judeo-Christian values, I would say that secularists distort and then re-package them to fit their current agenda.

There is no moral worldview apart from that defined in the Ten Commandments; all other worldviews are immoral as they have their source in man, who arrogates to himself the right to interpret reality and fashion a code that pleases his desires.

Controse| 8.4.11 @ 2:16PM

On the contrary all these behaviors are easy to understand. The least among us are always seduced by the something-for-nothing offered by the left. Self-esteem without accomplishment, grades without study, money without working, vote without thought, health without healthy habits, families without commitment, etc, etc.

Grzmlyk| 8.4.11 @ 3:21PM

I don't know - every single person I work with professionally, who I see socially, and come into contact with by happenstance is a liberal who has bought hook, line and sinker into this crap.

I know a very successful, wealthy woman who is plugged into the Palo Alto, CA smart set - she wishes her son were gay.

My best friend - a highly intelligent, accomplished musician, flipped from being a moderate conservative to a socialism-spouting Obama acolyte.

My boss, a law school graduate and otherwise responsible person, is a Keynesian whose most heartfelt desire is that America becomes an out-and-out socialist country, and he believes the rapture is at hand.

My ex-girlfriend, a fairly level-headed, pragmatic person who genuinely cares about others, called me on the day of Obama's election ecstatic that we had finally elected a black god as president who would deliver unto us the social justice we so richly deserve.

My former college roommate, a bright attorney, has chosen as his pet cause the abolition of fracking and any other pursuit of domestic energy self sufficiency.

I have another female friend - a sharp, witty person, who is a dyed-in-the-wool leftist - even though she admits she's a hypocrite when it comes to her willingness to pay her taxes.

I could go on and on and on. What we are witnessing is nothing less than group insanity.

It's not just idiots or the least among us - those are the pawns. The problem is that our population has reached a critical mass whereby the culture is entirely in the hands of the other kinds of liberals - the fools, the class warriors and the crooks.

What mystifies me is how pervasive is the reflexive leap at fool's gold among people who consider themselves highly-evolved, highly-discerning and constitutionally immune to being taken in by crass scams such as the Nigerian Prince who wants to park his $500 million in your bank account for a few days - if only you'll give him your bank account and social security numbers.

And yet the promise of leftism is every bit as obvious and phony as that scam.

I will never understand it, except that I think it's a kind of group hypnosis, a collective, silent agreement to embrace an utterly false consciousness.

Mankind is highly susceptible to mythologizing himself; for years that mythology took the form of patriotic pride and a "my country tis of thee" certitude that, whatever else, America was the land of the free and the home of the brave.

Since the 60s, that mythology has been inverted; America is now the great evil in the world, the prime mover for all of humanity's ills.

And as we mythologize our country, we mythologize our own personages, but in a very, very different way.

We are so collectively wealthy, so steeped in comfortable affluence, so surrounded by a plethora of luxurious gadgets and gizmos, so unmarred by existential threats, that we have given oursleves over to the indulgence of our every whim, our every fantasy, our every delusion; the lip service we pay to our country being evil is simply cover for our naked aggrandizement of ourselves.

We have lost sight of a work ethic, of personal responsibility, of the strength of rugged individualism.

We have succombed to a cultural narcissism that would put the bullying hegemonic presumption of the Roman Empire to shame. We have gone soft, in other words, and opportunistic disease has completely compromised the body politic - as it did in Rome.

Entropy has had its way with America. There is no recovery forthcoming.

George True| 8.4.11 @ 4:42PM

Griz, after about five or six back-to-back $1.5 trillion dollar annual deficits in a row, when our money buys only half as much, a lot of those self-deluded people we all know will finally wake up. Not before. When they realize that they personally have been made to pay a terrible price for the profligacy of their leftist gods, then and only then will they begin to see reality.

Thom| 8.4.11 @ 5:16PM

Griz,
This is what happens when children don't grow up and you give them power they can't handle IMHO. You are now officially a child until age 26 via government decree. Each generation since WWII has smoldered it offsprings with material riches and sheltered them from the reality of the world for more and more years until now many young adults don’t know what “work”, “income taxes” are until they enter their thirties and beyond. Many go through life trying to hang on to that utopian world their parents gave them and the government school system indoctrinated into them. If you go through 40% or more of your life living off someone else’s money (free education/day care, free health care, free housing, free food, free retirement, etc) conditioned response takes over….. The so called Greatest Generation taught the Worst Generation to expect much of their life’s expenses to be provided or greatly subsidized thus every generation that follows is more entitlement driven and narcissistic in nature. The whole concept of self-worth and the esteem that comes from being a productive human being is being replaced by a Borg collective of self-absorbed drones that can’t get through the day without the latest “I” thing plugged into one or more bodily orifices…. Sound like any of your “friends”?

kurgan| 8.4.11 @ 5:55PM

I've read what you wrote and I think that I'm on the same page with you. I recommend that you abandon these people that worry you so. I've read the Bible through seven times. Please read second Timothy, third chapter. Read the fourth chapter too, the one about rejecting sound doctrine.

You seem to me to be a person of intellect. My question to you is what plans have you made to preserve yourself? People don't plan to fail, people fail to plan. I'm not advocating that you buy a gun or that you turn your house into a bunker. Do you have things around that will see you through some bad days? Do you have books that have the information that will help you along? Do you know people that you can count on to help you if you need it same as they can count on you?

Look for people that share your views, court and cultivate their friendship. In the times that are coming we will all need friends to watch after each other while the idiots are busy dying off.

Thom| 8.4.11 @ 6:55PM

kurgan,
I have a plan "B", been working on part of it since 1994. I've given this same advice to many in different forms. A network of people and complimenting skill sets are key. I'm fond of telling likeminded people, Rambos will be found alongside the road in the ditch dead...... I'm also fond of telling some people that you cannot "plan" out everything but you must be adaptive enough to not become part of the problem early on.....

Occam's Tool| 8.4.11 @ 8:35PM

Mr. G---might I strongly suggest that you move to Cullman, Alabama and start a business there? They'd like you, the girls are gorgeous, the bass fishing is great, and my relatives could get you settled in. You'd be 45 minutes from Huntsville.

You'd also become a little more optimistic about our future. The South is going to rise---this time in a non-racist fashion---and save this country.

Grzm, dump them homies| 8.5.11 @ 5:00AM

Dump the girlfriend like yesterday. OK, she's your ex? Good move. Don't change it.

Tell the Palo Alto chic she ain't one. (No woman her age -- real woman with a soul -- isn't a bit goosebumped and thrilled over even the notion of grandkids -- as in, like ones that will bear some family resemblance/traits. Two homos just don't cut it.

Ask the fracking counselor dude if he powers up his cell phone, electric razor, iPod, iPad, alarm clock, dishwasher, fridge, freezer, AC unit, heater, hot water heater, work PC, and just how long he can live without lightbulbs, email, texting, the web, frozen pizza, Edy's Mint Chocolate Chip Ice Cream, OJ, or size C, D, AA, and AAA batteries. Ask him. Ask him how cool he'll feel washin' his clothes down at the creek with a 1890's washboard. No soap or box of Tide because that would require a 18-wheeler and burnin' fossil fuels. Dude would be screaming for his mommy just 72 hours in.

Tell boss man to spend 6 months in Belarus (White Russia). Oh, like, he'll dig it. At week #19 he'll either already be in prison (never to be heard or seen again -- with no toothbrush) or he'll be personally begging on his knees the US ambassador in Minsk at Starovilenskaya 46 to ensure his safe passage back to our fruited plains.

That's enough for now.

Just be aware, cognizant of a well-worn and tested truth: You can judge a man by the company he keeps.

John II| 8.4.11 @ 12:27PM

"Why must we subject ourselves every now and then to such abject failure in order to once again find our way?"

Whaddaya mean "we," Allie? You and I didn't vote for the bastards. And don't forget: the Left's economic theory is in service to its will to power. And the theory is time-tested and experimentally validated: the Marxian-lite Keynesian wham-wham is deliberately intended as a means to foster a degenerate and dependent culture of Eloi-like losers eager to be told what to do by their masters. The dependency culture is the end-game for the Left, and the creeps are doing rather well.

When the Professor was running for President (overtly, that is) in 2008, a college sophomore at a pep rally was asked what she thought about the arguments regarding socialized medicine. Her snappy response: "I don't care about any arguments--I just want my medical care to be free!"

THAT is the mindset of the Professor and his political base--and THAT is rapidly becoming the mindset of more than half the addled electorate.

The "abject failure" of Obamanomics is a colossal political winner for the spoiled punks who advocate it. The end they seek is not prosperity and freedom; the end is power .

Why do I have to keep reminding conservatives of these elemental points?

"Oh, sometimes I think I will just go mad!" (Groucho Marx quoting Greta Garbo, 1929)

Grzmlyk| 8.4.11 @ 12:38PM

Very, very good comment, John.

But the truth is, as a culture, we - America - has allowed this to happen.

When a Barack Obama rises to the office of presidency, the apotheosis of corruption is complete. His elevation on the national stage is a damning indictment of our country, and proof, in my opinion, that the Constitution turned out to be suicide pact after all.

Else, why did we end up as flotsam on this bank and shoal of time?

That is what is so depressing. The American Experiment eventually ran out of steam and imploded due to the oppressive weight of greed and lust for power - ever was it thus.

We are now witnessing that implosion.

Al Adab| 8.4.11 @ 12:51PM

A collective "we" John, but thanks.

righthook | 8.4.11 @ 1:31PM

He's going to run his re-election campaign on this "fair share" class warfare message. How much longer do you think Americans are going to listen to this garbage?

Maddox| 8.4.11 @ 5:36PM

Until they learn there is not enough to give a fair share to all. The wealth of America will run out and there will be hunger, want, and chaos. Then they will realize it was all a lie, when it is too late to save the golden goose that was America from the butchers.

Goatlocker| 8.4.11 @ 3:47PM

I also fear that you are correct. With 47% of the voting public dependent on the federal government for their welfare or jobs (and many others simply too stupid to understand what an unmitigated disaster Obama is), he is likely to be reelected. In that contingency, our country may well be too far gone to save by anyone.

Negro X| 8.4.11 @ 6:31AM

Pete,
You hit the nail on the head, stand by for racism on a daily basis.

Brian Mc| 8.4.11 @ 7:03AM

I'll take it a step further. This country, thanks to the alien, is turning into a battle ground for the haves and have-nots. If there is an overthrow of everything we see as evil, the have-nots will see this as an unwillingness to share. After all, they have a sense of entitlement which has replaced their self determination. Fueled by the media, this will escalate into only God knows what.

righthook | 8.4.11 @ 1:33PM

This is exactly what Obama is counting on. He's clearly trying to destroy our economy and capitalistic system. The more people he puts on food stamps, the bigger his base.

Maddox| 8.4.11 @ 5:38PM

It doesn't matter if the alien is re-elected and evil is defeated or if the traitors retain power, the damage is done. Either way, most of the free riders are going to be hurting and we will face "God knows what."

Shamus| 8.4.11 @ 7:01AM

I think we should compromise. I didn't want him to have any terms and he wants two. So we'll compromise on one.

Southern_Comment| 8.4.11 @ 8:00AM

but throw in the adjunct that everything he signed over the past three years is null and void - and then take out an ad in the NYT and HuffPo that reads.
We were only kidding libs - do you think we'd REALLY give you any kind of real responsibility???

jd| 8.4.11 @ 7:02AM

Pete,

I couldn't agree more. My prediction is, he WILL be re-elected.

wodiej| 8.4.11 @ 7:04AM

good grief, you think 67,600 jobs created a month is a success? Really??

Keith I| 8.4.11 @ 7:11AM

I have owned my own Architecture and Engineering business for 21 years. EVERY conversation that I have with other business owners begin the same way. "How are you doing? Hanging on.....barely". We are in a mallaise but this one has been Caused BY THE GOVERNMENT. It is so dismal that it is difficult to focus on the work that we do have.

We can probably hang on for another 18 months. Another 5 1/2 years...I have little doubt that most of us will be through. What will we do? I guess pray more.

chuck| 8.4.11 @ 7:24AM

Ditto that! Been in the construction industry for 30 years, and it's the same for everyone I do business with, just barely hanging on.

Kurt in S.L.C.| 8.4.11 @ 9:14AM

My family has been in the construction business for 60 years,most of our employees,the one's still on the payroll anyway,don't have Ivy League degrees but they are sharp. I would be surprised if any of them vote for the Zero this time around,as I said they are not idiots

Mimi| 8.4.11 @ 7:31AM

Here too! I asked my SON , "HOWS BUSINESS"? Always the same...answer " Just paying the bills"

Have you considered| 8.4.11 @ 10:45AM

Keith, I feel for you. I too have been in construction for 30+ years on the administrative side.

There is one sector that is doing quite well. MBE/WBE/DBE and Vet Owned business'.

You might want to figure out how to restructure, like finding a veteran to put in an equity share, and get the Wonka golden certificate as a vet owned business.

There is a lot of public works projects at all levels of government (city/county/state/fed/universities,etc..) both small and large that need their "participation" goals met.

Just a thought.

righthook | 8.4.11 @ 1:34PM

You're so right. Small businesses will not be able to hold on another 5.5 years. It will be a miracle if most can make it through the elections. He has put such a stranglehold on private business. Wait until Obamacare fully kicks in...

Mimi| 8.4.11 @ 7:15AM

I don't think even the "True American" voters in the DONKEY party will vote for him this time. They did so reluctantly in 2008, prefering Hillary, and won't chance it this time. In fact, look for signs of another DEM running against him in the PRIMARY....and then there is always resignation. He needs to stop Shivering inside, he's in so far over his head! The " COOL " is GONE !
As the Conservatives in the GOP primary get their running shoes on and present their "PROGRAMS", as the NEW ...Newt did on Hannity yesterday things at our end will certainly get optimistic and hopeful!

Conservative View| 8.4.11 @ 10:25AM

ET TU BRUTE, THEN SO FALLS - - -

Mimi is very likely to be correct. I suspect that even now in hushed and whispered tones comments in hidden Congressional cloak rooms are discussions over the possibility of a Democratic primary in 2012. O'bamma is not a leader, he has shown that time and time again. He can't make a statement, and then stick to it. Again, he has shown that time and time again. It took Ried and Boehner working together to get any sort of deal done. The two of them entirely by passed the President.

Unemployment is up, the country is broke, the people are rising into a third party, job creation is at an all time low, and the DOW has tanked. How much more can the Democrats endure? I suggest they have already passed that tipping point.

The President is scared spitless over just this future. He is running to the well of contributors time and time again in an effort to drain the well before anyone else can get to it. If a second Democrat runs in a primary against him, the well will be dry. At least that is his hope. But, if Hillary were to toss her hat into the ring, I suspect that the knives will come out, and the President will have scant, begrudging at best, support from the Party heavy weights.

I'm not worried about the President regaining office in 2012. I'm worried about the other Democrat we haven't met yet.

Al Adab| 8.4.11 @ 12:56PM

So, "this is the way the world ends, not with a bang but a whimper."

saleboter| 8.4.11 @ 7:20AM

Some people work for a living, others vote for a living. Unfortunately there are way too many of the latter

Timothy L. Pennell| 8.4.11 @ 7:29AM

Don't worry. I heard that he's "Pivoting back to Jobs" now. I heard something about a "Laser Beam", and some kinda Focus" thing. I'm told that Jobs are the 1st thing he thinks about when he wakes up, and the last thing he thinks about, before he goes to bed. I think he said that we need STIMULUS, now. "We've gotta create Jobs".
I know what you're thinking: "This isn't new. He's said he was gonna "Focus like a Laser Beam" 10 TIMES. We already went the STIMULUS route. He's PIVOTTED so many times, I'm getting dizzy."
I know. I get it. He SAYS lots of things. That doesn't make him a LIAR. Does it?
I know that he got his $900 BILLION Stimulus Package, and gave it to the States, to ensure that his Dues Paying, CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTING, Public Employee Union buddies, stayed in their jobs, and KICKED BACK MILLIONS in the 2010 Election.
But, that doesn't mean he would do that again. Does it?
He said there would be Hundreds of Thousands of "Shovel Ready Infrastructure Jobs", in that Stimulus. Then he JOKED about, how, "Un-Shovel Ready, those jobs really were". Everybody had a good laugh. Now, he says he wants an Infrastructure Bank, for all of those NEW Shovel Ready Infrastructure Jobs, that he's gonna create.
I know. "Fool me once" But, you can't possibly believe that he could pull the football away, AGAIN. Do you, Charlie Brown?
There's no way, that he would have the BALLS, to look us in the face, and then SPIT in eye, by using this NEW STIMULUS, as a Personal SLUSH FUND, like he did the 1st time. Is there?
Could he really be the MARXIST, that we think he is? Has an ENTIRE LIFETIME, immersed in MARXIST/COMMUNIST/SOCIALIST/MAOIST Ideology, from his Parents to his Grandparents, and his Mentors, and his College Professors and his Community Organizing days, really made an impression on how he sees the world? On how he sees US?
I wouldn't worry too much about this upcoming Election. Our ride to HELL, is just getting started. Remember, his "Policies" are just getting in to gear. Wait til INFLATION rears it's ugly head. The Job Losses are about to reach CRITICAL MASS.
Ladies and gentlemen. I give you The Fall Of ROME. The END of The British Empire. The fulfilment of every prophet who KNEW, that America could only be defeated, from WITHIN.
Me? I'm not worried about the next election. I'm more concerned on what's left of our REPUBLIC, come November, 2012.
I'm worried about what President Pivot Man at a Circle Jerk has planned for us, now.

Mimi| 8.4.11 @ 7:46AM

Tim ...This guy is OVER ! What we should worry now is... What can we do to prevent this ever happening again in this country. We can take an eraser to his STUFF...unravel the treachery, rebuild the dismantled LIBERTY and deliberate destruction. Newt says he'll do it 5 minutes after being sworn in with 200 executive orders....DING...It's GONE! ........Yea , I know it will take time....maybe , The Newt will resurrect himself!

Timothy L. Pennell| 8.4.11 @ 7:54AM

The Newt is dead. Long live the Newt's ideas.
That doesn't mean that he's not a valuable asset. Let's hope that he will offer his wise council, to whomever we run, this Election

joanne| 8.5.11 @ 1:53PM

Mimi,
I pray that you are right. I know people are dumb as rocks, but honestly, I can't see also anyone wanting more of this..malaise, debt, unemploynent, and feeling hopeless!

joanne| 8.5.11 @ 1:53PM

Mimi,
I pray that you are right. I know people are dumb as rocks, but honestly, I can't see also anyone wanting more of this..malaise, debt, unemploynent, and feeling hopeless!

John Navratil| 8.4.11 @ 8:19AM

I just wanna' assure the American people - people who work hard and play by the rules - that my re-election is the first thing I think of when I get up in the morning and the last thing I think of when I go to bed at night.

Appleby| 8.4.11 @ 7:32AM

I wish we had somebody to offer in his place, who would use has his slogan THE SIXTIES ARE OVER. Because at the heart of Zeros programs and schemes is the firm belief that its 1968 in America.

Its time to stop the Merry Pranksters and replace them with adults. Do we actually HAVE any adults to offer?

Conservative View| 8.4.11 @ 10:30AM

I'm sure he really wants to believe that. The protesting, bra burning, rable rousers of the sixties are who now? Why that's granny with her walker who joined the Tea Party. Who do you think makes up the Tea Party? It's the same people that marched in 68!, who went to Woodstock, (or said they did) who burned a draft card. Right the 60's are over. Now when a million of them collect on the mall, they actually pick up their trash. Let's hear it for the 60's!

Appleby| 8.4.11 @ 11:24AM

Actually, the Hippie Scum was a very small percentage of the Baby Boomers; most of us were the first ones in our families to graduate from university (or sometimes even from high school) and were sweating to pay our bills, while in school, working more than one part-time job while taking a full-time class load. We knew that stuff was garbage then, and we know it now.

The difference is that now our group is the Tea Party, and theirs is still the hippie scum, and they are still getting most of the press.

John II| 8.4.11 @ 12:58PM

That's true, Appie. Midge Decter wrote a book about it back in the 70's ("Liberal Parents, Radical Children"): the so-called sixties decade (really, about 1965-75) was dominated in the public imagination by a tiny minority of spoiled-brat malcontents fearful of the military draft; when the draft ended in 1973, two years before American disengagement from Vietnam, the "anti-war" protest quickly fizzled.

The media blew the whole sixties thing out of proportion because the media themselves were dominated by the liberal parents of the radical brats in the streets. We're still living with the consequences of that colossal cultural fraud. It's amazing how so small a segment of the population can exercise so much baleful influence. The ontology of it all eludes me.

And now back to "It Came from Outer Space" (1953), an underrated sci-fi tale in which the origins of the Lefty mindset are explored metaphorically. The consequences are anticipated in the superior 1956 version of "Invasion of the Body Snatchers."

Merlin| 8.4.11 @ 7:06PM

Appleby,

I could support any of our current candidates except Romney. My fear is that Caine, Bachman, etc will divide the conservative/tea party vote and we end up with Romney. Probably what Obama is counting on.

bennyhavens| 8.4.11 @ 7:36AM

Remember that the same people who voted for him the first time are still out there. He may have lost some “independents” but we don’t know that for sure. We only know what the media spoon-feeds the public.

The big money supporters, Soros, Gates, Spielberg, Heinz and the Unions will gladly give to keep him in the White House.

The Media will go into a full court press and attack any candidate from the Republican Party. It will not be a campaign of ideas and solutions but rather character assassination, innuendo and name-calling.

Mimi| 8.4.11 @ 7:53AM

Did you ever see FULL COURT DEFENSE !!?

THAT WILL BE US !!

martin j smith| 8.4.11 @ 7:52AM

My problem is not with Obama--we ( most of us ) know ho he is. My problem is who is our defender--the opposition to Obama or will they even be one ? Let me explain. John McCaine. I observed his behaviour during his so called run and I would almost bet that he purposely threw it away. That is right, you heard me--he lost on purpose. we had two candidates neither of which should have been up for a Presidential vote --neither !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now we watch as our fearless leaders ( Mitch McC and John the B ) seem to be imitating John McC to the letter. They did nothing to stem the economic down turn in even the minutest way . Obama is getting what he wants but we-are going to get devoured.
I do not trust these guys. I would say that if they were more open thus being honest about how and why they justify this deal I might feel differently but I do not see it. I am very pessimistic about our future. However, I have no choice but to vote AGAINST THE SOCIALISTS. I hope the Tea Party continues to press BOTH PARTIES especially our side ( because the SOCIALISTS ARE A LOST CAUSE ) When we have leaders who are unafriad and willing to stand up for our nation I will reconsider.

oldfart| 8.4.11 @ 8:24AM

A second vote that Sen. McCain blew it on purpose.

David T| 8.4.11 @ 9:46AM

oldfart--Both you and mr. smith give McCain too much credit. McCain did not blow it on purpose--he blew it because he was incompetent. He was Bob Dole without the charisma and imagination.

oldfart| 8.4.11 @ 10:10AM

LOL point taken

Grzmlyk| 8.4.11 @ 10:34AM

Yeah, he doesn't ever have to worry about being invited to join MENSA.

What kills me is how many of these execrable, stupid, useless human beings wind up flourishing in Congress/the Senate. I mean, Harry Reid is only slightly more evolved - and less attractive - than an earthworm. And yet he hangs onto power and actually convinces a fair amount of people that he's not a waste of human tissue.

Ditto Nancy Pelosi - a loud-mouthed, empty-headed, narcissistic PTA mom from hell on steroids who doesn't have the brains God gave your average mollusk.

And of course the poster child for non-entities everywhere: the crushingly empty Barack Obama, who couldn't hold a job as the second-shift grill man at a rural McDonalds if he weren't inflated like a Macys' Thanksgiving balloon by the greed and vanity of his puppetmasters.

Appleby| 8.4.11 @ 11:26AM

Just like the UN, eh? People who are capable of getting real jobs would never go into politics full time.

Al Adab| 8.4.11 @ 11:43AM

That's part of the problem Appleby. Those are the very people who should be conducting the public business. It happens in many towns and local governments, why not the national one?

SUBVET| 8.4.11 @ 3:36PM

@GRZ.......O man hold a job he has never held a "job" just a 127 day stint in congress if you want to call that a job.

darcy| 8.5.11 @ 2:46AM

"I mean, Harry Reid is only slightly more evolved - and less attractive - than an earthworm." I needed a laugh. That was great.

Grzmlyk| 8.4.11 @ 10:19AM

Martin, I think you are right on the money; the ruling class is the ruling class in DC, and it doesn't matter one whit which letter is behind any of the names.

The game in DC is power. And power is attained and held by confiscating money from one group of people and doling it out to constituents, lobbyists and influencers. Period.

DC is not about making America wealthier, fairer, stronger, better educated or healthier; it's not about preserving rights, it's not even about promoting the green agenda, feminism, alternate sexualities or even socialism.

It's about Power. And money IS power.

That's why Repubs, Dems and the Mainstream Media - even some ostensible conservatives - are commiting character assassination on a scale never seen before against anybody who represents the Tea party's interests - because the Tea party is not of the ruling class and, as such, threatens to cut off the oxygen supply of the power elite - MONEY.

There is only one way this is going to change. Revolution. And, let me tell you, the kleptocracy that now rules in DC will NOT go gently into that good night - which is why the second amendment is so important as we enter this period of total collapse.

aj| 8.4.11 @ 10:39AM

Careful, big guy. The 'R' word is not a good word. The 2nd Amendment is most valuable as a distillation of the independent spirit of a large minority of the American people. That it exists at all will obviate the necessity of revolt (which always turns out badly in real life).

Grzmlyk| 8.4.11 @ 11:25AM

Actually, the first American revolution didn't turn out badly.

I quote from the Declaration of Independence:

When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."

Call it what you want - it has become necessary; the system will never be fixed from within. NEVER. We have become a banana republic.

And, in any case, the die is already cast; economic collapse is inevitable; it has already begun. It is from that upheaval that a new government must emerge.

Have you considered| 8.4.11 @ 12:52PM

Hey Grz, have you ever read the Out of The Ashes series of novels?

It is frankly inspiring in how we could emerge from the ashes...these particularly contemplate nuclear destruction, but the principles are the same.

I have read the series twice because I found them so inspiring. Very Randian.

Have you considered| 8.4.11 @ 11:47AM

aj, I'm not so sure I agree with you, by simple virtue that the US was the culmination of one.

Revolution is a fearsome prospect.

I have seen this word crop up here in the U.S. more in the last couple years than I ever have before, and I have been a news and politics junkie for over 30 years.

Every male member of my family sans one, has served in one of the armed forces. I have asked every one of them if they would open fire on Americans, like the Syrians.

They each responded with...well it depends, but they were inclined to say no they would not.

The reminded me that they have taken the Oath of Office to Uphold and Defend the Constitution, and that oath does not ever expire. There is no repudiation of that oath upon discharge. The answer seems to revolve around the reason for insurrection. If the government is imposing unconstitutional laws, or acting in an unconstitutional way, then their duty would be to stand with the insurrectionists. But this is a subjective determination.

I will point out that our Constitution specifically limits the funding of an Army for a two year period. This is because, at our founding, a standing army was considered, not only very expensive, but very dangerous to the citizens, and that it was thought likely that tyranny could be the result.

Well, this is exactly where we are today.

We have a standing army that will be commanded to put down any insurrection...the question is...will they obey and really fire on us?

As someone recently posted, we have 3 means of changing our government, the soap box, the ballot box, and the ammo box. So far the first two do not seem to be working, but there is still 2012 in the not to distant future.

Was it Jefferson who said, the tree of liberty must, from time to time, be refreshed by the blood of tyrants and patriots?

Grzmlyk| 8.4.11 @ 12:24PM

Your Jefferson quote is apt; the fact is, we have rejected the Constitution virtually in its entirety, and the reality is that the American government has been usurped by a creeping communist coup over the last 40 years or so.

Most revolutions - particularly in the 20th century - have been some form of socialist revolution. The usurpation of an ancien regime with an utterly fictitious construct. Just as in the populist French Revolution, the chaos that ensues is exploited by totalitarians, extremists and score settlers.

That is NOT the kind of revolution to which I refer. I refer to a restoration, if you will, of American Constitutional government, one that has new guardrails built into it to prevent tyanny from entering the halls of liberty under the guise of ever-burgeoning "rights."

Maybe the term "restoration" would be more palatable to AJ. But, again, whatever you call it, upheaval is upon us. The collapse of our economy, our instititions, our coccooned, NPR-fed complacency will shortly be a thing of the past simply as the result of tectonic shifts that have already occurred. We are already over the cliff. We just haven't hit pavement yet.

The question is, what form of government do we want when - and if - we emerge from the rubble?

Have you considered| 8.4.11 @ 1:00PM

Grz, I can tell by your posts that you seem to be a strict constructionist, and I always enjoy your posts.

It is odd that you say a "restoration" as that is exactly what my brother, who served in the Army says is needed.

He stated that in his oath, that they pledge to not support or incite a revolution, therefore this word is not in his vocabulary. However, it is silent on a "restoration".

Al Adab| 8.4.11 @ 2:52PM

What we ll call the American Revolution was in fact a war of independance. It is arguable that the "Civil War" was such also. In any event, the possibility does exist that a War of Independance by several of the States is not out of the question. What form exactly that might take and what the response of the national government might be is debatable.

Already we see the national government suing states when they attempt to enforce federal law on their own behalf. In that sense the "Revolution" has already begun. Thirty some states are attempting to settle the "immigration" (actually illegal migration) issue. The Federal government refuses to perform its enumerated duty to protect the States from invasion. That was one of the powers granted to the national government. Do the States have recourse when the Fed refuses to perform its duty?

aj| 8.4.11 @ 3:55PM

Yes, that is a better "R" word. "Lesser Magistrates" is another concept I like. One could argue that the American War of Independence (vice "Revolutionary War") met that standard. Words mean something (or at least they used to). Ask Ken the Old Texican which he prefers; "Civil War" or "War Between the States"....etc.

Revolutions result in great carnage and historically end in great tyranny. I like your 'restoration' terminology much better.

In either event, like Milton, I am not hopeful. ......

"Alas, what can they teach and not mislead,
Ignorant of themselves, of God much more,
And how the world began, and how man fell."
--Milton--

Al Adab| 8.4.11 @ 7:05PM

Ceasar claimed to be "restoring" the Republic. I sense danger there.

aj| 8.4.11 @ 4:34PM

I took the same oath. Twice. Once as a fighter pilot. Once as a cop.

The key phrases are "all enemies, foreign and domestic" and "orders of my superiors". The notion of "lawful orders" was an adjectival modification missing in the oaths but brought to the fore by My Lai.

Would your relatives consider a mob an enemy of the Constitution? Would I? That is the question.

A better debate is elsewhere in this comment section where I see the notion of "nullification" discussed. That is where the confrontation will come. It is consistent with my "lesser magistrate" comment in other places.

Al Adab| 8.4.11 @ 7:04PM

AJ:
What do you propose in the eventualiity should the people holding office under that oath become the "domestic enemies" of the Constitution? Of course they are foresworn, but what recourse is there aside from waiting out the election cycle and firing them?

aj| 8.5.11 @ 11:01PM

Who makes that determination? Each individual? The Sovereign Citizen movement seems to advocate that type of problematic thinking.

What recourse? Appeal to, band together with, the "lesser magistrates"........which seems to be happening. Governors, legislatures, city / county officials, etc. all can play a part in resisting tyranny from above. See Arizona and Alabama. Yeah, they have been sued by DOJ, but that is a badge of honor. And that battle will be fought with words not with bullets. 26 states attorneys general have joined suits of various sorts opposing aspects of the healthcare abomination. Another good sign that the lesser magistrates are on the case.

I carry a gun as a cop but my head and my mouth are my much preferred tools. We need to think the same way about our political frustrations. Persuasion..."a soft answer turns away wrath" and ..."be sly as a serpent and gentle as a dove" (albeit a well armed dove).

Maddox| 8.4.11 @ 5:52PM

Grz, true words were never spoken. Until the pols in Washington have reason to fear the justice of the people nothing is going to change. They investigate and police their own, have us pay millions for kangaroo hearings, then punish us with more rules and regulations they are not required to follow.

Clint| 8.4.11 @ 7:55AM

Make Obama wear & own the bad economic numbers.

Americans will vote their wallets in 2012.

The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here & Now.

Carpe Diem.

Bob Grant| 8.4.11 @ 8:35AM

Clint, make him wear those numbers like a scarlet letter.

Clint| 8.4.11 @ 1:47PM

I want to wear Obama's underwear and own it.

Americans will pay to see that in 2012.

The Tea Party is Revolting

Crap-ae Dumbass

Elron H.| 8.4.11 @ 1:49PM

...I think Clint has finally cracked...

Or maybe he's on crack..?

Bob Grant| 8.4.11 @ 2:57PM

Owning Obama's underwear? ...Crack? I sense a gerbil reference in the making.

Occam's Tool| 8.4.11 @ 8:38PM

No self-respecting Gerbil would go there. Of course, Clint knows plenty of sluttish gerbils in his day job as a Catamite...

Bob Grant| 8.4.11 @ 9:15PM

But he was a self-respecting Catamite.

Clint| 8.4.11 @ 9:49PM

I Know Your Old Lady,Tool Job.

Clint| 8.4.11 @ 9:48PM

You Lick Bobby Grant's Crack , Dr.Reich

Clint| 8.4.11 @ 9:43PM

I Didn't Write That Post.
Apparently, , An Anti-Tea Party Crybaby Wrote It.

William L. Gensert| 8.4.11 @ 7:56AM

Why do people call Obamacare the President’s “signature achievement?” It’s not as if he wrote the legislation, or was even involved at all until the end. He stayed above the fray, presenting no specific ideas, only generalities, just as he did in the debt ceiling negotiations.

Southern_Comment| 8.4.11 @ 8:05AM

You're kidding right?
You must be - no he didn't write it but he was the thug behind forcing it on us - and he's also the thug that while doing that he ignored (unless to specifically harm) the one thing he was supposed to focus on - have you missed the saying- ITS THE ECONOMY STUPID (never have I heard health care substituted in). It's his, he owns it.

John Navratil| 8.4.11 @ 10:49AM

Southern_Comment,

I don't think Mr. Gensert was kidding.

Obama never wants to get his hands dirty or to break a sweat. Not that he would have done much different but he gave the task to the two grandest big-government types in the room and said "make me proud". Those closed session were closed to the people and to the opposition. Remember "Elections have consequences" and "We won" from our esteemed President?

You are quite correct in asserting that it's his and he owns it. He claims credit for everything even through he does nothing. He's had no clothes for a long time, only now with the debt ceiling imbroglio is it becoming apparent. It's not pretty.

Bob Grant| 8.4.11 @ 8:48AM

Think of Obama as Mayor Burnside on Carter Country:

" Handle it Harry. Handle it. Handle it."

An even bigger boob.

Doctor Right| 8.4.11 @ 1:51PM

That's an extremely unfair comparison.

Mayor Burnside was an old-school, corrupt Democrat hack.

In other words, he knew how to grease the skids to get things done.

And he also knew how to delegate...

Bob Grant| 8.4.11 @ 7:41PM

You could be right. After all, he did handle the affairs of the town PLUS he was endearing in a goofy sort of way.

Teddy Burnside 2
Baraka Hussein Obama - ZERO!

Clint| 8.4.11 @ 11:01PM

Dr.Reich & Elron H.

NedB| 8.4.11 @ 8:17AM

You want to prevent this from happening again? The only way is for some serious constitutional amendments

1. rewrite the commerce clause to reflect what it was originally intended to mean. insuring the smooth flow of goods, services and information between the states.

2. reform of the tax code by amending the constitution preventing it from using the code to redistribute funds. It should be used only for funding government services, such as defense.

3. Term limits for congress and judges with a recall provision.

4. Strengthening the 10th amendment

5. giving the stater the means to override federal laws and regulations. (Suggestion was passages by the states similar to an amendment say 2/3 or 3/4 of states vote to repeal, it's done)

6. Balanced budget amendment.

Most of these could be combined into one or two amendments, but you get the idea.

oldfart| 8.4.11 @ 8:30AM

Repeal the 17th ammendment and return to appointment of Senators by the States. This was originally passed because some states refused, to appoint Senators and the Senate had a problem making quorm. This was originally designed to prevent exactly what we are seeing now. There could be incentives to appoint so a balance is maintained. We need Jefferson's wisdom on this one.

John Navratil| 8.4.11 @ 8:49AM

oldfart,

I absolutely agree! Unfortunately, how will you get such an amendment through THE SENATE. This mistake is, I fear, irreversible.

Conservative View| 8.4.11 @ 10:35AM

hear, hear. It is past time for a second Constitutional Convention. Only, we had better make sure that the convention is headed up by those who would have a smaller less intrusive government, rather than liberals that populate professional politics as we have today.

Al Adab| 8.4.11 @ 1:02PM

Let's see a new convention with Reid, McCain, Wasserman-Schultz, Bill Clinton, Boehner, Romney... well you get the idea.

The reality is those types would comprise a new committee. It can however be done State by State should they adopt a (sorry to use the word) comprehensive amendment to adress the issues.. That would bypass both a convention and Congress. Sadly any liklihood of that, as it would need 38, is beyond remote.

Louis Jenkins| 8.4.11 @ 8:36AM

From the way things look it is easy to term Obama as a 'One Termer'. But I still see our "friends" wearing Obama T-shirts, Obama 2012 stickers, and hear of his supporters. I sincerely hope the Tea Party fields a decent candidate, because we need one now more than ever. The Old Republican Guard? Forget it. I will not vote for one of them.

George True| 8.4.11 @ 4:55PM

If enough people do as you suggest, then Obama will be re-elected. I will champion true conservatives in the primaries. But once we are in the general election, and the only choice is a RINO or a socialist, I will vote for the RINO. Every time. Anything else, including not voting, is a vote for the socialist.

If we had sixty John McCain clones in the senate (a cringe inducing thought) we would not be saddled with Obamacare or with $1.5 trillion in new debt every year.

darcy| 8.5.11 @ 3:07AM

Here is where you've been deluded, my friend. Of course we would not have had Obamacare; we would now be wrestling with McCaincare and too timid to speak ill of our "fellow Republican," probably the single most idiotic statement Reagan ever made.

somnolence| 8.4.11 @ 8:44AM

Summer of 2012 could make Summer of 1968 look like a church picnic.

John Navratil| 8.4.11 @ 8:47AM

NedB,

Good points (I don't like 5 as it invites abuses of the 10th amendment), but don't you think the 10th amendment would do it all? Well, we would probably need to rein in the overbroad "Commerce Clause". Where would the authority be for all the departments?

Get rid of Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Labor, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Transportation, Energy, Education AND Homeland Security. Merge Veterans Affairs into Defense. None of these departments provide anything other than regulations and programs. If it's important enough, and truly related to interstate commerce, Congress can act without them.

That leaves the Departments of State, Treasury, Defense, Justice and Interior. While the EPA isn't a department, it's head (Lisa Jackson) is cabinet rank. Get rid of her (it's an Interior function).

The rest of your wish list (specifically 2) becomes moot.

I'm dreaming, of course. Please don't awaken me, it's so pleasant to contemplate.

Occam's Tool| 8.4.11 @ 8:45PM

John,

I'm glad to see someone agrees with me on Cabinet departments. I went back and read some history on what posts evolved from what other posts---fascinating.

Michael L. Hauschild| 8.4.11 @ 8:52AM

I donate my time to haul Vets to the VA hospital. Many times I have to park, or walk through, a State Operated Facility that is retirement housing. It is one of the best facilities in the Nation. The staffing of this facility is mostly black, very competent, very professional black middle class nursing, doctors and health care providers. Virtually every car in the staff parking had an Obama campaign sticker in the run up to the 2008 election. Today you have a hard time finding any, those that are there are "aged" or remnants that have not been removed. There are vets there I visit, and I know many of the providers in that Wing; hardly a word is mentioned about politics and before that was the ONLY conversation. Obama is in a lot more trouble than is glowingly portrayed in the MSM.

George True| 8.4.11 @ 11:16AM

God bless you, Michael H. for your volunteer service to our Veterans. It is very ironic that conservatives in general and tea party people in particular are so vilified by the left and the media as being such horrible, selfish people. And yet, it is conservatives who are overwhelmingly the givers of their own personal time and funds to the needy. The left, on the other hand, while talking how much they care about the disadvantaged among us, don't give but a fraction of what conservatives do (studies have borne this out).

They say one thing and do another. They rarely shell out their own cash to help another in need. They always self-righteously pose the question, "What would Jesus do?", when they are the very ones that Jesus railed against as hypocrites.

Jack London| 8.4.11 @ 7:00PM

It's just as well they have a VA hospital to be hauled to, hey George?

Occam's Tool| 8.4.11 @ 8:41PM

They served this country, Jack. They exposed their bodies to bullets and shells. When you do that, I'll consider free healthcare for you, too.

Bob Grant| 8.4.11 @ 10:02PM

Well put and accurate.

Bob Grant| 8.4.11 @ 10:02PM

Well put and accurate.

Occam's Tool| 8.4.11 @ 8:40PM

Michael, G-d Bless you for your service.

Obama screwed the Vets by wanting them to get private insurance for service connected illness. They remember.

W| 8.5.11 @ 12:55PM

Great work, Michael.

Tyrone Cooper| 8.4.11 @ 9:03AM

Health care costs have been going up long before Obama became President and the Republican Party is in bed with the insurance companies and has done nothing at all to stem the rise in premiums.

The Republican Party refused to address the issue of denying coverage to people because of pre-existing conditions. Elect a Republican President in 2o12 and see how your insurance premiums INCREASE and do NOT decrease. If that makes you happy then I guess you like to see millions of more people without the ability to afford medical insurance.

Republicans want to privatize Social Security and Medicare and have no problem with the rich having everything and the poor and middle class being totally screwed and the safety net America has has in place for the past seventy years destroyed. Government by the rich and powerful for the rich and powerful.

JP| 8.4.11 @ 10:01AM

MMMmmmm...is that why the largest health insurance firms (United Health and Blue Cross, for example) signed on early with ObamaCare? Is that why insurance firms for the last 25 years have gotten out of underwriting health insurance plans (ie the number of insurance firms offering health insurance have been dropping since the so-called "reforms" of 1986)?

Insurance companies need to make a profit in order to attract investors. There are 50 insurance regulatory bodies (every state has one) on top of HHS. It was a Democrat (FDR) that created this mess, and it has been Democrats who maintained it for over 65 years. Since 1937 it has been the dream of Dems to offer "free" government subsidized health care to the public. And it i not charity that drives them, but the Will to Power. That is the ultimate aphrodesiac - the power to determine who lives and who dies. For people like Obama, Sebelius, and Pelosi, that kind of power is better than sex.

Louis Jenkins| 8.4.11 @ 10:41AM

To quote a blogger:

"If it's fair to make me purchase your Obamacare insurance then it is fair to make me pick your cotton." (Or something of that nature.)

Al Adab| 8.4.11 @ 5:48PM

Or to mandate the purchase of CFLs or maybe a Chevy Volt.

Bob Grant| 8.4.11 @ 10:49AM

"If that makes you happy then I guess you like to see millions of more people without the ability to afford medical insurance."

Tyroon,

Obama's team admitted as early as last month Obamacare will indeed bend the cost curve --- UP! That cost will be absorbed by everyone including the consumer which might prevent even more people access to health care.

The law of unintended consequences.

Indeed, John McCain was a boob but his health care proposal, if allowed to be fully implemented, would have addressed all of your concerns and more by allowing consumers to shop for insurance in any state, Tort Reform, eliminating bureaucratic waste within the healthcare industry, streamlining payment systems, and creating high risk pools which would allow coverage for individuals with pre-existing conditions. All at a fraction of the cost of Obamanation care with minimal government intrusion, minimal free market disruption, and maximum certainty of costs for businesses who HIRE PEOPLE.

Your class warfare rhetoric is tiresome and outdated. You'll need to develop a better argument.

Indiana Alex| 8.4.11 @ 11:04AM

You probably don't realize that privatizing Social Security would actually allow all workers to accumulate assets.

This would most benefit the working class, who don't have the means to establish a 401k, and don't have a pension, unless they work for the government.

The ability to pass accumulated assets down generationally would do more to eliminate poverty then all of the government spending programs dedicated to this effort combined.

Of course this would take the money and the power out of the hands of government, which scares the hooey out of nearly all Democrats and some Republicans.

Al Adab| 8.4.11 @ 1:05PM

Indeed Alex. Just imagine that all those payroll deductions were placed in your personal investment account. Any number of vehicles even a simple annuity could be used. How would your personal net worth look then? You could use the money as you see fit, in whole or in part, for medical expenses, retirement income, to pay off the mortgage, whatever YOU chose. Additionally, think what the overall capitalization of the national economy would look like with those dollars actually circulating.

Conservative View| 8.4.11 @ 11:31AM

Cooper, two things leap out at me from your comments.

First, how do we pay for Obama Care? Time and time again liberals say that it will save us money, when in fact the studies show that it will actually cost us money. The underlying assumption is that American wealth is inexhaustable. It isn't. We have run out of it.

Second you are onboard with the class warfare argument. You suggest that the (evil) rich are "screwing" the poor. You can't make the poor rich by making the rich poor. The concept of taking from the rich to give to the poor is Marxism. And finally why is it the governments responsibility to offer a safety net to the poor at my expense? That isn't governing, that's theft.

Many, many poor have risen from the gutter of poverty to wealth. Our President is an example. Why should I be forced to surrender my wealth to those that have nothing as a matter of choice?

So, Cooper, I'm damn tired of liberals claiming their theft of my income is for the good of the poor. Theft is theft. And those that support that theft are little better than the vile professional politicians, the PP's, that have their hands in my piggy bank to help them get re-elected. You suggest that I support the rich. I suggest you support the thief.

Al Adab| 8.4.11 @ 11:53AM

"To take from one person, group, or clas to provide for another person, group, or class is theft."
John W. Davis
Democratic Presidential candidate 1924

Ahhh, what has become of the "home of the Brave"?

George True| 8.4.11 @ 11:44AM

Tyrone, it is evident to me from your comments that you do not know much about how the insurance industry works. I do not say this to denigrate you. But your perspective on this issue, like that of the left and the MSM, is indicative of someone who does not know how health insurance is really supposed to work.

I have been an independent life and health insurance broker for the last 22 years. I have seen the very real issues that are involved with not only the cost, but also the availability of coverage for those with pre-existing conditions.

The Republicans most assuredly did NOT refuse to address the issue. Their position was that this could be accomplished without government taking over the entire health care and health insurance industries. The Dems said, essentially, your opinions are not needed and will not be addressed. The Republicans were quite literally locked out of the room while Obamacare was being debated and crafted.

When Obamacare was illegally shoved through last year, over the clear objection of 70% of the American people, several things happened immediately. First, premiums went UP, not down, because of the onerous new requirements on insurance companies. The most damaging one, the mandated loss ratios of 85%, meant that many insurance companies had no choice but to raise premiums or risk insolvency.

Prior to the passage of Obamacare, things were gradually headed in the right direction. Driven by consumer demand, insurance companies were coming out with more and more choices and options in coverage to fit everybody's budget, much like car insurance companies are able to offer. There was a whole new category of so-called mini-med plans for people with medically uninsurable conditions, that were both affordable, and some of which offered surprisingly good benefits. Not as good as major med, but way, way better than nothing.

The biggest thing preventing insurance companies from offering even more custom tailored coverages and price points to consumers has always been the over-regulation at the state level. Now, coupled with the unrealistic mandates of Obamacare, the result will be less choice coupled with dramatically higher costs. Just the opposite of the direction we needed to go.

There is an old saying: Take what you want...and pay for it. Everything comes at a cost. You want "free" healthcare for all, no exclusions for pre-existing conditions? Fine, just be prepared to pay the price. The real price will be dramatically increased costs for everybody, and rationing. As we speak, they are rationing surgeries for people with life threatening conditions in the UK. That sure sounds like a death panel to me. Nothing is free.

Jack London| 8.4.11 @ 3:04PM

'Prior to the passage of Obamacare, things were gradually headed in the right direction.'

That's got to be the funniest thing I've seen from you George. You should have been a comedian not a boring insurance man.

George S| 8.4.11 @ 3:32PM

The gentleman has been in the insurance business for 22 years, yet he knows nothing? But a narcissistic rabble rouser who never held a real job in his life can take on the most demanding executive position in the world and be the best you'd ever seen? Now THAT'S funny.

Jack London| 8.4.11 @ 3:46PM

Seriously George - healthcare premiums doubled under Bush and they were going up regardless of Obamacare, which will make Medicare more efficient if we let it.

skip| 8.4.11 @ 4:20PM

And, don't forget, it is a "FACT: Every dollar spent on unemployment benefits creates $1.61 in economic growth."

Idiot.

Jack London| 8.4.11 @ 5:06PM

I suggest you call Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics, who calculated the figure, and while you're about it all the other agencies that put a positive value on keeping unemployed people economically active. I'd be happy to explain it to you but as we know you believe in people who preach voodoo not facts so there's little point.

A conversation with you makes as much sense as:

I know a man.
What man?
The man with The Power.
What power?
The power of voodoo.
Who doo?
You do.
Do what?
Know a man.
What man?
The man with The Power…”

Al Adab| 8.4.11 @ 5:46PM

Cary Grant

Jack London| 8.4.11 @ 6:03PM

And Shirley 'Skip' Temple. I raise a glass of Glenlivet to you.

Al Adab| 8.4.11 @ 6:59PM

Our UN ambassador no less. Fun movie and thank you for the glass.

Thom| 8.4.11 @ 5:53PM

“other agencies that put a positive value on keeping unemployed people economically active.”

By this standard Jack the Soviet Union, Communist China, Communist North Korea, Communist Vietnam, Communist Cuba should have turned out to be economic power houses since the government of each mandated that each person have a “job” even if that meant spying on their neighbors and turning them in for the reward for infractions of Utopian thought. A little common sense says that if government spending produces that kind of effect why would anyone every need to work in this country? All the government has to do is borrow or print money and drop it from helicopters onto the masses and the problem is solved. Right?

Jack London| 8.4.11 @ 6:08PM

Sorry - but these are economic analysts saying this, not me. Partly it's about the knock on effects of immediate spending that avoids further job losses, so the gain is also made up out of savings in further unemployment benefit I believe. Just for once maybe we can actually look at why Moody's, the CBO etc calculate the positive effect of food stamps and unemployment cheques and not descend into ideology.

Thom| 8.4.11 @ 7:08PM

The same economic analysts that predict economic growth through their "models" and consistently get it wrong every time and have to revise the figures from one quarter to the next, one year to the next....

Have I made the point Jack or do we have to revisit why "climate scientists’ “models” won’t predict the past with known data input into “their” models? I’ve heard this money multiplier 1.5 thing since the early 70s and it has not worked anywhere it has been tried for the same reasons climate models don’t work.

What next "weather scientists" predicting hurricanes and making policy off that too?

Jack London| 8.4.11 @ 7:16PM

That's OK - you don't trust data even when there's consensus, I realize that. But you have to realize too that you are then in voodoo land.

Just out of interest, is there any piece of scientific or other type of data that has consensus you do trust? How about the Earth going round the Sun? We modelled that one yesterday but there is a chance we got it wrong I guess.

Occam's Tool| 8.4.11 @ 8:48PM

Not necessarily, Jack.

But, when the measurements are forged, the measurement equip,ment is put in places that are unsuitable for measurement, and e-mails are being passed back and forth by the major figures involved about the invalidity of the data, I start to wonder. Recall Wakefield and the Lancet immunization article.

Science is rarely "settled." Using the earth revoving around the sun is a ridiculous counter-example. Global Warming data is much more analogous to the data on using antidepressants in bipolar disorder.

Jack London| 8.5.11 @ 8:01AM

Climate science is not a fraud unfortunately. You might wish it so as I expect you fear change, which is understandable, but it won't go away if you ignore it.

Thom| 8.4.11 @ 9:23PM

I worked at NASA on the Shuttle Program Jack. It didn't fly into space, around the planet and back down safely over 100 times based on "consensus". I was there when the first of the atmospheric measurement satellites went into orbit. The measurements it sends back isn’t “consensus”. I don’t need “experts” telling me what to think, when and how based on their self-interest in their self-serving professions. I don’t need a “consensus” to get through the day without a disaster ruining my day without an “expert” in tow. Most people have enough God given intuitive reasoning power to assess the world around them without having some busy body interject their self-appointed expertise into every decision a person makes. I don’t need an “expert” to tell me to not step off a tall building, play in traffic, jump in water without the means to swim or float or stick my hand on a hot oven burner but it seems people like you need either an “expert” or a “consensus” of self-appointed know it alls. I’ve made this point before to you, “Climate Science” has no commercial value and is solely the domain of those in either academia or government and serves an agenda common to both thus asking what “climate scientists” think is like asking the Nazis what they think about human rights. No one but you would be surprised at the monolithic answer the “Nazis” gave in return. Follow the money Jack, if the “climate” isn’t falling the whole group of your “consensus” folks will need new jobs doing real work for some commercial enterprise. The Horror of that…..

Thom| 8.4.11 @ 9:47PM

To drive home the point on “consensus” Jack, both shuttles and crews were lost due to “consensus” decisions that violated known scientific norms or parameters and over the objections of the scientists and engineers that wrote those parameters for the shuttle operations. Millions of hours of research, simulations and testing to minimize risk blew up because someone relied on “consensus” thinking for one moment. You don’t launch outside of known temperature limitations (we did) and put something on the main fuel tank “consensus” says will stick (it didn’t repeatedly) which then damages the shuttle on liftoff and kills both the bird and crew because of “consensus” science. Science is not “consensus”. Politics is “consensus” and when the two intermingle the credibility of true scientific advance loses in the long run.

Jack London| 8.5.11 @ 7:59AM

Scientific change happens when outliers and anomalies become accepted enough to overthrow the paradigm (as Thomas Kuhn taught us). What you're saying is that people ignored the paradigm, which is a different thing. It's just incompetence.

Climate science clearly has a new paradigm, so to ignore it would be incompetence. I understand why people like you don't believe it - it's fear of change partly, as it will mean a change in the way consume things, and it's also convenient then to put it into a box labelled 'communist plot' or whatever your preferred way of dismissing the science is. But that doesn't make the paradigm shift go away.

Occam's Tool| 8.4.11 @ 8:42PM

Moody's Analytics, who STILL haven't downgraded the US Credit?

skip| 8.5.11 @ 1:08AM

"I'd be happy to explain it to you but as we know you believe in people who preach voodoo not facts so there's little point." (8.4.11 @ 5:06PM)

Voodoo like the intentionally manipulated fraudulent 'research juju' from the IPCC witch doctors you claim is settled science?

"Hmmm. Let's see. 98% of climate scientists think man-made global warming is real. 2% don't." (7.8.11 @ 4:05PM)

"Just as long as you're confortable being a crank on the 2% against the 98% consensus." (7.10.11 @ 9:02AM)

"Fact: Every dollar spent on unemployment benefits creates $1.61 in economic growth." (7.22.11 @ 4:18PM)

Idiot.

Jack London| 8.5.11 @ 7:48AM

Shirley, you are paranoid - watch out now - there are Commie climate change plotters in your yard right now and they've brainwashed all our politicians - what hope do we have?

skip| 8.5.11 @ 12:10PM

...said the idiot conveniently ignoring the idiot's very own words quoted back at the idiot.

Defend your voodoo claim 98% of scientists believe global warming is manmade, idiot.

Defend your voodoo claim $1.61 in economic growth occurs every dollar spent on unemployment benefits, idiot.

Corporations, throughout the U.S.:

Our cash assets are getting a little fat. What is our best return on investment? Should we increase production capacity through another production facility? Increase production rates through updating equipment? Increasing the utilization of existing facilities and equipment through additional hiring? How do we best maximize our profits? Remember, every dollar we spend on any particular opportunity bears a cost that means that dollar is unavailable for any other use w might have for it.

Consultant extraordinaire, Equus Asinus Enthalpy London:

Well, we could invest in unemployment benefits. It is a stone cold FACT that every dollar spent would create economic growth at a 61% increase.

Croporations, throughout the U.S.:

61%? It's a FACT, you say? Yes! Of course, we should have thought of this long ago! Thank you, wise and venerable Equus Asinus Enthalpy London. We're Saved!

Idiot.

Jack London| 8.5.11 @ 7:48AM

Shirley, you are paranoid - watch out now - there are Commie climate change plotters in your yard right now and they've brainwashed all our politicians - what hope do we have?

skip| 8.5.11 @ 12:11PM

Didn't you already say that? Or am I just being paranoid?

Idiot.

darcy| 8.5.11 @ 3:21AM

Cary Grant and Shirley Temple and Myrna Loy: The Bachelor and the Bobbysoxer.

George True| 8.4.11 @ 5:00PM

How much premiums went up under which president is completely irrelevant. I know how the industry works...and you don't. You know less than nothing, Jack. Because everything you think you know happens to not be so. But by all means, continue to come here and spout irrelevant statements and questions.

Jack London| 8.4.11 @ 5:07PM

So why did our insurance premiums double, George?

George S| 8.4.11 @ 5:21PM

Jack:
There are basically two reasons why the insurance premiums doubled (stipulate). Neither one is insurance company profit -- which is where I think you are headed. I'm sure Mr. True will tell you that the premiums underwritten by non-profit insurers followed the same rate increase trajectory.

Reason #1: People do not incur the real cost of the labor and material involved in the delivery of health care. Most people have their medical bills paid through their employer's insurance policy and only see a modest deductible. They subsequently do not care if the medical service they are receiving is delivered in the most cost effective manner. But if you paid for most of your preventative care, you damn well bet people would watch their pennies -- forcing the providers to become efficient and COMPETE, thus lowering the price (see: Surgery -- Lasik, Cosmetic).

Reason #2: Medicare does not reimburse providers in a timely manner nor in full. This causes an operating capital deficit, incurring a cost of money. The providers then over bill insurers for as much of the difference as they can get. Since you, the policy holder, only pay a modest deductible and never see the premium cost to your employer, you do not care. Multiply that by the Cadillac policies of working and retired government employees and union members and the math become 2+2=4 obvious.

George True| 8.4.11 @ 5:38PM

Premiums also doubled under Clinton. Why, Jack? Why??

Jack London| 8.4.11 @ 6:19PM

Healthcare supplier costs are of course the main driver as is uncapped demand for overtreatment, so I'm not blaming the insurers overly but we do spend far too much on admin. The point is that nothing was changing until Obama and at last we have the prospect of a brake on futile Medicare spending. There is no prospect of uninsurable seniors shopping around for treatment of multiple co-morbid chronic conditions though, no matter how much you wish it so.

By the way, the Clintons did try to do something about healthcare. You've forgotten to take your memory pill.

George S| 8.4.11 @ 6:44PM

I see you are slowly coming around... "spend far too much on administration". Yes. The reason? Regulations. Lots of them. Requires boat loads of full time workers who have to be paid and benefited. Which cannot come anywhere else than your insurer's claim payments.

But the real difference will be made when all of us become involved in as paying for as much of our health care as we are able. Here's a shocker for you: I wouldn't mind government mandating I buy and hold medical insurance as long as I can deduct the premiums from my gross. Add to that eliminating the corporate tax credit for employee insurance and get all payroll people to pay their own policies with the tax deduction right off the top. Do you have any idea how far that would go to reining in medical costs?

Why can't we do it? The tax cut and the fact that the money spent on health care bypasses government. ObamaCare was mean to be the first filter in health care spending. Government first, then you. That is a recipe for disaster.

Jack London| 8.4.11 @ 7:10PM

I want to end employer linked insurance too - it's a stupid contraint on social mobility. But where I part company with you is that along with a mandate I want a decent public option for all with no tax credit for private plans. I see no reason why we can't have a mixed system of public/private insurance like the Europeans, as well off people are able to top themselves up with gold-plated plans if they want to.

By the way, I'd end the mortgage tax break too.

George S| 8.4.11 @ 8:12PM

Jack (7:10 pm)

A public option only works on paper. Government is very inefficient and in no way can compete with private sector insurers. Eventually, government will make it a headache for providers to take on P.O. patients. When that happens, the beneficiaries (aka voters) will complain what good is a free P.O. when no doctors will see them?

That's when government steps in, regulates, and it's 'optional' no more. It becomes an entitlement. Taxes will be raised -- add P.O. payroll tax withholding next to Medicare and social security. In short, we get Medicare Nightmare II.

Medicare was supposed to be a backup, instead it turned into a dependency as people knew it would be waiting for them and spent their extra money on bigger apartments and vacations instead of saving for their retirement years.

Government programs are like alcohol -- they numb the pain now but they ruin your life later if you never see the dependency creep up on you.

idalily| 8.4.11 @ 9:03PM

And what I want, Jack, is for you to explain to me the moral justification for the government to steal my money to pay for your heath care. I'll wait.

Jack London| 8.5.11 @ 7:45AM

If you have private insurance you'll steal other people's money to pay for your care. Go figure.

Occam's Tool| 8.4.11 @ 8:50PM

Yes, I remember the American Psychiatric Association being allowed to testify for a WHOLE two minutes in front of the Hillary Committee. Contemptible farce, just like all socialist plans.

W| 8.4.11 @ 7:17PM

Jack, my premuim just went up 39% for the coming year,

Jack London| 8.4.11 @ 7:28PM

And why is that? Did your insurer tell you?

George True| 8.4.11 @ 7:43PM

Because of the mandated loss ratios of Obamacare.

Jack London| 8.5.11 @ 7:45AM

The whole 39% George? Are you sure about that?

W| 8.5.11 @ 10:41AM

I asked for a writtent explanation and will share it with all. Verbally, some was the mandates. I asked for a breakdowon by percentage for each factor.

BackToBasics| 8.4.11 @ 6:46PM

Medical costs went up for a number of reasons. One was increasingly expensive equipment, a second was better specialists who could perform what have been described as medical miracles, they charged more, tailor-made drugs and medicines were often expensive and were made possible by the inflated prices. Another price-inflator is the fact that government made it too easy for patients to sue hospitals and doctors.

But the major cost increases occurred because public-paid for patients went to the doctors and hospitals in droves, and most often uneccesarily. And hospitals and doctors who took publically-assisted patients realized they could charge high prices under medicare, and the State-run Medicaid programs and the government would not look into every individual prescription and operation and hospital stay. But the bottom-line to it all is that it was governemnt involvement that tip the scalles heavily in favor of higher prices.

The government should get out of the health care business as an insurer and should only provide necessary health and safety specifications and requirements and inspections in manufacturing of health care products and facilities.

The Medicare Bill LBJ signed in 1965 should be rescinded, in stages if necessary.

BackToBasics| 8.4.11 @ 6:55PM

Sorry, was thinking too much about history, both personal and the Medicare Bill that started medical costs to spiral up so fast. Of course Obamacare should be rescinded, now and all at once.

Jack London| 8.4.11 @ 7:20PM

How do you explain the fact that universal systems everywhere else control costs so much better than we do?

Occam's Tool| 8.4.11 @ 8:50PM

2 year waiting lists for back surgery. My wife, New Zealand NHS, 2007.

Jack London| 8.5.11 @ 7:42AM

You always cite NZ - its a small country that I expect cannot provide the scale of larger nations, but I would expect it to be improving. Try comparisons with Germany, France, the Netherlands, which are more relevant as they have combination private/public systems.

BackToBasics| 8.4.11 @ 9:49PM

Occam's Tool has a good point. Are you sure that they do control these costs better? If your question is meant as a rebuttal I am not sure why ths would apply. We live in A,erica and not somehwhere else. We have a larer population base than most countries and a much different demographic makeup. Also, our population may be more prone to knee-jerk medical treatent. The answers are many. I do not know them all or even if you are correct.

It does not really matter. My answer is the same, get the government out of the health care insurance "business."

Jack London| 8.5.11 @ 7:44AM

Look at Germany, France, Netherlands etc. There is no major difference in health outcomes with us but costs are about half per head.

John Navratil| 8.5.11 @ 8:48AM

Jack London,

No major difference? Try cancer survival rates.

Jack London| 8.5.11 @ 9:03AM

Cancer survival rates (and mortality rates) are about the same, John. In fact some are better in Europe than here. When you factor in the fact that US data is only from certain areas, and that certain groups - blacks and the uninsured - do rather worse, we don't look so good.

skip| 8.5.11 @ 12:15PM

An idiot and a liar.

Who could have ever anticipated this?

Perhaps you should look up the definition of the word 'fact'.

Name one European country with better cancer survival rates than the U.S.

Idiot.

Liar.

Jack London| 8.5.11 @ 1:12PM

It depends on the cancer and gender, Shirley - for example France has the world's best rate for female colon cancer, so I suggest you go there when you get it. There are other examples and there is in any case very little difference among the top nations, such as the US, France, Canada, and Australia, and as more data is now being added to the US dataset we are seeing US rates go down, and data still covers less than half our cancer cases.

Sadly we also have a great gap between whites and blacks - 14%.

skip| 8.5.11 @ 4:59PM

Equus Asinus Enthalpy London

Surely, you're admitting you got nothing. Other than one type of cancer for one European country, which barely eeked out number two on the list, the U.S.

Surely, even an idiot like you knows The United States of America has the top survival cancer rate in the world.

Surely, your little quickie search didn't reveal how in 2003, in the country of - wait for it - France, their health care system failed so spectacularly 13,000 died, from a summer heat wave no less, which I remember from a Walter Williams article, where he yet again ridiculed liberals who think European style medical care superior to the U.S.

Surely,we'll never know how those females among those 13,000 would've affected the results for that particular cancer.

Surely, this was due to rampant manmade global warming that the '98%' of scientists believe in, right FACT boy?

Surely, virtually every reader here needs no further proof what an idiot you are.

Surely, virtually every reader here needs little convincing in addition to a pathetic idiot, you are also a despicable liar.

Surely, you are an idiot and a liar whether on medicine, economics, science, or no doubt any other topic.

Surely, you can't help yourself, as the archives reveal in blatantly obvious honesty.

Jack London| 8.5.11 @ 5:28PM

Many people die of heat here too Shirley. I'm old enough to remember the 1995 Chicago disaster that killed about 750 people alone - I expect you had just been born then Miss Temple.

I also do a lot of work in healthcare and indeed in oncology - the cancer stats are things I do know about and you obviously don't.

As for climate change, I wouldn't bother your purty little head about grown up subjects, Shirley. I do try and keep bad news from innocent minors.

skip| 8.6.11 @ 12:31PM

Surely, if the quality of your healthcare and oncology education and experience matches that represented by your posts on political, economic, and scientific issues, among others, patients affected by your involvement, whatever that may be, are in dire straits, and in dire need of prayer.

Surely, ignoring yet again that the U.S. has the highest cancer survival rates, at the same time boasting of your knowledge of cancer statistics in your area of expertise, is quite revealing, as readers have no doubt duly noted.

Surely, no other poster here misuses highly selective thoroughly discredited FACTS as intellectually dishonestly as you do, as readers have no doubt duly noted.

Surely, American Spectator's archives do not lie. You do.

Surely, you are an idiot.

Surely, over time, through copious replies to your absolute intellectual dishonesty from a plethora of responders, you have begun to sense this.

Surely, that is, unless you are even more intellectually dishonest than has been thoroughly documented.

BackToBasics| 8.4.11 @ 9:57PM

And if we are more expensive, part of the answer may be nothing more than that until recently, we simply had more money to "throw around" (TIC) than other countries.

W| 8.5.11 @ 10:45AM

Jack, lousy service. In Italy you have to bring your own sheets, forks, to the hospital. If you want better care, then you have to buy a supplement insurance. At our local university hospital, we always have patients from Europe and Canada for special surgery, ususally neurosurgery, becaue they are not competent enough there. I have personally spoken to the families of patients from Canada and Europe who came here for neurosurgery.

Jack London| 8.5.11 @ 11:32AM

Well I work in healthcare in part of my work an visited several European hospitals and they do vary in age and quality, as do what is provided. So do our hospitals though - and we have higher medical and surgical error rates. Sure we have some great technical centers of excellence - eg MD Anderson, Sloan for cancer - but there are world centers of excellence in Europe too.

winterhawk| 8.4.11 @ 9:09AM

The degree to which this incompetent failed is historical. America can tke no more of his agenda. So long failure.

emilio lizardo, PhD| 8.4.11 @ 10:10AM

as long as O's opposition consists of the walking dead (Gingrich, Romney), cretins (Bachmann, Palin), squirrels (Cain) and the tired old inside the Beltway bulls and eunuchs of the Republican Old Guard, the man has nothing to worry about. Obama is the worst president in our nation's history, and his policies are ruinous. But tell me the name of even one person who has a ghost of a chance of beating Obama the man. It is not his policies or administration that are up for reelection, whose name will be on the Ballot. Anyone?

Ground Control| 8.4.11 @ 10:46AM

Rick Perry.

W| 8.4.11 @ 10:51AM

Emilio, you tell us who should run. be constructive.

mcr| 8.4.11 @ 10:58AM

Bachmann & Palin are cretins? Please explain. Especially Palin-she has more courage in her left pinky that all of them put together...

emilio lizardo, PhD| 8.4.11 @ 1:01PM

your absolutely right, Palin bravely resigned from the governorship of Alaska- "when danger reared its ugly head, she bravely turned her tail and fled"

John Navratil| 8.4.11 @ 1:20PM

emilio lizardo, PhD,

You may recall the flood of ethics charges, which the State of Alaska could not defend, which was consuming all her time. The entire plan was to keep her from acting a governor. What a pity that she stepped aside. It gave her critics nothing to carp about.

Al Adab| 8.4.11 @ 1:55PM

Actually John, they resent the fact that she is making money. No one should ever be allowed to do that.

RCV| 8.4.11 @ 2:00PM

If she couldn't take the political heat in Juneau, how could she take it in Washington. Her explanation was pure BS.

John Navratil| 8.4.11 @ 2:09PM

RCV,

The law in the State of Alaska is that ethics charges are not defended. She had to defend them at personal expense. This tack was taken specifically for this purpose and to force her from the governership. It succeeded, so please stop crying.

RCV| 8.4.11 @ 2:29PM

She had an on-line legal defense fund that raised hundreds of thousands of dollars. She also settled some of those "meritless" ethics charges by reimbursing Alaska for personal expenses she charged the state for. So please stop crying.

John Navratil| 8.4.11 @ 3:21PM

RCV,

And spent all her time doing what? Hunting Caribou? No crying here. I'm not upset that she resigned. It's the guys who were looking for a punching bag who seem to be upset.

John Navratil| 8.4.11 @ 3:25PM

RCV,

PS. If having the family travel along and ultimately having to reimburse the State $8100 dollars is the sort of high crimes that exercises you so, what can you tell me about the first lady's trip to Spain.

RCV| 8.4.11 @ 4:20PM

Doesn't exercise me at all, John. I was happy to see her go as Governor and happy if she remains on gravy train lecture and talking heads circuit.

emilio lizardo, PhD| 8.5.11 @ 9:54AM

consuming what time she had left over from writing lame books and planning her reality tv show and raking in the $$$. Come on dude, if you want to defend Sarah you can do better than that. Can't you?

emilio lizardo, PhD| 8.5.11 @ 9:54AM

consuming what time she had left over from writing lame books and planning her reality tv show and raking in the $$$. Come on dude, if you want to defend Sarah you can do better than that. Can't you?

Sgt Brock e Lee| 8.4.11 @ 11:01AM

@dr lizard,
Your droll cynicism with regards to O's defeatability is comprehensible, your crass characterizations of GOP candidates is not.

emilio lizardo, PhD| 8.4.11 @ 12:58PM

Tell me how to characterize the party that has trotted forth the likes of Bob Dole and John McCain

John Navratil| 8.4.11 @ 2:24PM

emilio lizardo, PhD,

As a profound disappointment to conservatives.

W| 8.4.11 @ 2:27PM

Emilio, "the likes of Bob Dole and John McCain" are the war heroe who fought for us.

darcy| 8.5.11 @ 3:33AM

So, every war hero is automatically qualified or deserving of our vote for president?

I run into this same attitude when I talk to "older" Republicans: War hero = fitness for presidency. Forget that the war hero fought for amnesty for illegal immigrants, or that he and Feingold sponsored a law to restrict free speech, or that he and Lieberman pushed for Cap n Trade, or that he was involved in the Keating 5 scandal, or that he dumped his first wife, suffering the debilitating effects of a car crash, to go marry a wealthy heiress. Forget all that and more: He was a war hero, who cares that he's also a skunk.

W| 8.5.11 @ 10:52AM

Darcy, no, but I will take Dole over Slick Willie, and I will take McCain over Obama. That is not even close. And who is this "emilio" to criticize Dole and McCain? The "emilios" post this nonsesne to generate arguments among conservatives, such as we are having, to divert attention from Obama and Clinton. Let us keep our attention on the persons who caused our problems, Obama and his crew.

emilio lizardo, PhD| 8.5.11 @ 9:57AM

I see hundreds of men and women every day at the VA Hospital who are war heroes who foughtfor us, and it is a pleasure and honor to provide them care. Havent seen a single one fit to be president. Enough of the platitudes.

W| 8.5.11 @ 12:05PM

If you really work at a VA hospital, I find it unbelievable you do not see one veteran who is more qualified than Obama. The first 200 people in the phone book are more qualified than obama. You are the one with the lefty platitudes.
Which hospital, which city?

Buckaroo Banzai| 8.4.11 @ 11:23AM

Laugh while you can monkey boy!

Occam's Tool| 8.4.11 @ 8:51PM

"History is made in the Dark."

(Truer lines never spoken anywhere.)

Conservative View| 8.4.11 @ 11:37AM

"Obama is the worst president in our nations' history---"

Oh rise again Lennard Filmore.

Bob Grant| 8.4.11 @ 11:53AM

And just think. Shortly after taking office, there actually was serious (I'm not kidding) talk about including Obama on Mt. Rushmore.

I now hear crickets chirping from that movement.

Al Adab| 8.4.11 @ 1:56PM

Millard

Conservative View| 8.4.11 @ 2:12PM

I sit corrected.

Bob Grant| 8.4.11 @ 4:27PM

Slouching a lil' too much?

George S| 8.4.11 @ 3:36PM

... Fillmore

Michael L. Hauschild| 8.4.11 @ 3:36PM

Mallard?

Al Adab| 8.4.11 @ 3:53PM

Good cartoon strip that.

Rockerbabe| 8.6.11 @ 1:47AM

I do believe that honor goes to Dubya, Obama's predecessor.

PineKnot| 8.4.11 @ 10:33AM

We desperately need to get rid of this president, get a Republican Congress, then hold their feet to the fire to repeal ObamaCare, pass a Balanced Budget Amendment, and then go after the worst of them all with national tort reform.
In an ideal world, lawyers wouldn't be allowed to hold political office, only judicial positions. If they were appointed by non-lawyers, think how much less mischief there would be in government. Look, I have lawyers for friends, and they candidly admit there are too many of them.

Pete| 8.4.11 @ 10:42AM

At least Clinton used his legal training and experience as an adulterous dirtbag to have some plausible deniability when he lied. Obama just comes right out with lie after lie after lie, directly contradicting himself for the all the world to see. This kind of stuff would be on a loop at CNN, etc...were it an R in office.

Nick| 8.4.11 @ 10:48AM

The best way to keep the incompetent O'Bama responsible is to hold our own leaders responsible.
Do not forget about Boehner the liar:


John Boehner is a liar and broke his word. He promised in the
2010 Pledge to America (remember that GOP?) to give
Americans THREE DAYS to read legislation
before a vote.

"Americans should have three days to read all bills before
Congress votes on them."
- John Boehner, Oct. 30, 2010

He's only been Speaker of the House for seven months, and he is
already breaking his word. How is this any different than when
SanFran Nan Pelosi did the same thing?

It's not like Boehner is incapable of keeping his word. That is, for
democrats. Remember H.R. 1, earlier this year? He let democrats
offer hundreds of amendments to keep "the Pledge’s commitment to an
'open process that makes it easier – not harder' to cut spending
[...]."

I guess we conservatives can just go pound sand, huh?

By the way, this grand deal has cut $4.5 billion from
national security spending for Fiscal Year 2012. These are
real cuts, $4.5 billion less spending
than FY 2011, not the phony C.B.O cuts from baseline
budgeting, which only reduce the growth of spending.

Thanks to this cry-baby Oompa-Loompa, we no longer have a veto
over that incompetent boob in the White House. Thank
you, sir, may I have another!

"'The American people are in charge of this country, and they deserve a Congress that acts like it,' said Boehner. 'Americans should have three days to read all bills before Congress votes on them--something they didn't get when the "stimulus" was rushed into law. We should put an end to so-called 'comprehensive' bills that make it easy to hide wasteful spending projects and job-killing policies. Bills should be written by legislators in committee in plain public view--not written in the Speaker's office, behind closed doors.'" (All emphasis minne.)
- Penny Starr, CNSNews.com, quoting John Boehner

"'Americans have lost trust with their government, which has too often ignored the will of the people in favor of party loyalty and a desire to pass partisan bills at any cost,' said the introduction to that part of the Pledge to America. 'Backroom deals, phantom amendments, and bills that go unread before being forced through Congress have become business as usual. Never before has the need for a new approach to governing been more apparent than under Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her leadership [ARRRRRRRGH!]. Americans are demanding change in the way Congress works, and we are fighting to bring much-needed sunlight to the process and give the American people a greater voice in their Congress.'" (All emphasis mine.)
- Penny Starr, CNSNews.com, quoting the GOP's Pledge to America

$*@!#%*#! HYPOCRITE!!!!!!!!!

RCV| 8.4.11 @ 1:59PM

I feel your pain, Nick.

Nick| 8.4.11 @ 2:17PM

RCV,

Why?
You should be used to liberals lying to you by now!

Sgt Brock e Lee| 8.4.11 @ 10:57AM

@dr lizard,
Your droll cynicism with regards to O's defeatability is comprehensible, your crass characterizations of GOP candidates is not.

Oldefarte| 8.4.11 @ 11:01AM

As the following indicates, ITS THE DEMOCRATS, STUPIDS:

http://youtu.be/JJVZpWZzqhk

Sadly I still read comments here about OBAMA having to OWN HIS NUMBERS next year. How in hades will that be accompolish is every conservative doesn't VOTE REPUBLICAN? Is this nation going to repeat its STUPIDITY OF 2008 by voting for Democrats and re-electing Obama and even more Democrats? According to the STUPIDLY insinuated commentary sometimes exihibited here about the rise-up of the tea party as a supposed independent political party capable of overthrowing both parties, that seems to be the modus operendi thought process amongst many of you. The tea party conservatism can only function within the Repulican Party [and a Ross Perotism will fail]!!!!

MacDaddy| 8.4.11 @ 11:22AM

I NEVER EVER thought I would put these words in this order in a sentence. "Please, Hillary, run."

RCV| 8.4.11 @ 1:58PM

She will, as Obama's running mate in 2012. mark my words.

Reprobate Charlatan Vomitus| 8.4.11 @ 5:01PM

I don't bother with silly protesting when my words are marked in posts such as "I abhor santimonious conservatism of the tea party brand, an ideology wholly lacking in intelligence or a shred of real Christian love and compassion - It espouses policies dangerous, damaging, and detrimental to our country and it's future - It will have a lifespan much like its intellectual forebearer, Know-Nothingism" and "I belong to a party that cares about human beings AFTER they're born" on boldly proclaiming mark my words and mark my words I feel a bunch of the letter z strung in a row very wittingly coming on matters.

RCV| 8.4.11 @ 5:14PM

z

Reprobate Charlatan Vomitus| 8.5.11 @ 1:00PM

I don't bother with silly actually responding with actual by God wit on using not a string of but only one z - that'll really show'em all - on not getting carried away after all an alltime hall of fame highlight list of witty responses will consist of this response - consisting of one single solitary letter - and not a single solitary other response matters.

George True| 8.4.11 @ 5:05PM

Great. Then they can both own the wrecked economy.

W| 8.5.11 @ 10:54AM

RCV, Obama will need a food taster. Why will Hillary replace Biden. Kidding aside, I prefer Biden to Hillary. He is funnier and not an idealogue. Besides, Hillary had her two terms, How can she potentially serve a third term?

RCV| 8.5.11 @ 11:08AM

The addition of Hillary to the ticket will energize the base, and will give Hillary the nomination in 2016 if she wants it. And she wants it.

Reprobate Charlatan Vomitus| 8.5.11 @ 12:35PM

I don't bother with silly there is nothing tea partiers want more than a 2012 liberal ticket of a petulant dithering idiot liar in chief and a braving a hail of bullets on the tarmac fatally tarnished legacy vice idiot liar in chief than maybe for the braving a hail of bullets on the tarmac fatally tarnished legacy vice idiot liar in chief running on a 2016 ticket to boot on how is it possible to post this consistently stupid yet in newly creative ways anyhow but let everyone with the sense God gave turnips all hope for no change to this brilliant idea of sheer genius matters.

RCV| 8.5.11 @ 1:47PM

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz..................

Reprobate Charlatan Vomitus| 8.6.11 @ 12:56PM

I don't bother with silly the savior who ran in 2008 becoming the martyr running in 2012 much less the harridan who will run in 2016 on wanting what is only for the best for our exceptional nation matters.

W| 8.5.11 @ 9:13PM

It appears you supported Hillary during the primary . She would have been a better president than Obama, and probably not much different than McCain.
Hillary on the 2012 ticket will also energize the Republicans. There is a lot of history with her.

RCV| 8.6.11 @ 1:11PM

I supported Obama from the beginning, though I would have gladly voted for Hillary had she been nominated.

Who Knows?| 8.4.11 @ 12:07PM

Here's a "today" factoid that ought to make the hair stand up on your neck---

Obama et al are spending $4 billion a DAY of borrowed money, and---

The ENTIRE NFL will have sales of $9 billion for a YEAR.

Cheer on, sports fans, as the American "team" in DC kills the American dream.

George S| 8.4.11 @ 3:49PM

Warren Buffet and Bill Gates have, between them, 100 billion. That wouldn't even save one month of borrowing if you confiscated all their money today. (Liberal trick question: How much can you confiscate from them next year?)

JFGalt| 8.4.11 @ 12:31PM

This morning I read an article about Nazi Germany and its rise to power. What was spooky about it was that for fun I started substituting OBAMA!'s name for Hitler and the Democratic Party for the Nazi party and what it read like was what we are seeing today. I wouldn't leave out Baby Bush in this mess either. The same type of intrigue and demonizing. The corporations working behind the scenes to manipulate everything to their advantage and a war and security apparatus that is becoming all powerful. I just pray that it doesn't lead us to the same place. But since history tends to repeat itself...

RCV| 8.4.11 @ 1:56PM

Let's see -- the Nazis complained that the socialist Weimar Republic had double-crossed the German people and lost the war, and were controlled by the Jewish bankers. I see the parallels....huh?

simon templar| 8.4.11 @ 2:12PM

He is talking about the Nazi political platform. In fact, remember those, a written platform was presented at the time and it indeed reads exactly like the DNC platform of objectives. I have seen a copy of it in a history book I was reading a few months ago.

DRed| 8.4.11 @ 4:53PM

That's why you always here Obama talking about invading Canada to get us some of that sweet lebensraum, right? And jeez-when will the DNC shut up about getting revenge on France and Britain?

simon templar| 8.4.11 @ 5:08PM

No, but hear hear him calling for a civilian military core the size and strength of the US military, you hear talk of youth movements, you hear talk of ecology and back to the land rhetoric, you hear talk of of those greedy corporations, you hear talk of nationalizing industry, you hear talk of infringing on the right of gun ownership, you hear talk of class warfare. The list is endless. Typical left wing garbage. The same crap thrown around by the Nazi and every other left wing faction in Europe and the rest of the world.

RCV| 8.4.11 @ 5:16PM

You've convinced me, Simon. The parallels are just eerie.

simon templar| 8.4.11 @ 5:18PM

Nationalization of business, forced profit sharing, outlawing all profits during wartime, abolition of all income not earned directly from work (via high capital gains/inheritance taxes), the state shall provide a "livelihood for its citizens", old age insurance funded by government, price caps, price controls, rent controls, laws against speculation.."communal" rent free living areas, an end to the "materialistic" world order, free higher education focusing on "civic affairs" (humanities, political science--the left's favorite (and useless) subjects to learn), labor laws, censorship against news media that don't tow the line (libs demanding "fairness doctrine, increased penalties/regulation against clear channel, newscorp, etc)...bottom line, "common good..."common interest" before individual interest, and a strong central government to make these goals come true...mainly through economic coercion and force. The left wing parties of TODAY condemn individual achievement at every turn. Their aim is to remove every reason for individuals to excel in this society, and to create a class of dependent people subservient to the almighty state. They justify economic oppression in the name of "social justice" or the promoting "common good." Much like the Nazis, they support extreme infringements on personal liberties. Like the Nazis, they favor MASSIVE taxation, massive regulation, and often support government takeover of entire industries.

Now, does that sound like an American Republican or an American Democrat?

"We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions." --Adolf Hitler

DRed| 8.4.11 @ 5:41PM

Yes, the Nazis took political ideas from the left wing of the German political spectrum. They also took arguments from the right, but let's just ignore that for now. For argument's sake, let's assume that whoever wrote that is right and American liberals believe in all those things, just like the Nazis did. You still have to get around the stubborn facts that the Nazis also believed in racial purity, the superiority of the German race, hated immigrants, hated homosexuals, hated Eastern Europeans, wanted to eliminate the jews, the gypsies, the crippled, criminals, promoted militant nationalism and believed in using massive violence to usher in a racially homogeneous utopia. So no, they're not very similar to contemporary American democrats at all.

Nick| 8.4.11 @ 11:30PM

DRed,

"You still have to get around the stubborn facts that the Nazis also [...] hated homosexuals [...]."

Is that why they let Ernst Rohm, a raging out-of-the-closet homo, command the SA, i.e., the Sturmabteilung (Stormtroopers)?

Until, that is, the Wehrmacht demanded his removal in return for their pledge of loyalty to Hitler, and Hitler obliged with the Night of the Long Knives?

You should know by now not to spew your lefty cliches here.

DRed| 8.5.11 @ 12:33AM

Homosexuality was a crime under the Nazi regime. They imprisoned tens of thousands of men for being gay. Ernst and some of his, shall we say, close associates, seem to have been a special case. Hitler wasn't exactly known for his consistency.

Nick| 8.5.11 @ 9:30AM

DRed,

So, you admit that they didn't really "hate" homos, like they did the Jews, Slavs, and other races; and, that they used them more as political pawns; therefore, making that part of your statement wrong?

simon templar| 8.4.11 @ 2:14PM

The Weimar Republic ( ) is the name given by historian to the parliamentary republic established in 1919 in Germany to replace the imperial form of government. It was named after Weimar, the city where the constitutional assembly took place. It was not a socialist government.

RCV| 8.4.11 @ 2:19PM

Simon - You do not know much about history if you think the Social democrats didn't run the Weimar government.

RCV| 8.4.11 @ 2:22PM

...you also didn't read further down in your Wikipedia check: "The Republic was soon under attack from both left- and right-wing sources. The radical left accused the ruling Social Democrats of having betrayed the ideals of the workers' movement by preventing a communist revolution. Various right-wing sources opposed any democratic system, preferring an authoritarian state like the 1871 Empire. To further undermine the Republic's credibility, some right-wingers (especially certain members of the former officer corps) also blamed an alleged conspiracy of Socialists and Jews for Germany's defeat in World War I."

simon templar| 8.4.11 @ 4:53PM

A parliamentary republic is not a socialist state. Yes, there were various political stripes within this government that represented European politics and the various political factions of left to right politics in europe. I can guarantee you that there were no constitutional Republicans advocating limited government there either. What you lying, distorting, and manipulative progressives love to do is falsely present the left and right of european politics with American politics. There left and right are factions or slices of a broader Left and have absolutely no correlation to left and right here in America. These right wing forces were monarchist, and other fascist versions of European political ideologies antithetical to communism and republican representative ideologies. I know a great deal about history in fact..more than the talking points and distortions you get from the ministry of left wing propaganda and historical revisionism that you receive daily. In fact, you might want to pick up the book, Liberal Fascism, by J. Goldberg and read all about your origination and the history of your political philosophy. You have a much greater affinity and closeness to Hitler than you will ever admit. My political philosophy, on the otehr hand, is the exact opposite of the so-called 'right wing' Nazi's, who are not right wing but actually left wing fascist.

simon templar| 8.4.11 @ 5:00PM

By the way, most of Europes history in the twentieth century consisted of one faction of the Left killing another faction of the Left. Like the communist bolsheviks killing the national socialist and the socialist democrats and on and on ad nauseum and each one shouting right wing fascist at each other.

RCV| 8.4.11 @ 5:20PM

In your little reconstructed political spectrum, Simon, I guess that's how it was. And by the way, most of the social democratic states in Europe (left wing socialists to you) are parliamentary republics. And I agree that those societies are not "socialist" just as ours is not.

Al Adab| 8.4.11 @ 5:41PM

Guys:
In a socialist nation the government would own say the banks, or maybe the insurance companies, perhaps even the auto manufacturers and probably the medical industry. None of that would ever happen in America now would it?

DRed| 8.4.11 @ 5:59PM

Well, our government doesn't and hasn't owned those industries outright. And in any event, in a socialist country the government wouldn't necessarily own industry. You're getting socialism and communism confused.

simon templar| 8.4.11 @ 6:23PM

No, you are and you are not even a good socialist progressive. A true socialist state in its pure form as Marx defined it, is the ownership of production by the state and a dictatorship of the proletariat via the vanguard of the workers revolution and that vanguard being the state and its elite party members. Socialism was the necessary step towards communism, the ideal by which man would be unalterably changed and the state would naturally whither away bringing about a new communal society where people would live in complete harmony without individualistic aims but only collective ones and no force would be needed to achieve the communistic ideal. But guess what? It is a myth and a complete failure. What we did have were many variants of the pure form and ridiculous, failing attempts like the grand soviet union that came the closest and collasped.

Al Adab| 8.4.11 @ 6:57PM

DRed:
Operative word "outright". Nice attempt to dissemble. Inchallah.

DRed| 8.4.11 @ 7:32PM

Dissembling? There's a huge difference between temporary government ownership of a car company and permanent government ownership of the entire auto industry. And the bank bailouts-those are even close to socialism. Those were a transfer of wealth to the rich, and the government didn't control those banks at all.

Occam's Tool| 8.4.11 @ 8:54PM

RCV---just have the Ruth's Chris Certificate ready, my friend. Dow dropped 500 today.

By the way, you do need to read Caliphate by Colonel Tom Kratman. Had dinner with the author yesterday---fascinating guy.

RCV| 8.4.11 @ 11:35PM

We'll see who the public decides is ultimately responsible for the latest tailspin. I vote for the guys who thought it would be a good idea to create an artificial crisis over the routine debt ceiling issue.

I can taste that buttery steak already, Occam. How was Cape Cod?

Bogie| 8.4.11 @ 12:36PM

ONE AND DONE............Everything that's up, should be down...Everything that's down, should be up

Bogie| 8.4.11 @ 12:39PM

OBAMUNISM didn't work in East Germany, while capitalism worked in West Germany....they both started out together and we all know how they ended up...how about Cuba...the Cuban's were living LaVita Loca, until Castro and Communism

David| 8.4.11 @ 12:44PM

How could Obama get anything done? That guy, Bush, has been in control of everything and thwarting Obama's every effort to help Americans! It's a conspiracy, I say!

Or.

Obama hadn't a clue, got elected, tried to let others make him look good, and hoped things would work out by themselves without any effort on his part (but fully expecting to take credit much like Bill Clinton did during his term).

I don't know.... I still think it might have been Bush's fault.

LOLZ

Bogie| 8.4.11 @ 12:45PM

Hillary, Huma Weiner and George Soro's are the force behind the "Arab Spring", you notice all the country's involved have oil wealth. Soro's is the God, and Hillary and Huma the deal makers....Soro's and his followers will control all the oil in the Mid East

RCV| 8.4.11 @ 1:57PM

Egypt, Tunisia and Syria have no oil wealth. What nonsense!

simon templar| 8.4.11 @ 12:52PM

For all those conservative Tea Partiers:
You have to check this article out, it will put a smile on your face:
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=45290

Keep doing exactly what we are doing, do not settle for incremental, snail crawling change, keep fighting and pushing forward!

Have you considered| 8.4.11 @ 1:44PM

Simon, thanx for sharing. It did make me smile.

simon templar| 8.4.11 @ 1:01PM

Dearest TAS editors and staff:

I have officially announced a campaing to request that our Grzmlyk be contacted an offered a column here at the illustrious TAS with full benefits and wages. It is not fair that you should benefit from such brilliance and articulation free of charge since we all support capitalism and the idea that all should be rewarded for their efforts and paid for their contributions and work. So, if you agree and would like to sign the "petition" then comment below with your approval.

Pecos Pete| 8.4.11 @ 2:53PM

Agreed, but only if Beverly Gunn, our East Texas Rancher, is included.

Don| 8.4.11 @ 1:17PM

my guess is that democrats that are not radical marxist and communist (ther might be a few left) are talking behind closed doors (like Hitler's generals did) on how can they get rid of this thug from Chicago and run somebody that stands a chance against the "generic republican" or "anybody but the communist obammer"

Have you considered| 8.4.11 @ 1:46PM

Bernie Sanders, Socialist from VT wrote an article the other day saying that Obama should face a primary challenge.

RCV| 8.4.11 @ 1:54PM

As a matter of fact, it's only the far left of the Democratic Party -- Bernie Sanders is a good example -- that are dissatisfied with Obama, who they feel has abandoned the Progressive agenda. And the polls continue to show that the general public may be unhappy with the President's performance, but they are far more unhappier with every one of the potential GOP alternatives. This article is more of wishful thinking from the right.

simon templar| 8.4.11 @ 2:07PM

The polls. Which ones? The ones out of your basement or the ones down at the local Cup of Joes with your friends. The commie-in-chief by ALL real polls has lost 15 points in last two weeks and is trailing behind a soda can and every GOP candidate as well. He is losing in critical states. As a matter of fact....that is really funny....facts are really not postmodern things that are created for narratives but rather real, objective, incidents of truth that can be tested and repeated.

RCV| 8.4.11 @ 2:16PM

Simon: go over to RealPolitics.com, which tracks all the polls. If you think they're biased, here's the latest one from Fox News comparing Obama to the Gop field: Romney - Obama +6; Bachmann - Obama +11; Pawlenty - Obama +10; Perry - Obama +10.

George S| 8.4.11 @ 4:06PM

You seriously think the White House believes any of those numbers? (Boehner & McConnell, yes; the White House, no.)

RCV| 8.4.11 @ 4:21PM

Yes.

simon templar| 8.4.11 @ 6:04PM

Yeah, Rasmussen and Gallup seem to disagree. Polls for the most part are rather useless most of the time as the polsters have largely been politicized.
I got a poll for you, 513 point fall in the DOW in one day and a 1000 drop in a month. How about this one, two big democratic voting businessmen and millionaires who want your messiah's hide and defeat in 2012. A public which is just about ready by ALL polls to storm the Bastille in DC. Your messiah poll disapproval numbers? How they stacking up. But no, I am to bow down to your poll from the gods of the realpolitic as the tablets coming down from heaven...actually better than God's truth..because you a liberal sack of shit told me so.

RCV| 8.4.11 @ 6:57PM

Very well reasoned close, Simon.

Occam's Tool| 8.4.11 @ 8:57PM

Simon, RCV---guys, RCV is not "a sack of..." he is simply wrong. What he is is a Scoop Jackson Dem, and I don't believe he realizes yet that the Current Dem Party are Kuciniches.

Hey, just do like I do---bet him a $50.00 Ruth's Chris certificate that Obama will lose in 2012.

RCV| 8.4.11 @ 11:36PM

I only bet with my trustworthy friends.

Reprobate Charlatan Vomitus| 8.5.11 @ 12:44PM

I don't bother with silly relativities of whether my posts are consistently pathetic when not downright despicable is a matter of being simply a liberal sack of shit - hey isn't that a tautology? - or simply being wrong - over and over and over and over? - on letting the volumes of archived posts speak for themselves - does anyone else smell something really really really really dreadful too? - matters.

RCV| 8.5.11 @ 1:49PM

Zzzzzzzzzzz...................

Nick| 8.4.11 @ 2:15PM

RCV,

How many times do I have to tell you? Polls taken today mean absolutely nothing.

RCV| 8.4.11 @ 2:18PM

I hear you, Nick. But they're all we have as of now. And they speak volumes about the GOP candidates if they can't beat Obama in this climate.

Nick| 8.4.11 @ 3:09PM

RCV,

"And they speak volumes about the GOP candidates [...]."

No, they do not speak anything, that is my point. They mean nada, zippo, nothing. Anything can happen, and will, between now and next summer.

But, if today's polls help you sleep at night, by all means, believe them. They are not a reflection of reality, though.

simon templar| 8.4.11 @ 6:05PM

Lie, lie, lie. You are outdoing the father of lies himself..you better watch out.

Occam's Tool| 8.4.11 @ 9:00PM

All I know is this, RCV---I work with a bunch of Union members. Nobody's excited about Obama. In 2008, he could fill Colisseums. Maybe he can fill a high school auditorium now. Even with that and an economic meltdown and Republican fatigue, he only beat a puss Republican by a few points in 2008. I think Bachmann could whip him, but Allen West could give the guy an old fashioned back alley beating in the polls...

RCV| 8.4.11 @ 11:38PM

You've been too long in the Minnesota cold, my friend, and spending too much time with mentally disturbed folk. I hate to break the news to you about what folks outside of tea party circles in the midwest think of Ms. Bachmann and her very, very strange hubby.

Pat| 8.4.11 @ 2:05PM

During a recent joint session of Congress attending President Obama’s “State of the Deficit” speech, the President promised to repay the United States’ Treasury one billion dollars out of his personal assets if the economy doesn’t turn around during his second term in office. The Democratic side of the aisle rose for a three minute standing ovation upon hearing these words. Once quiet resumed, however, the Honorable Edgar Grud (R-TX) challenged Obama on two specific points: Was he sincere enough regarding this promise to swear on the Bible and did he even have $1 billion? Grud is a tight wad Congressman from Ft. Worth, a right wing politician the New York Times claims is a dues paying member of Redneck Jihad - a suspected domestic terrorist organization – and who has long been a vocal critic of the president and has publicly expressed, on more than one occasion, his opinion that President Obama has never possessed a nodding acquaintance with the truth.

But, when the mainstream media severely questioned Obama on his claim, the President indicated he did, in fact, own sufficient assets which would be immediately placed in a legal trust in support of his repayment promise.

That admission was good enough for the New York Times and Washington Post reporters but an unnamed source later leaked the President’s list of personal assets to the Bakersfield Bee. A partial reprint of this list notes Obama will be placing the “real” and “original” copy of his birth certificate, valued at $100 million, into the trust. Other assets include the deed to the family homestead in Hawaii where it is rumored he lived as a young man, his autographed Willie Mays’ baseball card and his Muhammed Ali athletic supporter, a birthday gift from his friend and mentor, the Rev. Wright of Chicago.

Today, an unofficial White House source leaked the news President Obama indicated that fulfilling his promise must be made contingent upon raising the federal debt ceiling once again and allowing the Treasury to immediately borrow an additional 5 trillion dollars. If our economy doesn’t then recover during his second term, the president is prepared to honor his promise. Supporting this raising the debt ceiling contingency request as “very reasonable”, the New York Times reported the President’s stated promise appears to be legitimate.

Eduardo| 8.4.11 @ 2:12PM

I still mad at how the 2008 election election turned out. Part of the so-called "perfect storm" that got BO elected and this ridiculous presidency started can be laid directly at the feet of John McCain, who not only ran the worst presidential campaign of my lifetime (I'm 55) but was one of the most unappealing candidates ever. Compared to McCain, Walter Mondale would appear charismatic. I know, I know, war record, war hero, etc. And he has my admiration and complete respect for that aspect of his life and his service to our country. But take that away and what have you got? If this type of standard bearer is what the GOP establishment can come up with in 2012, God help us.

Uncle B| 8.4.11 @ 2:24PM

America: Proletariat reduced to precariat, even some totally disenfranchised, Shiites her old working-class, leaves them without even decent medical care, in a population cleansing that is absolutely necessary for progress. Huge Capital flights, technology flights to China mark the end of the "Cheap Oil Era" and the end of the Middle Class. They stand as surplus today. So useless, untalented, spoiled, so 'entitled', they can hardly emigrate to Asia, follow their jobs, accept deserving pay for work done there, they languor in 'unemployables lines', in soup kitchens, on park benches even in tent cities, shanty towns, cheap boarding houses, waiting for the impossible to happen waiting for $20.00 dollar and hour jobs that now pay $2.00 a day in Asian countries, and folks there grateful for them, even to eat every day. Obama seeing each with a vote potential, sets out to change history, even the science of populations, and promises remedies that work within 4 years, remedies and a theory that only the very uneducated could possibly believe. America - glutted with non-producers, high cost, high expectancy non-producers, spoiled labor, living far beyond their means, and an Uber-rich class not ready to pay out of their pockets for even one more year of this expensive circus. Will a "crash" come? almost certainly. Will the poor pay a high price? almost certainly, will the rich share in the pain? Hell no! They will sell short on the market all the way down, accumulate larger share, consolidate, and start again towards the top, this time with labor costs much reduced, labor well winnowed by the storm, and workers not so convinced of socialist notions of 'entitlement", not so certain of absolute government provided security, and a decided will to survive. This is a natural process for a Capitalist society, it is hat the U.S.S.R. needed to prevent collapse but could not achieve, and is the base reason Capitalism forges ahead where all other systems fail. There will so be a body count, Many will be very disappointed, some of the fabric of the nation torn, even families divided, but in the end, the shareholder will reign supreme as God meant it to be!

Hunter Comstock| 8.4.11 @ 2:47PM

Obama might ignore us, however you can bet your bottom dollar that we won't ignore him at the ballot box November, 2012. I would absolutely vote for anyone but him.

Deaf Eddy| 8.4.11 @ 3:08PM

Is Boston Scientific's paying higher taxes worth the short and long-term troubles created by firing in America and hiring in China?

Deaf Eddy | 8.4.11 @ 3:17PM

Is Boston Scientific's paying higher taxes worth the short and long-term trouble of firing in America and hiring in China?

Thom| 8.4.11 @ 6:40PM

Yes. China has 1/7th the per capita income of the US and thus where equal quality of products can be produced there is a tremendous labor and tax savings (in China) over the base floor labor (and benefit) cost here. Note, “Medical equipment providers” get hit twice by King Obamacare, once as a tax on their production and once across the board with mandated benefit cost increases….on their labor. Which tax increase are they really avoiding here?

asesr| 8.4.11 @ 3:25PM

Why do conservatives hate America so much they are willing to take down Obama at any cost, even if it means the total economic collapse of the US? And all because he is black, how disgraceful. I changed my registration to Democrat after decades as a Republican after the outrageous and childishness of the teaparty controlled Repub Congress.

George True| 8.4.11 @ 5:17PM

If you were ever a Republican, then I'm the queen of England. You will have to do way better than that, my trollish friend. You will also have to get up before 3:00 in the afternoon. You are kind of a johnny-come-lately to the troll party today.

martin j smith| 8.4.11 @ 3:28PM

I will tell you what the debt ceiling deal did achieve:
As Obama stated it helped us go to another topic. And that one is the total collapse of the Obama Economy. It is here that we need more effective leadership--not Boehner or McConnell or McCaine. It could well be true that the CONTENTS of the so called agreement stink. Yet
by moving on and allowing the economy and the voters to react to the "deal" there is an opportunity. But we need another kind of leader.

Michael L. Hauschild| 8.4.11 @ 3:29PM

Anybody watching the Stock Market? I'll bet Kaminski is hopping around like a one legged paper hanger.

Louis Jenkins| 8.4.11 @ 5:05PM

500 points down today.

MyGirlFriday| 8.4.11 @ 3:51PM

What I don't understand is why the Republicans are not highlighting all the wild-eyed, mad-hatters known as the Progressives in the Democratic Party. The Democratic party leadership has tried its best to divide and conquer the Republican party by making the Tea Party the bad guys. "They don't care about the poor,and elderly" this mantra will continue now that we have the new debt commission.

We need Independents and old Kennedy Democrats to join the Republican Party to defeat Obama in 2012. We must show who the obstructionists really are, they are the Progressives of the Democrat Party. Highlight the unemployment, poverty, in those districts and states where these "leaders" supposedly "help" their constituents. Why would American's listen to those who have reined their economic terror down on America and are willing drag us down the road to insolvency. California has 12.5 % unemployment.. Pelosi/Boxer/Feinstein, Nevada is over 14.5% ... Harry Reid. Take Maxine Water's District, show the unemployment lines and misery these representatives have dished out in their own states and districts and ask American's: Is this what you want America? This is what the face of "social justice" looks like, and exactly what the Progressives won't show you.

The truth and facts are on our side. We must highlight who the true obstructionists really are. They are the Progressives inside the Democratic Party. They are the spenders and job destroyers not the new Republican Party with the Tea Party. It is in fact the Progressives within their own Democratic Party that are the real hostage takers. They are holding our nations children and grandchildren futures hostage with their spending. We cannot allow them to divide and separate our party.. not now. We need to highlight/separate and divide the Progressive "cancers" within the Democratic Party and not use general words like leftists, leftist democrats. Stop calling them simply Democrats, call them Progressives and make them the face of the Progressive commentators at MSMBC. We need to put faces and names to these Progressive Democrats: Nancy Pelosi Progressive Democrat. No self respecting Democrat wishes to be associated with the likes of Nancy Pelosi. We must shine a light on these usurpers of the Democratic Party and give them a viable choice in 2012 to vote "right" of Nancy Pelosi and her Progressive caucus.

George True| 8.4.11 @ 5:20PM

The Republicans do not have a clue how to frame a narrative, or how to package effective sound bites and talking points. They will win next year in spite of themselves.

tfgray| 8.4.11 @ 8:51PM

"California has 12.5 % unemployment.. Pelosi/Boxer/Feinstein, Nevada is over 14.5% ... Harry Reid. Take Maxine Water's District, show the unemployment lines and misery these representatives have dished out in their own states and districts ..."
Hold the phone, honey. are you saying that Federal laws are applied differently depending upon which side of the aisle the rep sits on?
You might want to check the pork rolls to account for the difference. Red states consistently get more Federal money than they pay in taxes: only two reds pay more in tax than they get back (TX & GA, with ratios of $.90-or so for every dollar paid in Federal tax.) The reverse is true on the Blue side, with only a couple of Blue states getting more than their citizens put in (MD, loaded with government offices and military bases and NM, with a lot of Native Americans.)
It'll be interesting to see what happens when you all get what you want, but then again, what you really want if for yourselves to get pork and everyone else pay for it, while you loudly complain about taxes and spending.

Dan| 8.4.11 @ 4:12PM

He is possibly an illegal president, probably a closet Muslim, of the socialist/communist variety, presiding over a country in economic free fall due to his leadership and yet in poll after poll he still beats named Republicans running for president in 2012 and loses to a generic Republican candidate. I don't understand it, someone, anyone, please help me out. Certainy in all of America we should be able to find a candidate who, at this moment, would pin his ears back....but we can't.

tfgray| 8.4.11 @ 8:38PM

It's pretty easy to explain:
1. He was born in Hawaii, which was the newest state at that time. If you don't believe the government-issued birth certificate, you can check the local newspapers for that date. They are privately-owned, capitalist enterprises.
2. W tarnished the Republican brand so badly that Jesus himself running on the elephant ticket couldn't have gotten elected. Then again, it is widely reported that Jesus hung out with prostitutes and tax collectors and was overheard telling some "job creator" that he needed to give away all his money if he wanted to be part of his cult.
3. If you look at the "socialist/communist" and compare his policies to Republican presidents, you'll find him slightly to the Right of that notorious commie, Richard M (EPA, OSHA, federal revenue-sharing, ended the war against the Viet Cong) Nixon.
4. The current Republican candidates, who are either on the Koch Brother leash, or terrified that the Koch Brothers will fund their opponents, have one solution to all problems: Give more money to the rich! Never mind that since W gave away the store the jobless rate has risen and that the slowing of job creation happens to coincide with the end of the stimulus money, nope, the problem is that the poor just have too damn much money.
Just as a hint, when a business borrows money from a bank, it doesn't make a bit of difference whether the loan comes from one millionaire's account or the accounts of a thousand people who each have $1000 (do the math). Second hint: taxation levels have little to do with job creation. You get taxed on profit. If few people have disposable income, there's a smaller chance that they will be able to buy your product. Low sales, low/no profit, low/no taxes.
Keynesian economics, BTW, can be found in the Bible, read it here: http://www.biblegateway.com/pa.....ersion=NLT
Rush Limbaugh notwithstanding, the concept of the government storing a surplus to sustain the country during difficult times is no commie plot...unless Yaweh was a Marxist.

Dan| 8.5.11 @ 10:40PM

Your delusional...and that's being kind.

A.C. Guard| 8.5.11 @ 10:51PM

It is obvious Grey that you are noting more than a Democratic ideologue. Your comment on Obama's birth certificate proves you are easily fooled.

Wilfredo Djesus| 8.4.11 @ 4:30PM

I am an Independent and I voted for President Obama, something I will not do again because he probably has done all the wrong things during his term. However, I have also voted for many republicans, some of which have also done "all the wrong things." But I vote based on many qualities shown by the "applicant," unlike many of the people who submitted their comments here and who have only one point of view, a view which leads many of them to think that the last president was a good president, lies, lack of knowledge, etc., notwithstanding. If the republican party doesn't take action to educate its voters to consider all sides of the picture, it will certainly give this country up to democrats in the future.

Bob Grant| 8.4.11 @ 5:08PM

Please don't take this the wrong way but you are what I call a Floater, one who floats all over the political spectrum, not deeply knowledgeable of the issues of the day but feels the need to vote in every election because it's your civic duty.

Sure, you say you're independent who studies the candidates before making an "educated" decision but 10 to 1 odds you voted for Obama because you liked the "cut of his jib" or the "crease in his pants".

Yes, people on this board are fully aware GW Bush was a disaster.

Do us all a favor and just sit out the next election. You might make the wrong decision again.

George True| 8.4.11 @ 5:22PM

Well said, Bob! I forgive you for not liking Sarah Palin.

Bob Grant| 8.4.11 @ 7:03PM

GT,

Thanks. Primary Sarah I could do without. General Sarah will suit me fine.

martin j smith| 8.4.11 @ 4:54PM

Who supports Obama ? Among others WALL STREET !!!!!!!!!!!!!! They have given him lots of change in exchange for his benevolence. The media
in exchange for his benevolence. Among others neither of these very poor. in fact many obama supporters are not poor in fact they are in some cases millionaires and billionaires.

one point about media--fox is in my view not fair and balanced any longer. it has shifter decidedly.
they are afraid.

ONTIME| 8.4.11 @ 5:48PM

The Mysery Man has scored another win over the reluctant RINO's , he put a sour pacifier in their gummy mouths and they bit on it and now the debt ceiling gives him more leeway, the default avoidance has done nothing, ask the lack of confidence in the stock market that is now occuring, remember when these bunch of liars said this would not happen.

Remember the commission of six dummies they want to run congress, who is to stupid to do it's job and is going to bown to the wishes of these incompetent jerks who just got through lying their frigging butts off about what just happened economically. We are in for more horrendous lies and deceptions by this adminstration and the congress, if you are finacially independent or control your finanaces with no debt, you won't for much longer, all you gold holders you are slated for easy pickings and business is going to take more hits...count on it.

These jerks, liars and thieves we elected are suicidal, because when they finnish wrecking the country what will they do then for a job?...ask them!

BackToBasics| 8.4.11 @ 6:13PM

The economic news sure is bad. Looking for the silver lining in it does not even raise my hopes too much beecause I think it will get darker before it gets lighter and I mean darker before November 2012.

But if the news continues as it has, Obam will be out. Secondly, the nauseating and tiring lines the Dems have been using to blame all our problems on the Republicans for the last 40 or more years are more and more going to fall on deaf ears. They will fall with a resounding thud. If my hunch is right these changes will be good to see but it will be bittersweet too as many dark clouds will befall us too.

If this bad news continues, soon the Dems and RINO's will begin to reposition themselves as not being so far away from the Tea Party after all.

And getting Obam out will be especially good IF the strongest AND the most conservative Republican wins the presidency and if we get the Senate back too.

Chief_Cabioch | 8.4.11 @ 7:11PM

For the life of me I dont see why Americans arent pursuing his Birth Certificate issue, there is MORE than enough proof he isnt elligible to be President, why would we allow anyone to intimidate us to keep this going ?, the threat from Black retaliation ?, which is worse?, Blacks retaliating, or the collapse of America?,.

PCP Smoker| 8.4.11 @ 7:51PM

I would not underestimate the ability of Republicans to completely screw this up. It's not too far fetched to see Romney nominated, while the GOP bashes the Tea Party for their beliefs AND asks tea partiers to enthusiastically support Romney.

tfgray| 8.4.11 @ 8:09PM

Oddly, you have not problem with the costs incurred by Bush's Medicare Part D, which was not included in his budgets and is, by law, forbidden to negotiate drug prices.
Oh, right. Deficits don't matter when Republicans create them.

Bob Grant| 8.4.11 @ 8:25PM

fftray,

No one will take your bait. If you thing you'll find someone at this post defending Bush's Medicaid Part D plan, you're smoking crack.

Bob From District 9| 8.4.11 @ 9:33PM

Congratulations, you have managed to sabatoge America's recovery to the extent you expect to destroy the administration and sink health care for millions of Americans.

All you had to do to achieve this victory was to lie, mislead, dissemble, and sell your soul. Ok, with the low value of your soul that's not such a bad bargain.

Obamacare is very popular in general, with only portions unpopular. Your delight in the increased cost due to the extension of health care coverage to 23 million more Americans is indicative of the death panel mentality extant in the right wing of America "If you can't pay for medical care, go ahead and die."

Now we see the economy in trouble, all of the stock market gains for this year have been wiped out because your side tied up the debt limit and tied it in knots to keep the president off job creation. You sold the public on the notion that the debt was the all encompassing threat, instead of job creation which so many of us Democrats were calling the real danger.

Well, you got your wish, but if you get the presidency your president may well inherit instead of another Great Recession, another Great Depression.

Your balanced budget amendment will cripple the next president's ability to bring this country through that. Which means, your next republican president may preside over the decline of America to third world status.

Thanks a lot, American Spectator, David Catron, and R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr. You may have succeeded where all foreign enemies have failed. Fortunately for you, history will likely forget you in the shadow of the major players like John Boehner.

You, however, will know.

George True| 8.4.11 @ 10:06PM

Pull-eze. Barack, Harry, and Nancy have gotten everything they wanted so far. They now own the wrecked economy.

Obamacare was opposed by the American people by a solid two to one margin. Those numbers have not changed since then.

The balanced budget amendment...did not pass.

I don't see a single thing that Republicans or conservatives have done to cause the current depression. They were powerless to stop the Dems from doing any damn thing they wanted. Even since winning back the house, the Repubs have gotten rolled by the Dems on every issue.

Your Messiah and his minions OWN the unfolding economic disaster.

Sorry, but we can't fix stupid here.

John II| 8.4.11 @ 10:48PM

T'ain't stupid, Truie. 'Tis vicious. For the sake of those who have passed over my rant, I repeat:

The Left's economic theory is in service to its will to power. And the theory is time-tested and experimentally validated: the Marxian-lite Keynesian wham-wham is deliberately intended as a means to foster a degenerate and dependent culture of Eloi-like losers eager to be told what to do by their masters. The dependency culture is the end-game for the Left, and the creeps are doing rather well.

When the Professor was running for President (overtly, that is) in 2008, a college sophomore at a pep rally was asked what she thought about the arguments regarding socialized medicine. Her snappy response: "I don't care about any arguments--I just want my medical care to be free!"

THAT is the mindset of the Professor and his political base--and THAT is rapidly becoming the mindset of more than half the addled electorate.

The "abject failure" of Obamanomics is a colossal political winner for the spoiled punks who advocate it. The end they seek is not prosperity and freedom; the end is power .

Why do I have to keep reminding conservatives of these elemental points?

"Oh, sometimes I think I will just go mad!" (Groucho Marx quoting Greta Garbo, 1929)

DRed| 8.4.11 @ 10:49PM

Like when the democrats rolled the republicans into letting the Bush tax cuts expire? And when they steamrolled the republicans into voting for an additional round of stimulus spending? Finally, they topped that off by refusing to agree to a debt ceiling deal that didn't raise taxes-right? Oh no-the republicans won all those fights.

John II| 8.4.11 @ 11:09PM

Oh shaddup, DReddie. We're on to you now. Game's up, baby. We lose. You lose. Your hatred for the Americano experiment disgusts me, but even that's all over. There's not going to be anything left for you to hate in just a few short years.

And now back to "The Ten Commandments" (1956), in which the spirit of DReddie has a role as Dathan, the slippery opportunist played by Edward G. Robinson.

"Do you know who I am?" Dathan asks the future Egyptian pharoah Ramses, played by Yul Brynner.

To which Ramses replies: "I know who you WERE."

DRed| 8.5.11 @ 12:17AM

Well, I was talking to George. I mean, how is this country going to get out of this mess if people insist on believing things that aren't even remotely true. There's no way you can look at the last Congress and say that Obama got everything he wanted. It's just plain false. Why do I care? I care because I love this country, and it drives me nuts to see it being driven to ruin by ideologues. There's plenty of blame to go around, but blindly insisting that your side is always right is no way out of this.

skip| 8.5.11 @ 1:21AM

"believing things that aren't even remotely true?"

"There's no way you can...say that Obama got everything he wanted."

Obama crammed through Obamacare, which will cost trillions, will create hundreds of bureaucracies, isn't on the books yet, and wasn't part of the debt ceiling fracas.

Obama increased federal spending a third. What of that third has been cut back?

"how is this country going to get out of this mess"

With your example of willful ignorance I have my doubts let me tell you.

skip| 8.5.11 @ 1:22AM

Oh yeah, stimulus anyone?

Wake up.

Intelligent Design| 8.4.11 @ 9:51PM

Obama and his entire administration should resign. They won't, of course. Perhaps there should be a Constitutional amendment whereby a certain level of incompetence triggers a special election, so the people have an opportunity to elect a new government, to stop the damage a failure such as Obama and his comrades have already inflicted on our country.

Bob Grant| 8.4.11 @ 10:05PM

Nice idea. The British have a system where the opposition runs a parallel government to make a smooth transfer if necessary. Might work here.

Wayne | 8.4.11 @ 11:51PM

We had an interesting discussion. It would actually be much easier for the US to change than for Obama. Its quite amazing if you think of it.

Rockerbabe| 8.6.11 @ 1:49AM

Why didn't you think of this during the Bush years?

Nite| 8.4.11 @ 9:53PM

Most people hate Obmacare and many companies have already canceled employee health benefits because of this program. There are so many mandates, high taxes and other big surprises that people will be furious when everything finally becomes known. Obama and the Democrats overreached on this one. Medicare and Medicaid Dept. says that costs for Obamacare will go up and not down as the Democrats postulated. Hopefully Obama and this turkey will both be ousted!

Rockerbabe| 8.4.11 @ 11:30PM

So smarty, just what do you intend to replace it with? And do you even care about the 40+ million Americans who do not have private medical insurance at the moment? Obamacare is better than nothing and nothing is what the GOP is offering; absolutely NOTHING.

Wayne | 8.4.11 @ 11:49PM

Nothing is what is left after Obama and his cronies get their cuts.

Trebor Noslem| 8.4.11 @ 10:53PM

Y'wanna know who's responsible for this mess? WE ARE, because we piss and moan about Occupant and the Sociocrats, the feckless GOP and, yet, we keep sending the same bunch back to Washington to continue screwing things up. Look in the mirror and tell the person you see there that things are lousy and getting worse because he (YOU) doesn't have the cojones or G.A.S. to vote that ignorant SOB out of office, along with the rest of the losers that infest DC.

POST American| 8.4.11 @ 11:08PM

---------------------BOTTOM LINE--------------------

RED China sellout and TREASON,
the awesome world depop op pulsing in Fukishima, American
DEE----IN-----DUST--realization,
and AWE---STARE---IT----HEEE
are guaranteed to steam onward as the impeccable
CFR 'continuity of agenda', stretching from
Bush SR, and before, remains
unchallenged, unrecognized, UN----mentioned.

Remember kiddies, BEWARE those Freemasonic
front ops ( like the recent Norway horror).
And NEVER forget, we're the ITs --even as we lose our jobs in I.T..

---IT--- really is central to this FINAL phase.

Mike| 8.4.11 @ 11:18PM

Well, the market weighed in on you right wing Tea Party assholes.

John II| 8.4.11 @ 11:21PM

Say--what?

Trebor Noslem| 8.4.11 @ 11:23PM

I think you might want to add the inspired leadership of Occupant, Harry Reid and the rest of the Sociocrats to your list. This isn't one party's fault, nor one group's fault - it's yours, and mine, and that guy over there's, because we keep sending the same sorry bunch (or their "freshman" clones) back to DC to continue screwing things up. Wake up, chum, smell the coffee. If we don't kick 'em ALL out, we have nobody but ourselves to blame.

George True| 8.5.11 @ 2:11AM

The market told us what it thought about the debt ceiling being raised another 4 trillion dollars.

RCV| 8.6.11 @ 1:17PM

No, as S&P made clear in its downgrade announcement, it was a judgment on the disfunctionality of the current Congress: the willingness to turn what should have been a simple decision into political theater, heedless of the damage the theatrics would cause. It's time to throw these Tea Party Luddites out on their rear ends. Very short term limits for them.

Reprobate Charlatan Vomitus| 8.6.11 @ 8:05PM

I don't bother with silly realities of the state of the nation when in my genius I recognize tea partiers for what they are and abhorring them for wholly lacking any intelligence and abhorring them for lacking any shred of real Christian love and abhorring them for lacking any shred of compassion and abhorring them for espousing policies dangerous and damaging to this nation and abhorring them for being from economically depressed red states and abhorring them for being from red states where education is low and abhorring them for being from red states where they believe right wing nonsense and abhorring them for not supporting Obama the only adult in Washington D.C. and abhorring them for not supporting Hillary the future of this nation but most of all abhorring them for unintelligently and unChristianlike and uncompassionately and uneducationally not supporting abortion which unconstitutionally violates individual rights by caring for human beings at least BEFORE they're born on reminding everyone with yet another post why I am a pathetic despicable stupid lying douchebag asswipe matters.

RCV| 8.6.11 @ 8:34PM

Zzzzzzzzzzz........

Rockerbabe| 8.4.11 @ 11:27PM

I like President Obama; he gives me hope and I haven't had any for a very long time. The Bushie years were a waste of money, emotion, work and aspiration and the economic meltdown caused by the ignorant policies were frustrating to most of us sane people who actually go to work daily and do our best to make the "world go round". President Obama is trying his best to keep all the balls in the air, but is is real hard when the opposition has more loyalty to their political party than to the American people. We all saw the GOP kidnapping called the debt ceiling debate. Not a descent person in the GOP as far as I am concerned. I for one, will not be voting GOP for a very long time. I don't kin much to kidnappers and extortion, let along trying to bring down the duly elected leader of our nation. The GOP is just a bunch of TWERPS [the worst ever republica picks].

John II| 8.4.11 @ 11:42PM

Say--what? It's awfully late for the gerbils to be active.

John II| 8.4.11 @ 11:42PM

Say--what? It's awfully late for the gerbils to be active.

John II| 8.4.11 @ 11:43PM

One way or the other, I'll get the last word in on this thread . . .

skip| 8.5.11 @ 12:50PM

Please continue your 'kidnapping and extortion' narrative while opining about the political process in action that enacted the legislative act known as 'Obamacare'.

Miserable in MI| 8.5.11 @ 12:45AM

I would say that we should let Obama be reelected(we cannot have him attempting another run down the road) and stop him at every turn in congress. However, Obama does most of his dirty work through his czars and by executive order. Moreover, he is as dirty as they come and Repubs in D.C. have no idea how to deal with him. Therefore, I do not think we have any choice but to try to unseat him.

sepatu futsal | 8.5.11 @ 8:35AM

thats is nice and great!

wildrover4| 8.5.11 @ 9:14AM

"Between the recession's low point in January 2009 and April 2010, net private sector job creation improved by 67,600 jobs a month." Almost immediately following passage of Obamacare, however, monthly job creation flattened to less than 10 percent of that amount.

The author's last statement is demonstrably false and AS should make a correction. Private sector monthly job creation is far in excess 6,700. I don't know any source that has it pegged at this level. Even if one were to include public employee layoffs, which would be disingenuous, you can't get to that number.

rick3262| 8.5.11 @ 9:31AM

Time for Obama to go. Now, he's trying to act superior by saying "Chance that we can believe in" wasn't going to happen in a day, or a few weeks, as if anyone expected it to. He set the parameters himself in the article referenced above. Now, he's trying to act as if he's not accountable for it. Now, he's still attempting to blame George W. Bush for his failures for the past three years.

caydave| 8.5.11 @ 11:06AM

your article may be all true, but it just doesn't matter if neither the republicans or MSM are going to ram those facts and figures down the throats of every american over the next 12 months...

Jack Davis| 8.5.11 @ 11:39AM

Please add my note/voice to the growing chorus of those who can't wait until Obama is shown the door (to put it mildly and politely).

Alex| 8.5.11 @ 1:32PM

Anyways only getting a few paragraphs into the story we already find a manipulation, that heritage graph really looks great if you want to make the President look bad but if anyone cares to look into it you'll see why it's manipulative.
Here's a link explaining why:
http://modeledbehavior.com/201.....mployment/

joanne| 8.5.11 @ 1:38PM

I never in my life have been so anxious, fearful and disgusted at the same time. This inept wolf in sheeps clothing never takes responsibity for anything. I knew that he would never "triangulate" after the 2010 midterms because he is not done DESTROYING the America that we all love. Why doesn't he move to Venezula, he would fit right in. The author hit the nail on the head re. the bill shoved down our throats, despite the outcry. I will never forget these wackos who are steamrolling all over the public. 2012 can't come soon enough for MANY people, and Obama and his ridiculous and dangerous czars have to be kicked out on their a**.

RME KRNL| 8.5.11 @ 3:16PM

He would HAVE to be better at SOMETHING than he's been as president, and I can only hope it's being a good prognosticator about his not having a second term.

Buck Ofama| 8.5.11 @ 3:23PM

BUSH'S FAULT!

HOAX and CHAINS!

WARE MY GUBMINT CHEK???????
U NO WUTI SAIN?

Mistral| 8.5.11 @ 5:42PM

Americans must face up to the reality of a failed quasi-mohamaten proto-communist president being followed by what, in fact? Next in the queue are more dubious candidates from the old guard who now support legalised sodomy; sex-pervert indoctrination programmes for school-children; more abortions on a large-scale and anything else that crosses their self-prepossessed personally politically ambitious minds which looks like prolonging their ephemeral but immensely expensive popularity.

Time for Americans to think beyond all of this nonsense and to prevent a vote for a prolongation of this appalling situation.

It is time for a Palin or a Paul-type or a candidate who talks sense and means it. Wise-up and read the manifestos - ask candidates awquard questions and keep asking them until they give concrete answers. USA is now in make-or-break territory. A massive disaster is awaiting it just round the political corner. Returning a hopeless left-wing narcissist spells final doom while raising an old-boy-network Republican will not prove to be much better. Stop voting for proven hypocrits and parvenu upstarts - rather vote for those who say what they mean and who mean what they say.

Mistral| 8.5.11 @ 5:42PM

Americans must face up to the reality of a failed quasi-mohamaten proto-communist president being followed by what, in fact? Next in the queue are more dubious candidates from the old guard who now support legalised sodomy; sex-pervert indoctrination programmes for school-children; more abortions on a large-scale and anything else that crosses their self-prepossessed personally politically ambitious minds which looks like prolonging their ephemeral but immensely expensive popularity.

Time for Americans to think beyond all of this nonsense and to prevent a vote for a prolongation of this appalling situation.

It is time for a Palin or a Paul-type or a candidate who talks sense and means it. Wise-up and read the manifestos - ask candidates awquard questions and keep asking them until they give concrete answers. USA is now in make-or-break territory. A massive disaster is awaiting it just round the political corner. Returning a hopeless left-wing narcissist spells final doom while raising an old-boy-network Republican will not prove to be much better. Stop voting for proven hypocrits and parvenu upstarts - rather vote for those who say what they mean and who mean what they say.

POST American| 8.6.11 @ 12:23AM

------------------BOTTOM LINE------------------

---BTW, speaking of set ups---

'Christian Terrorist'? --The world debates"
Yahoo News

'Lesbian Heroes of Norway IGNORED?'
Yahoo News

has anyone, noticed
anywhere, anybody going into the OBVIOUSLY
Freemasonic trappings of the OBVIOUSLY
mind control set up Norway horror?

I mean now that the whole thing is being memory
holed, right on top of the Fukishima world depop
OP --and John Wheeler's murder
(----itself just weeks before the HAARP-esque Japan tsunami).

Andrew P| 8.6.11 @ 3:31AM

I hate to throw cold water on the talk of Obama's retirement. It is true that the fundamentals do not favor his reelection, but the particulars do. 1) He has a very solid floor of support about 45%. 2) The black vote is solid, is loyal, will turn out, and this could carry key states like VA and NC just like it did in 2008. 3) The media narrative is strongly Democratic, and this makes a huge difference in national campaigns. 4) The ability of an incumbent President to shape events to his liking should never be underestimated. Remember Osama Bin Laden?

RCV| 8.6.11 @ 4:34PM

You left out 5) The lack of a viable candidate in the GOP who can garner support from even a majority of Republicans let alone Independents and Democrats.

Reprobate Charlatan Vomitus| 8.6.11 @ 8:09PM

I don't bother with silly will Rick Perry win the 2012 election by more than Reagan's electoral numbers or not on either way Rick Perry is a lock for the presidency I'm just consistently stupid and dishonest don't mind me matters oh yeah the tea party is wholly lacking in intelligence and a shred of real Christian love and compassion and at least I belong to the party that cares about human beings AFTER they're born matters.

RCV| 8.6.11 @ 8:36PM

Zzzzzzzzzzz ........

shipley130| 8.7.11 @ 12:30PM

America has gone well beyond taking care of those who cannot help themselves. That is the problem.

nice | 8.6.11 @ 5:55PM

obama.. obama.. obama..

Buck Ofama| 8.7.11 @ 3:54AM

TRUMP the CHUMP (or CHIMP) whichever you prefer.

rick3262| 8.16.11 @ 1:24AM

Bam-Bam's going to look at that interview where he talks about the criteria for him being a one-term president. He'll turn to you, look you directly in the eye, and say, "Do you think that's me? Are you telling me that all Black people look alike?"

jhopkins| 8.16.11 @ 11:22PM

I think george bush is the worst president ever. Look what his lies has cost our country

Rick| 8.31.11 @ 8:18PM

Your antisemite!

Rick| 8.31.11 @ 8:17PM

Obama will NOT loose! Your a bigget and the medacal companies are rasist!

Tenn Slim| 2.29.12 @ 8:51AM

update
2 29 12.
Obama is sitting very securely in the Oval Office.
His GOP opponents are spending, wearing thin.
The Economy, per se, has warts, bumps and some relatively good aspects (DOJ 13000). So. A one termer? Nevada boards say something like 6/10 odds FOR re election.
IF this prediction comes true, then Survival within a Dark Ages Socialist USA is the only answer left.
Obamacare alone will destroy 1/6th of the economy left from the first 4 years. Cloward Piven, DOE, EPA, USDA, Czars will eclipse the rest.
What is survival. For the Seniors, How to Live and Not die within Obamacare. For the rest. You figure, survival like Wyoming, a separatist state or like Vermont, already a separatist Socialist state.
Regions may well be the demise of the Republic.
Dark ages for sure.
The Chaldean Hand has written.
Semper FI

More Articles by David Catron

More Articles From The Obama Watch

Holding AWOL Obama Accountable

May 23, 2013 | Betsy McCaughey

Obama’s Assault on the First Amendment

May 22, 2013 | George Neumayr

Anyone Still Believe Me?

May 21, 2013 | Aaron Goldstein

Obama’s Far Left Hand

May 15, 2013 | George Neumayr

That Is What We Do

May 14, 2013 | Jay D. Homnick

http://spectator.org/archives/2011/08/04/the-one-termer-weve-been-waiti

ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Headlines

We Will Remember

Roger Kaplan|26 comments

Real Immigration Reform Requires Free Markets

Ross Kaminsky|80 comments

Enough With the Bipartisanship

Matt Purple|45 comments

The United States of El Norte

Larry Thornberry|59 comments

Vodka = Vodka = Vodka

Daniel J. Flynn|93 comments

Laying Down My Pen

Quin Hillyer

Tornado Chasers

Claire Healey|35 comments

The Chinese Waltz

George H. Wittman|2 comments

The Spectacle Blog

Jimmy Wray, R.I.P.

Aaron Goldstein | 4:19PM

The Spectator’s Spectacular: May 18-May 25

Patrick Ryan | 10:45AM

Updated: NBC News: Holder Personally Approved Fox Reporter Warrant

Ross Kaminsky | 5.24.13

Felonious Attorney General?

Kaylin Bugos | 5.24.13

Did the Boy Scouts Cave to Pressure?

Claire Healey | 5.24.13

BBC World Survey Ranks Israel Near Bottom in Global Popularity

Aaron Goldstein | 5.24.13

Obamacare is a Big and Growing Problem for Democrats

Ross Kaminsky | 5.24.13

Stein on IRS Scandal

Patrick Ryan | 5.24.13

SPONSORED LINKS

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Clip of the Day

H/T to National Review Online

Most Popular Articles

#FreeKate? Movement to Normalize Pedophilia Finds Its Poster Girl

Robert Stacy McCain | 5.23.13

Obama and the IRS: The Smoking Gun?

Jeffrey Lord | 5.20.13

The Inoperative Jay Carney

Jeffrey Lord | 5.23.13

Holding AWOL Obama Accountable

Betsy McCaughey | 5.23.13

Obama's Imbroglios

R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. | 5.23.13

Laying Down My Pen

Quin Hillyer | 5.23.13

Lerner's Plea

Ray V. Hartwell | 5.23.13

Time to Go for the Kill

Peter Ferrara | 5.22.13

ADVERTISEMENT

Home |About |Contributors |Advertise |Donate |Privacy Policy |Contact

The American Spectator Foundation is the 501(c)(3) organization responsible for publishing The American Spectator magazine and training aspiring journalists who espouse traditional American values. Your contributions are tax deductible to the extent permitted by law. Each donor receives a year-end summary of their giving for tax purposes.

Copyright 2013, The American Spectator. All rights reserved.