The only "debacle in office" is in office.

Democrats know nothing about economics. Obama knows even less than most Democrats. We need a strong economic policy more than anything else right now.

The choice is clear, less gov. or Obama's big gov. --So basically you like being told what to do, when to do it, and how you are going to do, which is fine for people who can't think for them self. Just don't forget a government that is big enough to give you everything is also big enough to take everything away, including your rights under the Constitution.

PhatNate:your opinion counts. Pease provide the basis for your comments. Do you remember the 8 years of poor economic policy that got us into this mess? People have such short term memories. I understand that you want to see improvements in our economy, but you will not see an economic collapse turn into a surplus of jobs and wealth in 4 years. Simply said, it's not possible. I'm a moderate but seem to vote where the math adds up. I understand there is large debt but it was to hold up this country and stop the bleeding. If you look at history, the government has always had to pump capital into the economy and then focus on reducing debt once the economy again improves, which we see signs of currently.
Anyone can get up in front of the country and say,I'll cut taxes for everyone even more than Bush, I'll change healthcare back to the way it was while remaining bi-partisan, I'll cut all the credits to green energy and put back into medicare, I'll make sure the U.S. is energy independent by giving a bunch of credits to oil companies and build a pipeline from Canada(?), I'll add jobs by cutting taxes only, I'll give medicare folks a choice in health provider, I'll increase military budget to protect this country, I like teachers but let states fix educaiton. Oh by the way, I'll reduce the debt at the same time and not borrow from China. If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. It's like saying, I'll paint the house blue but it won't be blue. I promise.

30082 So you say you want numbers, Here they are.............

The day the democrats took over was not January 22nd 2009, it was actually January 3rd 2007 the day the Democrats took over the House of Representatives and the Senate, at the very start of the 110th Congress.The Democrat Party controlled a majority in both chambers for the first time since the end of the 103rd Congress in 1995.

For those who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy that everything is "Bush's Fault", think about this:
January 3rd, 2007 was the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress.

At the time:
The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77
The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5%
The Unemployment rate was 4.6%
George Bush's Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of JOB GROWTH

Remember the day...
January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee.

The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy?
BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES!

Unemployment... to this CRISIS by (among MANY other things) dumping 5-6 TRILLION Dollars of toxic loans on the economy from YOUR Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac FIASCOES!

See Page 2

Page 2
Bush asked Congress 17 TIMES to stop Fannie & Freddie - starting in 2001 because it was financially risky for the US economy.
And who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae AND Freddie Mac? OBAMA

And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie?OBAMA and the Democrat Congress

So when someone tries to blame Bush.
REMEMBER JANUARY 3rd, 2007.... THE DAY THE DEMOCRATS TOOK OVER!"

Budgets do not come from the White House. They come from Congress and the party that controlled Congress since January 2007 is the Democrat Party.

Furthermore, the Democrats controlled the budget process for 2008 & 2009 as well as 2010 &2011.

Page 3
In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused them to compromise on spending, when Bush somewhat belatedly got tough on spending increases.

For 2009 though, Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid bypassed George Bush entirely, passing continuing resolutions to keep government running until Barack Obama could take office. At that time, they passed a massive omnibus spending bill to complete the 2009 budgets.

And where was Barack Obama during this time? He was a member of that very Congress that passed all of these massive spending bills, and he signed the omnibus bill as President to complete 2009.

If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the 2007 deficit, the last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets.

If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself.

In a nutshell, what Obama is saying is I inherited a deficit that I voted for and then I voted to expand that deficit four-fold since January 20th.

Zac, Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 ( Deregulation ) This was only part of it all........This was a time when Bill was just eating pizza at the office.... This was a by-partisan agreement like many are, the democrats voted 38-7 and 155-51 to pass this bill (84 and 75 percent). Obama voted for it (or was this one of 24.9% he missed) and Bill Clinton signed into Law just in time for Bush.
www.larouchepub.com/other/2010/3725dump_barney_gl-st.html
As said above REMEMBER JANUARY 3rd, 2007, clearly put the fox in the hen house,

** People don't forget the house and senate elections, they are just as or more so inportant....

You people don't make any sense...complaining about big government at the same time criticizing the government about jobs & the economy. Truth be told, Bankers run this country and any one who believes different is uninformed. The only branch of the government with no over sight is the Federal Reserve....get it, capitalism is about capital ie money banks issue and control the money therefore blame the folks that actually took your job overseas, not the government. If you blame the government you believe in socialism, if not stop blaming the president.

FAIL!

I agree Charles, It is not about the winner or loser. Individuals should be focusing on the content, not how loud or fast someone talked.

I guess I enjoy "verbal agression"??? I enjoy seeing someone show some emotion about the state of our Country. We need someone passionate about fixing this mess.

Yatta- Of course you weren't looking for a winner, unless Obama won. If I supported Obama I wouldn't look either.

Some one had to take charge, Obama wouldn't even look the man in the eye, all he did was look down or away from Romney, you know Yatta like when you scold your twelve year old.

Lack of respect? Just how many times did the Commander and Chief talk RIGHT through and OVER the moderator? Good Grief, even when he had nothing left to say, he still ran over and over and over the moderator.

Thats what debates are for, a winner, someone who is firm on where he stands, and obama was a weak sister. As long as obama has his yes men around he is fine, but when he faces an opponant face to face, he is useless!!!

Mike, You sound kinda whiny. Romney won the debate, making him a winner, not a bully. Obama lost the debate because he is spineless.

It's called a debate. From Wikipedia...Debate is a method of interactive and representational argument. Bully congress? Really? I don't think any President in the past 20 years has been able to come even close to bullying Congress. Most absurd statement of all.. "they (Republicans) want the country to fail." Get a clue.

Even CNN said Romney won...

wow.What debate did you watch?

Really Mike, last 4 years, you should remember the first two years, that's when the Democrats had the House and Senate, gave you all the welfare money and obamacare which the rest of us are paying for. Has dependency blinded you that much.

As I remember, Obama and the democrats had control of the house and senate his first 2 years of office. If he had worked on the economy those first 2 years instead of ramming Obamacare, maybe the Dems could have kept the house, and our economy wouldn't be in the crapper. I'd like to know when or if Obama will own up to his failures and stop blaming Bush for his troubles? Will Obama or Dems ever own up to what's happened within the last 4years? Or will they keep playing the blame game?

Romney sounded more like a "silver tongued devil" to me!

Biden can't even spell floor so good luck with that!

good luck on that one...

Biden wipes the floor, moving us into the 20th century...

One other thing everyone should keep in mind. Back in the 90's, obama was one of the main players that "forced" banks and lending institutions to lower the qualifications of home buters, so that people with little or no (even bad) credit could buy homes, and he also supported predetary loans, also remember that the "Rev" Jerimish Wright was his teacher and mentor as well as his Pastor for 20 years. Let see, wright is a racist who preaches hate and anti semitism, this was for TWENTY years. So remember that when you vote, this man is a socialist who believes that the Goverment knows best, not you.

We should all be angry right now.....look at the state of Our Country!

Of course you did.........

Exactly right...and every American should be pissed at what has happened in the past 4 years. Obama has golfed 110 times, and blew off half of his daily Presidential briefings with his Cabinet. If you aren't angry there is something wrong with you.

what everyone else saw was a President who for a change did not have a teleprompter...with someone else's words..Romney kicked butt.

Yeah...Romney is great at appealing to redneck sensibilities. He touches all the triggers--States' rights, socialized medicine (God forbid! Everyone has health insurance and can't be jerked around by private, self-interested insurance monoliths!). The bottom line is this--if America continues with the self-righteous, Republican-led path of take whatever and do whatever we want, we're going to crash and burn. If you'll notice, Obama frequently mentioned "balance," a word that is virtually absent from both Romney's vocabulary and philosophy.

Brian, Dude, we have already crashed and we are burning. We need a Fireman and all Obama has brought to the party is a can of gasoline.

Way to wax poetic, Mike, and again without the use of any actual information!

I did too, Paula. Obama, to me, had specifics, and a plan. Romney had sound bites, was rude to the moderator and the president and that smirk was annoying. Obama looked tired. I remember back to when Osama Bin Laden was killed. Obama was being lambasted by the Republicans for something or another and all the time he was addressing that situation, he was authorizing the mission to take down Bin Laden. I gained a lot of respect for him that day.

"If you'll notice, Obama frequently mentioned "balance," a word that is virtually absent from both Romney's vocabulary and philosophy."

Brian, what has Obama ever balanced? Sure wasn't a budget. Speaking of... isn't there supposed to be a budget passed each and every year? Your guys didn't even pass a budget while they had Obama and both houses. WTH? Tell me that would be just fine with Democrats if the Republicans had such power.

Your guys are screwing over my children and Grandchildren. What's the excuse?

Humm Paula - I saw a complacent black guy with no spark and no ideas.... Just saying!

May 16, 2012, "President Obama's budget suffered a second embarrassing defeat Wednesday, when senators voted 99-0 to reject it." Has a Presidential budget ever been defeated so soundly.

PhatNate
"Obama has golfed 110 times, and blew off half of his daily Presidential briefings with his Cabinet."

Really? I kind of remember the previous President. You know the one that took more time off than any other president in the history of the USA. You know the one that was reading a kids book while America was under attack. The same one that blocked investigations into the hideous crime for 444 days. The same one that used lies (weapons of mass destruction) to attack Iraq that resulted in 100,000 brave Americans dying or suffering incredible injuries. Remember the President that crashed the economy. Where was the stock market when Bush left office? Republicans have very selective short memories, good thing otherwise Mr. Etch-A-Sketch wouldn't stand a chance.

Sorry Shediac, got to call you on some of your over the top claims. First about reading the book, if I was on his security team I would have told him to sit tight and let us get a handle on this and not sure what folks expect him to do, whip out the nuclear football and launch a strike from the classroom. Next the weapons of mass destruction that liberals keep insisting didn't exist. This will come as news to our allies the Dutch, Poles and Canadians who discovered and destroyed those weapons. Wait, what you didn't know that. The Canadians destroyed the bulk of the material found since our only facility for doing such actions were closed down. Third 100,000 killed or wounded in Iraq? I have no idea where that comes from. Total killed was 4,486, and 32,223 wounded.
Sincerely,
SFC USA (Ret)

Thats no way to talk about Jim Lehrer!

For all the whining about a person's color not being the end all of a person, WHY is that always brought up by those who endlessly claim they WANT to stop Racism?

FACT if people will STOP using color in their positions, we might just get past it. The first black president has served in the office.
(2nd if you count Pres. Clinton, 3rd if you remember Pres. Jimmy Carter's claims)

Thats the debate I saw too, Paula. A white guy that kept saying he had a plan for this and that but never saying what that plan was.

Exactly!

Ironic, David. I'm sure you were the picture of objectivity~

Now, now Mr. Brian? Where are the facts in your previous statement? I wonder if KM & you are as biased about Obama as David is about Romney? Something to think about my darling!

try rewatching it with the sound off. Watch the twitches ticks and general body language. I would prefer two other choices than these men but Mitt was engaged and wanting to talk. Obama looked down, away and in general deeply annoyed by something whether it was Mitt, Jim, or the fact that it was his anniversary night. He's a thin skinned man in a job that requires thick skin. Surprisingly he showed a side that didn't match his great communicator persona.

@km I WANT your drugs

May I ask, What planet do you live, Fantasy World?

That was it exactly, a performance! He needs to go into show business!

I LIKE THAT, ROBME!!!!!!!!!!!!!LOL LOL LOL

My dear Edward:

What a funny little title from such a funny little man. Would you also prefer Hussein be used for the Prez?

Typical lefty spin. Obama pulled punches? Obama was simply unprepared. Obama thinks all he has to do is show up, I know it worked for him in 2008, hopefully it doesn't work in 2012.

PhatNate, he was unprepared because he doesn't know whats going on or wrong with the nation.

you want people to respect obama, but you disrespect Gov Romney! Typical flaming liberal.

Demeanor??? Did you happen to observe Obama twitching and unable to look Romney in the eye?? Have you ever studied body language?? Sure signs of lying. Obnoxious? He showed passion about Our Country. Are you on welfare?

Sarah, that is part of the problem - you "don't care what either one said". So, you are basically voting on how the candidate looks and not the policies he represents? Not very smart in my opinion!

Crazy B--
For good or ill, I truly believe demeanor, not content, is what people remember in these debates. We live in a world where what is said in a debate isn't as important as what Saturday Night Live will do with it the next weekend. Most people don't remember the specifics of the 2000 presidential debates, but they remember Will Ferrell and Darryl Hammond saying things like "Strategery" and "Lockbox."

Dear Ryan Smith:

For many your point may be appropriate. However, for those who study the issues the content rules. Especially in light of the fact that our economy, unemployment, housing and the like have changed the game in this election. This is a very different time in our nation's history with regard to our economy and global presence.

Personally, I like Obama. But I don't respect or trust him.

I sort of like Romney. And, I respect him immensely. I believe my trust of him will come based on his record as Governor of MA and his ability to work with an 87% Democratic majority to get issues solved.

Fondly,
Ms. Millendorf

GEE anyone that makes the Prez looks bad is obnoxious? No wonder the man is conflicted on stage, was his performance failure due to his mothers genes?

And of course Climate change Global warming is at fault for the Debate failure too because our current leader can't perform above 5000 ft. Great! I hope he never has to make a decision while traveling in Air Force One or during a trip to the Mideast.

I remember the timeless comment about "discussing nuclear disarmament with Amy over breakfast"...(at the time I believe she was an early teen)

The expression on President Carter's face right after he spoke, combined with Reagan's expression was right up there with the "You're No Jack Kennedy" moment years later.

Are you wearing rose tinted glasses? I find that flaming liberals always wear them.

Cary,
We're certainly not trying to present this as a scientific poll and we state that in the article. It's designed to be a snapshot of opinion of people who are very active in the two parties.

Cary- They did state it was not a scientific poll. However, the MSM puts Romney as the winner too. If the liberal media picked Romney as the winner then he, by God, must have won.

I very much agree with Ron Paul's stance on government. However independents simply do not pull enough votes...

I agree Brian. I felt that Obama offered facts and Romney offered sound bites, but no real plan.

As I was saying... http://politicalwire.com/archives/2012/10/04/fact_checking_romney.html

Brian, where do you come up with these big words, "mendacious"? Let's see, liberal and well spoken. Bet you're a school teacher, history or English literature. Which?

Neither, but thanks for the approbation.

Hi, Mike - Michelle Obama's ad is showing up on my computer. I think it's in a rotation with other ads.
Tank - If you take a closer look, you'll see that Georgia Dems in this flash poll also said they thought Romney won the debate.
Of course, the bigger question is - does it matter who won the debate?

No, it doesn't matter. Partisan lines are drawn with permanent marker these days.

Oh how I yearn for a non-partisan, fiscally conservative, socially liberal candidate. Sadly, the price of entry in politics is that you can't have actually lived life and made mistakes like us regular schmoes...you have to pander and cow tow and schmooze and give up your values for "the party's" and be broken and remade like a show pony. Again <sigh>.

Romney has no new ideas, just fresh talking points.

Ah yes, the old 'we want to make a bad first impression approach'. Well played Team Obama. You are soooo clever.

Darling Sarah:

I so love your conspiracy theories! I'm certain that we'll be hearing a lot more of them from you & others.

Fondly,
Ms. Millendorf

"Big Birdgate" and THAT'S whats haunts us?

GEEZE with all the feeling going on, I hope we remember to get a room at the next debate...

Yes, Karen, we are out here. I am one of them. In fact, you and I could be twins when it comes to how we feel about the current choices.
If I have to choose between "not great" and "really, really bad", I'll take not great anyday.

Karen what path is that? 30 months of job growth? Didnt go into a depression? Saved the auto industry? The market is at 13k. Home market is coming back. And that was with a gop whose only goal wasnt to save the country but make him a one term president. So they were for something, he said good idea. Then they were against it. Obamacare is the dole plan they put up against clinton care. Please tell me what obama did that was so bad. He isnt even a liberal for christ's sake.

Obama has you minions wrapped around his finger with his hope, change and forward garbage. Obama HOPES you will re-elect him so he can move FORWARD with his goal to CHANGE what is Great about America. Free Enterprise, Wealth, Strong Defense, Strong Business, the Best Health Care in the world to name a few.

Obama had two years with democrats in both houses and he chose to spend that golden opportunity, forcing a massive healthcare scam on America when we don’t want it. He chose to spend that time propping up his green energy buddies so they could fail at the expense of our children. He chose to save the United Auto Workers Union so he wouldn’t lose their support and could claim victory to saving the auto industry. HORSE CRAP! Tell that to all the dealership owners and employees now out of work.

He has chosen to Leak Classified information to glorify himself while blocking investigations and covering up information like Fast and Furious and most recently the Deaths of our Unprotected Citizens in Libya. The man is a liar and a farce. I wash my hands of this deliberate destruction of America while you fools vote to keep Obama in office.
No thank you!

No that's how he really feels. All the man di was ship jobs over seas, destroy companies or have companies that created really crappy jobs.Your kidding yourself to try and believe the spin. And when he takes away your mortgage deduction please dont have the nerve to be surprised.

AS opposed to our President's very own Jobs czar, the head of GE that's currently transferring those jobs to China or the Iphone producers?

PLEASE open your eyes and READ for yourself.

Dear Mr. Jones:

It is apparent where you do your research...

Fondly,
Ms. Millendorf

Thank you Bridgett. I appreciate your comment.

Tax cuts have been in effect for a number of years. How many jobs have been created as a result? Alone, tax cuts are not the answer. There must be a more comprehensive approach to facilitating economic growth. When so many people are out of work, there has to be some sort of stimulus that gets the economy going strong again. Government AND the private sector must work together and trust that each will come out the other side better off. That trust is not there, largely due to the infighting and partisan politics pitting each against the other with those of us who do pay taxes stuck in the middle. If we could all afford to open bank accounts in the Cayman Islands and Switzerland maybe we could avoid paying more than 14% in income taxes and feel more comfortable with the decisions our politicians make.

My dear Mary:

Try to be truthful! You claim the Republicans trash others who don't agree with their views. Do you understand that as a liberal you just did the same thing to the Republicans?

Additionally, I have personally viewed many more liberal attacks on Republicans!!! The President did so last evening!

So, your position is not only very inaccurate it's also very biased. Both sides attack one another. Please take off your rosé colored glasses and see reality.

Fondly,
Ms. Millendorf

OMG, the democratsand obama have bee lying and name calling for decades, where have you been. If you disagree with a democrat liberal, the 1st words out of his mouth is: reactionary, greedy capitialist, hater, ect. so don't put I am holier than thou Ms Mary McQuinn.

The tax policy center was guessing based upon the information available. They surmised the rest. As Mitt pointed out last night, those details have not been determined yet. if you go and slam a done deal on the table before congress, you are not going to get both sides of the aisle to work with you (as Obama did). Instead, he has given principles that will guide Congress of how much needs to be saved and the overall picture of change. This allows both sides of the table to come together and decide the details of line items that will be affected.

Romney's understandings in this area are real leadership. Giving the team a chance to participate and bring the best of their creativity and solutions to the table is important for success. No one can have all the answers. Obama's slam dunk approach, Nancy Pelosi's you'll get the details of Obamacare after its passed do not work in a free country. Romney's leadership will bring us back to the UNITED STATES in a time when it is sorely needed.

The Republican party had absolutely no intention of giving Obama credit for anything. They knew that all they had to do to get out from under "The Bush Disaster" was wait, delay, and obstruct long enough for them to hang it on Obama. If a Democrat came in and presided over a successful recovery, the GOP would have been out of power for decades. The only reason we have had the meager recovery we have is because Obama and the Democrats managed to ram through The Reinvestment and Recovery Act while they still held a supermajority.

My dear Amy:

You seem to use purported "non-partisan" studies to tear away at Romney and yet you do so as a very partisan individual. It's interesting to note that the Democrats have complained about Romney having no plans when according to you he does. How convenient.

By the way where's your analysis of Obama's detailed plan? Fair & balanced? You are not!

Regards,
Ms. Millendorf

Romney's plans are vague outlines at their best. The problem I and many others have with his answers last night is that he directly contradicted much of his 18 months of right wing base pandering.

So where can we find the detailed plan that the president will execute over the next four years if re-elected?

Bill Clinton has appeared in ads telling us there is one, but I can't find the text anywhere with specifics... Forward! right over the cliff still investigating the Libyan embassy incident.

the "non-partisan Tax Policy Center is staffed with liberals you flaming liberal LOL

On how well who did? I give Mitt Romney props for doing what he needed to do last night. Bottom line is that one debate in early October does not make or break a campaign. I do think you're way off base with your "47%" comment but some people will believe anything.

If you want to know what the Mormon church is really about, go to http://www.lds.org/daily-messages?lang=eng, and see who you are calling Cultists.

A religion is nothing more than a "cult" with a 2000 year head start.

Obama surrendered the presidency saying MittRomney "will be busy his 1st day as president." Love it! ...the press also slipped up and called Ann the first lady.... Every single person I know who voted for Obama...is very sorry they made that choice...and even Dem friends are voting for Romney.

Actually, John Kerry was accused of flip-flopping constantly in the 2004 race. Both sides make the accusation. Sometimes it's valid and sometimes it's not -- the danger is that politicians are afraid to legitimately change their mind on an issue, lest they be accused of flip-flopping.

Ryan,

Do they teach you guys in journalism schools to repeat "both sides do it" ad nauseam? I'm asking because it's irritating as hell for a couple of reasons. First, when one side is doing it, whatever "it" may be, rather than calling them out on it when it happens, you guys encourage it by jumping in with, "well, the other guys do that too." Second, the "both sides do it" assertion ignores context, scale, prominence, and numerous other factors.

I honestly don't know what members of the press think that they are accomplishing when crying out, "both sides do it" at every opportunity, but more often than not, the assertion itself is fiction, and I'm quite confident that the overuse and misuse of this phrase is among the reasons that the press is rapidly losing credibility.

C.J.:
Actually, I think that one of the biggest problems in journalism is the loss of objectivity in favor of "balance." Both sides are not always equally right or equally truthful. But pointing out that both liberals and conservatives have accused the opposing side of flip-flopping is objectively correct. It has nothing to do with any judgment calls on policy.

Thanks, Ryan. I sense that we agree.

As you can see this is a pet peeve with me (I've criticized your Patch colleagues for the same thing too). As I indicated, the press doesn't have to criticize Republicans each time there's a legitimate reason to criticize a Democrat, or vice versa, by chiming in with "both sides do it." Why not respond to an indecent act on its own terms, and then – if there’s another indecency later – react to that too, and on its own terms?

In this case, as far as I can tell, saying that both sides accuse the other side of flip-flopping does not enlighten or inform. To the contrary. When such an accusation is made from either side, the question for the media is, is it accurate?

C.J. -- I agree that each case should be dealt with on its own terms. In this case, I wasn't trying to make a point about "flip-flopping" as much as refute one. Laura said that liberals were never accused of flip-flopping -- instead, they "evolved." I called her on that because it's objectively wrong. Another thing that disheartens me about a lot of journalism (especially cable journalism) today -- journalists barely ever tell people who are objectively incorrect that they are, in fact, incorrect. There's no shame in being incorrect if one is merely misinformed, but journalists act like they're afraid to point out objective errors in fact -- to say nothing of flat-out lies that politicians routinely get away with. Ed Murrow wouldn't have taken that, dammit!

If you go to Politifact.com you can see a complete list of Obama's reversals of position. The individual mandate...campaigned against Hilary on that issue and wrote it into law as soon as he was elected. Raising the debt ceiling, called Bush "unpatriotic and unAmerican" for doing so...and has now raised it himself...how many times? I've lost count. Gay marriage, was for it, then against it, then for it again when Biden backed him into a corner. Claimed the president couldn't authorize a military attack without approval from Congress...and then did so with Libya.

Thank you for admitting in print that the President was not even there ...

Those of the 47% that would vote for Obama anyway.

Mitt Won Any one can cut a video and make something it is not watch all of his speech last night

Re: " watch all of his speech last night"

I did. This video is the tip of the iceberg--

Here's Romney during the debate...

"[N]umber one, pre-existing conditions are covered under my plan."

...and here's Romney's spokesperson after the debate.

those who currently lack coverage because they have pre-existing conditions would need their states to implement their own laws that ban insurance company from discriminating against sick people.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/10/top-romney-adviser-states-will-have-to-cover-people-with-pre-existing-conditions-under-president-rom.php

Romney vs. Romney. Who won?

I agree!!

Ms. Taylor, your post reflects a heavy dose of "talking points" from the DNC with little regard for the full facts, starting with no discussion about the entire national landscape in our economy in the 1990's and that Clinton was pushed into working with the Republicans on welfare reform etc.

The Internet bubble and huge increase in capital gain revenues. No discussion on the culpability of Conton and the repeal of Glass Steagall (yes, along with some GOP'ers that I disagreed with). The defense of Fannie Mae and tightening up loan standards by the Dems. And so on.

Which is why I am going to the Brookhaven Farmer's Market behind Haven restaurant on Dresden Drive this Saturday morning....I need to talk to some farmers on how to grow my own food for my family. I cannot eat my EBT card.

clinton signed and ratified nafta what nafta did was change the tax system to allow big business to close there doors and use child labor or pay an labor wage of 20 dolla a day to its employees in a foreign country then turn around and ship the goods back with little or no tax on them . the down turn of america and the loss of jobs took a nose dive nation wide due to clinton .
if u were say an american and wanted to really give hope and change it would be to actually hold true to ur original promises and slam the border closed ,build a real fence as u promised ,round up all the illegals . theres approx 1.3 million illegals working and theres about that many willing to work who cant find a job . the rest jus wana mouch off welfare and get a free ride . so what i would do is end welfare and make them work FOR A CHANGE .

Mike without a doubt he did indeed.. Made much more money than I and you. Doesn't change anything. I still got no deduction for one single penny spent on my horse. But then my horse was only worth a couple thousand. I paid 20%, he paid 13%. It took him 9months to submit his 2011 taxes. I did mine in Feburary. My income was about 2/3s of what he deducted for his wife's horse. Another thing , I am certainly not installing an elevator for my car in my California mansion. Although I did do improvements on my drive way. Maybe I can deduct that? Don't forget Mike , I am in that 47% because I am retired drawing my S.S, and useing Medicare. Mike , Rommey ticked me off when he put his foot in his mouth at that $50,000.00 a plate dinner and I an't about to get over it before the election. Were you at that dinner, Mike? Were you invited? By the way Mike Rommey made more in one year than you made in your entire life too. Don't try insulting me trying to make your politicial views count. I"ve been insulted by better than you!!!! I had to use a ladder to get on that high horse, 16hands to be exact.and I still didn't get a deduction.!!

Hey, you do see it in the NFL with Broncos games. If this debate was at sea level Obama would have killed!

I wonder how that conversation went down. "Hey, honey -- guess where we're going for our anniversary!"

I bet Michelle never guessed she was in for an evening of Kabuki theater.

Michelle? Is she still proud of her country or did that wear off already? What a worthless sack!

Calling the First Lady a sack? Classless.

“Calling the First Lady a sack? Classless”
Not in Michelle Obama’s case it’s not. She’s scum.

Calling our Volunteer Military terrorists while they are fighting in Iraq? THAT’S CLASSLESS and the Democrats did it.

Trying to embarrass General Petraeus in front of the world while calling him General Betrayus? THAT’S CLASSLESS and the Democrats did it.

Calling Bush a liar after signing on to a war in Iraq? THAT’S CLASSLESS and the Democrats did it.

Don’t tell me that calling a spade a spade is classless.

Put on your tin foil hat!!!

George, if you're looking for "correct information", it would behoove you to turn off MSNBC.

This wasnt one of Obama's negative ads about Romney...this was a debate. The problem with your premise is that Obama was standing right there. Literally standing there, staring at the floor wondering where his teleprompter was, instead of responding...Either he isnt knowledgeable or informed enough to know something was untrue, as you say, or he was overwhelmed...neither is a good thing to admit if you're the President...

Well, they can spell and speak English

Two thumbs up!
I see you're another one who has woken up! Yay!!!

You mean like Deliverance?

in the OPPOSITE direction on those rails...

I think anyone who says tax the rich is just jealous because they are not rich. There's always been the haves and the have nots. Using a tax scheme to level the playing field has never worked. Using words like ultra-rich is equivalent to penis envy.

And since when is a person's death looked at as a way to return wealth to the government? Only those who believe all we have is LOANED to us by the government in the first place.

The death tax needs to END period so NO family has to suffer the indignity of having to PAY because a family member left this life.

PhatNate...Fairness and Jealousy are two different terms and two different issues. The odds are you're one of Romney's "47%" dead-beat/leech group or a working stiff paying taxes at a rate higher than Romney. Fairness is that there shouldn't be preferential rates for capital gains, dividend income, and "carried-interest". Fairness is that a person shouldn't be able to claim $4 million of itemized deductions when the intent of itemized deductions was to allow taxpayers to deduct a limit set of reasonable living expenses. Fairness isn't allowing people to avoid taxes by keeping $100 million in tax deferred IRA accounts (the purpose of IRAs was to encourage savings for a person's retirement...Not the next 10 generations.)

R...99.5% of American families have nothing to worry about when it comes to estate/inheritance taxes. The tax code currently exempts estate of $5 million. Now, if you research estate taxes, you'll find out that one key reason for estate taxes is that in most large estates, the majority of the value is the result of long-term capital gains on which no taxes has even been paid. One of the purposes of the estate tax is simply to trigger the paying of capital gain taxes which have been deferred.

So what would happen if death didn't trigger the paying of estate taxes? The capital gains could go untaxed forever, generation after generation could avoid paying taxes and yet, receive all of the benefits of the USA.

R, your position on estate taxes places you in direct opposition to our founding fathers who rebelled against hereditary aristocracy.

Brian, leaving treasure that one works for and earned, to those of his choosing, has nothing to do with aristocracy. Nice try though.

Why don't you tax loving dems leave all of your property to the government when you croak?

Here's the problem with that R. The six wealthiest heirs to Sam Walton's estate have the same net worth as the bottom 30% of American families combined yet they did nothing to earn their treasure. Their heirs will have even less of a connection to Sam's hard work and good fortune yet their treasure will continue to grow. This is exactly how aristocracies are created.

Thanks for explaining it to me your way chum. You're still wrong. Having riches, self earned or inherited, in this country does not by definition grant you any specific governing power. If that were the case with the Walton heirs, the community would have no right to petition and stop the building of new stores. Again, nice try. You guys are usually wrong about most things.

Again, why don't you leave everything you've worked for to the government so to certain that no aristocracy takes place in your down line?

Re: "The death tax needs to END period so NO family has to suffer the indignity of having to PAY because a family member left this life."

It's frustrating to have to state the obvious, but here it goes. People don't pay inheritance taxes because a family member left this life; they pay inheritance taxes because, well, they inherited money. No inheritance...no tax. Many, if not most, who lose a loved one receive no inheritance.

An inheritance is income. Unlike income that's earned by setting one's alarm and going to work every day, an inheritance is money that some of us simply luck into. That's completely fine with me. But if people who make most of their money through work have to pay taxes on money that they earn to help pay for our national defense, highways, schools, and the like, then people who get most of their money through inheritance should also have to pay the exact same rates on money that they inherit.

Global Warming,

I wish it were that easy, but you don't win an argument by writing, "nice try."

Nice try though.

Re: "and EARN through investment."

Again, stating what should be obvious--

At the time that an estate is inherited, heirs and heiresses didn't EARN anything, through any means...work, investment, or otherwise. Unless you call receiving money because you were born into the right family, "earned."

Re: "yes, all income, should be taxed at the same rate regardless of it's source. But, by definition, inheritance is not EARNED therefore not taxable."

Actually, inheritances are taxable after about $5 million or so for individuals and just over $10 million for married couples. But the current exemptions and rates are beside the point.

I'm simply advocating the opposite of those who say that we should eliminate the estate tax. To the contrary, I'm advocating that unearned income (e.g., inheritances) should be taxed at the exact same rates as earned income (e.g. money from work).

Liberals consider inheritance as income. Income is something you work for and pay income tax on. Inheritance tax is double taxation period.

No law says you guys can't pay more. Go for it.

RE: "Yes, that would tax money that was earned by someone else who has already paid taxes on it. By the same definition, money given to anyone at any point in life should be taxable income."

Agreed and agreed.

The money in our paychecks is money that comes from customers, investors, or both. So, when our paychecks are taxed, we're also taxing money that had been earned by someone else (customers and investors) who has already paid taxes on it.

I don't disagree that taxing inheritances is double-taxation. But the money that we earn from work is also double-taxed. That's how we share the burden, by taxing money as it moves through the economy. If the heirs and heiresses get special tax treatment, then that means that the tax burden on everybody else is higher.

With regard to your point that any money given to anyone at any point should be taxable income, there is, in fact, a gift tax as well.

Re: "No law says you guys can't pay more."

Personally, Global Warming, I don't want to pay more. I want to pay less. That's why I'm advocating that everybody should pay the same rates, including those who get a lot of their money by being lucky enough to be born into a family that has something to leave behind.

Well then you and I agree that everyone should pay Federal Income Tax. This would include of course the 47% that Romney hates and wants to see burned in hell.

Taxing unemployment is also double taxation so why not tax welfare and Social Security and Medicaid and disability and bums in Atlanta and yard sales firemen collecting at the intersection? Oh and cheerleaders that wash cars?

It was Frank Lutz the Republican pollster who came up with the term "death tax" instead of "inheritance tax"because it polled better.In factbecause of the large exemption most family farms and small businesses are not affected.Republicans want you to believe otherwise.

Again Frank its arrogance that takes the belief that the government should get ANYTHING upon one's death PERIOD. The exemption of 5 million to which you gleefully refer is one of many changes that will be reset to a much lower level next year...

Considering our government's historical whims on the definition of wealth, that limit could just as easily drop to 200K, 100K or even 50K in 2013.

This GAIN you claim really only occurs if its actually SOLD to raise cash.
I've seen too many families get pinched into liquidating small farm plats ( Read Non-mega farms) and private homesteads just to meet tax burdens, because the tax valuation was based on pure fiction.

Check your own tax value for car tags - is your vehicle REALLY worth what the state claims? Could you actually sell it today for the value they use? How about property tax, is your house lot REALLY valued as the county claims? Could you sell it today right now for THAT value?

As to the claim that most wealth was NOT taxed is pure envy and GREED. All cash that brought the initial stocks first hand was taxed. All sales get taxed either as long or short term gain. Stock holdings in many parts of the country are taxed based on value as of 12/31 of every tax year regardless if they are really worth it on Jan 1st.

@Brian

The founding fathers NEVER envisioned a government that was so LARGE and involved in every aspect of the citizens life to the point that reasonably intelligent citizens would hold the position that Government should get the first portion upon a death.

If this were what they had intended, we NEVER would have started out under the Articles of Confederation.

"It's frustrating to have to state the obvious, but here it goes. People don't pay inheritance taxes because a family member left this life; they pay inheritance taxes because, well, they inherited money. No inheritance...no tax. Many, if not most, who lose a loved one receive no inheritance."

An inheritance ... including illiquid assets that must first be converted to actual cash to pay the state ASSESSED or assigned value. NOW if those taxes were based on what you ACTUALLY sell it for, that might be a little harder to argue against ( Not much harder - but still)

This is just based on the mindset that the GOVERNMENT is owner of all and simply loans everything to the citizen during his or her life and like a library book, its to be returned.

R, you're completely correct in all your refutations of Frank Jones' various nonsensical claims but you're wasting your time with him. Frank and his hero Obama have made it crystal clear: What is YOURS is also THEIRS and they feel entitled to use the full power of the federal government to take it from you and spend on whatever failed liberal ideologies that they see fit.

I just hope enough Undecideds figure this out on election day and vote that miserable, achievement-hating socialist out of office in November.

I like the way you think.
I'm glad to know that you really SEE WHAT'S GOING ON!
Both are the same type of balls, just spinning in different directions!

R...For most Americans, Obamacare will have zero to minimal impact! Why? Because most Americans already have health insurance through their employer, military, medicare, or medicaid. So if you already have insurance, stop your complaining as it isn't going to cost you anything or much and it will provide you benefits. (The costs Romney is throwing around is rubish. Insurance costs have been growing far in excess of inflation for years!)

Obamacare will provide those without insurance due to pre-existing conditions or affordability the option to acquire insurance.

Obamacare does not force anyone to purchase insurance. However, it's known that people who don't have insurance often use the emergency room for their health care needs, wait too long for treatment causing something minor to be something big, and then not being able to pay their hospital bills -- those "dead-beats" without insurance. So Obamacare will charge a small annual fee for not carrying insurance to help offset those unpaid bills.

You're part of a society. Start acting like it. Otherwise, move to an desert island.

Roger That...Do you already have healthcare - YES or NO? If Yes, you will not pay a fee, a tax or a penalty. None, nada, zip! If No, you will pay a fee/tax/penalty into a fund to partially fund the financial damage done when many uninsureds can't pay their bills.

FWIW, a significant portion of the healtchcare expense is the direct result of people using hospitals as their primary healthcare provider and not being able to pay. Hospitals are required to provide life-saving and life-stablizing treatment to anyone who comes through the door, even without proof of ability to pay.

Those who choose to be uninsured, get injured/sick and can't pay their bills are dead-beats and cause healthcare to go up for responsible citizens.

For those against Obamacare and don't want to buy insurance, I think the rules should be like this: "No Treatment Before Proof of Ability To Pay!"

For all you anti-Gov't, anti-Obamacare, anti-Universal Healthcare, "personal responsibility" people, feel free to be uninsured, just don't expect us to pay for your poor decision. And hey, if they change the rules to "payment before service", I won't shed a tear when you are denied treatment and die. Works for me!

"Those who choose to be uninsured, get injured/sick and can't pay their bills are dead-beats and cause healthcare to go up for responsible citizens."
Liberals discover dead-beats!

Frank so we wont pay the 3 percent medical device tax on our prescriptions then?
We ALL pay there's NO free ride.

As to no changes in work provided health plans? Not so since this act was passed we lost providers, paid MUCH higher premiums and drug cost has DOUBLED.

@Frank
That splittin of busfare just might do the trick after I determine how I'll pay taxes on assets I can't sell for the value the Government claims they're worth...

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/10/04/it-time-to-end-unemployment-rate-shell-game/

Mitch...take a look, the economy is getting better. Auto sales - UP. Home sales - UP. Building permits - UP. Home prices - UP. Retail sales - UP. Consumer confidence - UP. Employment is improving but the Red team can't win if they admit that things are getting better.

Will there be a revision next month? Maybe so as the numbers for the prior release were also revised UP with today's numbers.

ahh...yes... a lot of happy folks working part time at Party City....Halloween right around the corner!

Frank.
Can I use you as a guest speaker to spread your joy to the 200 plus workers I've had to layoff over the past 3 years? Let me know when you're available. I'll provide a bullet proof vest and a helmet for you.

Didn't we just go through a month where the prior period's Great News! numbers were later revised, having been corrected in a MAJOR way? (like cut in HALF)

So now we know its coming again at the end of Nov. as long as they look "good" for the early voting ballot periods, it's all moving "forward".

To me Romney's expression looked more like, "Holy crap, is this jackass really the President of the United States? How in the heck could that be?". I often wonder the same thing myself.

Almost half of America with open eyes and common sense felt that way about Obama four years ago and our fears were obviously spot on. Why in hell you people still chose to ignore the obvious my Grandchildren will never understand. They will however pay for your ignorance.

Lol..yes, Mitt is the big bad wolf....Hoping your kid has mom's genes.

Beautifully spoken. My nomination for comment of the week.

My nomination for stand up routine of the week.

I especially get a laugh out of the "selfless" part. That's hilarious!

@David
I don't think Limbaugh, Boortz, Fox News with Hannity and company and now one half of the editorial page of the AJC could be characterized as liberal.

George I read somewhere else where someone told you to take your medication. I think you took too much and now your goofy. Obama is the biggest joke, hoax and spineless person that has ever been president. You said wisdom and dignity and he has NONE. All he does is blame everything on someone else.

@Jerome Williams
@ Argumentum ad Hominem is a fallacy in argument .Either argue the point or quit with the school yard blather. It hurts your credibility.

And George, repeating the same thing proves that you have none.

Y A W N !!!

@ Chris
Some people don't get the message so you have to keep repeating the same thing over and over.

Actually David, Zach is quoting the true, or "official", unemployment rate which is the universally agreed upon U3 measurement.

Just a couple of points here - Obama has deported a record number of illegal immigrants. I believe the housing problem started before he took office, where people who bought more house than they could really afford on an adjustable rate mortgage. I'm not sure why the mortgage companies decided to raise the rates, sometimes doubling them, but they did. Then the credit card companies followed suit, lowering people limits to basically what they owed, therefore lowering everybody's credit score. I believe that those two things contributed big time to unemployment and foreclosures. And I don't believe I can blame any of that on Obama.

Pam... Obama has allowed a record number of immigrants into this country... on purpose.

NGW, it’s amazing how liberals (like pam j) pick and choose Obama’s infamous highlights. You do understand don’t you that Obama miraculously saved the Auto Industry while constructing a precise, conservative plan to personally kill Osama bin Laden while stroking on the back 9 in Hawaii. The guy is a frickin genius.

Obama single handedly ruined the American Dream for a record number of ILLEGAL MEXICAN CRIMINALS (as Pam J boasted) while also breaking FEDERAL LAW, bypassing Congress and granting his own version of the Dream Act just a few months before the 2012 elections.

North Georgia Weather, I ask, which parts of Obama’s GREATNESS do you fail to understand? Please catch up sir.

LOL Roger!!!!

"This executive directive, issued by President Obama on June 15, 2012, is implemented by Secretary Janet Napolitano of the Department of Homeland Security"

OH! I see! That's pretty much the same thing I said isn't it ZACK? Napolitano clearly does what her her boy wants her to do. Of course Janet Napolitano has America's security and best interest at heart. We've all witnessed her commitment to the Rule Of Law when it comes to the Southern Border. She's a Piece O Crap. She too will be out of a job soon and America will be better off for it. Maybe she and Obama can work together heading up the Occupy WallStreet turd movement.

Okay. I submit my smart remark about single handedly was just that. Not sure if handedly is a legitimate term.

I did though TOTALLY miss the part were Congress agreed to let undocumented, illegal Mexicans have rights to freedom in America. I emphasize the term "undocumented" because these folks need not have proof of their original birth place nor date of transfer, to be eligible for such semi-amnesty.

No American with a heart wants another human to suffer and be treated as a lesser being but this country has hundreds of thousands risking their lives in other parts of the world while we have a frickin open door policy at our borders.

Good Gosh! What will it take for you people to understand the damage being done to our future under Obama's rule? Do you think for a second that his decisions being forced upon us are to best serve this nation?

I guess you haven't been watching the news Tammy. Obama's poor showing at the debate was catalyzed by a few things to include the moderator doing a poor job, the air being thin, and of course Romney's lies. We can't possibly expect the POTUS to overcome such obstacles! ;) Hoping he never has to field that 3 am phone call or we will all be doomed.

John B, Obama already has fielded that 3:00am phone call. Well... he received the call. Fielded is another thing. He received notice of the Benghazi Attack on Sep. 11 and then he went back to sleep. He needed beauty rest for his fund raiser in Las Vegas. You know Las Vegas? The city that he told Americans not to go while the economy is in this condition. What an incompetent boob Obama is and that goes for all of his minion stooges that give him money to continue his plan of destruction..

His point wasn't that Romney has money. His point was that he made that money by taking over companies with borrowed money, sucking all the cash out of them with one time dividend payments to Bain, then leaving the company (now loaded with far more debt than it had to begin with) to sink or swim on it's own. Romney claims he "helped" companies cut waste as a consultant. All he really did was make it even harder for them to survive. The companies that did manage to survive the vampire did so with massive wage/benefit cuts and layoffs.

We will do anything to keep Republicans out of office because supply side economics and runaway deregulation is responsible for the mess we are STILL in today. We've been trying supply side now for 30 years. We had a brief respite when Clinton raised taxes in 94', but that only lasted till 2001. What is your theory on why income inequality is the highest it has ever been? Why have median incomes been FALLING for 30 years when factoring inflation in? Low taxes on "job creators" might have a small effect on job growth, but it mainly just makes rich people richer. Trickle down DOES NOT WORK.

Total Net Worth
Top 1 percent Next 19 percent Bottom 80 percent
1983 33.8% 47.5% 18.7%
1989 37.4% 46.2% 16.5%
1992 37.2% 46.6% 16.2%
1995 38.5% 45.4% 16.1%
1998 38.1% 45.3% 16.6%
2001 33.4% 51.0% 15.6%
2004 34.3% 50.3% 15.3%
2007 34.6% 50.5% 15.0%
2010 35.4% 53.5% 11.1%

You see that last number? 20% of the people in this country now control 89.9% of the wealth. This is the legacy of "voodoo economics" as so aptly labeled by Bush Sr.

In 2004, Republicans were crowing about giving companies a one time exemption for their overseas profits. A corporate tax holiday. They said that if the companies brought all this wealth back to the US it would create jobs. It didn't. Guess what those companies did with all that "free" money. They issued dividends, handed out bonuses, and raised executive salaries. This is one reason why the middle class has all but disappeared in this country.

Either you've been sleeping under a rock. Are just don't keep up with really goes on in the world. unemployment was at 7.6. It had start climbing two years before the 2008 election. Because during that time we were given money to stimulate the ecomony.To push thing down the road so the next president would have deal with it. But before the president took control of the office in 2009. The bottom fell out with job market.

Amy L, are you serious? Above you say "He conveniently left those wars OFF the books"

Who is “he”? You couldn't possibly be speaking of George W. Bush because he (the president) doesn't control the "books" as you apparently refer to federal accounting. Congress (including a large number of democrats) agreed and signed onto the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Otherwise it would have been illegal for Bush to send our HERO MILITARY into battle.

You may want to take some time out and learn the different branches of government and responsibilities of each. I understand you may be confused as Obama has ignored the law and bypassed Congress at will several times during his only term but George W. Bush had more respect for the position of Commander In Chief and was not independently responsible for “the books”. Please let us know when you understand how things work. Many of us who already understand will be pulling for your success in education.

Not even close on the deficit assertion. Based on federal fiscal budgets Obama hasn't matched the $1.41 trillion of Bush's last budget deficit much less exceeded it 4 fold.

More people are holding their hands out because we haven't had a meaningful increase in the minimum wage in decades and middle income earners have seen their wages FALL over the past 30 years when taking inflation and other expenses like healthcare into account. The only people making money in this country are the "executive" class who have seen their compensation rise 247% compared to a barely above inflation rise of 40% for the rest of us.

There are always exceptions to some being on social programs BUT there are many who have made it their life, a terrible cycle of welfare. If someones really gets down and needs help, so be it, but there should be a time limit to learn a trade or get enough of an education to help themselves. About minimum wage - you can keep raising it over and over again but at what point is that even enough? If you have been living off of minimum wage for your livelyhood year after year after year, then you have to take responsibility for that yourself. You did not prepare with education ot trade trainning to compete. A lot of people want to blame society for not being fair for their own downfalls. Some, like that, need to look in the mirrow, and ask themselves exactly why they are in the shape that they are. Welfare has evoved into a "way of life" for so many. Why try to get off welfare when you get for free what others have paid for with their taxes? Look at some of the family dymanics - you have a mother with more children than she can take care of , goes on welfare, and then her children go out and get pregnant and they are on welfare also. Sometimes it is a learned behavior cycle that has to stop.

He is saying that the current repugnant party is the party of the top 20%.

Total Net Worth
Top 1 percent Next 19 percent Bottom 80 percent
1995 38.5% 45.4% 16.1%
1998 38.1% 45.3% 16.6%
2001 33.4% 51.0% 15.6%
2004 34.3% 50.3% 15.3%
2007 34.6% 50.5% 15.0%
2010 35.4% 53.5% 11.1%

This is the legacy of the republicans controlling most of government since 1996. 80% of Americans have seen their net worth drop from 16% of GDP to 11%. The top 20% have seen a net rise of 5%. The republicans claim to be totally against income redistribution but it is a lie. They just like it when the redistribution is from poor to rich.

Can you at least try to address some of the arguments I and others like me have made? Does your intellect stop at throwing petty insults? Can you form a rational argument based on facts, statistics, and research? Your comment added absolutely nothing to the discussion.

Average productivity for American workers has increased 80% since 1979. Yes, Americans are getting 80% MORE done by working longer hours and doing more while at work. Yet wages for most Americans has barely gone up 20% in the same time span. All while the income of the top 1% of wage earners has increased 240%

Corporate profits are way up, executive compensation is way up, productivity is way up, what most people make for a living is down. How about that trickle down economics!

Amy L, where do you get YOUR facts? MAD Magazine?

"Americans are getting 80% MORE done" GOOD GOD! You need to find reliable resources. Had you stated there is 80% automation, maybe you would be more accurate.

Take a pill or few shots of whiskey or something. Please!

Have you seen a recent picture of Al Gore. I haven't heard much from him lately and have to assume it's because every time he opens his mouth these days he is stuffing food in it.

Absolutely agree, education does not always mean college - learning a trade that everyone needs at some time is often the smarter way to succeed in life. College debt can be enormous, especially when you major in something that is not in great demand. There is nothing wrong with learning a trade and doing it well. One problem with many ( NOT ALL ) college graduates is that when they do go out into the field that they chose, they expect to start at the top. I have to blame that on the family dynamic, the way children were brought up until they became an adult, and oops, all of a sudden they think that the business world should treat them the same way mom and dad treated them. The family dynamic has changed for the worse in many a family. I can say this because I am a previous business owner. We had our business for 5 successfull years until I was involved in an accident that left me to require 4 surgeries and one and a half years physical therapy. My average pay was $13.00 an hour for employees. We had a great little business in Gatlinburg TN. We were on Ski Mountain. We had a little grocery store, which included a pizza delivery, video rental, deli, that we delivered to all who stayed on Ski Mountain. A lot of people would just up and quit if they did not get the schedule they liked. We finally grew to the point that we found the "right" employees. It was a lot of work, working 18 hours a day, but we still have the "right" employees that still keep in touch .

Not only that but there are about three traffic lights within one quarter of a mile. If the city is trying to control traffic flow, it would make since to lower the speed limit in that area. Have you noticed the cost of a gallon of milk these days?

Hey, you wrote that. Good job. But really now, what does it have to do with the price of milk these days?

.....and then....paranoia set in.....

Here you go Zach, a little reality for you. Don't read both links on the same day, your head might explode:
http://www.pointofview.net/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=-1&page=NewsArticle&id=7041
This one from the UK:
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/commentators/dominic-lawson/dominic-lawson-democrat-fingerprints-are-all-over-the-financial-crisis-949653.html

What's wrong Zach, two people can't have the same thoughts? And who are you?

And no Zach, it does not prevent anyone from signing on under multiple names as long as it's a different email address. What's that "A" stand for?
I could guess but my post might be deleted...

Paranoia at least. Hey ZACK! The patch staff doesn't work for you and your imagination doesn't work for anyone.

Your boy Slobbering Barney lied about Fannie/Freddie while his boyfriend was looting the American public. Now could you PLEASE go away?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uwjcbo34VGk

It's true. Romney was more specific. He specifically proposed a tax plan that defies arithmetic.

No, you can't make the Bush tax cuts permanent, then reduce upper income tax rates by an additional 20 percent, eliminate the inheritance tax, add $2 trillion to defense spending AND not raise taxes on the middle class AND balance the budget. People complain about pandering politicians, but if you buy Romney's snake oil, then you're just begging for politicians to lie to you.

"if you buy Romney's snake oil, then you're just begging for politicians to lie to you"

Wow! Isn't that what we have gotten from Obama for four years? That with record debt, record unemployment, record gas prices, record polarization of Americans, a massive heath care lie, leaked Classified information, Fast and Furious coverup, broken promises of transparency, Auto Workers Union bailout, failed - corrupt green energy scams and on and on. All this coming from a moron who has never earned a real job in his life.

Romney has a lot of work if he plans on matching Obama's record.

Chris would be right about President Obama if the things that he listed were true. But there were no energy scams, union bailouts, coverups, health care lies, or any of the other faux scandals that many seem to want to believe despite evidence to the contrary.

With regard to record unemployment, millions of private sector jobs were added under Obama after millions were thrown out of work because of the recession. With regard to record debt, Obama inherited a $1.4 trillion deficit and an economy that had just contracted by nearly 9 percent and in which millions were losing their jobs.

You can't cut deficits during a major recession causing millions to be thrown out of work, unable to pay taxes, file for unemployment, and apply for food assistance and Medicaid--not without turning a great recession into a great depression. (Recessions automatically cause revenues to fall and spending to rise.)

The best way to balance the budget is not to cut spending for those who need it most, but to put even more Americans back to work. Romney and Ryan's planned austerity cuts--needed to pay for their tax cuts for the wealthy and an even bigger military industrial complex--intend to do the opposite.

I continue to be surprised by the notion that we should vote for the ideas that caused the recession while simultaneously blaming others for not fixing it fast enough.

Sure. Whatever you choose to believe.

"Chris would be right about President Obama if the things that he listed were true. But there were no energy scams, union bailouts, coverups, health care lies, or any of the other faux scandals that many seem to want to believe despite evidence to the contrary."

CJ, this is some seriously good comedy...though I expected to see this followed by, "These are not the droids you are looking for." Thanks for the laugh.

Yea Frank, and Obama's math has been SO accurate as he promised.
C.J. you say that America is blaming Obama for not fixing the recession fast enough? It was Obama that said the recession was over two years ago. Manwhile Obama has done nothing but throw away borrowed money on his Green Energy idiot buddies while thousands of legitimate businesses cease to exist.
If the deplorable healthcare act wasn’t a lie, then why did your guys say it wasn’t a tax? If it was forced on America as a cost saving initiative, why is it now projected to cost trillions more than was promised? Since when does the government force Americans to pay for something that we never asked for? Remember “We The People”? Maybe you can tell us why business owners are saying they will wait until after the election and after the tax increases before considering more employees.
You guys love to claim all these millions of jobs that Obama created but you never address the fact that even more jobs have been eliminated while Obama has been in rule. Talk to the millions out of work about your hero and the millions of jobs he created. How about you address all the jobs permanently lost from Obama’s disdain for coal, oil and natural gas? You people elected this idiot after he promised that electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlTxGHn4sH4 Fine Job! Obama is an idiot and you people drool over him.

Re: "If the [deplorable healthcare act] was forced on America as a cost saving initiative, why is it now projected to cost trillions more than was promised??"

Chris,

There's so much misinformation in your head that it's impossible to keep up.

Let's talk about the "deplorable" health care act that was "forced" on America. First, in a democracy, the guys who win an election get to pass legislation that they campaigned on. Obama campaigned on a health care plan, he won, and he got it passed. As far as I'm concerned, that's something to be commended.

ObamaCare was not forced on us anymore than the Bush tax cuts, which were passed by Republicans only because Dick "deficits don't matter" Cheney temporarily came out of the darkness to cast the deciding 51st vote in the Senate. As far as legislation being forced on us is concerned, you seem to have one standard for Republicans and another for Democrats.

Also, the Affordable Care Act isn't projected to cost "trillions" more than it was promised. Just the fact that you mentioned "trillions" indicates that you have no idea what you're talking about. The CBO has made 20 year estimates indicating that ObamaCare will save approximately $1 trillion over that time period. Yes, it will REDUCE deficits by about $1 trillion over 20 years (note: 1 trillion = 1,000 billion). Obviously, those estimates will fluctuate, by billions, without impacting the overall estimate that savings will amount to hundreds of billions over time.

Thank you C.J. for clearing up all that "misinformation" about Obamacareless.

Don't stop there. Next... ?

Our nation is in the crapper swirl and Obama is wasting borrowed money flying around the country on Air Force One making jokes about Big Bird. Absolutely typical for this amateur idiot. We are rapidly losing our freedoms while you morons support this scumbag and his failing policies. All because he’s a democrat. That is so weak.

Frank, don't ask these people to do simple math, 90 percent of them went to failing schools, and they want to cut more education spending....so brilliant!

At least we aren't miserable, I pity you Rex, who ever you are, may you find peace in your heart..

Peace in my heart is acheived by knowing Obama will not be reelected.

Other than the inane teleprompter reference, I generally agree with this comment. Stylistically, Romney won. He was energetic, assertive, and articulate.

Given the number of swing (low information) voters out there, President Obama's performance that night was an act of political malpractice. During the '08 primaries, he repeatedly showed that he doesn't like debates, and he obviously didn't take the potential ramifications of this one seriously enough to properly prepare. So if style matters more than substance...if the issues are unimportant, then based on that debate performance, Romney is the one to vote for.

On the other hand, if it matters whether we slash Medicare and Medicaid benefits, whether we privatize Social Security, whether we overturn Roe v. Wade, whether we seek personhood amendments which could lead to outlawing IVF and some forms of birth control, whether we spend a couple of trillion more on our already bloated defense, cut upper income tax rates for the wealthy by 20 percent and pay for it all by slashing veteran's benefits, education, access to nursing homes, investments in highways, ports and other forms of infrastructure...

If it matters whether we put the policies that have made the rich richer and destabilized the middle class on steroids, then positions matter. I'd vote for a mute who had dropped out of high school if he is right on the issues before I'd vote for this Harvard MBA (Romney) whose primary mission is to enrich the rich.

You just keep saying the same thing. Obama has paralyzed the middle class by putting fear into business owners. All by design.

Business owners are afraid of what?

Higher profits? Profits are at record levels.

Higher returns on their investments? The stock market is at record levels.

Higher demand from more customers? The recession thew millions out of work, and job growth has been restored, albeit slowly.

The Clinton tax rates? Because the economy took off when those rates were in place (despite Republican's predictions to the contrary).

Business owners should be afraid of policies like the ones that threw us into the ditch, not the ones that are pulling us out of it.

Well you clearly are no business owner with employees. You libs think that every job creator in a millionaire that steals from the poor. Do you work 80 hours a week so you can keep a business running during these times? If so, are you going to continue working that hard while adding jobs knowing that your taxes are about to put even less in your pocket?
How ignorant can you possibly be?

C.J.... just for you.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/10/timeshare-mogul-warns-in-email-will-need-to-lay-off-employees-if-obama-is-re/

Re: "How ignorant can you possibly be?"

You're projecting Roger.

NGW, I don't worship at the feet of multi-billionaires who plan on taking their anger at politicians out on their employees. The man lost money under Bush and gained much of it back under Obama. Mysteriously, some people want to cut off their noses to spite their faces.

For the record, customers are the job-creators. No customers, no successful businesses, no jobs. Opening a lemonade stand doesn't create jobs in the long run unless and until people show up to buy the lemonade. The best thing that we can do for business is to stabilize and grow the middle class...that is, give them more customers.

"You're projecting Roger."
Is that your answer to my questions? How about you being very specific and tell me exactly what private sector jobs that Obama is personally responsible for creating. I can copy and paste from here specifically about jobs that no longer exist due to deliberate policies of Obama. Stop with your one liners and start showing facts. Otherwise, you have the credibility of Obama. Need I explain?

When you close your comment with "How ignorant can you possibly be?", clearly nothing I say is of any interest to you. I'm happy to debate these issues with anybody at any time, but once you start calling me a moron, idiot, or ignorant, then I'm out (see above). Those are conversation-enders.

NGW...just for you.
http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2012/10/09/david-siegel-and-the-billionaires-sad-lament/

Well, when one makes claims that you do, people with factual knowledge tend to question. Ignorant is not name calling in my opinion but simply questioning your lack of aforementioned.

You say "Opening a lemonade stand doesn't create jobs in the long run unless and until people show up to buy the lemonade." Here we go again with the "you didn't build that" BS. What next? You can't open a lemonade stand until someone else builds the sidewalk?

With ALL that knowledge you have C.J., is the concept of business really that difficult for you? When you opened your lemonade stand, hired all your employees and obtained all your loyal customers, was your plan to lose money or break even? Did you do all that work, take all the risks because it was your goal to create jobs or did you perhaps have dreams of a nice lifestyle for yourself and your family?

You also say "The best thing that we can do for business is to stabilize and grow the middle class...that is, give them more customers." Okay, it sounds like a good idea. I'm open. What do you have in mind? Obama, you Democrats and your buddies at the EPA are killing jobs while protecting the Western Long Legged Silver-back Desert Cockroach. Is that bug going to contribute to saving our freedom in this country?
(Disclaimer - i made up the roach bug species)

"... inane teleprompter reference..."

Hey not our fault that Obama supporters thought it was unfair that they would not let Obama use a teleprompter during the debate.

Yet another example of the caring liberal mindset.

You seem to forget what happened in 2010. Your King Obama is trailing in some polls now by 5%.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html

Unfortunately, I think Obama WILL win because the majority of voters in this country of brain dead bloodsuckers. That's why I love to gloat about the fact that you libturds here in Georgia have absolutely no say in the matter. Romney won this state of intellectuals long before the games began. Please stay home and call your idiot hommies using your Obama phones. It will help keep the lines moving on November 6.

The surge is just beginning and it has the perfect timing to give Romney a landslide victory

FOX News 10/7 - 10/9 1109 LV 3.0 46 45 Romney +1

Rasmussen Tracking 10/7 - 10/9 1500 LV 3.0 48 47 Romney +1

IBD/TIPP Tracking 10/4 - 10/9 757 LV 3.5 49 44 Romney +5

Gallup Tracking 10/3 - 10/9 2721 LV 2.0 48 48 Tie

Pew Research 10/4 - 10/7 1112 LV 3.4 49 45 Romney +4

WashTimes/JZ Analytics* 10/5 - 10/7 800 LV 3.5 45 45 Tie

Politico/GWU/Battleground 10/1 - 10/4 1000 LV 3.1 48 49 Obama +1

Wow! A Master's Degree? And she's telling everyone on the internet that she cares more about this country than anyone does. Now who's the idiot?
Just a little advice there BStein-Einstein, an insult argued with an insult, simply insults you. You may want a refund on that "masters degree".

Vote away as it won't change a thing.

I apologize. I thought your name was Bertha.

You're right polls don't matter much b/c Polls are just tools to gadge speculations and that can change with the wind.
If people are indifferent to the debates, it must be due to the fact that many don't think their vote counts and the number of ppl who aren't voting is increasing!
Some ppl aren't going to put their trust in the government no matter who gets in office; they win either way it goes b/c they are counting on themselves to look out for themselves.

The polls have an excessive amount of sampling of Democrats so Romney winning or being in a tie in at least 5 polls is very significant. It shows that there is a good chance of a Romney landslide.

What? Bertha?

You can't read or comprehend very well, because I never endorsed a candidate. So you may have a master degree in BS, from another failing school.
To me, It doesn't matter which one gets into office; I don't look for government to save me! My year and outlook on life is not enveloped around who's in the White House.
Come what may, if Obama or Romey, I am moving forward with my agenda no matter what!!
I'm telling everyone, with the way government is going, endorse YOURSELF AND RELY ON YOURSELF!!!!

Obama is the one who will be raising taxes on the middle class. In fact, he already has raised taxes on the middle class by instituting Obamacare.

Obamacare is going to cost $1.930 Trillion so the $200 billion to rid of it is insignificant when you get a savings of $1.730 by getting rid of it.

Opps strike that $1.730 figure as apparently is is even higher:

http://www.npr.org/2012/07/12/156659733/weekly-standard-obamacare-cost-estimates-rise

Tell me how one thing has anything to do with the other. Oh wait....Another problem the republicans are trying to put on the black guy...I get it now.....

BStein your cheap race card attempt is denied. Obama is a failure no matter his skin color.

Still havent tied one activity to another......shocker! conservative can't connect dots

Your invoking racism into this shows that you are the racist. Race card denied again.

Yup, self hating white guy here.....If one person in this forum can tie Obama to Hollywood and Hollywood to Libya, in a clear, concise, truthful manner I'll keep quiet. Not counting my chickens though, pretty sad to see Mittens taking advantage of a national crisis in his capmaign though. Just like his Republican cronies in congress.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dana-milbank-letting-us-in-on-a-secret/2012/10/10/ba3136ca-132b-11e2-ba83-a7a396e6b2a7_story.html?hpid=z7

Looks like you are trying to put words in David's mouth.

Obama's administration did not increase security at the embassy and his minions lied about what caused the embassy to get overrun and the diplomat to be killed.

Obama showed his concern about this incident by proceeding to fly in to fundraise for his reelection bid with his Hollywood buddies.

The higher the population the higher amount of consumers.

Think a minute about India having a population of 1,241,491,960 in 2011

India, despite having a massive population and large regular population growth has gone from 45.3% poverty level in 1994 to 29.8% poverty level in 2010.

http://data.worldbank.org/country/india

THE CPI in India is very low. Here is one area's food and housing prices along with median income level (monthly) in USD.

http://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/city_result.jsp?country=India&city=Lucknow+%28Lakhnau%29&displayCurrency=USD

Very deep. I'll be sure not to step in it.

Speaking of India, has anyone tried the new curry blizzard at Dairy Queen?