Yes "mate" perhaps Obama should have done nothing and let the morons starve to death, die from poor water control and allow their schools to close. All things that happened during the Depression. Guess that would have made the tin foil hat wearers happy?
Saving ths country took money. Period. The other choice would have made even sane people unhappy but the uneducated in this country just cant grab that thought and get their level of understanding around it.

Jaonne, you are one of the same reason we think you guys are as dumb as a rock. Brainwashed and paranoid, stupid and hateful and I know the more we tell you that you are dumb, the more you'll go on hating. Screw you and go on hating till you get hit by a truck.

Hey, louis4louis, don't hold back. Feel free to say what you really mean.

right you are robwriter. Why didn't they protest about the spending spree during the last administration? I like it when people are passionate about a cause or belief, but this seems to be based on such ignorance of the facts. A "don't bother me with the facts please" mentality.

So the additional stimulus package voted on by Congress this past winter along with the bailout of GM and Chrysler was still under the Bush administration?

Carole - the stimulus package is an effort to clean up the mess left by the previous administration. Is it perfect? No. Is it better than nothing? Absolutely. And if you think that cutting government spending during a severe recession is a way to make a quick recovery, then you might want to crack open an econ. book... or at least a history book - we tried that back in '29 and, if you recall, it didn't turn out terribly well.

How on earth can you say the obama administration didnt want the bail out???

Obama told the press after november 20th that if they didnt pass legislation it would be his first act as president so dont sit here and pretend the democrats had nothing to do with bailing out the fat bankers on wall street

right you are gak001. You could also have told Carole that it was the Bush administration that first bailed out GM, except it didn't insist on accountability, while Obama has. It was Bush who first bailed out the banks (how can Repubs forget about the $750 billion no-strings-attached bailout fund Paulson and Bush requested from Congress a year ago? I'm convinced Repubs have brain damage; no one's memory could be that bad.)

The only American history these people are concerned with is the Civil War. They lost that one and they lost the last election. Let's not tap dance around these protests...they are about race, PERIOD. "The nerve of that uppity N-word tyring to tell a bunch of us pristine, God-fearing white folks what to do! We'll show him!" These bottom-feeding losers have been looking for something to yell about for a long time and now, thanks to Beck and other scourges of humanity, they have it. Avalon is right, this is going to turn into something very ugly and out of control. It's why I keep a loaded .357.

Right on robwriter! What the hell is wrong with these people?? Obama is a freaking centrist not a socialist!! How stupid the American public is and they need to stop listening to Glen "Idiot" Beck and listen to NPR and the like.

Oh yes they did. This is the most corrupt administration in history. You need to take some of your own advise and "Get your f@@@@ing American history right." Bush was given the same information that Congress was given by Colon Powell to go to war. Maureen Dowde argued how imminent it was to go in the NYT's. You can blame Colon Powell and Maureen Dowde for cheer-leading for that. Look at the paper trail of Obama, ACORN, ACLU, and the corrupt Democratic Party and you will find who destroyed the housing market and our financial institutions. Bush did whatever it took to keep us safe and he accomplished just that. Obama is dismantling every protection we have. Now, we are vulnerable to be attacked here again. You'd have to be crazy to travel right now. Obama's friends are waiting patiently to hit us at the right time and they will before his four years is up. You keep drinking the koolaide and maybe you want feel anything.

To Joanne38: please seek mental help.

>"Bush was given the same information that Congress was given by Colon Powell to go to war."<

This never ceases to amaze me. How stupid. How totally and completely stupid can you get.First of all the information that congress received was selectively chosen by the Bush administration. All intelligence that refuted the desired intell that would justify a war was excluded. What you ended up with was an exercize in inductive reasoning. The excuse that "everybody agreed on the intel" never made any of it true, nor does it excuse those that utilized the worst form of reasoning if you are actually looking for the truth and are determined not to make a monumental mistake that will cost American lives and destroy it's economy.

Einstein once said that all the experiments that man can come up with will NOT prove my theories true. It only takes one to prove them false.

>"Look at the paper trail of Obama, ACORN, ACLU, and the corrupt Democratic Party and you will find who destroyed the housing market and our financial institutions."<

What paper trail? The ACLU?? ahh the right wings favorite "whipping boy". We all understand your hatred for civil liberties. That is... when it's applied accross the board. Now of course you scream about your liberty when it's that very same ACLU that watches every abuse of our civil liberties. In other words you're chiming in with whatever there is in the right wing "grab bag" of institutions to demonize. I support the ACLU. When right wingnuts like Bush and Cheney attempt to subvert the constitution in order to claim powers that supercede the constitution, I certainly can't count on cowards on the right to stand up for their constitutional rights, let alone anybody elses.

>"Bush did whatever it took to keep us safe and he accomplished just that. Obama is dismantling every protection we have."<

You mean like overriding the 4th, 5th, 6th, and 8th Amendments? Oh, and they kind of slipped up on 9/11 if I recall. Too busy with other things. Terrorist threats were not high on their agenda. You had no problem with giving up your liberties as long as Bush kept you safely tucked in at night. Can't let that boogyman get you. What a bunch of cowards. You willingly give up your freedom so you can feel safe. You're willing to use torture on people which goes against every American principle dating back to Washington. And then you claim to hold "American values and principles"?? Got news for you. Torture isn't an America value. You who never compromise your principles...have done exactly that. Because you trust a small group of elites that tell you what you want to hear. What a weakminded lot you people are. I'll tell you what...Go ahead and seceed again. We won't stop you.

You are right, the Obama Administration didn't start bankrupting the country; it has been going on thru every administration since the first. It just has written more "rubber checks" and promised more financially, than any administration in the history of the US. I just don't understand why I,(a very far from rich), under median income taxpayer, who already pays over 60% of my income to various taxes, should be expected to pay even more taxes, to cover the complete support of people who can but won't work, or others who don't pay taxes on their income. I am already being taxed to death. My wife and I have to work multiple jobs, just to get by; and the more we earn, the higher percentage rate we pay. In my financial situation, I am starting to appreciate the concept of the "Fair Tax".

Joanne38: Where do you get your history? Glenn Beck? The Obama Administration hasn't been in power long enough to be the most corrupt ever. Please give us some facts. What is this paper trail your talking about? Surely you know that the facts about the war have shown that the Bush administration lied about the war eight yrs ago. Do you know there is no link between 9/11 and Iraq? Please tell me what Obama is dismantling that is scaring you?

Wow, Joanne - I'm really impressed. I joke about it a lot, but you really managed to roll almost everything I find ridiculous about the far-right wing into one comment. You have an impressive ignorance of basic history, extremely recent history, and reality - and the kicker: you don't even know it. I'd say you were crazy, but I think you're probably either suffering from Aspergers or you're just not terribly bright.

Valleygirl is correct. A very interesting book came out ten years ago or so -- Tony Horwitz's "Confederates in the Attic." The premise being that a significant hardcore minority of Americans is still fighting this battle. Fundamentally, it's not just Southern and not just about race -- it's about people demanding that any criticism of their worst, most hateful beliefs, and any attempt to control their worst, most hateful behaviors, is "oppression." There's fundamentally no difference between these tea-party 9/12 gasbags and the guy in that famous picture of the lynching in Ohio -- you know the guy, standing there with a steely grin and pointing at the two hanged and burned bodies of black men. The brownshirts in Germany were considered a laughable fringe element until they started beating people in the street who disagreed with them. We have to take this problem seriously -- when you see a sign that reads, "We came unarmed (this time)," it has to be dealt with.

FYI -- TJ was a deist, not a christian.

riall1---you go and I love it you summed it up just right!!! I agree with you 100% I have been asking the same thing where the hell was everyone's injustice when the patriot act was enacted??? Idiots!!!

riall1, tell it boo! Having seen the Bush administration from a fine vantage point in New Orleans I simply do not understand how anybody can have a memory so short! Unless it really is all about race, and it is. The pathetic part of it is that poor ignorant rednecks like the Beck Mob vote against their own interests to the point of homelessness. A Black Democratic President should be the best thing to ever happen to these poor suckers.

Connie47, you are the benchmark for ignorant rot. No critical thinking skills, no life at all; You're on every thread here a hundred times. So we know you don't read about ideas or discuss with real people. There's no thought, just the Rupert Murdoch script.

So is some PR firm paying for connie47 to post drivel in an attempt to influence? The pattern says so. How many people play you on Madison Avenue somewhere?

Missbike-
If you've read
Connie's posts a hundred times-
Then you must by now realize
You've got the wrong girl.
You should apologize.

Wait: all these replies 'ignore' the policies except to 'explain' them? And somehow this supports the original claim? Republican Reason, to be sure.

Please list Obama's lunatic policies and explain how they are not good for America. Be specific here. Where has Obama made a horrible decision so far? It is hard to discuss cliches.

escomments--your an idiot, Bush sat around as the lame duck he was and watched the country go to hell in a handbasket and if Obama had done nothing all you idiots would want his head saying he planned this and now he is going to take over the country and push his socialist agenda! He is not a socialist he is a Centrist!!! Idiot!!!! But is was ok for Bush to go to other countries pushing his "socialist agenda democratizing other countries"" what f*&^%$$ing idiots everyone is!!! Go live in another country if you don't like how this one is going!

Excellent Point! To take this one step further. I've read a number of replies saying something like "where were you when Bush enacted the Bailout of Wall Street?" Well, if I remember correctly, the first TARP plan (H.R. 1424 - Emergency Economic Stabilization Act) or whatever it was called the first time failed the House the first time because we WERE protesting. We haven't stopped Protesting!

The Biggest mistake by Bush that would require drastic measures by Obama..was cutting taxes and launching two wars. Where did the money come from to wage these wars? Take a wild guess...and then look east. I doubt if there has ever been a time in human history in which a king, or emperor, or Ceasar, or whatever did NOT raise taxes to fund an army when going to war. So to answer your statement " Because Bush made horrible decisions it's OK for Obama to take horrible decisions?", the answer is yes. Decisions that Obama has made have everything to do with the economic survival of the country and it's industrial base. We managed to avoid to full depression. People like you seem to think that the US economy should turn on a dime. This is like trying to turn an aircraft carrier. They are not easy decisions but necessary nonetheless. As for the statement, "Where are the ideas?", obviously they are right in front of you. Health care reform. Energy policy reform. Foreign policy reform. The fact that you don't like them doesn't mean that they aren't there. Your ideas didn't work. They were simply reactionary policies designed to turn the clock back about 80 years. These policies move us into the 21st century where most of us want to go.

Don't be so trite.

This is my first visit to this website, and it amazes me as to the number of racists, particularly anti-white, as well as anti-religion, and people against self-responsibility. There is a lot of finger pointing, between two sides of the arguement, who have committed the same offenses. From what I gather here, I am the worst example of human, because I take care of my family, and am responsible for their health and welfare. I have worked to pay for everything I have, including health insurance; I served my country, I follow laws, and I don't expect anything from anyone, I haven't earned, especially from the government. I just don't see how that is wrong. By the way, a lot was said about the Democrats, and people's knowledge of history; has anyone researched the history of the Civil War, and what the Democrats supported?

Excellent observation, spoken like a gentleman and a sportsman, gak001.

Thanks, missbike.

Skchief - the Democratic and Republican parties have had a basic 180 degree switch since the Civil War. It's actually a rather interesting story. You might also want to check out what the New Deal did to American politics. Either way, good on you for being a responsible citizen.

You are absolutely correct gak001. That was the point I was making, at the end of my post. The both parties have changed 180. There have been some posts on here, that weren't correct in their history. The Dem side hasn't always been the party of equality , particularly racially. The Dems were once known as the Southern Good-Ole Boy party. Many of which were also members of certain "anti-equality" groups. The history of the south "was" the Democratic Party.

You might try a little critical thinking!

I agree camfield , Democrats are givers, they give my tax money away to outfits like ACORN. They give my hard earned tax money to people who do not work and game the welfare system- yeah they still do that. They give my money to prop up GM and Chrysler. They do not believe in the dignity of the individual. They look at the working class and the poor with contempt and guilt as oppossed to republicans who just have contempt. yes, with that high level of guilt and fear they take 'pity" on the less fortunate and develop "programs" with my money.

Bcaldwell, i'll take camfields way over your cynical one any day. Everyone is a liar and cheater in your world. No one deserves a hand up. everyone is trying to take your money and your gun from you. It's a world of paranoia !

The problem is that so many like you have is that you look at all of these wall street, oil, pharma etc cheats who screw us all without regard for political affiliation, with the misguided dream that one day you might be one of those guys perched in the mansion at the top of the hill. That if we mess with that system in any way, were robbing you of that opportunity.

Chances are you will remain just like the rest of us schlubs, just trying to make day by day to keep a roof over our heads and food on the table. We are all a few paychecks from a tent under the highway. One day it might be me, one day it might be you.

if it happens to be you, for no real fault of your own, you will then suddenly understand what we Dems' already do. So if it means that a few illegals get free healthcare or that some drug addict scams the welfare system, I am willing to take that loss, because one day it could be me who hit the hard times or someone in my family or a friend.

Whether it be your system or mine, our money is being pissed away. In yours though, once I run out it's " sorry...your shit out a luck " but in mine there is healthcare for my children, even if I can't afford it and a small safety to get me back on my feet. A little payback for the 20 years of taxes I have pumped into the system.

I wonder how many of those bankers who lost their jobs to the crash still vote Republican ?

dear camfield, 80 years!, I am moved, seriously. What changes you have seen! You have been being ripped off by government spending for longer than most of these fools and you are still able to be objective about how its being spent. So much for the arguments or characterizations of our seniors as being somehow 'calcified'. I loved the clarity of your line; "Those unable to think for themselves or debate in an intelligent manner are easily convinced that somehow they are being cheated out of something rightfully theirs." I, like you, have been for years, cheated out of MY tax dollars, being used as they were to feed the 'Military Industrial Complex' that Eisenhower warned us about. And I wasn't able to do anything about it, that was just the way it was. Now, we are having to clean up the mess, well that will just cost what it costs, so be it. At least those tax dollars are going to repairing the damage rather than causing it. Keep up the good fight, and God bless you!

>"Republicans are all about controlling people, working to mould the world in their own image and mindset--yet still jealously denying others the opportunity to rise up to their life style"<

That's been my observation Cam, but it seems to me that it began to take on the trappings of aristocracy with the writings of Russell Kirk in 1953. He laid out the "canons' of conservatism in a book called "the Conservative Mind". as providing the central idea upon which American conservatism is essentially based, calling it ordered liberty.

Kirk described six basic "canons" or principles of conservatism:
1.A divine intent, as well as personal conscience, rules society;
2.Traditional life is filled with variety and mystery while most radical systems are characterized by a narrowing uniformity;
3.Civilized society requires orders and classes;
4.Property and freedom are inseparably connected;
5.Man must control his will and his appetite, knowing that he is governed more by emotion than by reason; and
6.Society must alter slowly.

Ok. Fine. Now maybe he could demonstrate how all of that is actually true. I'd like to examine the methodology he uses to come to those conclusions.

Once doctrine such as this is laid out, a fence surrounds the idea. It can never hope to be greater than what it suggests. To do so, falls outside of the dogma and it becomes something else, and loses it's claim to conservative ideals, values, principles, etc. It's therefore, self-limiting. It's also a fallible, man made idea. It's prone to error. The problem is that conservatives can never admit that there could possibly be anything wrong about their thinking. The difference between a conservative and a liberal, is that the conservative knows that he's right. The liberal knows that he could be wrong.

A liberal doesn't acknowledge limitations. He refuses to put up a fence around the mind. To do so, impedes the limitless possibilities. Adhering to dogma and doctrine has never moved mankind forward. A liberal always challenges conventional thought and the institutions that perpetuate it. Conservatives love their institutions. That's why they would never have approved of the most radical of change that took place with the American revolution against the established monarchy in England. Freedom is not a conservative idea. Conservatism is built on a heirarchal society. Lords and serfs. Masters and slaves. It's about preservation of an aristocracy.

The tactics of conservatism vary widely by place and time. But the most central feature of conservatism is deference: a psychologically internalized attitude on the part of the common people that the aristocracy are better people than they are.

I think you swapped the definitions of the two parties. In my 55 years, the more I work and earn, the more that the Democrats want to knock me down and take away what I earned, to benefit ones who who don't pay taxes and non-responsible individuals. I was taught in school, that everyone in China and Russia were treated the same, only in a Capitalist country, could one strive to succeed, and be rewarded with higher earnings and benefits, by their extra work. I'm starting to feel that I shouldn't try so hard, kick back, and let others do my fair share. Damn, I'm getting liberal.

Where do you make your money, bcaldwell? If you were even up the wage slave food chain you'd pretty much pay no tax. So you're middle income used to be middle class taxed 20 to 35 %... By Republicans to pay for two useless wars. And The Big TARP Con. And Katrina tradgedy money diverted to Bush family friends.

There's so little welfare in this country as to be considered none by the rest of the world. Your taxes go to the very wealthy, Haliburton, Shaw, Yale DKEs who stole the Katrina money. And Cindy McCain paid 4% on 4 million income last year.

Does that make it feel better? You aren't supporting any nigga welfare Queens. AFDC is only like $60 a month anyway. Poor people are forced to deal drugs or be Michael Steele, OK sweety? (snicker) They can't get your money. Blackburn already took most, rich Wall Street babkers got the rest.

You only work hard to support the very wealthy having leisure.

adagio; Wow! Elegantly explained, never heard of the book but everything you posit I've seen around me all my life and know to be true.
I grew up as a Southern landed aristocrat, but my people were Democrats who sent the serfs' kids to college. Now I'm just a farmer LOL. No more Planter.

It's tremendously difficult to be raised on order and surety, then have that shift into a completely different paradigm. Making your own bed is a hard new skill in a suddenly chaotic world.
Maybe that's the big fear bringing out mobs, and I don't think health care is the chaos. Poor whites were always mistaken in their belief of superior rank to black people; The overseer is naturally going to lose it when the only person he thought he had to look down on is the ruler now. That's who's yelling teabag, and to have it rubbed in the face... But the Africans who worked have always been more valuable and important. Every black person I've ever met knows the caste and that they aren't really the bottom.

Don't underestimate old class resentments and restraints. We still have them in the South, very visible...

I totally agree! I've said for years that when the Democrats are in office they tax me and give my money to people who need it more -- hungry children, head start, people with disabilities, education, etc. When the Republicans are in office, they take just as much of my money, but they give it to themselves.

What Government?
They all look the same, act the same and get very little done that has any substance, just spend! and spend! and spend!
They will really show their colors when it comes time to pay back China.

Hundreds of thousands? Which branch of the right-wing do you represent? The powerful elite wing that used false propaganda to get us into a mess in a bankrupting mess in Iraq or the loony tunes fringe that repeats whatever nonsense they hear on FOX news?

Rearend, if anyone hates America, it is the rightwing nuts (teabaggers). They are angry and feel no one cares about their views and don;t realize they don't make much sense. The signs talk about the president as Hitler, abortion, healthcare for illegals, and 'Let's go back to Jefferson's way' (as tho' we live the same way as they did back then when 13 states). They don't even know what the healthcare bill will be, just that it may be 'socialist'. I don't care how many people went to Washington, I am not impressed with them or their ideas. One woman interviewed insinuated that the President was illegal (born in Kenya)! Don't these people ever understand the TRUTH? They live in their own world of ignorance.

Two kinds of republicans. The rich republicans who's sole objective is to stay rich. Through deregulation or tax cuts to the rich.
Or the poor republicans who're pandered to through social issues such as abortion, gay marriages. The sad thing is that the poor ones honestly believe the lies shilled to them by the rich, like tax cuts to corporations somehow equal more money for them through trickle down.

These protests are largely based on taxes. Why do right-wingers hate America so much they're unwilling to pay taxes to support it? You, sir, are the America hater. Let' call you what you are: Extremists verging on terrorism and insurrection.

>"the vast majority of America-Hating SOBs are all on the left. HA!"<

We on the left don't hate America. After all, if it weren't for liberals and liberal thought, America wouldn't exist. Everyone knows Conservatives hate radical change and there was never as radical a change as the American Revolution. Conservatives opposed the creation of the US, and hate democracy. We on the other hand, love this country. It's just that we despise crackers on the right that make us all look so freekin stupid, Wingnuts are a complete embarrassment to every sane person in this country. In other words..we have to put up with the right wing stupidity everyday, and make excuses for your moronic behavior. It really is getting tiresome.

For your information, the DC police reported 1.5 MILLION people at the rally. Surely the democrats cannot be THAT narrow minded in thinking that all of the 1.5 million people were there b/c of BECK?!? (I don't even think that many people watch the Fox Network).

Maybe Beck had a little to do with this, but you CAN blame it on our 2 party system which have become corrupt with their own self interests. I think this country needs a complete overhaul, but I don't agree with the NEW republicans and I don't agree with financial equality for all.

John D Rockfeller once quoted "Competition is a sin". I disagree, how can this country have become a great nation if it wasn't for the free markets and let corrupt and irresponsible corporations fall so it makes room for the new guy. Competition is what drove this country, its what drives people to to succeed, and without it, what's the point. It truly makes me ill that everything we buy in this country is from China when our manufacturing industry is in dire need of a facelift.

In closing, I think both republicans and democrats need to start being nicer to each other if they are looking to solve the country's problems. The name calling of "idiots", "nut jobs" and associating all people who are not democrats with some sensationalist reporter is only proving ignorance is on both sides of the isle.

"Hundreds of thousands"...What a joke

FACT-CHECK for LibertarianNOTrepublican: DC Police reported 60 to 70 thousand people at the march. If it would have been the 1.5 million as the myth has it can you imagine the chaos that would have caused in the city? It would have looked like the inauguration day crowd which did, actually, have about 1.5 million people there. Just because Michell Malkin reports something does not, necessarily, make it true.

miss bluerose you are so right! But can't they hurry up and implode? I think press coverage and continuing use of the name is the sort of life support they use on brain dead cadavers.... But the viable organs have walked (Spector) or have probably considered it so why does the news prolong the Frankenstien's monster running amok?


I also wonder what meetings at FOX are like. I have to believe Beck et al are just laughing their backsides off at the ridiculous things they get people to do. Is it like writing for comedy to them?

These protests are a hodgepodge of anger against a number of things and the overall message is lost in it. While they may be intended to be against big government, huge taxes, etc... some of the signs, language, attitudes and messages of the majority of these protesters have little to do with real concerns about big government and more to do with abject, uninformed paranoia.

What do the following messages vented at these rallies have to do with big government and taxes:
-Obama is not a legal citizen
-Obama is a Muslim
-Obama is a racist
-Obama wants to take your guns away
-Obama wants to kill your grandma or disabled baby
-Obama wants to put you in a concentration or reeducation camp
-Obama want to take over the automotive and financial industries
-Obama wants to let in the terrorists
-We came unarmed [this time]

It sounds a lot like people have a problem with Obama personally and have exaggerated, misrepresented or just plane made stuff up about his policies to make him seem like a scary outsider. There's also an undertone of threatening violence or revolution if they, a small roughly %20 minority, don't get their way.

You and the other %15-%25 of American's who also oppose the planned reform may have legitimate concerns about what's going on, I know I do but I wont go into that now. However, these people being allowed to control the conservative side of the debate are not only undermining any attempt to get the message out about those valid concerns, they are also angry, unpredictable and dangerous.

>"Hollering racism is the last refuge of a scoundrel."<

Wow!! Ring the bells everyone. Racism is officially over in the United States. Gary4205 has stated it as so. I'm so pleased to know that all those redneck conservatives that I've been living around in Alabama have changed their ways and have all embraced civil rights and rejected their racist past. That is what you're saying isn't it?

Uberieff, you need to start doing your homework. A lot of people are having problems with our two party system. 1.5 million people attended (according to DC police).

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/09/12/celebrating-the-912-rallies/

Our government structure and spending is out of control and there is no accountability or transparency.

It's the Federal Reserve that needs to be investigated and dismantled. They have single handedly devalued our dollar since its inception and now Obama wants to give more power to an entity who has more power than our congress AND president.

There's so much more going on here than what you've listed, you surely should read more about it before assuming all people are against obama and not just the powers that be.

gay4205 is a funny wingnut. Typical Lee Atwater, derivative of Jung, hijacked by Rove, and looking for a new torch bearer of Projection Debate.
The right lasted less than 90 days, hoping that would disguise their fuming racist anger at a black man being President.
But alas, the volcano could not be contained, and the explosion of racism, and the lava of bigotry, was unleashed, and the Tea Party crazies, Birther nutjobs, Death Panel psychos, etc. were all let loose. After all, the idle rich have nothing else to do, like help poor kids build a Boy's Club, or volunteer at a soup kitchen, but anything altruistic is an anathema to them.

Glenn Beck is too busy counting his money to pose. He'll turn bleeding heart liberal if the price is right. I wouldn't order that four tons of silicone bronze quite yet...

Besides, we may see more interesting things from Mr Beck yet. He may not be the crackers hero in the end.

Reminds me of the austere parades, some with mythic Teutonic Knights on horseback, and the new military hardware, that drew crowds much larger than Beck, but then you did not have the blogosphere.

Another article about the "bad white people".

@clearthinker..ironic call sign..another article about the " bad white people ". Sir... if it quacks like a duck...another white person who believes the days of racism are behind us. Too funny. Clearthinker...I think not ! and please don't go citing uncle tom Steele as an example of how much the Repugs have progressed. It's quite amusing how Steele pops up from time to time, out of nowhere with his statements. You never see him standing there backed up by his Southern White party members, he is always alone.

Should anyone play the race card in this debate ? no but your denial that race has anything to do with the ferocity of these, foaming at the mouth, insano's marching on Washington is just as bad. That picture that spread of that idiot Wilson sitting with the rest of his clan members in Congress, during the Presidents address to Congress, with the uber tanned grand wizard, plantation owning, boner sitting in the middle, was a classic.

@Frenchmanaz
Steele reminds me of the guy in every black comedy movie who is secretly betraying everyone in order to get out of the ghetto instead of improve it.

@Clearthinker
As a white guy it's easy to think that racism is over just because you aren't actively racist or hateful. However, it's difficult to come to terms with latent racial/community bias which is present in all people of all colors and backgrounds. Poor people hate rich people for exploiting them, rich people think poor people are gross/dangerous. A lot of these people aren't consciously racist, but you can tell that there's something other than policy choices that upsets them about Obama in the claims that he either isn't a citizen or that he's a Muslim, etc...

>"That picture that spread of that idiot Wilson sitting with the rest of his clan members in Congress, during the Presidents address to Congress, with the uber tanned grand wizard, plantation owning, boner sitting in the middle, was a classic."<

Isn't it just a bit ironic that the civil war began in South Carolina, and the guy calling the president of the United States a liar on the House floor during an address to both houses, just happens to be from SC, and is a member of the "Sons of the Confederacy", and our president just happens to be the first black man to hold that office.

Steele knows that "Selling Out Is The New Keeping It Real", as we say. T shirt from Upper Playground, don't rip it off.

But Uncle Michael knows highly paid tom figure head beats serving the drinks. He IS the guy escaping the ghetto and not looking back. Does anybody think he's lame enough to come up with that hip hop urban youth publicity campaign, or whatever absurd 1995 reference. He has to read the scripts for hours out loud just cracking up to keep a straight face on camera.

Do he and Glenn Beck ever party, you think? Read each other the propaganda they're in charge of and fall out laughing?

Uncle Michael lives in fear of the racism debate. He'll have to go back to serving g&t on silver trays to "bad white people".

Just another editorial, no substance, just an opinion.

I sure as fuck didnt support Bush, i went to plenty of antiwar rallies, but you would rather pigeonhole me than actually think for yourself.

And keep in mind Bush couldnt have pulled off all of the treading on the constitution that he did without the complicity of the democrats.

Both the parties are one big power grabbing, money grubbing whores who would prostitute their own grandmother wearing an american flag so as long as the johns kept handing up money when they came to eat from the troft.

There is not one piece if evidence, NOT ONE, that they lied. That is why Pelosi, Hillary ad other Dems supported going into Iraq--most everyone believed bad intelligence. You're welcome to your opinion, which is based upon what you think must have happened, but to conclude it as fact is typical lazy thinking. And even if the lying asertion is true, you fail utterly to deal with his point, whuch is that the left looks at protesters agaisnt Bush as people of conscience, and people protesting Dems as dangerous mobs. That is a concerte fact.

@ Vagrant -- try Somalia. No big bad government there to speak of. They'll welcome you with open arms.

wolverine, here's another "concerte fact": Bush's yellowcake speech to Congress in 2002, claiming that Iraq had sought uranium from Niger, when Ambassador Joe Wilson (not to be confused with cretin Joe Wilson) told them the story was untrue.Joe Wilson uttered his "liar" comment 7 years late. He should have done it when George Bush gave this "yellowcake" speech in the run-up to the Iraq war. Then, Wilson would have been accurate and actually making a positive contribution to the country.

I'm convinced that most of these angry outbursts on the right have little to do with actual policy disagreement and a lot more to do with racism masquerading as principled opposition. Those doing the shouting have so little to potentially lose (and likely much to gain) from this legislation that their screaming has to stem from some other deep-seated fear, like being led by an African-American.

debbieqd

Its people like you who said at the start of the war "well if you dont like it you can get out" its a bullshit argument that appeals to soft headed people because it makes it easier for you to dismiss me as oppose to the hard thing, actually having something to contribute to a conversation other than two incomplete sentences that have really has nothing to do with anything. Oh a worn torn country with several competing factional government embroiled in poverty with no main infrastructure, in and out of civil war constantly, lemme tell you as a libertarian i would just jump on that sinking ship. i have nothing but contempt for that sort of thinking.

Pennyskid

What on earth makes you think has anything to do with racism? Partisanship plays a factor but out and out racism? where on earth do you see evidence for this??

Isn't it amazing that NOW.... "No one voted for Bush?" I wonder how in the hell he got elected....TWICE...? Because just like VagrantPhilosopher, I cannot fine ONE REPUBLICAN "who will admit" that they voted for the Moron!

And btw VagrantPhilosopher, for the first 6 years of the Bush Administration, Republicans also had total control of Congress, therefore, they didn't NEED Democratic complicity....Why the hell do you think EVERYTHING was so freakin Secret?

Vagrantphilosopher- If you'd use punctuation we could understand what you were muttering about? And your computer has spell check.
I'm serious, can't understand a word.

And oh yeah when there's Confederate battle flags there's shack trash screaming, or about to scream, The N Word. People from the top of the old landed class system wouldn't touch that flag; too offensive to the people who work in our businesses and social institutions. And it's flogging a dead horse. We sell you oil and your food and still need social programs here in the country.
Do not confuse actual landed people with Republicans. I grew up in the Rural South face to face with Third World type poverty. People in more genteel poverty in the Big Houses pushed hard for the Great Society, so any plantation owning GOP in Congress stole some money and bought one ten years ago. Posers. HAH! Shack Trash frontin'. Got you, Wilson.

But that was then, this is now...loonies at it again.

Bush approved of torture, illegally wiretapped Americans, and lied in an effort to rush the country into war (see my "yellowcake" speech post above). Far from Hitlerian but vastly more than Obama has done or even has proposed to do, much less turning the U.S. into a Socialist State. So, Dems protested what Bush actually did, while Repubs are protesting what they imagine Obama might do.

These things do not add up to the same. Not all presidential actions are equivalent, not all protests are the same. Making them look that way is intellectually dishonest and mentally lazy

I absolutely agree with you. There was no less protests against Bush than Obama. The protesters did so on the "facts" they had, the same as protesters against Obama, are acting on facts. Bush was called Hitler, that same as Obama is called Hitler, and neither are anywhere like Hitler. A lot of promises were made by Bush and by Obama, and both broke those promises. The biggest promise that comes to mind, is Obama's promise that he would take this country out of debt, within his first term. He has time left, but I can't see it happening, with his current path.

I doubt that the numbers are equal in the general population. Also, there are plenty of Republicans in Congress who suppport or refuse to denounce the Birthers. I don't think you will find any Democrats in Congress who support or refuse to denounce the Truthers.

That's absolutely not true, sophie. That's the Repub tactic of "false equivalency." The truther people are an extreme fringe group, and they seldom appeared on blogs until the Right dragged them up.

OTOH, you had your representatives at the seat of government talking about BHO's citizenship, and it's still happening.

I believe sophia5 has just gifted us with the rights newest talking point; there is nothing but extremists on the left and right, where are the normal people? I heard this from cons this weekend. Seems that my being a Democrat makes me the equivalent of these sign carrying walnuts.

Since when are Truthers part of the left wing? Truthers and Birthers are the same people: people turned away from UFO conventions.

To loose morality you have to have it in the first place. Historically, this country has come a long way albeit recently behind western EU in many progressive aspects.

However, to say there is LESS morality, or we are loosing our morality, is erroneous. The twenty-four news channels drag out every piece of dastardly deed that is not sanctioned in this country and gives the illusion that everyone's next door neighbor is a child murdering rapist.

Too much exposure to bad news hides the tilt of the good. Things weren't any "better" and people weren't any more "moral" back when there was hardly more than a news hour on one television channel or radio channel a night, they just didn't play depressing criminal nonsense.

This argument is sort of like saying we are less moral because there are more violent crimes being committed now than in the 1900's, but without acknowledging that there were far less people in the 1900's and per capita violence has likely dropped since the turn of the 20th century.

Although the rest of the post it spot on, one would likely agree.

You are right, we are losing our morality. There were protests against Bush, and his, invading Iraq. There were lots of protests against the loss of Americans on the battle field. There were plenty of protests against soldiers returning from battle; there were even protests at some our servicemen's funerals, calling those servicemen gay, or baby-killers. The same happened with Vietnam protests. I don't recall any protests when Clinton sent troops to Kosovo. I don't even recall how many troops were lost there. Did we protest ethnic cleansing and mass murder in the Baltics, Africa, Iraq or any other part of the world, with the same furfur?

"Somebody is going to get shot by one of these right wing whackoes one of these days."

Actually, somebody already did. The security guard in the Holocaust Museum.

I don't recall Alex Jones ever calling for an armed coup, although passionate he often speaks for civil responsibility and disobedience, albeit a slightly contradictory message.

Alex Jones asks questions, while Glenn Beck gives you answers. A paranoid giving simple folk answers rather than questions is MUCH scarier.

uh......tim mcveigh murdered 186 people.....THAT "is the more dangerous course."

That's the best example you can come up with? Wm Ayers and his wife? That happened forty years ago, fahchrissakes. Another example of false equivalency from the Rethugs.

And Mussolini's blackshirts were from the Right. That's what Facists are--big authority and big corporations and big military. Sound familiar? No? Then take a poli. sci. 101 class.

roger37 The facists had one other leg-the moral cover of the Catholic church. The religious right of today filled that void during the 8 years of Bush's facist ruke.

>"They organize into ACORN or Mussolini's black shirts"<

Mussolini wasn't left. He was right. He began as a socialist, and then invented fascism and veered hard right. An authoritarian dictator. Just the kind of guy the right wing loves.

I don't have the stats with me right now, but there is a very clear difference in the disapproval (and in fact, hatred) of Obama numbers coming from the South, compared to the rest of the country. The South very obviously disapproves of (hates) Obama noticeably more than the rest.

There are good people in the South; but there are a lot of bad ones as well.

Thank you, Mark McKinnon, for giving Rita something to report today.

Hey, tell Dan Fowler that we're happy to let South Carolina go away. It's been on the wrong side of history since Fort Sumter, and if they feel disenfranchised they deserve it.

Not to mention the fact that for every dollar that SC contributes to the Federal Government, they receive $1.38 in return in Fed spending. So it will save the US a considerable amount of money.

her are the numbers denjuge are looking for:

approval-disapproval-no opinion

NORTHEAST 83 11 6
SOUTH 28 68 4
MIDWEST 63 32 5
WEST 60 35 5

now, considering that the south is about one quarter african american and they approve of obama at 87 percent, i figure the white approval numbers are under 20 percent at this point...

stating the obvious...the teabaggers are simply people who didn't vote for obama in the first place...their candidate lost and they're pissed

Sen. Chambliss has advice for the uppity:

http://tinyurl.com/nj5rk9

You wouldn't know socialism if it sat on your face. Taking the example of medicine, if it's socialized, the Feds own the hospitals, clinics, and all peripheral services (ER's, etc.) and the docs and nurses and orderlies are all employed by the state. And all the drugs and medical equipment mfr's are owned by the Feds, also.

Nobody, least of all BHO, wants that because it does indeed inhibit innovation. We're not even near that. Barack Obama as a "socialist" is just an easy propaganda slogan that non-thinkers pick up to avoid reaching their own, independent, conclusions.

Did you ever consider that you might be 100% moron?

No, please define socialism and link that to an Obama policy, or go take a political science 101 class, then get back to us. Okay?

Hey Glenn (I mean no-bama) - Seems you behave exactly like your hero. Where is an explanation of your claim? Please address incognito-ergo-sum or get the hell out of here.

And NO BAMA is 100% racist, using phony issues to stealthfully promote racism, and work weak minded fools to fall for his racist garbage, and join him. Spotting these racist is easy as shooting fish in a barrel.

The number of people is immaterial, because most of them had no idea what they were demonstrating about. All you had to do is read the signs to determine that.

Why should ANYONE be excited that xenophobes who hate all parts of the political system they live within choose to march with the blessing of completely senseless talking heads?

If all these equal opportunity left-right haters are so angry and mobilizing for their own reasons, where the fuck were they back in the early eighties when so many of the seeds of today's excesses were put into place by Reagan and expanded upon by every administration up to the present?

What was that reason again? Fiscal responsibility? Nope, that would require a very close look at where Mr. Beck and Mr. Limbaugh get their paychecks. If government is the problem and Business, (with a 'B', NOT your mom 'n pop stores that have been out of business for a loooong time), happens to own the government. It's a big circle jerk.

Where is the lament for that? Why aren't I seeing any signs protesting lobbyists or trans-national corporations?

Rhetorical question, by the way.

...but for what it's worth, the crowd at the Mall only reached up to 3rd Street, which based on past experience means about 60-70 K people. BFD.

>"Denjudge: Don't fault people in the South for disapproving of Obama. They are not the entitlement crowd found mainly in the North East and Left Coast."<

You're justifying racism?? I mean you're comparing racism in the south; a complete impediment to social progress to a perceived "entitlement crowd"??? Tell you what..if I was discriminated against, and deprived of attending a good school, eating in a restaurant, riding in the front of a bus..I just might feel that I'm entitled to a few of the things that YOU'VE been denying me because of your attitude over something out of my control.

I lived in the heart of Dixie so I don't think I need to hear from you regarding "beliefs" of the people down there and taking responsibility. Who gives a crap about somebody's beliefs anyway? They're just beliefs. When their stupid belief system stands in the way of other peoples rights, then the belief system is wrong, and should be dismissed as some kind of disease of the mind. How about taking some responsibility for what they did to people down there that didn't look like them? They don't like "gummint" intervention. No of course they don't. They're willing to stand in the doorways of schools to maintain their racist bigotry.It took Government intervention to get these crackers to recognize that their racist ways were not going to win the day in this country. Not a bad quality???? You're a justificationist for the most obscene behavior that we have permeating this country. These people are a blight on humanity. They stand in the way of every conceivable attempt at moving into the 21st century and we have to drag them kicking and screaming all the way. And you're all concerned over the "entitlement crowd" as if there is some kind of moral equivalency?? Give me a break.

Nope, they realized it wasn't "their" country. Just as it's NOT "our" country. We don't own it. They didn't own it. So it's OK that we took it, dig?

...wait.

First of all, how does creating a government monopoly on healthcare reduce healh care costs? Thats the party line i hear but whenever they never really elaborate on the economics of it and it seems to me that either their monopoly will either be that, a industry killing monopoly, or it wont be a monopoly, instead it will just be very ineffective public option which wont compete well and either fail, or provide sub par care, but if you believed our system sucks now then how does it make sense that your going to have 65 millions plus people injected into our current. healthcare system and somehow its going to just be able to encompass everyone while keeping quality up and costs down, its a pipe dream.

Our current system is a nightmare because its so regulated, right now each state has a handful of insurers that is state approved to insure people, essentially a state approved semi monopoly, they only give out a few licenses at all and call it a free market.

Vagrant,

How is a public option - key word *option* - a government monopoly on healthcare? You are one of the raving loonies on this subject and what you will reap is greater and greater healthcare premiums, bankrupting millions of Americans, combined with denial of healthcare benefits. It's going on all around you. Wake up and take a look. The cost of healthcare is tied to 60% of all American personal bankruptcies.

From VagrantPhilosopher

"Our current system is a nightmare because its so regulated..."

Yeah...and deregulation worked so well for the Financial Industry...

VagrantPhilosopher asks: "...how does creating a government monopoly on health care reduce health care costs?

Private insurance companies have this thing called "overhead". Overhead includes profits, CEO salaries and bonuses, advertising, legal fees when they get sued, research to figure out which people not to insure, investigations into the past history of sick people to find reasons to cancel their insurance, etc.

Overhead of private insurance companies ranges from 30% to 50%. Money spend on overhead is not used to help sick people.

Government-run programs such as Medicare have overhead too. Their overheads range from 1% to 4%.

So you can see that for the same premiums, sick people get a lot more treatment (money) from government programs than they do from private insurance companies.

This is how a single-payer system reduces our health care costs. We pay less for the same quality of care. Any more questions?

Love it! vagrant claims there is never any "economics" behind a government monopoly, well that is because there are no economics behind a government monopoly on healthcare........because there is no proposed monopoly of healthcare.
Also, did this guy seriously just claim that Obama's promise of change is B.S. because pot isn't legal????? That was a joke, right? California has completely decriminalized pot and is contemplating legalizing it........know who has made those choices?......oh that's right, a conservative governer.

AlanD2: Your numbers are from the WHO in 2000 or 2001. On top of that your not comparing apples to apples. Since not everyone in the US is covered it skews all the numbers. Here is a link for the WSJ from August showing how high costs and rationing are a problem with the French system.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124958049241511735.html
Here is one short paragraph from the article.
The problem is that Assurance Maladie has been in the red since 1989. This year the annual shortfall is expected to reach %u20AC9.4 billion ($13.5 billion), and %u20AC15 billion in 2010, or roughly 10% of its budget.
In all fairness its hard to compare costs unless the exact same data sets are used and there aren't any anomalies. It does show that you did some homework and your not just using talking points though.

I have to disagree with you on single payer or a public option which is single payer in disguise. Bottom line if the government controls it they will, if not right away then in time use it to lower the price so everyone is forced onto it and private companies will be driven out of business and we will pay through our tax $ to make it happen. If its such a good thing than why isn't it part of the plan for Federal employees? Or better yet why waste all that money on developing a new system, just add us to the one they have. We already pay for it and according to BO they get such good rates because of the size of their group. Add all of us and they could probably cut the premiums by half.

As to it being the moral thing to do and the fact that we are our brothers keeper, I agree with you on an individual level and since I'm a Christian. The only problem is that it wouldn't be fair for those that don't agree to that statement to have to pay now would it? Isn't that part of that whole separation of Church and State that you on the left always scream about? Can't have it both ways. Also it is a personal choice to be your brothers keeper, it should not be a federal mandate.

Timbo52: You are correct. The WHO numbers are from 2000. They do not have anything more recent that I know about.

The "OECD Health Data 2009" chart does show that France spend 11.0% of its GDP on health care, while we spend 16.0%, so France is still better off even today. While France does have financial problems, we do too. I agree that comparisons are likely inaccurate, but we have to go with the best numbers we have.

A government-run single-payer system does not have to put private insurance companies out of business. Switzerland, for example, has single-payer using private non-profit insurance companies which are tightly regulated. This is pretty much the same system used by Federal employees, except there is no regulation of insurance companies - only the government's massive risk pool drives prices down.

My personal goal would be "Medicare for All", since Medicare already handles over 50% of America's health care costs.

As far as morality goes, why is it not fair to make people pay for things they don't like? I hate our two wars, but I still have to pay for them. Surely it is more moral to help our brothers than to kill them. And if it takes a federal mandate to help them, I'm for it.

>"First of all, how does creating a government monopoly on healthcare reduce healh care costs?"<

There already is a monopoly on health care by a handful of giant insurence company's. The cost has not gone down. It's gone up, and will continue to go up. So how does maintaining the status quo reduce costs?

If my taxes went up to cover the cost, I would have no problem. I'd still be paying less then what is taken out for private insurance right now and I could have the option of dropping the private if I wanted to and not worry about pre-existing conditions.Right now about 35 or 40 bucks comes out to go toward medicare. Plus I have to pay for private insurance which amounts to around $400 a month. I'd be happy to pay 150 to get rid of $400.

We have already seen that maintaining the status quo doesn't work. Why isn't public education a threat to private education? One would think that private schools would have vanished by now. Why pay 40 grand a year to go to Harvard when you can pay a fraction of that to go to Alabama? It seems to me that Harvard and Stanford and the others are doing just fine in spite of State University's throughout the country. As far as an industry killing monopoly goes...we can already see an industry that is killing people by denying them coverage. I have no sympathy whatsoever for anybody that profits off the sickness of anybody. They have a profit motive that intercedes the concern of the individual with an illness. There is no room for profit to play a part in a life and death situation. If they are so good at doing things and the government is so bad at doing things...then what are they worried about? Another way of helping to pay for it is to recind the 1.3 Trillion dollar Bush tax cuts.

>"instead it will just be very ineffective public option which wont compete well and either fail, or provide sub par care, "<

And you can demonstrate somehow that what you're saying is true? What is the methodology that you're using to come to that conclusion?

For many of those dying under the sociopathic administrations of Lenin and Stalin there was a VERY good reason to rant and rave incomprehensibly. They were about to die, no matter WHO they were all the way up to the private confidants of both.

However, this is not applicable to the current state. If we are bringing so many people to the countries' square from all around the country then the oil companies are doing ok, (they had to get there somehow, certainly not teleportation), and the pharmaceutical companies are doing ok, (a level five trip DMT usually enlightens one. At least for the experience, such as birth and death DMT flooding. This mindset regards none of these causes), then Lenin and Stalin are...dead.

So fuck it. I say 'fuck Lenin'. I say 'fuck Stalin'. I also say, 'fuck milton friedman'. I also say, fuck Palin. Fucking witchdoctor freak. I also say 'fuck Paris Hilton', puppy abusing whore. I also say 'fuck donavan', Atlantis was a great song, but he needed a hair cut. I also say 'fuck carrot top', prop jokes are out.

But mostly, 'fuck the American and otherwise english speaking political commentators, because they interject NO humour, and I have read the responses for the past twenty minutes here and will NEVER get this twenty minutes of my life back. I want the government to intervene on behalf of FOXNews, and I want COTTON CANDY. It's tasty.

This is the same shit back and forth. If we suck so much talking anonymously it's clear why we cannot even speak to each other when most folks' next door neighbors will pull out their cell phone rather than speak to their next door neighbor. Maybe all of you deserve to die, but since god loves me I will be saved.

Maybe if you have read this entire thing than you need to go outside and play in the sun, or rain. Or go hug your kid(s), or parent(s). Or write, read, fuck, or sleep, but everything above here is a variation of three or four ideas at best, and a few rants. I'm willing to bet everything below is equally nonconstructive discourse between partisan and moral autocrats in a country that does not exist digitally. I've wasted time writing this, and I'm sorry you have wasted time reading this. Watch the Powerpuff Girls movie. It's funny.

You misunderstand me, sir. (Did you even read my post?) My point is that historically (over the past 90 years) ALL protest-based movements are pretty much doomed to fragmenting, then being marginalized into irrelevance. It happened to the Wobblies, it happened to the Birchers, it happened to the Anti-war hippies, and will probably happen to the Tea Party protesters. What you take as an attack on the Tea Partyers is nothing more than the amused, sympathetic contempt I hold for all protest politics, regardless of their position on the political spectrum.

Make no assumptions about my politics. If this were poker, I'd see your Glenn Beck and raise you one Lew Rockwell.

(P.S.: "You just keep sitting on your couch..." Man, I haven't used a WebTV system for ten years!)

>"Just like the rest of the lefty's here who's preferred method of debate is liberal to liberal."<

That only counts if they're looking for an intelligent conversation. Which reminds me; have you ever read Ann Coulters book," how to talk to a liberal, if you must". So you see, with people like that leading the charge from the right, it's already understood that reason is not going to be applied to a discussion with a righty. So...other then for the humor aspect, theres really not much to discuss. You operate on belief systems. We function through reason and logic. There it is.

>"You can try to portray them as nothing but a bunch of gun toting drunken hicks but they are about as main stream america as you can get"<

Oh really? By whose definition? Yours? Are you defining what main stream America is for the rest of us? I like to think that mainstream America is actually pretty well educated and can utilize critical thinking. I could be wrong I suppose.

>"There wasn't a single arrest that I'm aware of from all these Waco's."<

I think you mean Wacko's. Waco's in Texas. And I must say that I'm impressed that there weren't any arrests. There weren't any at the innauguration either, and that was a legitimate 1.8 million with several hundred thousand unable to get in.

>" Lock your doors there coming for you, o no."<

We pretty much stopped worrying about that after it was certain that Bush was gone. You know the Patriot Act and the suspension of the 4th Amendment and habeas corpus is sufficient reason to be concerned. And yet it's a nutjob with a gun that wacks three cops in Pittsburgh because he thinks Obama wants to take his guns away.

>"You all don't have a clue who these people are or what they are all about"<

Oh but you're so wrong about that. A weak mind is an easy read.They are pathectically easy to read. I hear them on the radio every day, on Beck or Hannity or Limbaugh, so don't tell me I don't understand them. Theres very little depth there to digest. These people have all been spoon fed by Glen Beck. He was the prime mover in this entire thing. They actually listen to this idiot and buy into his bullshit. A recovering alcoholic college drop out who steals ideas from great minds, turns them inside out, and claims to be an heir to their wisdom. He co-opts Paines "Common Sense" as if Paine would have anything to do with this phoney sack of crap. How can you assume that nobody has a clue about these people when it's these very people who are clueless to begin with. That much we already know. The believe there are Death Panels. They believe money is being used to fund abortions. They believe illegal aliens are covered in the bill. They "believe" these lies. Now one of two things are in play here. They are too stupid to think for themselves. Or they are willing to be ignorant because it's easier then having to think. They have Rush to do that for them. We know exactly who they are and what they are all about. And race does factor into this whether you'd admit to it or not.

>"I think many people are worried right now that "the Left" (using the word loosely) is already keeping tabs on anyone who didn't vote Democrat in the last election. Not to mention people recently returned from service in Iraq."<

You think that huh? Do you have any proof that this is happening? I mean can you demonstrate how that is true? Or is this just another fantasy conspiracy theory from a wingnut?

Timbo, Bush didn't just "drive up" the total national deficit---he doubled it, from a base of $5 Trillion to $10 Trillion. And by the end of this fiscal year (Bush's budget) it was at $11 Trillion. Google "national debt."

Yes, BHO is adding to it, but it was necessary due to the stimulus---which has worked, BTW. The Repubs' alternative was tax cuts, which would have driven the deficit up by the same amount, and taken about 5 years to work.

This drives me nuts. Why can't all of us - ALL OF US - do what you did, continuously. I am going to post that info on his website right now and suggest that everyone do the same. We have do DO something, because not matter how insane/inane his rantings are, it is now SO out of control!

I post on the Bernie Goldberg site. It's a neo-con hot-house, but they have a high tolerance for the most part. I post on there from time to time because at least I can post without being deleted when mentioning criticism about Fox Freaks such as Glen "Charles Milles Manson" Beck AKA Jesus Christ and his followers, "The Family." If the thread does well enough it does get the attention of the Fox Freaks like his producer Stu AKA Tex Watson.

Actually national socialism is just that, Nationalistic socialism. They tried to establish a new order and tear down the old, they instituted corporatism, expanded government power, and tried to indoctrinate people into a certain mind set, and in fact, before the holocaust and its horrors you have tons of progressive left wingers over here praising for what theyre doing that "noble experiment" they were experimenting with over there in progressive europe.

It wasnt until after the wars that the left began to completely blur the lines of what fascism really is, socialism with a nationalistic flair, as opposed to communism, socialism with an inter nationalistic flair

>"The Nazis and their National Socialist Party were right-wing thugs, regardless of the name of their party. It looks like a lot of Americans today are so poorly educated that they can only read the label, but have no idea what's in the package. That kind of ignorance is dangerous."<

It's so weird to think that people don't get that. You can call yourself anything, but your actions will always reveal that you're something other then what you claim. Hitler wasn't the kind of guy that felt he needed to be defined by the name of a party. He defined the party. They didn't deifne him. It's like Bush calling himself a conservative and then spending like theres no tomorrow and sending us into wars. These are not conservative actions.
Hitler was an extreme right wing totalitarian racist monster. Trying to paint him as some lefty is a feeble attempt at historical revisioinism. There wasn't a liberal bone in his body. There was NOTHING liberal about the Nazi's.

>"It wasnt until after the wars that the left began to completely blur the lines of what fascism really is, socialism with a nationalistic flair, as opposed to communism, socialism with an inter nationalistic flair"<

Oh please. Mussolini invented fascism. It's totally removed from socialism. Mussolini himself was a one time socialist. He even edited the socialist Avanti magazine. But he renounced socialism and invented fascism and purged all socialists from Italy.

As no less a thinker then F.A. Hayek said in his essay, "Why I'm Not a Conservative", "I sometimes feel that the most conspicuous attribute of liberalism that distinguishes it as much from conservatism as from socialism is the view that moral beliefs concerning matters of conduct which do not directly interfere with the protected sphere of other persons do not justify coercion. This may also explain why it seems to be so much easier for the repentant socialist to find a new spiritual home in the conservative fold than in the liberal.

.

You make some interesting points and your semantics re tax cheats (indiscretions?) is puzzling. How do you feel about the Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee (Charles Rangel) tax improprieties. BTW, that committee writes the tax code. Rangel writes it, he just doesn't follow it.
As for watching the country "rot" for 8 years, I have to disagree. Bush's tax cuts and policies helped many working families and small businesses. I hate to see them expire. If the federal government would just live within their means (don't spend what you don't have) like responsible families do we would be OK.

Ozone, I am confused at your empuzzlement. My point, vis a vis, tax cheats was that there is plenty of blame to go around, regardless of the offense, whether it be tax evasion or corruption. None of it is acceptable but no party has a monopoly on cheaters.

Your reasoning that the left has no right to call the right " wingnuts " because certain people that Obama hired happen to have cheated on their taxes does not compute.

Let me also clarify that the term " wingnut " does not, for the moment, define the entire Republican party but it certainly looks like they the party is being hijacked by these folks.

If you are reasonable Republican who has questions about where things might go under Obama's leadership and have genuine and reasonable solutions then you are not a " wingnut ", so why take such offence.

As for the Bush tax cuts, sorry but a $ 300 ( or whatever the amount was cause I don't remember ) really didn't change make any impact on my life. It helped me cover the additional costs I was incurring imposed by Bush's oil buddies, as they manipulated the market for profit. It was a band aid on a wound that required surgery.

Those tax cuts while it might have given the impression that our government really cared was really nothing but a ploy to make the uber rich, even richer. Let the populace lick the spoon while we give our friends the cake.

Sorry if I don't feel like high fiving our last President with you, but we are in this horrible mess because of that man and his team of incompetent fools. No matter how the right tries to twist this around, every single move Obama is having to make is simply cleaning up after the last guys 8 year long party.

I repeat if you are not one of these imbeciles marching around shouting death panels and where's Obama's birth certificate, then you are a genuine Republican, not a wingnut, so why feel the need to defend them ?

I'm actually a Democrat. Bush certainly made mistakes in 8 years. Failing to close the borders and comprehensively dealing with illegal immigration should have begun on 9/12/01. The invasion of Afghanistan was necessary. It could have gone better. I still hope it turns out better than when the Taliban was in charge. For me, the jury is still out on Iraq. I hope that democracy is given a chance to grow and flourish and perhaps spread throughout the Middle East (a pipe dream, but it would be nice). My heart breaks for every American life lost over there. I wonder if the war would have turned out differently if the Congress really got behind the administration and our troops. From Harry Reid's (The Iraq War is lost") to John Murtha's irresponsible and false accusations about our Marines in Haditha ""of cold-blooded murder and war crimes," to John Kerry's accusation "that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the--of--the historical customs, religious customs." These statements during wartime from Democratic leaders in Congress not only demoralize our troops but send a message to our enemies that we are not in for the fight. I wouldn't lay blame at Bush's feet for all of the economic problems either. Barney Frank's asleep at the wheel attitude toward Fannie and Freddie giving mortgages to people who had no business getting them contributed to the meltdown. I hope Obama can turn this around without adding too much to our deficit. I wish him luck.

Ozone, suddenly we are on the same page. I for one am enraged at the entire Congress for years of inadequate and often criminal behavior.

I will not inject my views on our policies in the Middle East because this is for another day. I have actually commented recently on a post concerning Iran. I share my thoughts on this issue there.

I have lived in Asia ( 18 years ) Europe ( intermitently throughout my life, and the US ( 23 years ). I look at all matters including the healthcare debate through numerous and often multicultural lenses.

Back to my point though, if all of this anger where directed at Congress, left and right, I might be chanting, albeit not nearly with such hatred, right along with many, but instead too many ( wingnuts ) are blaming a President that is just breaching his 8th month in office, handling one of the biggest disasters this nation has ever faced from so many different angles.

I believe we will be looking at a different nation this time next year and prefer to see the glass as half full.

Frenchmanaz: So if a wingnut is a term to identify hypocrites what do you call someone who rambles for 10 paragraphs, has fantasies about John McCain, gives personal opinions on the Financial and Auto Company bailouts, blames everything on the previous President, then uses that to justify quadrupliling the deficit by the current President and decides we just need to give him some more time? Your the nut here.

The people that protested this past Saturday are fed up with big government trying to fix everything especially when the polls clearly showed that the "majority" of Americans were against the bank bailout, and the Auto company bailouts no matter who the President was at the time.

So you say the only option was to save them and I guess that makes it so. I disagree. They should have been allowed to fail and restructure in bankruptcy or close their doors what ever made more sense. This is especially true of GM. It will cost us a whole lot more to run this company, and keep pumping money into it, all while they can't make a car for a profit then letting the inevitable happen which was to let it fail, because it already had. It was nothing but a back door deal between Obama and the Unions who helped finance his campaign. GM's creditors were the one's that got screwed here. And so big deal if their would have been more layoffs, we have been bleeding out about a half million jobs a month for quite a while. How's that Stimulus working for you?? Obviously these are my opinions but you state things as if they are fact because you say so, your the hypocrite.

PS Go back and look at some of the campaign promises of Obama and tell me what happened? Most of them are 180% opposite of what he has done since he took over.

@ Timbo...hmmm where do I begin ? First off, if you don't like what I have to say, don't read it. Second, sorry but if our last President isn't responsible for the mess were in then who was ? Last I remember Clinton left Bush a nice fat surplus. As someone so amusingly said in another post, your blaming the firemen for the fire.

The emotional side of me agrees with your view that we should have just let the banks and the car industry fail but I realized this was a simplistic view without taking into consideration the hundreds of thousands, likely millions of lives who would have been affected by this approach. It was tantamount to throwing dice. You were obviously willing to risk the crushing of all of these lives, with the calculation that it would all work out in the end. I wasn't.

I won't make assumptions but I don't hear any arguments from so many who think the way you do about the colossal waste of blood and financial resources the were poured into a war that didn't need to happen. Forget for the moment the moral implications. Do I like the fact that my 8 year old will likely be paying for the bailouts for years to come ? No I do not, but sorry the alternative of countless more on the soup line thanks to an emotional decision was simply not acceptable.

Unfortunately, before Bush took office we were in the black and now we are not. In order to fix this broker ship money needs to be spent. Does this mean that we have ended up putting more money in the coffers of these cheats and thieves who lead the banking industry in particular, yes, but it's the cost that had to be paid in order to save the hundreds of thousands who count on these companies for work and for the banking sector, if we had simply disolved these banks instead of saved them, they would have simply washed their hands of all of the investment returns owed to investors etc etc.

It's so easy to say " burn them all " when the impact is minimal on your life.

I want a clean balance sheet as much as the next guy, but until we come even close to reaching that point, sane decisions need to be made that are going to cost us big time.

For all of the criticism I hear from people like yourself who just love to insult ( your comment about the length of my posts was unecessary ) I don't hear any new solutions, no new path, just money morning quarter backing about how " Obama is going about it all wrong ". It's quite simple, for as wonderful as it is to imagine if the roof is leaking and the toilet is broken to simply tear down the house and build a new one, the fact is that the only rational approach is to patch up the roof and fix the toilet.

Sorry, while were not nearly out of the woods yet, the ship is not sinking as fast as it was which has only bought us a little time to change the course.

Were you expecting this " Obama's Change " to happen overnight ? While you probably didn't vote for Obama, you were giving him a mere 8 months into his first term before you started calling him a failure ? And...exactly what " change " did you hear Obama state that he is not trying to enact ? Examples please.

As so many have said it took Bush 8 years to turn this country into a pile of shit and it's likely going to take as long to bring it back to life. At this point, we are just feeling a pulse.

Obviously a pointless debate with two people with very different views on the pains we must endure now to ensure that our country survives in this new world. Sorry but leaving it up to the thieves in private industry who have proven time and time again that they couldn't give a rats ass about us, simply doesn't cut it. Their incompetence, condoned and even encouraged by the last administration is what got us into this mess, so I am willing to give this new administration a little more time to fix things before I start calling them a failure.

Well, let me play devils advocate. My husband and I were bopping along with our own company, when we got a tax bill for sending out late 1099's although we did send them on time. Paying the bill was easier than fighting with a bureau that constantly sent us "we are sorry but we have not been able to get to your case yet" letters, while the interest and penalties racked up. We were not tax cheats, we paid and forgot it.

Individual responsibility and honesty

The point is Rawhide, is that political parties (government) are not supposed to control the American people. It is not up to those in power (even in the minority) to control anyone. It is true of liberals as well. I cannot stand it when the pundits find it outrageous that ____(insert political party here) has not disavowed, distanced themselves from, condemned, etc protesters X, Y, and Z.....it is stupid.

Bush had protesters cordoned off. And what do you think he would have done to people who showed up to his rallies with firearms?

You read her post, so you know, yes, she is out of her mind.

What passes for "political discourse" in America these days:

Statement issued by President Obama: "The sky is blue today."

Rush Limbaugh (jowls flapping against the microphone): Obama is trying to take over the entire atmosphere and turn it into a communist sky. This is dangerous folks, so I'll pass along my wisdom once more: If he keeps this up, he'll trick everyone into believing the sky is blue. I hope he fails!

Glen Beck (crying): I just love the sky so much and I can't stand that he's trying to say something is wrong with it being blue. Are you with me? Let's form a Million Moron March on Washington!

Sean Hannity: Did you hear what Obama said today? He said the sky is purple - that's outrageous! He also said anyone who disagrees with him is a bad person. This statement makes it obvious that he hates white people.

Pat Buchanan: Back in the 50s and 60s, this was a country with a red sky. People who saw red skies built this country. The sky has always been red and you would know that if you were a real American and not a lousy immigrant trying to use reverse-discrimination against white people who deserve to run this country..

Dick Cheney: This is totally irresponsible and a threat to our safety. We have to protect America and we will be forced to torture anyone who tries to make us weaker by proclaiming the sky is blue. We should invade other countries where we think there might be a shred of evidence that they will try and turn our skies blue.

TeaBaggers: We want our smog-filled skies back - Obama's taking our sky away from the people it belongs to. He's really a Communist Nazi Muslim, who's trying to abort all white babies! He's from one of those countries in Africa that's full of black people ands he wants to give all our money to the terrorists in the middle east. What? Shut up this ain;t about race, it's about the heritage of the Confederate flag. No, it's about Obama not being born here. No, it's about Obama recruiting schoolkids to join the Black Panthers.
Check out our scary signs - just look at our guns - we're not going to take this! We're ready to take back the country, wait, we're ready to secede - wait - where will we go? Glenn, can you lead us to the 1950s?

Republican leadership: No. The sky is not blue. No. The president won't even look at our alternate proposal that says the sky should only be accessible to those who can use some more tax credits. We'll have the actual numbers on this in a few months or so. What? he said he might be willing to agree with some tax cuts? No, still, No - You call that bipaprtisanship Ha! No, the answer is no. We repeat, No to whatever you are saying - just NO. Also,by the way - You Lie! And again, just in case you didn't listen to our position on any of your proposals - it's NO.

Blue Dog Democrats: Well, maybe the sky is blue, but sometimes there are white clouds and streaks of red and we just wouldn't want our supporters to think we had abandoned them and their large sums of money by saying the sky is wishy-washy blue, although we do support blue skies for all Americans, but let's not push things too far just yet.

and finally, Liberal Democrats: Damn it, Obama is Not doing what we wanted. We want the sky to be declared completely Blue right now or else we are not supporting him anymore. Hurry Up! We are growing very impatient. Pretty soon we might even think about getting up out of our chairs and do something about it -

mbstrong---Absolutely priceless!

Yes, because we know monopolies reduce costs. And what else do we know? That the government knows how to run an efficient system. Like your favorite country, France.

AndreainNY: You are absolutely right. Their efficient government system is why France pays only $3,000 a person per year for health care, while we Americans pay $7,000.

What do you think we get from that extra $4,000 a year, besides higher insurance company profits and CEO pay?

Here are a few embarrassing facts for you, Andrea:

Pfizer recently agreed to a record $2.3 billion settlement for health-care fraud.

An average of 22% of health care claims in California are rejected by insurance companies. PacifiCare, the worst, rejects 40% of its claims.

After UnitedHealth Group paid fines of $1.4 billion for various frauds, they fired CEO William McGuire. McGuire took with him a golden parachute of $1.1 billion, the largest in the history of corporate America.

Rick Scott, leader of Conservatives for Patients Rights, was CEO of a hospital which defrauded Medicare for $1.7 billion.

Stephen J. Hemsley, CEO of UnitedHealth Group, has made over $750 million in salary, bonuses, and other income in the last 4 years.

"An investigation by the House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations showed that health insurers WellPoint Inc., UnitedHealth Group and Assurant Inc. canceled the coverage of more than 20,000 people, allowing the companies to avoid paying more than $300 million in medical claims over a five-year period."

Wendell Potter, a former senior executive at CIGNA health insurance company, testified before the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation on June 24, 2009. This was part of his testimony:

"I know from personal experience that members of Congress and the public have good reason to question the honesty and trustworthiness of the insurance industry. Insurers make promises they have no intention of keeping, they flout regulations designed to protect consumers, and they make it nearly impossible to understand - or even to obtain - information we need. As you hold hearings and discuss legislative proposals over the coming weeks, I encourage you to look very closely at the role for-profit insurance companies play in making our health care system both the most expensive and one of the most dysfunctional in the world."

You can read the rest of his testimony at:

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07102009/potter_testimony.html

More interesting stuff on rescission at:

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07102009/profile.html

So, Andrea, why don't you find some efficiency in private health care before you start complaining about government programs.

Facts: The Bane of Conservatives.

No ones is saying the current system isnt flawed and doesnt need an overhaul.

The french system taxed 10 percent on you directly then ten percent on your employer (which is a way to tax you, because ultimately employees and customers carry that cost ie you) and it pays for 70 percent of general care, 100 if you qualify with a certain condition (eg diabetes)

Personally it all comes down to whos going to pay for it, and I the healthy, dont want to hand over 10 plus percent of my earning power for healthcare i dont need.

VagrantPhilosopher said: "I the healthy, dont want to hand over 10 plus percent of my earning power for healthcare i dont need."

This is exactly like saying "I the good driver don't want to pay for auto insurance I don't need."

This works fine until you have an accident, and suddenly you are in big trouble, with hundreds of thousands of dollars to pay and no liability insurance.

The same thing is true of health insurance. Being healthy and not having insurance is fine until the day you find you have cancer and will need a liver transplant and chemotherapy costing a million dollars over the rest of your life.

What will you do then, VagrantPhilosopher? Give up and die, or beg the rest of us to bail you out?

Except nothing in any of the bills calls for government monopoly.