Mixed Review

What planet are you conservatives living on??...........Ethics: Abramoff Scandals, Libby outs a CIA operative, Gonzo politicizes Justice, and just about anyone in the White House could be labeled a liar, torture, extraordinary rendition, non FISA wiretaps.....etc........Foreign Policy: Iraq war, AQ still on the loose, Bin Laden still on the loose; and are we safer?..................Responsive Government: Katrina, bungling Iraq war intelligence, maybe even bungling the 9/11 intelligence......etc.......I'm going to do everything in my power to see that Republicans LOSE in the next elections. I mean across the board, state legislatures to the White House, there is no longer a place for Republicans in the world I want to live in. The Republican of today is an indefensible talking point repeating polarizer of nations, which in my mind no longer deserves quarter.

Sorry GOPers, Y'all have a lot of "coming-out" to do, and until you do, Republicans are just toe tappers in airport bathrooms.

Let me just give some of my fellow Democrats a little sage advice before i get my lady's Marguarita ready for her arrival home . Don't get complacent! just because the party of hate doesn't have adequate representation on the Newsweek blogs doesn't mean they have completely faded into the sunset. Paulejb, while somewhat typical of the best they have to offer, he still falls way short. even holyroller and josemart do a better job.. The next election in 2010, where the dems. are favored to gain 2 or 3 Republican Senate seats will be just as brutal. The ultra rich in this country are dedicated to reducing the middle class and expanding the lower class. this will not change. So, while we're all having a little fun with paulejb, let's not forget, some of the reublicans we'll be up against are not as easily made fools of.

President obama fought back against every attack and destroyed the GOP. This is the only way to protect this country of ours. We saw what happened to Al Gore and John Kerry, when they didn't respond in kind. Let's not go there again. I'm out.

Republicans and Their ...

"Big Spending Democrat Facade"...

1. Bill Clinton was a Pure Believer in [Pay As You Go]

That means Clinton Applied Paying Off Your Debts as You Go, Oppose to Going into More debt or being Delinquent...

OK

2. George W. Bush and his then [6 Year Majority Republican Party] did not give a Rats Backside about ...

Appeasing Nor Pacifying [Liberals, Independents Or Moderate Democrats] The Spent and that Includes [McCain]

During the Republican 6 Year Reign in Congress and the Senate, they did and Spent as they Pleased and what Pleased them the Most was [Spending]

3. Bush & Cheney used the Parliament Procedure called [Reconciliation] to Pass Anything the Democrats tried to Block via Voting [Reconciliation-51 Votes Majority]

Funny, this same Procedure is Now being decried as [Marxist-Socailist] by...

[Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, Praeger and Savage]

When the Bush and Majority 6 Year Republican Senate & Congress was doing this throughout their Presidency, it was [Patriotism]

WOW !!

Such Hypocrisy !!

Reagan 101:

Reaganomics had its roots in two of Reagan's campaign promises: lower taxes and a smaller government. Reagan reduced income tax rates, with the largest rate reductions on the highest incomes, in a time of battling inflation, [citation needed] Reagan raised deficit spending to its highest level (relative to GDP) since World War II. As a result, there has been endless debate on whether the economic trends of the Reagan years actually came from the free market, or from government stimulus of the kind advocated by Keynesian theorists.[citation needed]

He lifted remaining domestic petroleum price and allocation controls on January 28, 1981 and lowered the Oil Windfall profits tax in August 1981, helping to end the 1979 energy crisis. He ended the Oil Windfall profits tax in 1988 during the 1980s oil glut.

With the Tax Reform Act of 1986, Reagan and Congress sought to broaden the tax base and reduce perceived tax favoritism. In 1983, Democrats Bill Bradley and Dick Gephardt had offered a proposal to clean up/broaden the tax base; in 1984 Reagan had the Treasury Department produce its own plan. The eventual bipartisan 1986 act aimed to be revenue-neutral: while it reduced the top marginal rate, it also partially "cleaned up" the tax base by curbing tax loopholes, preferences, and exceptions, thus raising the effective tax on activities previously specially favored by the code. Economists of most affiliations favor cleaning up the tax code, since tax preferences and exceptions distort economic decisions.[citation needed]

How many of our troops lost their lives in Iraq because the GOP and the Bush/Cheney administration opted to put billions of dollars into the F22 failed project instead of funding improved body armor and improved vehicles with the ability to withstand roadside IEDs?

GOP news conference.

Tax cut for the super wealthy...oh yes!

Tax cuts for the middle class...oh no1

Body armor and vehicles that withstand attacks...oh no!

billions for defense projects that are doomed from the start...oh yes!

Tax cuts for Big business...oh yes!

Extension of unemployment insurance during the recession...oh no!

Lower the estate tax for those in excess of 7 million dollars...oh yes!

Supplement the food stamp program...oh no!

Same ole, same ole.

In the next few weeks Sec. gates will present his defence budget. it includes dropping billions of dollars in failed weaponry projects and introduced new projects of useful weapons.

This will be a defining time for the GOP who will fight for these projects regardless if they're failures or not. the southern Republican's have long defended projects that bought money to themselves and their campaigns. I think the mindset is, we're already over weaponized and the projects are more important than the success of the projects. This accounts for the fact that while our troops were using faulty personal armor and driving vehicles that were easily destroyed, other projects were being funding that the GOP knew would never be used.

Let's admit it, we're all skeptical. What do we know about what's needed? We elected President Obama based on what he had to say during his campaign. We supported his based on his grasp of the situations and his analitical intelligence. Whether the economy come roaring back or not, i'm convinced we made the wise choice. We have a guy whose willing and alert enough to adjust his approach when we're not succeeding. the republicans would just watch the middleclass become the poor class while protecting the rich bastards that line their pockets.

The "growing" number of Americans skeptical with Obama's approach to the economy are the ones who didn't vote for him. Naggers.

If that growing skepticism has any base it is the saving of a banking system that has brought this country to its economic knees. And the sound of skepticism is getting louder all the time,

Obama has other than that, now achieved a long list of campaign promises kept.
But the economy is the one issue that affects all America and is of primary concern.
So far the effort has been to save a system that is responsible for the crisis, and that is not change we can believe in.

When Lehman Bros failed it was, and still is hardly noticed by Main Street. Had the entire banking system gone into bankruptcy it still would have little if any effect on Main Street, in fact it could have been the best thing to happen, placing the same criteria on the banking system that is being placed on the auto industry to retool or retreat.

Banks that once were dependant on depositors are now dependant on the debt of America as receivables and will keep Main street hostage as an end result of debt .
But even they know America is tapped out. Yet the focus of Geithner and Summers still is to encourage the banks to lend more; increasing that debt even more; further enabling a predatory banking system.
The economy was the number one issue in the elections and to save the system that brought the crisis to main street is not going to save main street it is only saving the status quo.

Banks now throw numbers in the trillions around while main street still thinks millions is a great deal of money, in short the banks and the people of America now exist in two different centuries financially speaking

The effort to force wages down and the standard of living with it has been going on for most of the last 40 years. The very concept of Globalization that is a premise of saving the banks still requires American workers to become equal with Chinese workers and they get closer to that goal every day.
Perhaps it all has a happy ending and people all over the world will have the same standard of living and the world is just one big happy productive Democracy in about another 100 years.
But the more likely end result, is a world that looks more like Zimbabwe because the motive of the banks and globalization is greed, not some utopian vision.

Notsoquietmajority-Can we have time out please? We have both resorted to childish comments back and forth and it really is time to stop this. I don't think we should take up anymore space here with this because it is not fair to others. I have read a few of your comments to me which are very funny and I want you to know that you have me laughing now and that's a good thing.

You and I don't agree more often than not but that doesn't mean I hate you. I bid you Peace.

I just read some of these blogs. Just when I was begining to think we had gone past some of this rhetoric, I realize some of you people have too much time on your hands, and the others are just idiots.Write something worthwhile.

let the president do his job.. stop this criticism, instead make your own difference in your own way.. give him chance to lead.. he knows better than you do thats why he's there and youre still at where you are now..

If that growing skepticism has any base it is the saving of a banking system that has brought this country to its economic knees.
Obama has other than that, now achieved a long list of campaign promises kept.
But the economy is the one issue that affects all America and is of primary concern to them.
So far the effort has been to save a system that is responsible for the crisis, and that is not change we can believe in.
When Lehman Bros failed it was, and still is hardly noticed by Main Street. Had the entire banking system gone into bankruptcy it still would have little if any effect on Main Street, in fact it could have been the best thing to happen, placing the same criteria on the banking system that is being placed on the auto industry to retool or retreat.
Banks that once were dependant on depositors are now dependant on the debt of America as receivables. But even they know America is tapped out. Yet the focus of Geithner and Summers is to encourage the banks to lend more increasing the debt and further enabling a predatory banking system.
The economy was the number one issue in the elections and to save the system that brought the crisis to main street is not going to save main street; it is only saving the status quo IE; more of the same.

Banks now throw numbers in the trillions around while main street still thinks millions is a great deal of money, in short the banks and the people of America now exist in two different centuries.

The effort to force wages down and the standard of living with it has been going on for most of the last 40 years. The very concept of Globalization used as the premise for saving the banks still requires American workers to become equal with Chinese workers and they get closer every day.
Perhaps it all has a happy ending and people all over the world will have the same standard of living and the world is just one big happy productive Democracy in about another 100 years.
But the more likely end result, is a world that looks more like Zimbabwe because the motive of globalization is greed not some utopian vision, and the banks are leading the way