Can The US Survive Another Porkulous Plan?

Well, I listened to one magnificent piece of heart tugging, Teleprompter-aided oratory tonight. It was to introduce the American Jobs Act, which would more properly be called the Obama Save My Job Circus Act.

Something tugged at my mind while I was listening to it. And then I got it... it sounded almost exactly like what he said while going after his first $800 billion porkulous plan. This one is different - it will only cost us $450 billion this time. But, the same assurances and claims can be found in both. In fact, if you want to see how recycled the platitudes, emotional pleadings, and promises are, merely compare the American Jobs Act speech with the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act speech. It's like his speechwriter ran out of ideas and so plagarized the earlier speech. What the hell - worked once, why not again!

He urged "Pass this bill!" something like 16 times.

He promises this will be used to fix our infrastructure - the fixes that he said would be done with the earlier $800 billion porkulus just two years ago.

He promises more jobs for construction workers, more jobs for teachers, and more jobs for the long-term unemployed - the fixes that he said would be done with the earlier $800 billion porkulous just two years ago. You know... those jobs that he promised would cap unemployment at under 8%. And get those "shovel ready jobs" going... that we later found didn't exist.

He promises modernization and rebuilding of thousands of schools - the fixes that he said would be done with the earlier $800 billion porkulus just two years ago.

Kind of like paying a guy to fix your roof, and he comes back a bit later asking for more money to make the fixes you paid him to do a couple of years before.

He promises "no more boondoggles" - the promise he made with the earlier $800 billion porkulous just two years ago, where he promised that Sheriff Joe Biden would ensure not one dime of the $800 billion would be wasted.

There were of course the usual appeals to class warfare, the wealthy, evil oil companies, etc - just like he used with the earlier $800 billion porkulous package. The usual chatter about "millionaires and billionaires" (although their numbers are rapidly decreasing in his presidency). The usual calls for the wealthy and corporations to "pay their fair share" - although they already pay the vast majority of the taxes collected, and the bottom 47% of Americans pay no share at all.

And then there were the parts that were just plain confusing. After complaining about corporations not paying their fair share, getting unfair tax loopholes and benefits, he followed that by saying: "By eliminating pages of loopholes and deductions, we can lower one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world." No explanation about how corporations aren't paying their fair share, and getting unfair tax breaks - and yet still be paying one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. Which one is it? That's the language of somebody trying to suck up to business after sneaking up behind them and kicking them in the ass.

Anyways, for those dazzled by The Anointed One's inventory, here's the link to the whole thing:
http://www.npr.org/2011/09/08/140320022/transcript-of-president-obamas-jobs-speech

But in the end, here's the question:

Can the US survive another porkulous package? Or will this be the final straw for the US economy? When do we finally agree that porkulous after porkulous is just money pissed away? It's not like there's a shortage of Republican RINOs who will happily tax and spend like a bunch of drunken tax and spend Democrats. as well

Trying to spend your way out of debt is like trying to screw your way out of pregnancy.

Considering the U.S. is one of the richest nations on the globe. It could probably afford the 1/2 trillion dollar bubble bath suggested, better than Georges multi trillion dollar escapade...for example. The U.S. is more capable than, just about anyone. Even in tough times.
The U.S. is very resilient, Though they are re-organizing now.
The whole world is waitng to see how they apply their effort.

mucker wrote:

Considering the U.S. is one of the richest nations on the globe. It could probably afford the 1/2 trillion dollar bubble bath suggested, better than Georges multi trillion dollar escapade...for example. The U.S. is more capable than, just about anyone. Even in tough times.
The U.S. is very resilient, Though they are re-organizing now.
The whole world is waitng to see how they apply their effort.

Relatively speaking, the us is one of the richest countries on earth.. but if we keep spending money we don't have, on wasteful, corrupt programs, & if we keep losing our GDP to welfare & high end govt jobs that don't produce anything, we will resemble ancient Rome more than modern usa.

We used to have about 7-8 out of 10 taxpayers who produced something.. manufacturing, construction, technology, etc. There were 2-3 people that worked for the govt, or were too old or sick to contribute. The 7-8 supported the 2-3. Now we are down to 5 of 10 who produce, & it is actually less than that, because govt workers are included in the figure. And govt jobs are not a GDP producer. Govt jobs are an expense.. a burden on the rest of the taxpayers. Firemen, police, & even the military are a luxury for a productive society who can afford them. If we spend ourselves into financial collapse.. which is what the left seems to want.. the real tax base will not be able to afford to support those who do not produce, & there will be no money to borrow to artificially fund the support of the other 5 of 10 citizens. We are only doing it now because we have this tremendous credit line.

Half of Obama's 'job package' is just money 'given' to some people. Unemployment benefits are extended to 99 weeks. 99 weeks? 2 years some people get to collect money for not working? How is this a 'job producer'? This is just tossing some money to the unions for their support. There are a lot more contractors, self employed, & construction workers who do not qualify for unemployment, & they have to scramble to make enough money to survive, & they have. They've lost houses, sold their truck, tools, & household goods, but they are taking care of themselves the best they can, while a lot of union members collect 80% of their wages or so on unemployment, with no motivation to look for any work, much less something that pays a lot less.

We may be able to survive Obama, but he's made it very tough on future generations. To be fair, it was not just Obama, but he epitomizes 'big govt spending' so very well. I am hopeful that more pissed of tea party types can get elected & stop the madness. But it will be very hard, & the economy will suffer more before it gets better. But if we get more of Obama type, big govt spending, i think we will see a financial collapse. There are too many people who are happy to let the rest of the citizens support them, & there is too much corruption for the nation to continue in the current course.

This is just Stimulus Package 2.0. ..trimmed down a bit to try to placate the republican congress. But it didn't work last time, & it won't work now. Obama is not a financial manager. His economic policies worked great in the Harvard faculty lounge, but they don't in the real world. He thinks too highly of big brother type govt, but it has never been a source of economic prosperity.

It all goes with the strucure of the economy we have. If people don't have money, they don't spend. If they don't dpend there is no job creation.

The problem is with all the wealth that is not created but transfered from one to another. while it is true that there are less millionaires. The one that are, own more wealth than before. That's because a lot of mony gets transfered from some to the others without any added value. Put that with the cost of living being higher and higher and most of the working people don't even have available income to do more than the basic living. As long as money was closely tied with goods the system was balanced. Now there is more money than goods and this money isn't real it exist only in accountant's books.

The US like all the world's countries can't make it's own economic politics anymore without considering the world balance. The local markets are not enough to support continuous growth and the actual ressources are getting scarce. The earth is not an infinite thing and we must realize it as soon as possible. There are more and more people and they all have needs. One country cam't keep on living like if there was nobody else.

Dancamp wrote:

It all goes with the strucure of the economy we have. If people don't have money, they don't spend. If they don't dpend there is no job creation.

The problem is with all the wealth that is not created but transfered from one to another. while it is true that there are less millionaires. The one that are, own more wealth than before. That's because a lot of mony gets transfered from some to the others without any added value. Put that with the cost of living being higher and higher and most of the working people don't even have available income to do more than the basic living. As long as money was closely tied with goods the system was balanced. Now there is more money than goods and this money isn't real it exist only in accountant's books.

The US like all the world's countries can't make it's own economic politics anymore without considering the world balance. The local markets are not enough to support continuous growth and the actual ressources are getting scarce. The earth is not an infinite thing and we must realize it as soon as possible. There are more and more people and they all have needs. One country cam't keep on living like if there was nobody else.

I do agree that much of what is called 'wealth' is an illusion. It is just pieces of paper with dead leaders' pictures on them. If we believe in the issuing country, we attribute value to those pieces of paper, & will exchange them for goods or services. But if the issuing country has problems, the value of their currency decreases, & inflation results. Simplistic, there are of course many other factors that enter in.

I also agree that there are fewer people prospering financially.. economic times, govt regulations, corruption & mismanagement all contribute to that. Many of the uber rich restructure their investments.. they have the resources & advisers to help them hang on to their wealth. I'm sure many of them lost money in the current economic crunch.. especially those whose investments were linked to real estate. But what made the current crash so devastating was its effect on such a large portion of the investor/spenders. Lots of people with a few hundred thousand in equity lost all of it. Trillions of dollars of equity was wiped out. The losers, who are legion, have little or nothing to spend or invest in other ventures. The uber rich lost, too, but they generally have better diversification. Most average people have their life's savings in their homes. Oh, they have an ira or other retirement plan, but that if for future retirement, not current spending & investing. I think that instant loss of net worth for so many people is the main reason for the current economic malaise. When stocks crash, it affects the economy, but the stock market recovers just as quickly, & investors are back to lighting their cigars with $100 bills. But housing is very slow to recover, & even when & if it does, the majority of the losers in the crash won't have any share in the recovery. Their credit is gone, & they are renting somewhere. Or for many others, when & if housing recovers, it just means the house is worth what they owe, instead of being upside down in their mortgage.

I don't think a country's economic policy should be tied to what other countries want. It is a competitive world, & nations are in competition with each other economically, as well as militarily. Protectionism isn't bad, if your country is the one benefiting from it, & other countries have open markets. China artificially devalues their currency so their goods are cheaper. Fair & enforceable economic treaties are the only way to keep the world economy fair & balanced. If a country is industrious, manages their money & builds wealth for its citizens, more power to them. They've worked for it & deserve to enjoy the fruits of their labors. Why should they be penalized or required to give their hard earned resources to another country who is perhaps less industrious, or more corrupt?

Why not follow one of the liberal left's main tenets of faith? Survival of the fittest. If a nation or group of people cannot survive in the world's climate, they need to change or evolve. Mandating that the stronger, more successful groups support the failures only weakens us as a species. Let the political & economic systems that cannot sustain themselves fail. Let the successful ones prosper & grow.

So how does Obama's plan fit into this? It is more of the same. It is a propping up of failure, rather than letting it evolve. Let motivated, hard working people succeed & prosper. Those who want to 'help the poor' can do so. But why should they force their religion on everyone else by making them 'help the poor?' And that is what we have now, with the liberal left forcing their religious values on the rest of the citizenry.

rydnseek wrote:

So how does Obama's plan fit into this? It is more of the same. It is a propping up of failure, rather than letting it evolve. Let motivated, hard working people succeed & prosper. Those who want to 'help the poor' can do so. But why should they force their religion on everyone else by making them 'help the poor?' And that is what we have now, with the liberal left forcing their religious values on the rest of the citizenry.

I think there is a balance to be done between supporting those who don't have the opportunities and giving more air to those who work. If it was the hard working people that were the more rewarded from their work ,there would be less unworking people since it would be a great motivation, Whether O Bama can do it or not is another matter. It's certainly not giving more to those that have a lot of available income that will solve any problem. Many of those and particularly large corporations have a tendency to promote concentration of income and wealth in few hands. Letting small and medium businesses breathe is more efficient from my point of view.

As for the other countries I didn't suggest to make common policies with them but to take more into account that they won't let their ressources go as easily as they did before. The competition is growing and the ressources aren't. I don't know when the limits will be met but it sure will. Not being part of the problems doesn't mean not to be part of the solutions.

Dancamp wrote:

If it was the hard working people that were the more rewarded from their work ,there would be less unworking people since it would be a great motivation,

The hard working are the more rewarded from their work.

We call them "business owners". We reward their hard work and motivation by taxing them more, the more successful they are.

People who worked and put in the time to finish university degrees. We call them "doctors", "lawyers", "architects", "engineers". We tax them more to, while asking why the rich don't pay their fair share.

People who went were the work was instead of sitting around playing B-ball in the hood while collecting welfare. We call them "soldiers", "roughnecks", "pit crew", etc., and we call them "millionaires and billionaires" if their gross family income goes over $250,000.

There is a fair amount of confusion that the top 25% of taxpayers - families and businesses with a threshold gross income of $67,280, who pay 86.34% of all the income tax collected - somehow or other didn't work hard to make that money,, or are somehow or other undeserving. They are more rewarded than they deserve, apparently. Other buzzwords for them, such as that used by the President, is that top 25% is "the more fortunate". Apparently, they got where they are simply because fortune smiled on them - the idea that hard work and industry, not luck, got them there is apparently a foreign concept.

Good point on the motivation, however. Where is the motivation to go back to school, or improve yourself, or work your ass off to make something of yourself when the government will float you through life on a system of welfare, entitlements, and assorted other government programs and handouts? Where is the motivation to work and not worry about the implications of government spending when Income Tax Day is somebody else's problem and you're just a beneficiary?

Not having the assurance of "well, at least it's enough to get by on", might turn out to be a great motivator as well...
At Emirates, four cabin-crew job fairs the airline held in Miami, Houston, San Francisco and Seattle attracted an average of about 50 people each, compared to a global average of about 150 and as many as 1,000 at some events in Europe and Asia. "I would have liked to have seen more and would have expected to see more," says Rick Helliwell, vice president of recruitment.

The jobs require little more than a high-school diploma and fluency in English. They include free accommodation and medical care, and starting pay of about $30,000 a year. Mr. Helliwell speculates that Americans might be hesitant to move to Dubai, where the jobs are based. "Maybe they have less of an adventurous spirit" given the uncertainties they face at home, he said.

This is just one example, but people in other parts of the world would riot for a chance at an opportunity like that. You go through the grind for a few years, with one of the most respected airlines, then find something with a domestic carrier that better fits your other life needs if you so choose once you have some experience. It can lead to decent opportunities and global experience, especially for someone with only a high school diploma.

And again... when did the military ever stop hiring? Ignoring the technical trades to choose from and ask for before signing up, there's the GI Bill that will pay for a pretty decent education as a current or former US servicemember.

So let's see... choices, choices: b-ball/welfare or cabin crew... hanging in the hood/unemployment or the military?

What to do... what to do?

What would a hard working MOTIVATED person do, who really - honestly - wanted to work but apparently couldn't find anything else. Sign up? Or hang in the hood? (or ski bum for those in more northerly climes)?

The CBO crunched the numbers on Obama's original porkulus package. It turns out Obama and the Democrats (i.e. "taxpayers") spent $228,055 for every job that was saved or created by that program. And many of those jobs were of short duration, temporary jobs, to gain access to a share of the pork. When the pork ended, so did the job. With Obama going on about how Porkulus v 3.0 will create thousands of new construction jobs, consider this: Los Angeles spent the $594 million in stimulus funds it received on projects that created or saved just a handful of jobs. Audits, in particular, assessed the $111 million used by the city’s Director of Public Works and Department of Transportation, calculating that the construction projects hatched a total of 54 jobs—about $2 million per job.

So how, exactly, is this a successful economic strategy? How much of that money did nothing other than evaporate in the government inefficiency and overhead of creating a job? Supposing we were stupid enough to do this again... Would we have been better off to instead spend the money through a dividing the porkulus up among the unemployed? Send each of them a cheque for $25,000, and tell them they could spend it on any goods or education, but the money had to be spent or committed by the end of the year? Could it have done any worse?

At least we'd have eliminated the excuse of "couldn't afford to finish high school/get an education".

You can no more spend your way out of debt by taxing and spending more than you can screw yourself back to virginity. The unending class warfare of "hate the rich", "tax the rich", etc wouldn't work, even if Obama were given largess to expropriate every dime owned by the Forbes 400, as Michael Moore suggests. Take every penny they have, and you could run the US government for 280 days only - and you'd still have the original debt.

Of course, despite chanting "pass this bill now" about 18 times, he has not yet to produce the bill so it can actually be read.

Interesting that not one of the candidates in the debate last night supported the new spending/jobs/stimulus plan. In spite of all the build up, hype, suspense, & announcement of a 'secret' proposal that will ignite the american economy, no one is buying it. All of the repub candidates are trumpeting shrinking govt, & fewer regulations & taxes, so businesses can grow. None of them seem to think the govt. can 'make' jobs, like Obama does.

Less spending, less tax money, less govt interference, more freedom. I think this is a plan that deserves consideration. The massive govt spending just lines the pockets of Obama' cronies, then they declare bankruptcy to hide from it. Or it is blown by states like Ca. that squander it on ridiculous job programs that ending up costing ~ $2 million each. Then when the govt money ends, so does the job, so it is not a long term solution, anyway. Better for people to find their own jobs & make it on their own.

My God, reading this blog makes me fearful for the future of this country! So many opinions, and so much lack of knowledge. So much lecturing about how hard certain people work for their money and how other people who do not work as hard (or so they are accused) just want to spend it with out any regard for the well being of the nation. If only it were that simple. Actually, it is that simple if you live in a world where the only information, or misinformation you receive each day comes from Fox television, and Fox television alone. I have always been conservative, but the direction that the republican party has taken in the last decade or so is just crazy. How can I continue to support a party that continues to put forth candidates like Sarah Palin ( a nice women I'm sure, but not ready for prime time), and the bunch that are running this year---oh my God! It is like watching a bad movie! And enough already with the idea that the republicans have been the fiscally responsible party. We haven't deserved that title for 35 years. Facts are stubborn things. Stop demonizing the other side and start cleaning our own house.

jesuschrysler wrote:

My God, reading this blog makes me fearful for the future of this country! So many opinions, and so much lack of knowledge. So much lecturing about how hard certain people work for their money and how other people who do not work as hard (or so they are accused) just want to spend it with out any regard for the well being of the nation. If only it were that simple. Actually, it is that simple if you live in a world where the only information, or misinformation you receive each day comes from Fox television, and Fox television alone.

What makes me fearful for the future of the country is those who cannot post without, somewhere in their post, blathering "Fox television, Fox television... Polly want a cracker, Polly want a cracker". And of course, inescapably linked with a comment or two about Sarah Palin. Often followed by claims that "I am a conservative" (right, sure you are) - and of course, decrying the lack of knowledge of "those people".

Now Fox television isn't perfect - although these people would reject Fox even when they announced Barack Obama won the last presidential election, under the assumption Fox can't get anything right. And Sarah Palin isn't exactly the perfect candidate either. But tellingly, that's the entire extent of their world view on politics, a world provided without context as regards what the other side has to offer - even as they tell the rest of us it isn't that simple.

What marks these people as babbling useful idiots, who are anything but conservatives, is the fact that while they can endlessly find time to criticize Fox, they never have a word of comment to offer about much of the garbage spewed by other media outlets. Not a word when a "journalist" says he feels a "thrill run down my leg" whenever Barack Obama speaks. Not a word about media outlets who won't subject Democrats to the same scrutiny and standards that Republicans are subjected to. Not a word of criticism when Democrats and left wing mainstream media accuse Palin and the Tea Party movement of being responsible for inspiring Jared Loughner for the Tucson mass murder - and then couldn't even find the ink to apologize once it was discovered he was apolitical, and if anything identified more with left wing/socialist ideology. No, these wise men don't have a problem with that - but if FOX ever got the news that wrong, they'd scream about FOX "misinformation" in every website they could post in.

They're babbling fools because they will criticize a party that will put forth a Sarah Palin, but not a word about a party that will put forth a candidate who got his political start with the help - and friendship - of an unrepentant, convicted, domestic terrorist responsible for bombing the Pentagon. Not a word of criticism about a party that embraced Kluxer Senator Robert Byrd for decades, nor a president who sat and listened to racist, anti-Semitic speeches from Reverand Jeremiah Wright for decades without saying anything in protest. Sarah Palin is a joke to them - but a President who talks about having visited 57 states, with a few left to go, and who can't even remember how old his children are is the smartest guy in the room.

Do the Republicans need to clean house? Oh yes, particularly of the RINOs who are nothing but Democrats with a poor paint job. They need to in particular cleanse themselves of the apologists who go around attacking conservatives, with not a word of criticism for the socialists/statists who are infinitely worse. RINOs are not a path for Republicans - Democrats are already on that particular road.

The context is that Republicans, and FOX, are nowhere near perfect. But they look pretty damned good when you compare them to the train wreck the statists and the leftists on the other side offer up as alternatives.

Jäger wrote:

jesuschrysler wrote:

My God, reading this blog makes me fearful for the future of this country! So many opinions, and so much lack of knowledge. So much lecturing about how hard certain people work for their money and how other people who do not work as hard (or so they are accused) just want to spend it with out any regard for the well being of the nation. If only it were that simple. Actually, it is that simple if you live in a world where the only information, or misinformation you receive each day comes from Fox television, and Fox television alone.

What makes me fearful for the future of the country is those who cannot post without, somewhere in their post, blathering "Fox television, Fox television... Polly want a cracker, Polly want a cracker". And of course, inescapably linked with a comment or two about Sarah Palin. Often followed by claims that "I am a conservative" (right, sure you are) - and of course, decrying the lack of knowledge of "those people".

Now Fox television isn't perfect - although these people would reject Fox even when they announced Barack Obama won the last presidential election, under the assumption Fox can't get anything right. And Sarah Palin isn't exactly the perfect candidate either. But tellingly, that's the entire extent of their world view on politics, a world provided without context as regards what the other side has to offer - even as they tell the rest of us it isn't that simple.

What marks these people as babbling useful idiots, who are anything but conservatives, is the fact that while they can endlessly find time to criticize Fox, they never have a word of comment to offer about much of the garbage spewed by other media outlets. Not a word when a "journalist" says he feels a "thrill run down my leg" whenever Barack Obama speaks. Not a word about media outlets who won't subject Democrats to the same scrutiny and standards that Republicans are subjected to. Not a word of criticism when Democrats and left wing mainstream media accuse Palin and the Tea Party movement of being responsible for inspiring Jared Loughner for the Tucson mass murder - and then couldn't even find the ink to apologize once it was discovered he was apolitical, and if anything identified more with left wing/socialist ideology. No, these wise men don't have a problem with that - but if FOX ever got the news that wrong, they'd scream about FOX "misinformation" in every website they could post in.

They're babbling fools because they will criticize a party that will put forth a Sarah Palin, but not a word about a party that will put forth a candidate who got his political start with the help - and friendship - of an unrepentant, convicted, domestic terrorist responsible for bombing the Pentagon. Not a word of criticism about a party that embraced Kluxer Senator Robert Byrd for decades, nor a president who sat and listened to racist, anti-Semitic speeches from Reverand Jeremiah Wright for decades without saying anything in protest. Sarah Palin is a joke to them - but a President who talks about having visited 57 states, with a few left to go, and who can't even remember how old his children are is the smartest guy in the room.

Do the Republicans need to clean house? Oh yes, particularly of the RINOs who are nothing but Democrats with a poor paint job. They need to in particular cleanse themselves of the apologists who go around attacking conservatives, with not a word of criticism for the socialists/statists who are infinitely worse. RINOs are not a path for Republicans - Democrats are already on that particular road.

The context is that Republicans, and FOX, are nowhere near perfect. But they look pretty damned good when you compare them to the train wreck the statists and the leftists on the other side offer up as alternatives.

A "babbling useful idiot"?
As a child, I often wondered how on Earth a man like Adolf Hilter could convince an entire nation of intelligent, industrious, hard working people to do the things that the Germans ended up doing. I soon learned that the socio-economics of the time along with a masterful genius for propaganda went a long way in facilitating his agenda. In your opinion I could never be a conservative because I dare question the blazenly obvious political bias of Fox television. I question their agenda, and so should you! This is not to say that I don't question the other networks, I question all misinformation whether it appears to benefit my own party or not. You ultra right wing radicals have high jacked the GOP, and are insisting that it is OK that we "dumb down" the party by being sympathetic to (and openly supportive of) the pathetic ones like Sarah Palin, Herman Cain, Rick Perry. Why is it that people from my party are the ones that openly and unapoligetically question science. They want to teach intelligent design as a science and they talk about the theory of evolution as if it were a hypothesis. It is embarrassing.
Yes, I do agree with some of the liberal thinking. Liberals like Eisenhower, Goldwater, Nixon and Reagan. That was back when it was alright and essential to compromise with the opposing party, because they understood that is how politics works and where the true strength of this country comes from. Your firebrand of conservatism is shameful and it is crippling my, yes my party, not to mention our country! Now I know how the Democrats felt when their party completely went off the rails back in the sixties. It is time to clean house of the militants who hate the other guy so much that they can't see what is right for the country.

jesuschrysler wrote:

As a child, I often wondered how on Earth a man like Adolf Hilter could convince an entire nation of intelligent, industrious, hard working people to do the things that the Germans ended up doing.

Ah yes... Godwin's Law is invoked. The enlightened ones who race to invoke Hitler in online discussions. Infantile, but predictable, according to Godwin's law.

It's a curious thing about the bug eyed ranters about FOX television.

First, they never provide specific examples of what they saw on FOX, they only offer pronouncements. It is difficult to believe that, with their contempt, they still bother to watch FOX instead of... oh... MSNBC. They hate it and despise it - and so they watch it.

Right.

Second, while they always have time to burble away about FOX, or a Herman Cain, or a Rick Perry... a diligent search will show that they are most glaringly obvious by their absence in critiquing the left wing media or a raving Marxist demagogue like Barack Obama.

If they handed out somewhat equal criticism, they might be believable. But instead, they're a one trick pony that can't do anything other than drop their guts about FOX and Republicans.

And of course, if you aren't a barking mad statist RINO like them, then you're an "ultra right wing radical". And while Sarah Palin is "pathetic" to these faux conservatives, a president who talks of visiting 57 states, who urges Hispanics to attack their enemies... well, that there is the smartest guy in the room.

These are the sad sacks who Reagan made speeches about while taking back the Republican Party. Like Obama, they often claim to be like Reagan, when of course nothing can be further from the truth. They talk about people "hating the other guy"... giving a pass to Obama telling one group of Americans to attack another as their enemies, giving a pass to a Joe Biden when he calls conservative Americans "terrorists". Because they believe it is quite possible to pick up a turd by the clean end, and because they have no principles themselves, they can't understand why real conservatives will not compromise with a man and party promising to fundamentally change America - without Constitutional amendments. That display of ethics, morality, and refusal to surrender the Constitution they lable as "hatred".

These are the same people standing around like a deer in the headlights after the last midterms, wondering what the hell happened. Just like their forefathers did after Reagan won the presidency.

They would be a lot more comfortable if they came out of the closet and came to terms with the fact that they may be Democrats, or perhaps even Marxists, they might even have a GOP membership - but they're definitely not conservatives.

I find it ironic that many leftists are not comfortable in their own skin. They are afraid of their own ideology, preferring to relabel it 'moderate' or 'centrist'. Either that or they are just promoting propaganda, knowing the general dislike of much of the american populace for 'leftist', 'socialist', and other such terms. ..doesn't matter to me. I don't care about labels, but what a person believes & promotes.

Why the obsession with fox news? Why can they not address issues, rather than attacking palin, bachman, or other people they perceive as 'leaders of the right'. It has been my observation that leftists, in general, have a messiah syndrome. They don't really like anyone, but when a leftist leader comes along, they must fall to his/her feet in abject worship & adoration. Usually they become disillusioned, as has happened with Obama, but that seems to be a pattern.

But i agree.. why no criticism of more blatantly biased reporting from other media sources? Why no denigration of Michael Moore, Pelosi, Reid, or Wasserman-Schultz? No, these 'centrists' always ridicule right wing spokespersons, like the only source of their information is the jon stewert show. Liberals like Goldwater & Reagan? Maybe some revisionist history as well?

The bottom line is no, the us cannot survive more deficit spending. Austerity is the only way to avoid financial collapse, & we need to get out of the euro envy mode we are in & return to constitutional us values. The left has pointed to europe for years, & now they don't point as broadly.. just sweden or scandanavia. Socialistic spending only leads to bankruptcy & oppressive debt. We have already done a disservice to the next generation, lets not make it any worse. I don't care which news channel you watch, what candidate you like, who you sleep with, or what you smoke in your own room. But we cannot continue down this path. Socialistic policies are ruining america. Jeffersonian democracy is a good system, & it has worked fairly well for us for ~200 yrs. We've gotten away from it, as we've been lulled by the socialists into thinking we can just print money & give it away! But spending, corruption & the socialist agenda have got to stop if we are to survive another generation.

rydnseek wrote:

It has been my observation that leftists, in general, have a messiah syndrome.

Indeed. They fawn at the feet of an Obama or some other God-like figure - which they can barely find a word to criticize. And yet, at the same time, they're usually ardent members of the Cult of Religious Hatred - not hate arising FROM religions, but hate directed TOWARDS religions and the religious. And so, these fawning statists/leftists give us stuff like this:

jesuschrysler wrote:

You ultra right wing radicals have high jacked the GOP, and are insisting that it is OK that we "dumb down" the party by being sympathetic to (and openly supportive of) the pathetic ones like Sarah Palin, Herman Cain, Rick Perry. Why is it that people from my party are the ones that openly and unapoligetically question science. They want to teach intelligent design as a science and they talk about the theory of evolution as if it were a hypothesis. It is embarrassing.

Shall we ignore for the moment the question of since when is a belief in being fiscally responsible, following the Constitution, and supporting free markets the definition of "ultra right wing"? Particularly when viewed from a conservative viewpoint - which the poster attempts to make us believe he is? (A conservative? As the saying goes, when you hear the sound of thundering hooves, you probably aren't listening to a herd of zebras). Is it embarrassing to claim to be conservative and yet call fiscal responsibility, a belief in small government, and government limited by and in compliance with the Constitution "ultra right wing"?

Shall we ignore for the moment the blatant lie being put forward by this poster that Palin, Cain, Perry or any other Republican candidate is advocating that government mandate that schools teach intelligent design as a science?

Let's deal just with the issue of how they and their fellow cultists in the Church of Hatred of All Things Religious trash conservatives who openly speak of their religious faith. Is it embarrassing to trash Republican candidates who have deep religious faith, when former Presidents like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, and John F Kennedy openly spoke of their religious faith and a belief in God and God's role in the governance of America. No sneers and smears for Washington, Lincoln, Kennedy, etc?

Really, who are the crackpots out there? Past presidents and Republican presidential candidates who openly acknowledge that they hold religious faith? Or the Cult of Religious Hatred wingnuts who won't contrast the policies and public record of a Herman Cain, Rick Perry, Sarah Palin - whoever - to the policies and public record of the person Republicans will be opposing in the next presidential election: Barack Obama. No, the wingnuts just focus in on dismissing conservatives because they openly hold religious faith - like Washington, Lincoln, etc did before them.

We are left with the question of whether they act in this manner simply because they truly are cultist crackpots who hate anyone who is religious (apparently giving Obama a pass because he went to church the first time last week since Easter - although the media just said it proves he too is a religious man)?

Or whether they fall back on criticizing them for being religious simply because Democrats and the leftist/statist/RINOs who abhor conservatism know Obama cannot run on his record and policies in his first term, so the focus in the next presidential election must be ANYTHING but Obama's record to date and his policies?