Barack Obama, our next President

"The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep," Obama cautioned. Young and charismatic but with little experience on the national level, Obama smashed through racial barriers and easily defeated ... Full Story
TSM

El Paso, TX

#812222 Nov 27, 2012
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, TSM, the perpetual moron, thinks the Republicans should continue to vote NOT to help us recover.
The stimulus bill took Bush's 700,000 a month job losses to job gains.
I have news, if the Republicans try that crap again, they will be blamed & then lose even more seats in 2014.
RealDave I thought your arguments has been that Republicans didn’t care about America!! My solution or suggestion was that Republicans should do the Right thing and just get out of the Way let the Liberal agenda move forth…do you not agree?
TSM

El Paso, TX

#812223 Nov 27, 2012
Homer wrote:
<quoted text>Wrong as usual -
Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Collins (R-ME), Yea
Specter (R-PA), Yea
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_ca...
I should have been more specific!! There was no house member that voted for the stimulus you’re correct on the senate side three rhino republicans voted with Democrats!!
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#812224 Nov 27, 2012
At least a few conservatives now recognize that Republicans suffer for epistemic closure. They were genuinely shocked at Romney’s loss because they ignored every poll not produced by a right-wing pollster such as Rasmussen or approved by right-wing pundits such as the perpetually wrong Dick Morris. Living in the Fox News cocoon, most Republicans had no clue that they were losing or that their ideas were both stupid and politically unpopular.

I am disinclined to think that Republicans are yet ready for a serious questioning of their philosophy or strategy. They comfort themselves with the fact that they held the House (due to gerrymandering) and think that just improving their get-out-the-vote system and throwing a few bones to the Latino community will fix their problem. There appears to be no recognition that their defects are far, far deeper and will require serious introspection and rethinking of how Republicans can win going forward. The alternative is permanent loss of the White House and probably the Senate as well, which means they can only temporarily block Democratic initiatives and never advance their own.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articl...
Mike R

New York, NY

#812225 Nov 27, 2012
sonicfilter wrote:
<quoted text>
I was actually thinking of giving joke gifts.
The Real Romney
http://www.walmart.com/ip/The-Real-Romney/171...
Since President Obama's re-election, attitudes and antics like yours prove the truth of the old aphorism that there's no one angrier than a liberal who loses -- except one who wins.

Aside from the profoundly unfortunate fact that the election means another four years of Obama-style decline for the United States, perhaps the worst result of their 2012 victory is the reinforcement it has provided for the low and ugly kind of politics that secured Barack Obama's reelection against the odds.

Certainly, the tone has been set at the top; can anyone recall any other president winning re-election and then taking a gratuitous shot at his defeated opponent weeks later? Maybe Michael Dukakis was on to something when he stated that a fish rots from the head down.

The race card first played by Senator Obama during the 2008 campaign seems now to have become a permanent feature of American life -- at least when it can be used to paint Republicans as racists (apparently, even the vilest attacks on conservatives like Clarence Thomas, Condoleezza Rice and Allen West are A-OK). EVEN THE PRESS HAS GOTTEN IN ON THE ACTION, no surprise there.

Appeals to principle will not change the behavior of the Democrats, it seems. But perhaps an appeal to self-interest will.

Has it occurred to anyone there -- trying so hard to divide Americans among race, gender and class lines -- that the party most reliant on identity politics stands to lose a lot if the other side decides to exploit the natural divisions that will exist among any interest groups?

What if someday -- sick of being perpetually victimized by the left's selective use of identity politics -- someone started systematically to discuss UNION'S HISTORY OF INSTITUTIONAL RACISM?

Or noted that allowing an uninterrupted flow of UNEDUCATED ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS (essentially a "RESERVE ARMY OF THE UNEMPLOYED") might serve the Democrat Party's political needs and Big Business's cheap labor needs, but hurts black and Latino efforts to reach middle-class status by keeping wages artificially low? What if someone pointed out to Asian Americans that they're the ones paying the price for liberals' embrace of affirmative action for other minority groups?

I am not advocating that the GOP follow in the Democrats' divisive footsteps. I believe in Dr. Martin Luther King's vision of an America where people are evaluated based -- not on the color of their skin (or gender or any other immutable characteristic)-- but on the content of their character, and where politics are conducted in accordance with that principle.

My only point is that the more Democrats legitimize the promiscuous exploitation of group identity for political gain, the more likely it is that the technique will boomerang on them at some point.
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#812226 Nov 27, 2012
Tax Cuts for Whom? Heterogeneous Effects of Income Tax Changes on Growth & Employment

The empirical relationship between tax cuts for the top 10% percent and job creation is negligible in magnitude, statistically insignificant, and much weaker than that of equivalently sized tax cuts for the bottom 90%.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm...
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#812227 Nov 27, 2012
Republicans Censor What They Can’t Refute

The appropriate response for Republicans critical of the Congressional Research Service report’s findings would have been to convene a conference, at which I am sure the author would have gladly participated, or to get the House Ways and Means Committee, which is under Republican control, to call a hearing.

Getting the report withdrawn smacks of censorship. Andrew Rosenthal, editor of The New York Times’s editorial page, commented,“Congressional Republicans seem to think that the C.R.S. should function like Pravda.” Pravda was, of course, the official organ of the Soviet Communist Party.

The irony is that the Republican effort to quash the report has led to it getting vastly more attention than if they had simply ignored it. Censorship has a funny way of doing that.

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/06/...

“fairtax.org”

Since: Dec 08

gauley bridge wv

#812229 Nov 27, 2012
Mike R wrote:
<quoted text>Those employers will have to shift to the one size fits all expensive government plan.
If you are uninsured because you can’t afford it, help may be on the way. But if you are one of the 250 million Americans with coverage, there are big problems ahead.
If you get your health insurance through a job, you might lose it as of Jan. 1, 2014. That’s when the new “employer mandate” kicks in, requiring employers with 50 or more full-time workers to provide the government-designed health plan or pay a fine. The government plan is so expensive, it adds $1.79 per hour to the cost of a full-time employee. That’s incidental if you're hiring neurosurgeons but a hefty increase for hiring busboys and sales clerks.
Currently, employers in retail and fast-food industries pay less than half that to cover their workers.To avoid thecostly mandate,some employers will push workers into part-time status. Other employers will opt for the fine. Either way, workers lose their on-the-job coverage.
Worse, they risk losing their jobs. Even the fine adds 98 cents an hour to the cost of labor, enough to make some employers cut back on their workforce.
As many as a third of employers are considering canceling coverage, according to McKinsey & Co. management consultants. But that doesn’t mean you’ll be uninsured; you won’t have that choice.
When you file your taxes, you will have to show proof that you are enrolled in the one-size-fits-all plan approved by the federal government. It’s mandatory, starting Jan. 1, 2014, or the IRS will withhold your refund. If you’ve been going without insurance, or your employer drops coverage, your options will be enrolling in Medicaid (if you’re eligible) or buying a government-approved health plan on your state health exchange.
What’s an insurance exchange? It’s like a supermarket that only sells cereal. The exchange will sell only the government-designed plan. In most states, exchanges will be an 800 number, a Web site and a government office, like the DMV. People with household incomes up to $92,200 will be eligible for a subsidy.
Don't confuse them with facts. They don't care about unintended consequences. That just like that feel good glow and be damn who they hurt to get it.
TheIndependentMa jority

East Bernstadt, KY

#812230 Nov 27, 2012
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
In other words, they did not vote Republican.
That's not what the sign said duhmmy. Can't you lemming herd pack bootalicking types read anything with out getting all twisted and distorted?

Dis iz coal country duhmmy, if that gives you a better clue.
carol

Orlando, FL

#812231 Nov 27, 2012
Dane Thorsen wrote:
<quoted text>
Yesterday the demonic Harry Reid says NO CUTS to the massive extention grade Entitlements so dear to the hard left. Game Over. Obama takes us another step closer to assuring a complete fiscal collapse and all out civil war.
What an exciting time for the Orwellian Left in their march to decimate our children's future hopes and dreams!!
Obama's plan to avoid the fiscal cliff:

Let the Bush tax cuts that apply to income over $200,000 expire. The top two tax rates - currently 33% and 35%- would increase next year to 36% and 39.6%.

Investment tax rates on the rich would increase to 20% for capital gains and to one's top income tax rate for dividends. Both are currently taxed at 15%.

This would amount to $1 trillion over a decade...(government spending amounts to that much in a year.)

Limiting the value of deductions and exclusions that high-income households enjoy...(proposed by Republicans and makes the most sense).

Calling for taxing carried interest as ordinary income. Managers of private equity, venture capital and hedge funds those managers would pay more than double the rate they currently pay.

Impose millionaire minimum tax: "Buffett Rule". Those making more than $1 million pay at least 30% of their income in taxes...
(Buffett has done an about face recently - wants only "minimal" tax increases on the wealthy)...A bill from Senate Democrats modeled on the Buffett Rule was estimated to raise $47 billion over 10 years...(government spends $47 billion in two days).

Enact business tax proposals: A host of smaller tax changes.

...So where are the spending cuts? Increasing taxes across the board seems to be the only Obama plan.

“The Intrepid”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#812232 Nov 27, 2012
THE DEBIL wrote:
<quoted text>
NO, HONEY, WE DON'T. SWEDEN DOES, BUT WE DON'T. AS WE SIT HERE TYPIN' THERE ARE AT LEAST 54,000 VETERANS OUT IN THE STREETS SLEEPIN' IN GUTTERS AN' EATIN' OUT OF DUMPSTERS. THERE ARE A MILLION OR MORE HISPANICS SLEEPING IN GUTTERS AND EATING OUT OF DUMPSTERS. THAT'S WHAT "WE" DO. THAT'S WHO "WE" ARE. ARGUE WITH ME, G'HEAD... SEE WHAT HAPPENS...
Yer awfully clueless for claiming to be the Prince of Darkness, Prince of the Power of the air/wind and all in it, Lucifer the beauteous....blah, blah, blah.

I thought you were the one who knows all the dirty secrets in D.C?

You, and your cronies, should know by now that no Mexican goes hungry in America.

Judged:

11

11

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: May 11

Loysville, PA

#812234 Nov 27, 2012
Mike R wrote:
<quoted text>Since President Obama's re-election, attitudes and antics like yours prove the truth of the old aphorism that there's no one angrier than a liberal who loses -- except one who wins.
Aside from the profoundly unfortunate fact that the election means another four years of Obama-style decline for the United States, perhaps the worst result of their 2012 victory is the reinforcement it has provided for the low and ugly kind of politics that secured Barack Obama's reelection against the odds.
Certainly, the tone has been set at the top; can anyone recall any other president winning re-election and then taking a gratuitous shot at his defeated opponent weeks later? Maybe Michael Dukakis was on to something when he stated that a fish rots from the head down.
The race card first played by Senator Obama during the 2008 campaign seems now to have become a permanent feature of American life -- at least when it can be used to paint Republicans as racists (apparently, even the vilest attacks on conservatives like Clarence Thomas, Condoleezza Rice and Allen West are A-OK). EVEN THE PRESS HAS GOTTEN IN ON THE ACTION, no surprise there.
Appeals to principle will not change the behavior of the Democrats, it seems. But perhaps an appeal to self-interest will.
Has it occurred to anyone there -- trying so hard to divide Americans among race, gender and class lines -- that the party most reliant on identity politics stands to lose a lot if the other side decides to exploit the natural divisions that will exist among any interest groups?
What if someday -- sick of being perpetually victimized by the left's selective use of identity politics -- someone started systematically to discuss UNION'S HISTORY OF INSTITUTIONAL RACISM?
Or noted that allowing an uninterrupted flow of UNEDUCATED ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS (essentially a "RESERVE ARMY OF THE UNEMPLOYED") might serve the Democrat Party's political needs and Big Business's cheap labor needs, but hurts black and Latino efforts to reach middle-class status by keeping wages artificially low? What if someone pointed out to Asian Americans that they're the ones paying the price for liberals' embrace of affirmative action for other minority groups?
I am not advocating that the GOP follow in the Democrats' divisive footsteps. I believe in Dr. Martin Luther King's vision of an America where people are evaluated based -- not on the color of their skin (or gender or any other immutable characteristic)-- but on the content of their character, and where politics are conducted in accordance with that principle.
My only point is that the more Democrats legitimize the promiscuous exploitation of group identity for political gain, the more likely it is that the technique will boomerang on them at some point.
My God, you have to steal the words of others.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/carolplattliebau...

Yet another right whiner you regurgitates the garbage written by other right whiners.

What's next Limbaugh? Beck?

Judged:

11

11

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
TheIndependentMa jority

East Bernstadt, KY

#812235 Nov 27, 2012
Homer wrote:
<quoted text>Yep, fck em, they can get a second, 3rd job, he doesn't care if they never see their kids, they never should have had them in the first place. Doesn't matter if their job was shipped overseas they should have anticipated that.
"....are there no prisons, are there no workhouses? Let them die and decrease the surplus population..."
well since you're going all dark age and commieticish Homer-yew forgot the debtors prisons!

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
TheIndependentMa jority

East Bernstadt, KY

#812236 Nov 27, 2012
carol wrote:
<quoted text>
Obama's plan to avoid the fiscal cliff:
Let the Bush tax cuts that apply to income over $200,000 expire. The top two tax rates - currently 33% and 35%- would increase next year to 36% and 39.6%.
Investment tax rates on the rich would increase to 20% for capital gains and to one's top income tax rate for dividends. Both are currently taxed at 15%.
This would amount to $1 trillion over a decade...(government spending amounts to that much in a year.)
Limiting the value of deductions and exclusions that high-income households enjoy...(proposed by Republicans and makes the most sense).
Calling for taxing carried interest as ordinary income. Managers of private equity, venture capital and hedge funds those managers would pay more than double the rate they currently pay.
Impose millionaire minimum tax: "Buffett Rule". Those making more than $1 million pay at least 30% of their income in taxes...
(Buffett has done an about face recently - wants only "minimal" tax increases on the wealthy)...A bill from Senate Democrats modeled on the Buffett Rule was estimated to raise $47 billion over 10 years...(government spends $47 billion in two days).
Enact business tax proposals: A host of smaller tax changes.
...So where are the spending cuts? Increasing taxes across the board seems to be the only Obama plan.
Hey Carol-

Let's drive the liberal illiterate lunaTics really insane today with some figurative literal "biblical" type links lol....

http://photoblog.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11/27...

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
carol

Orlando, FL

#812238 Nov 27, 2012
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
So, the evil Democrats say no to cutting help for those in need while the Republicans say no to increases taxes on the wealthy.
Now that suns it up.
Republicans would trample the needy to give money to rich people.
Democrats say the wealthy an afford it & don't take it out on poor people.
The welfare system and the entitlement programs are broken.

There is more waste and duplication that we can even imagine.

There is more manipulation of the system than liberals want to accept.

Maintaining the status quo while strangling small businesses from hiring at the same time is not the answer.

Reform is an absolute must. Democrats worry more about votes than having the courage to do what they know has to be done.

Judged:

11

11

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#812239 Nov 27, 2012
Mike R wrote:
<quoted text>Since President Obama's re-election, attitudes and antics like yours prove the truth of the old aphorism that there's no one angrier than a liberal who loses -- except one who wins.
Aside from the profoundly unfortunate fact that the election means another four years of Obama-style decline for the United States, perhaps the worst result of their 2012 victory is the reinforcement it has provided for the low and ugly kind of politics that secured Barack Obama's reelection against the odds.
Certainly, the tone has been set at the top; can anyone recall any other president winning re-election and then taking a gratuitous shot at his defeated opponent weeks later? Maybe Michael Dukakis was on to something when he stated that a fish rots from the head down.
The race card first played by Senator Obama during the 2008 campaign seems now to have become a permanent feature of American life -- at least when it can be used to paint Republicans as racists (apparently, even the vilest attacks on conservatives like Clarence Thomas, Condoleezza Rice and Allen West are A-OK). EVEN THE PRESS HAS GOTTEN IN ON THE ACTION, no surprise there.
Appeals to principle will not change the behavior of the Democrats, it seems. But perhaps an appeal to self-interest will.
Has it occurred to anyone there -- trying so hard to divide Americans among race, gender and class lines -- that the party most reliant on identity politics stands to lose a lot if the other side decides to exploit the natural divisions that will exist among any interest groups?
What if someday -- sick of being perpetually victimized by the left's selective use of identity politics -- someone started systematically to discuss UNION'S HISTORY OF INSTITUTIONAL RACISM?
Or noted that allowing an uninterrupted flow of UNEDUCATED ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS (essentially a "RESERVE ARMY OF THE UNEMPLOYED") might serve the Democrat Party's political needs and Big Business's cheap labor needs, but hurts black and Latino efforts to reach middle-class status by keeping wages artificially low? What if someone pointed out to Asian Americans that they're the ones paying the price for liberals' embrace of affirmative action for other minority groups?
I am not advocating that the GOP follow in the Democrats' divisive footsteps. I believe in Dr. Martin Luther King's vision of an America where people are evaluated based -- not on the color of their skin (or gender or any other immutable characteristic)-- but on the content of their character, and where politics are conducted in accordance with that principle.
My only point is that the more Democrats legitimize the promiscuous exploitation of group identity for political gain, the more likely it is that the technique will boomerang on them at some point.
Pretty full of ourselves aren't we?

I could find that same screed on any far right wing loony site in a heartbeat. Nothing new in it in any way, shape, or form. It's also extremely easy to refute most of it. I should know.

And BTW....any idea when Mitt will quit taking shots at the folks who didn't vote for him? IOKIYAR? Or just a sore loser?

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: May 11

Loysville, PA

#812240 Nov 27, 2012
TSM wrote:
<quoted text>
RealDave I thought your arguments has been that Republicans didn’t care about America!! My solution or suggestion was that Republicans should do the Right thing and just get out of the Way let the Liberal agenda move forth…do you not agree?
They should act to help us recover through honest negotiation with the best interest of our country in mind.

If they are unable (like the past 4 years) then yes, they should just let Democrats do it.

Judged:

11

11

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
carol

Orlando, FL

#812241 Nov 27, 2012
Homer wrote:
Walmart is the second worst thing to happen to America with Bush being first.
Homer only going back 10 years, don't even get me started on Reagan.
So, Wal-Mart hires 2.1 million employees. All these people would find other employment...where?

Judged:

12

11

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: May 11

Loysville, PA

#812242 Nov 27, 2012
Mike R wrote:
<quoted text>Those employers will have to shift to the one size fits all expensive government plan.
If you are uninsured because you can’t afford it, help may be on the way. But if you are one of the 250 million Americans with coverage, there are big problems ahead.
If you get your health insurance through a job, you might lose it as of Jan. 1, 2014. That’s when the new “employer mandate” kicks in, requiring employers with 50 or more full-time workers to provide the government-designed health plan or pay a fine. The government plan is so expensive, it adds $1.79 per hour to the cost of a full-time employee. That’s incidental if you're hiring neurosurgeons but a hefty increase for hiring busboys and sales clerks.
Currently, employers in retail and fast-food industries pay less than half that to cover their workers.To avoid thecostly mandate,some employers will push workers into part-time status. Other employers will opt for the fine. Either way, workers lose their on-the-job coverage.
Worse, they risk losing their jobs. Even the fine adds 98 cents an hour to the cost of labor, enough to make some employers cut back on their workforce.
As many as a third of employers are considering canceling coverage, according to McKinsey & Co. management consultants. But that doesn’t mean you’ll be uninsured; you won’t have that choice.
When you file your taxes, you will have to show proof that you are enrolled in the one-size-fits-all plan approved by the federal government. It’s mandatory, starting Jan. 1, 2014, or the IRS will withhold your refund. If you’ve been going without insurance, or your employer drops coverage, your options will be enrolling in Medicaid (if you’re eligible) or buying a government-approved health plan on your state health exchange.
What’s an insurance exchange? It’s like a supermarket that only sells cereal. The exchange will sell only the government-designed plan. In most states, exchanges will be an 800 number, a Web site and a government office, like the DMV. People with household incomes up to $92,200 will be eligible for a subsidy.
The NY Post opinion piece is your source?

Sealing other's words yet again.

This is really pathetic.

Judged:

11

11

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#812243 Nov 27, 2012
Alloramadai wrote:
<quoted text>
OMG. That sickens me. Hard to remain objective, wondering what was/is going on in her world/head.
You looked?

;)

Judged:

11

11

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“My Life Is A Shell Game”

Since: May 07

Lapeer, MI

#812244 Nov 27, 2012
Obama 2016 wrote:
<quoted text>True for the most part, but I still find "Married With Children" pretty inspirational.
That's like saying Jerry Springer was your life's mentor.

Judged:

11

11

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 18 min B as in B S as in S 49,202
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 29 min Rogue Scholar 05 181,829
New Beach Boys song. 2 hr The Beach Boys 1
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 2 hr Frijoles 71,015
Music Artists A to Z (Feb '14) 2 hr _Zoey_ 363
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 2 hr _Zoey_ 4,918
sex 4 hr rahul 1
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 6 hr Ralph 98,853
Chicago Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Chicago News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Chicago

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 11:39 am PST

Bleacher Report11:39AM
Complete Week 16 Preview for Indianapolis
NBC Sports12:33 PM
1 thing even Rahm can't fix: Da Bears - NBC Sports
NBC Sports 1:01 PM
Cowboys' Murray listed as questionable for Colts - NBC Sports
NBC Sports 8:26 AM
Report: Executives suggest Bears could have to attach a draft pick to move Cutler
Bleacher Report11:56 AM
Eagles vs. Redskins: Live Score and Analysis for Philadelphia