Personally, I never felt Marx had a lot to say that was relevant to the United States.
I have no objection to raising the effective tax rate on the rich until it matches my own.
Yes, WAS. That 14+ trillion dollars WAS spent. (I don’t normally use all caps but I’m trying to communicate here.)
And who’s proposing a new “stmulus”?
No, I’m older and wiser. And it’s not like we need you to keep us updated on the latest talking points. We have radios and FOX too.
Were you better under Clinton? Of course the whole country was. You were probably in kindergarten. We were good til, Bush gave all our money away.
The bankers were bilking their customers, lying to them and considering their own interests at the expense of the clients. So right wing of them.
First of all, I am a Democrat and a liberal. This type of thinking actually annoys me more than the far right Tea Party thinking. It’s true Obama is not perfect. But we did get some things we would never have gotten under a real 3rd Bush term. We now have Justices Sotomayor and Kagan instead of two more Alito or Roberts clones. DADT has been repealed. And we got (an admittedly flawed) health care reform bill passed.
I actually think that the thinking that their is no difference between any of them is what led to the sweeping Republican and Tea Party victory in 2010. The Tea Partiers have always voted Republican. The only reason the Tea Party had big victories in 2010 was because a lot of Democrats stayed home.
From Mars, all politicians look like Earthlings.
IOW, FlikTheBlue, our friend Der Trihs isn’t looking at Obama from a perspective anywhere near the center of any political map. So while you and I see the obvious real world problems with that kind of false equivalence, from Der’s starting point, it’s fairly apt (even if not particularly useful to us Earthlings).
The net result of the whole dog and pony show was indeed a sugar-coated shit sandwich.
However, I believe that it has really opened the eyes of the general public to the destructive spending policies of the libs. They are absolutely addicted to big government spending. With any luck whatsoever, we will see another sweep in Congress like we did in 2010, plus putting a fiscal conservative in the White House, and we can get the government back on track.
But it’s gonna take more than rhetoric. It’s gonna take massive hacking and slashing, including closing several government departments. The Departments of Energy and Education would be primo places to start.
The dems are the party that attempt to balance the budgets. The repubs are the cut taxes and spend like crazy party. You figure out who causes the deficits.
Was Clinton too far back for you to remember? How about Bush?
Been reading the Democrat playbook, haventcha?
I think you do not understand me. Most of what you say is spot on. The only exception that I see is the statement about corporation tax rate. The last I heard only Japan has a higher one. They may have dropped theirs by now.
We SHOULD stop the gaming of the system, whether corporations or personal, but that is not the same as higher taxes. Call it closing loopholes, if you like that term.
In additioin to our uncontrolled spending we have the issue of jobs. Liberals like to point out the surplus when Clinton was president. You have to understand that during that time jobs were leaving the country at an alarming rate. That had to come back to bite us. They left because of tax structure and regulations, both of which choke business.
Regulations on industry have to be reduced back to those absolutelly essential. Example; EPA wants to issue regulations to further clean up emissions from power plants. Is that good? The US already has the cleanest air in the industrialized world. Air moves, and China is the biggest polluter. To further cripple us will not help the planet when other nations will not help, and it only gives them an economic adavntage for us to do so.
Right now, we are facing the possibility of rolling black outs due to the fact that government has hindered the construction of new generation plants. That is sheer stupidity, as we have seen this coming for years or decades. So now, we don’t have the jobs this new construction would give and we don’t have the electricity either. Brilliant!
I just love the way you guys tell me I am copying Rush or Fox news, then post a link to Huffington Post! Funneeeee!
Kindergarten? I voted for Nixon, the first time.
So you admit that Reagan did a good job?
Yes, I agree that the bankers should not have gotten a dollar of any stimulus.
Feel better now?
I also think that Obama was way out of line dictating to GM on who would run it.
So you admit increasing the national debt by nearly two trillion dollars is a good job?
It was a snowball rolling down a Bush built ramp. Obama stopped the shedding of jobs which Bush left us with. If we kept the Bush policies in place, we would have been much worse off.
There were 170,000 jobs created last month thanks to Obama. Unemployment dropped to 9.1.
No, I’m Canadian, so American politics are a mere spectator sport for me, and though colossal stupidity and ignorance afflicts Americans of all types (to be fair, Canadians, too), the recent tea party upswing (and the religious politics that have been in play since 1980 or so) is particularly malodorous.
If you want to pay lower taxes, fine. At least demonstrate some basic knowledge of arithmetic and recognize the massive entitlement and defense cuts that would require, with the corresponding effect on millions of Americans.
Lucky you. 
Blaming Reagan’s deficit spending on Bush… That’s a new one. For clarity, do you mean George W., George H. W., or Preston?
I would feel better if you were able to recognize that Bush lost over 880,000 jobs in a single month. Obama has now had positive job growth for 17 straight months. Can you understand which is better?
Did they mention that on Rush today?
Here is a simple graph showing the difference. It will not be shown on Fox.
Let’s see, Reagan increased the national debt by nearly 2 trillion dollars. That was in 8 years, wasn’t it?
How much has Obama increased it in less than 4 years?
You just made one of my points. Obama is spending the republic into oblivion.
Dropped to 9.1 % unemployment? I wouldn’t quote that too loudly in the coming months if you want Obama to be re-elected.
So increasing the debt is good. Therefore, if Obama increases the debt faster than Reagan, he is doing a better job. That is the only conclusion I can draw from your screwball logic.