First they the Republicans through legislations and practices that broke the banks(SSI, taxbreaks, healthcare, not paying for WARS TO NOWHERE, and negligent regulation. Now, they want to get tough on us as if we made their decisions.
I propose this in opposition. Let everyone withdraw from the Federal Reserves coffers all of the money that they have invested into the unemployemnt fund. Every single penny of it, whereby it can be guaranteed to be evenly dispensed to the right person without prejudice or utilized in currying political advantage.
Wow! Imagine... What a jumpstart to this "freak show" of an economy that would be. Many of us would have the money to start new businesses, buy houses or invest with them in the newer bait switching ponzi-scheme derivative coming across the next horizon.

First they the Republicans through legislations and practices that broke the banks(SSI, taxbreaks, healthcare, not paying for WARS TO NOWHERE, and negligent regulation. Now, they want to get tough on us as if we made their decisions.
I propose this in opposition to both partys manipulative collusions. The Dems being no better with their "jobless recovery" bullcrap that mandates this extraordinary extended benefit situation. Let everyone withdraw from the Federal Reserves coffers all of the money that they have invested into the unemployemnt fund. Every single penny of it, whereby it can be guaranteed to be evenly dispensed to the right person without prejudice or utilized in currying political advantage.
Wow! Imagine... What a jumpstart to this "freak show" of an economy that would be.
Many of us would have the money to start new businesses, buy houses or invest with them in the newer bait-and-switch ponzi-scheme derivative coming across the next horizon.

Obama will not like that the Republicans are blocking unepmloyment money to the 57 states.

When will this stop? I understand how the political system works but This is absurd. The parties are always more interested in undercutting each other and making money rather than helping us.

The bi-party system is broken. Time for a radical change.

Proof the two party system does not work

Come on, they call it a jobs bill but is it really? Isn't it just more government spending and increasing of the deficit?

Okay, if I am out of work and struggling, I welcome some aid, some temporary help to get me back on my feet. There is nothing wrong with unemployment insurance or a certain degree of government assistance, that is welcome in a civil society.

The question is what are they doing to address the jobs issue? This is not a JOBS BILL, it does not permanently create private jobs. All it is doing is providing some temporary aid. The government is not willing or does not know how to create real jobs. Yet they seem to know how or are willing to allow our jobs to move out of this country.

Government should be providing incentive to keep jobs and manufacturing in THIS country. Instead they allow the bleeding to continue. All they are doing is re-bandaging the wound, costing everybody in the long run.

This indicates the republicans do not care for the unemployed.All of a sudden they are worried about the debt but when they were in power they passed a millionaires tax break and part d medicare without any means to pay it. If this was to reduce the corporate income tax or provide another tax break the republicans would be all for it. In most states unemployment is paid by the employer and extended benefits are shared by state and federal taxes. For both parties their objective should be to get the unemployed back to work and not play partisan politics

The Republicans just do not have the votes to stop anything the Democrats do. The Democrats have controlled Congress two years before Obama. It's just proof the Democratic leadership does not work.

Mike G, Caspian, Mike Q & Caspian: Left some new stuff on the june 11th board to look over that may be the only way for "we the people" united as "one" to obtain the focus of these knuckleheads from both parties- as well as their masters.
By the way, where are "their self imposed cutbacks" in salary and vacation time that is all on the publics side of the losses ledger?

Whatcha all doing this weekend?

G20 protesters vow to erect tent city near summit security zone ...Jun 25, 2010 ... TORONTO - Hundreds of G20 protesters vowing to set up a tent city near the summit security zone are on the move through city streets. ...
www.canadianbusiness.com/markets/.../article.jsp?content...

This is a troubling issue once more RNN's question aims to fix blame, not the problem. This vote is not partisan; it represents a real dilemma and an honest difference of opinion.

First, the jobs that the bill wants to protect are the responsibility of the states, not the Federal government. Many states spend as profligately as the Congress, committing to spend every last penny of revenue as though revenues can never turn down. It is called "living pay-check to pay-check" with no savings.

Well revenues have turned down, for the Federal government, the states, and many families. To the extent that we have no savings, we must borrow.

Provided that we have not reached the proverbial tipping point, growth will return and revenues will increase; we will be able to re-pay the debt.

One side is willing to risk the tipping point in the name of buying off the voters. They argue that many of the states cannot legally borrow or have reached their own local limits of credit. They argue further that local government layoffs will slow the economy even more. They argue that states will cut education disproportionately, even if only temporarily.

The other side argues that the first side is pushing over the tipping point, that government borrowing is crowding out the very private sector investment that we need to provide growth and that without growth interest on the debt, never mind payments on principal, will cripple us.

Whichever side one takes, one should be very cautious.

John, I saw your posts on "The Lost at Sea" board and commented. You keep saying I am pro-taxes, you stumped me on that one.

You want to meet in Toronto? Sorry, I have to update my passport first. I probably could get out but even though I am a lifelong citizen, I might have trouble getting back in. Ironic isn't it?

William, truly both sides are playing politics and NEITHER side REALLY have the best interest of the people in mind.

The unemployment extension wasn't paid for! It's 35 billion dollars that we just slap right onto the 13 trillion dollar debt. What don't you understand? The money simply isnt there. Blame whoever you want for that, it doesn't change the fact that it is NOT there to spend. When will you get it?

I think it's a shame for them to do that! I have been out of work almost a year and my unemployment was stopped 2 weeks ago. It's bad enough that I am getting half of what I was making, then turn off my benefits? I know people that have been out of work for 2 years and they are still collecting! Since I have been laid off, I have had to cut out a lot of things and I am robbing Peter to pay Paul just to keep a roof over my head. Now that my benefits or not coming, I am in the process of having my lights shut off and maybe homeless if this keeps up. I have been looking for work every day and I really think this is a total slap in the face.

Jeanne Hanlon
351 Richard Avenue
Hicksville, NY 11801
516 931 0685

June 25,2010

Dear Richard French,

I just tuned into your UNEMPLOYMENT DILEMMA. IT IS A SLAP IN EVERYBODY FACE.
I feel this unemployment cut is a slap in the face. I did not receive any notification my unemployment benefits were terminated. I learned today I no longer receive unemployment benefits. I HAVE BEEN GAINFULLY EMPLOYED SINCE I WAS 11 YEARS OLD.
I have a moving carton full of applications for jobs I applied for SINCE 2007. Most Jobs want 2 and 4 year degrees and will not consider a person for EMPLOYMENT for a lesser position. I am asked why if you are a Licensed Practical Nurse do you want to work as a secretary or a nurses aid when you are a trained Nurse??? I think everybody wants more employees for less money and that in particular is why I was Fired
Sincerely,
Jeanne Hanlon

Jeanne, obviously from the candid information you supplied, you are someone that is really looking. I wish you the best of luck, you might find something in New Jersey, if you are willing to travel, Hackensack or Ridgewood Hospitals seem like they often need help. I thought licensed nurses were in demand?

The mother of all lies seems to be, when this administration tells us the economy is getting better. Where? Not for the working class, that's for sure.

Most firms pay no income taxes - Congress
Study finds that the majority of domestic and foreign corporations in the United States avoid paying federal income taxes.
August 12, 2008 / http://tinyurl.com/6kyog3
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Nearly two-thirds of U.S. companies and 68% of foreign corporations do not pay federal income taxes, according to a congressional report released Tuesday.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) examined samples of corporate tax returns filed between 1998 and 2005. In that time period, an annual average of 1.3 million U.S. companies and 39,000 foreign companies doing business in the United States paid no income taxes - despite having a combined $2.5 trillion in revenue.
The study showed that 28% of foreign companies and 25% of U.S. corporations with more than $250 million in assets or $50 million in sales paid no federal income taxes in 2005. Those companies totaled a combined $372 billion in sales for the largest foreign companies and $1.1 trillion in revenue for the biggest U.S. companies
http://money.cnn.com/2008/08/12/news/economy/corporate_taxes/

Federal Reserve It is not federal, and it does not have any reserves.
http://tinyurl.com/ydzjhcx
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/reserve2.htm

Obama Needs to Find His Inner W.:

Now that Obama has picked Bush’s general, he should replicate Bush’s stalwart style.

June 25, 2010 12:00 A.M.



To succeed in Afghanistan, we’ll need the support of the likes of Abdul Sattar Abu Risha. He was the daring tribal sheik in Anbar province whose pivot against al-Qaeda in the summer of 2006 began to turn the Iraq War.

He marshaled other tribal leaders in what grew into a nationwide anti-al-Qaeda movement. Sattar acted knowing that the Americans had his back. “Instead of telling [the Iraqis] that we would leave soon and they must assume responsibility for their own security,” Col. Sean MacFarland, who worked with Sattar, has explained, “we told them that we would stay as long as necessary to defeat the terrorists.”

Sattar trusted Pres. George W. Bush and admired him “for sticking to his principles despite public opinion.” All of this is recounted in the new book on the Anbar revolt, A Chance in Hell, by Jim Michaels. As Mark Moyar writes in a review in the Wall Street Journal, it was only by winning the confidence of elites like Sattar — who was killed in September 2007 — that we had a chance to win over the Iraqi population.

What would Sattar have made of Pres. Barack Obama, who has set a deadline of July 2011 for the beginning of the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, and of Vice President Joe Biden, who guaranteed in a Newsweek interview — “Bet. On. It.” — that there will be large numbers of troops leaving by then? We know what Afghan president Hamid Karzai thinks — that he’d better explore an accommodation with his enemies well before any helicopters leave the U.S. embassy rooftop.

Obama implicitly promised a departure from the bumptious ways of George W. Bush as commander-in-chief. Where Bush was stubborn, he’d be flexible; where Bush was unconditional, he’d be nuanced; where Bush went all in, he’d avoid overcommitting. But ambivalence doesn’t play well in a war zone, especially in a war of insurgency that’s partly a contest over staying power.

If Obama’s July 2011 deadline showcased his deliberative care as the honorary faculty chairman of national-security meetings, it played disastrously in Afghanistan. In sacking Rolling Stone subject Gen. Stanley McChrystal and replacing him with Gen. David Petraeus, Obama has a chance to hit “reset.” But only if he finds his inner cowboy.

There’s no way the Afghan equivalent of Sattar sitting somewhere on the outskirts of Kandahar can know Obama’s intentions when members of Obama’s council of war don’t know them. Biden says July 2011 marks the start of major withdrawals; secretary of defense Robert Gates disagrees. Who’s to say?

To put the severity of a hard July 2011 deadline in perspective, the last unit of the surge Obama ordered last December won’t arrive in Afghanistan until toward the end of the year. The deadline gives the fully surged forces all of six months to operate, in an environment Petraeus says is more difficult than Iraq.

Obama should redefine the deadline as the time frame for a review of the current strategy rather than its endpoint. If it’s not working, then he can reconsider. Until then, he should shut down the rancorous internal debate within his administration and maintain the same firm tone he struck in his excellent Rose Garden remarks upon McChrystal’s departure.

His left might not like it, but they won’t berate him as a “chicken hawk,” as they did with Bush, or flail his chosen commanding general as “General Betray Us,” as MoveOn.org did during the Iraq surge.

Besides, his base isn’t his target audience. As President Bush always said, there were four key audiences during the Iraq War — the American public, the troops, our Iraq allies, and the enemy. “The enemy thinks that we are weak,” he said in a candid White House interview during a low point of the surge. “They’re sophisticated people, and they listen to the debate.”

That’s just as true of the enemy in Afghanistan. Now that Obama has picked Bush’s general, he should replicate his stalwart style.

Bill F: You can buy Petreaus if you want to; but then again you don't know what defines success, let alone VICTORY.
--------------
Tell us here, once and for all, what is the objective of having a war, when you have a DOD and commander in the field openly supporting and supplying and endorsing the enemy that is killing the very troops you have committed them to fighting, in your name?

WHEN YOU MUST PAY YOUR ADVERSARY IN ORDER TO SHOW THE ILLUSION OF CONTROL- YOU ARE A LOSER.

WHEN YOU MUST PROP UP, AND BE CARETAKER FOR A FIGURE WHO IS LEVERAGING HIS OWN POSITION BY HIS COMMISERATING WITH YOUR ADVERSARIES(the taliban, Iran,) at the expense of the peace and security within your own society because you can no longer afford to pay the price of running your own country let alone prop up this pipe dreaming lunacy - YOU ARE A LOSER!

HOW CAN IT BE WAR? If you can't persue the enemy?

WHEN YOU ARE SITTING IDLE WHILE YOUR ENEMIES DRIFT AROUND FROM PLACE TO PLACE WITH YOUR OWN GOVERNMENT IN COMPLIANCE-

THEN YOU AIN'T FIGHTING A WAR, YOU'VE BECOME... THE PATSIE with an addiction. And a trillion dollar per year habit.

"Tell us here, once and for all, what is the objective of having a war, when you have a DOD and commander..........."



Yea!,Yea!,Yea! Blah!,Blah, Blah!
What do you care?
Committed pacifists and lifelong draft dodgers can convince themselves every time that there is never a right war regardless of the urgency, and what really is at stake never meaning a hill of beans to their blind cookie cutter perspective of conflict. After nine years of hearing your excuses I can't think of a better classic example of this concept.

Into Battle Once More:

The president turns to a military leader whose winning strategy in Iraq he dismissed out of hand....

June 24 2010

In the long and proud history of the United States military, talented, dedicated commanders have led their troops to the sounds of the guns time and again to defend those who could not defend themselves. General David Petreaus proved his mettle in Iraq by devising and implanting a strategy that provided security for innocent Iraqis under attack by Islamic fanatics. Now he’s being asked to march into battle once more, but this time the guns are sounding on two different fronts: in Afghanistan where a resurgent, increasingly confident Taliban makes headway in the war that our president has said we have to win; and in Washington, where the conflict is of the political variety in the wake of General McChrystal’s dismissal [1] after that highly decorated soldier expressed his frustration with an administration that seems to specialize in vacillation.

With no relief in sight for the economy, no end in sight for the disaster in the gulf and an ever-increasing number of voters starting to realize that this administration is woefully unprepared, intellectually overmatched and ideologically handicapped when it comes to dealing with the great issues of the day, Obama desperately needs a victory somewhere, somehow. Failing in Afghanistan, especially in the wake McChrystal’s damning criticism, would practically guarantee that a Republican tsunami would sweep scores of Democrats out of office in November. And so the president has turned to the nation’s most accomplished, most respected military leader, a man whose strategy in Iraq he dismissed out of hand and whom, when this dedicated patriot was the subject of shameless slurs by his leftist allies, Obama could not be bothered to defend. Professional that he is, Petreaus will continue to forget the criticisms, slights and slurs and do what American military leaders have always done: follow the orders of the commander in chief, no matter how incompetent and hypocritical that commander may be.

A certain United States senator representing the state of Illinois didn’t seem quite so enamored of General David Petreaus three and a half short years ago. That’s when Petreaus took command in Iraq, replacing General George Casey (the Army’s current chief of staff, and the man who believes that the most tragic aspect of the Fort Hood shootings is the possible loss of “diversity” in the armed forces). Petreaus asked for more troops and proposed changes in strategy. Democrats from Harry Reid through John Muthra criticized the general’s proposals, having decided that the war in Iraq was lost. Then senator Barack Obama assured America that “the surge” could not possibly work [2], saying:

“We can send 15,000 more troops, 20,000 more troops, 30,000 more troops – I don’t know any expert on the region or any military officer that I’ve spoken to privately that believes that is going to make a substantial difference on the situation on the ground.”

Apparently neither Obama nor his vice president [3] talked to the right “experts on the region” or to any military officers who understood how to conduct counter-insurgency operations. Petreaus was vindicated in short order as the situation in Iraq turned around after the surge. Not surprisingly, the Obama administration employed selective memory earlier this year, apparently forgetting any criticism of Petreaus’ strategic vision, as vice president Joe Biden rushed to cling to the general’s coat tails [4]. “I am very optimistic about Iraq. I mean, this could be one of the great achievements of this administration,” Biden declared in a moment that redefined hypocrisy.

A few months after Petreaus assumed command, the ultra-leftist, Obama-loving organization MoveOn.org attacked the general, slurring him as “General Betray Us [5]” in an ad they placed in the New York Times in September 2007. Among other slanders, MoveOn accused Petreaus of “cooking the books” in order to make the Bush White House look good. Then-senator Hillary Clinton jumped on the bandwagon during congressional hearings, badgering the general in confrontations [6] that left her looking like a partisan hack.

Three and a half years after Petreaus first started pulling George W. Bush’s chestnuts out of the fire in Iraq, Barack Obama hopes that the general can work the same magic again for him in Afghanistan. But there’s a difference. When General Casey was replaced in January 2007, he was critical of the administration’s new strategy [7], saying:

“The longer we in the U.S. forces continue to bear the main burden of Iraq’s security, it lengthens the time that the government of Iraq has to take the hard decisions about reconciliation and dealing with the militias. And the other thing is that they can continue to blame us for all of Iraq’s problems, which are at base their problems. It’s always been my view that a heavy and sustained American military presence was not going to solve the problems in Iraq over the long term.”

George W. Bush, who always had a fierce loyalty and admiration towards anyone serving our nation in uniform, didn’t chastise Casey or attempt to derail his career because of those remarks. Casey’s current assignment is a testament to that fact. On the other hand, Barack Obama may be the most thin-skinned president in the history of the Republic. He didn’t hesitate to leave his hand-picked commander, General McChrystal, swinging in the breeze when the going got tough. If General David Petreaus can’t figure out a way to solve the multi-faceted enigma that is Afghanistan, there can be little doubt that he will suffer the same fate.

"Senate Republicans defeated the Democrats' jobs bill????"

Hey RNN: What fucking planet do you people live on??

The deciding votes to defeat the bill were cast by senate democrats.

Broccoli, cauliflower and other cruciferous vegetables are good sources of B vitamins. Fitness center employees who feel respected are far likelier to work hard and treat customers well

There's a wealth of information here. Thanks! I’ll be back for more.

This is a really good read for me, Must admit that you are one of the best bloggers I ever saw.Thanks for posting this informative article People take more pictures on their mobile phones than on cameras - perhaps for the simple reason that they have their mobile phones with them far more often than they have digital cameras with them.

Thank you for your help!Thank you and My best regards! Thank you and Sorry for so many questions but i really need your help.

Nice Article

There are certainly a lot of details like that to take into consideration. That is a great point to bring up. I offer the thoughts above as general inspiration but clearly there are questions like the one you bring up where the most important thing will be working in honest good faith. I don?t know if best practices have emerged around things like that, but I am sure that your job is clearly identified as a fair game. Each guest should be assigned a time of the day.

You had solid ideas there. I made a search on the issue and found most peoples will agree with your blog. I do know, however, that when it comes time for the basketball NCAA tournament, televisions at my friends and family member's houses will be on virtually non-stop, and mine might come on every once in a while, too.

I liked it. So much useful material. I read with great interest. These include Los Angeles, San Diego, and San francisco in California, as well as Seattle up in Washington State.

So begin by having a nutritious breakfast. This results in less marbling and healthier meat.

Use the energy to achieve goals you've been putting off. Overeating is also fine as long as you eat the right food choice.

I admire the valuable information you offer in your articles. I will bookmark your blog and have my children check up here often. I am quite sure they will learn lots of new stuff here than anybody else!

Do you have a spam problem on this blog; I also use Blog Engine, and I was wondering about your situation; we have developed some excellent practices and we would like to exchange thoughts with others, please Email me if interested. Double and triple check to make sure.

This article gives the light in which we can observe the reality. this is very nice one and gives indepth information. thanks for this nice article Luckily, anxiety attacks don’t hit me too often.

Wonderful illustrated information. I thank you about that. No doubt it will be very useful for my future projects. Would like to see some other posts on the same subject! Be careful though because they will ask for your credit card and could start debiting for automatic monthly payments after the trial period.

Hi there, I found your blog on Google while seeking for first aid for a heart attack and your post looks very interesting for me. While this item did cost a bit more than I usually like to spend, I still managed to score a deep discount on it, so I'm happy.

That is some inspirational stuff. Never knew that opinions could be this varied. Thanks for all the enthusiasm to offer such helpful information here.

This post was very well written, and it also contains a lot of useful facts. I appreciated your distinguished manner of writing this post. Thanks, you have made it easy for me to understand. It's rarely the best idea to jump into a new project - even one as fun and potentially rewarding as pursuing an online arts degree - with both feet before testing the waters.

You made tremendous great ideas here. I done a research on the subject and learnt most peoples will agree with your blog. This new practice is certainly going to hit them hard when it comes into effect on July 1.

We need men who can dream of things that never were. Their gift should be catered to that time of the day.