Neither!

Bernie Madoff is a saint compared to the government's social security PONZI SCHEME, OR

PAULSON AND Wall Street's banks.

Madoff is in jail, while Paulson and Wall Street banks are not.

NEITHER!

RE: August 2 budget deadline


Congress should take a significant CUT FOR A PART-TIME JOB, AS WELL AS ALL STATE, LOCAL AND COUNTY OFFICIALS!

PUBLIC SERVICE IS AN HONOR AND A PRIVILEGE. IF YOU WANT TO MAKE MONEY, STAY IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR.

If the federal government is broke, SELL OFF THE FEDERAL LANDS to AMERICAN CITIZENS, AND THE SAME FOR THE STATES, E.G., NEW YORK STATE IS HALF STATE PARKS LAND OF WHICH NEVER A HUMAN FOOT STEPS ON--LITERALLY THOUSANDS OF ACRES--THE ANIMALS LIVE BETTER THAN THE PEOPLE!

and, HUNTING AND FISHING ARE ILLEGAL OR PRICED OUT OF SIGHT FOR A LICENSE.


If an American citizen is broke, you have to sell off your land.

"SELL OFF THE FEDERAL LANDS to AMERICAN CITIZENS, AND THE SAME FOR THE STATES, STATE LAND," SELL TO LONG-STANDING, RELATIVELY POOOR, AMERICAN CITIZENS--NOT ILLEGALS, FOREIGNERS, NOR CORPORATIONS, NONE OF THIS NOT FOR PROFIT CRAP--THIS IS FOR CRAP, SO EXPECT TO PAY TAXES--AND NO STAR PROGRAM, WHATEVER!

AND CUT THE PRESIDENT'S SALARY AT LEAST IN HALF AS IT WAS BEFORE GEORGE W. BUSH, JR. WHEN HE WAS THE FIRST PRESIDENT TO HAVE HIS SALARY DOUBLED.WHAT DOES THE PRESIDENT NEED A SALARY FOR ANYWAY? EVERYTHING IS PAID FOR BY THE PEOPLE.

AND, CUT THE LIFE SECRET SERVICE PROTECTION FOR HE PRESIDENT AND FAMILY, ET AL. WHEN THE PRESIDENT LEAVES OFFICE, HE IS A CITIZEN--NOT THE PRESIDENT. IF A PRESIDENT RETURNING TO CIVILIAN LIFE NEEDS PROTECTION, CALL THE LOCAL POLICE--JUST LIKE THE REST OF US. IF NECESSARY, THE SWAT TEAM WILL BE HAPPY TO ASSIST.

AND, ONE OF THE JOBS OF THE SECRET SERVICE IS TO PROTECT THE CURRENCY. IT IS NOT THE JOB OF CASHIER CLERKS TO MARK EVERY BILL WITH A HIGHLIGHT MARKER TO DETECT CUNTERFEIT MONEY--IT IS THE SECRET SERVICE'S JOB TO FIND COUNTERFEITERS.

AND IT IS THE JOB OF THE POLICE TO FIND CREDIT CARD FRAUD--IT IS A SMALL COTTAGE INDUSTRY THAT HAS SPRUNG UP TO "PROTECT" CREDIT CARD HOLDERS--A SCAM!

THE PUBLIC IS PAYING THE POLICE FOR THIS SERVICE ALREADY!

Eliminate Medicare and Medicaide and social security for illegals and foreigners--they are NOT AN AMERICAN.
Keeep them out of the hospitals and schools.

What is a genuine American to do if Medicare and Medicaid are cut? Doesn't make sense. Where does an American go for this care?

There have been riots in Europe, Italy and Greece. Is the United States next?

The people with a comfortable living with a few houses with tax write offs, etc. want everything--and how many homeless live in cardboard boxes on the street?

IF YOU ICE BOX IS FULL AND MINE IS EMPTY, I'M GOING TO BE IN YOUR ICE BOX!

Comment from: Gail [Visitor]
The homosexuals--males-- in the area are buying up million dollar properties and hotels. THE HomOSEXUALS--typical males-- ARE LOADED.

A COUPLE, ONE IN THE PHARMACEUTICAL BUSINESS, BOUGHT A MILLION DOLLAR ESTATE ON THE RIVER AND IS RENNOVATING THE PLACE TO BRING THE EXCECUTIVES UP HERE AND A NICE WRITEOFF FOR THEM--another reason why the country is going down the tubes.


Another homosexual couple bought an old hotel in the area and rennovated it. No jobs for the locals, just the college kids.
Permalink 07/19/11 @ 12:17
Comment from: Gail [Visitor]
The homosexuals--males-- in the area are buying up million dollar properties and hotels. THE HomOSEXUALS--typical males-- ARE LOADED.

A COUPLE, ONE IN THE PHARMACEUTICAL BUSINESS, BOUGHT A MILLION DOLLAR ESTATE ON THE RIVER AND IS RENNOVATING THE PLACE TO BRING THE EXCECUTIVES UP HERE AND A NICE WRITEOFF FOR THEM--another reason why the country is going down the tubes.


Another homosexual couple bought an old hotel in the area and rennovated it. No jobs for the locals, just the college kid--who are typically from OUT OF STATE!.

Permalink
Permalink 07/19/11 @ 12:19
Comment from: Gail [Visitor]
The homosexuals--males-- in the area are buying up million dollar properties and hotels. THE HomOSEXUALS--typical males-- ARE LOADED.

A COUPLE, ONE IN THE PHARMACEUTICAL BUSINESS, BOUGHT A MILLION DOLLAR ESTATE ON THE RIVER AND IS RENNOVATING THE PLACE TO BRING THE EXCECUTIVES UP HERE AND A NICE WRITEOFF FOR THEM--another reason why the country is going down the tubes.


Another homosexual couple bought an old hotel in the area and rennovated it. No jobs for the locals, just the college kid--who are typically from OUT OF STATE!.

NEITHER! WHAT ARE THEY GOING TO DO? PULL A RABBIT OUT OF THEIR HAT AND THEY ARE SERIOUS NOW?


THE BUCK STOPS WITH OBAMA!

BIG IF, "IF YOU SEE KAY" (CODE)

IF OBAMA IS SERIOUS ABOUT THIS AUGUST 2ND BUDGET DEADLINE, THEN CUT OBAMA'S SALARY BY AT LEAST 50% TO BEGIIN WITH!

THE PEOPLE PROVIDE EVERYTHING THE PRESIDENT NEEDS TO BEGIN WITH, AND OBAMA DOESN'T NEED A SALARY.

THEN, CUT ALL THE VACATIONS TO ONE--ONE VACATION OF A COUPLE OF WEEKS. OTHERWISE IT IS A FULL TIME JOB, LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE. NO PART-TIMERS FOR THE PRESIDENT OR CONGRESS! ONE SALARY, NOT ANOTHER SALARY FOR THE CHAIRMAN OF THIS OR THAT. IF OBAMA MEANS BUSINESS?


TO BEGIN WITH FOR THE PRESIDENT.


'THE BUCK STOPS HERE!'

THE BUCK STOPS WITH THE PRESIDENT!

CRAP OR GET OFF THE POT!


THEY'RE ALLL COMING DOWN--THE EASY WAY, OR THE HARD WAY.

SO LET THE SHOW BEGIN WITH THE PRESIDENT!


All of congress and the President have had their chance(s)--NO MORE SECOND CHANCES! BEING ON THE BRINK OF THIS BUDGET COLLAPSE, THEY FAILED! FIRED!

THERE ARE QUALIFIED CANDIDATES WAITING TO SERVE THE PUBLIC FOR A LOT LESS MONEY THAN THE PRESENT CONGRESSMEN AND PRESIDENT. The women is a joke and I choke admitting it


MY COUNTRY TIS OF THEE, SWEET LAND OR LIBERTY OF THEE I SING...


MY COUNTRY TIS OF THEE, SWEET LAND OR LIBERTY OF THEE ICING....



NEW VERSION "ICING," "IC-ING"

No more paying farmers to NOT PRODUCE!

ALL BUSINESSES HAVE LOSSES, SO SUCK IT UP, PLAN FOR IT, WHATEVER. THE GOVERNMENT DOES NOT PAY FARMERS FOR NOT PRODUCING, NOR FOR PLANTING OAK TREES FOR AN AGRICULTURAL WRITEOFF OF THEIR LAND TAXES.

NO MORE TRICKS.

IF YOU CAN'T PRODUCE AND SELL WHAT YOU PRODUCE, THEN FOLD!

Both men are snakes in the grass.

Both men work in the interest of Wall Street and not main street.

Hey Caspian, the lifeboats have returned, we are not sunk yet..lol

"There will not be an increase in the debt limit without something really, really big attached to it."-John Boehner

That's political grandstanding, dancing for the Tea Partiers. Can't trust someone who pretends the greatest ethical determination while pretending he never said the opposite, pre-Tea Party.

Obama makes like he's conceding almost everything at the outset, then manages to hang in there, getting something out of it after all, if the McConnell plan is any indication (OK, you'll get your debt ceiling raised, in three installments, and at each time we'll vote for disapproval of it, which you can veto). The difference between Boehner and Obama, in this issue, is that Obama is not grandstanding while the bond raters get more jumpy every day.

(Thank goodness the board is back! I know I appreciate its being here for us.)

On Topic:

I don't trust either Obama or Boehner but in this case, Boehner is right. Government spending has ballooned to the point that even the Republicans realize it is out of control but sadly not Obama. He wants us to believe the only reason HE spent SO MUCH money is because of the mess created by the prior administration. The mess was created by unbridled spending, yet the Obama answer was to spend even more and not try to reel it in. Where was Obama’s concern for spending, prior to now? Where was his concern for compromise and bi-partisanship when he jammed the healthcare bill down everyone’s throat? He talks about balance as opposed to a cuts only plan, which means he is STILL not willing to spend responsibly. I totally agree with tax reform if someone is not paying their fair share but when Obama talks about a balanced approach he is really saying he wants to offset the cuts with more revenue, so that we don’t have to be responsible and can continue to spend beyond our means.

"Government spending has ballooned to the point that even the Republicans realize it is out of control."-MG

It's been a lot higher, as a percent of GDP, and no one made political hay out of that, and we did quite all right after that. How? By having upper bracket tax rates of 90% and more to pay off the deficit (following WWII).

"Where was his concern for compromise and bi-partisanship when he jammed the healthcare bill down everyone’s throat?"

If Obama were a unitary totalitarian dictator, he could try to jam or ram something down people's throats. Otherwise, not so much. He starts talks by first conceding far more than his base wants him to, and this is jamming things?

Overall tax rates are at levels as low as they've been for decades, so revenues haven't kept up with normal, everyday functional costs. The country is still growing, so you can't expect the federal budget to stay the same year by year. This administration is not overspending any more than previous administrations. Insisting that this one IS is partisan stuff.

But whichever political side anyone's on, are we REALLY going to play chicken with so much at stake? Both sides get a chance to be in the majority, or stuff the Supreme Court, or in some other way get what they want. We don't have to- and shouldn't- risk everything for what can and should be gained by normal democratic procedures. We don't have to be radical extremists, like the Tea Partiers want.

"It's been a lot higher, as a percent of GDP, and no one made political hay out of that..." MQ

Come on man, stop with the spin, there is a difference. Obama started his speech with how much money Bush spent and wasted and I agree. Yet Obama started his presidency spending at a much higher rate, slowed only by losing a majority in the house…

"Obama Added More to National Debt in First 19 Months Than All Presidents from Washington Through Reagan Combined, Says Gov’t Data http://www.cnsnews.com/node/72404

"If Obama were a unitary totalitarian dictator, he could try to jam or ram something down people's throats. Otherwise, not so much."MQ

Mike, he is not a totalitarian dictator but he had total control of the house and Senate and abused that power with the health care bill. He did not care about compromise, bi-partisanship or what the majority of the people wanted. He led his party, pushing through what he wanted, dividing America.

"Overall tax rates are at levels as low as they've been for decades, so revenues haven't kept up with normal, everyday functional costs. The country is still growing, so you can't expect the federal budget to stay the same year by year." MQ

Oh what a spin doctor you are! This is not normal everyday costs and I am not talking about the budget staying the same. I am talking about living within our means. What's enough taxes, 60% 70%, 80%? What if that is not enough to keep up with a growing country? When do we consider cutting back OR changing the way we do things?

"But whichever political side anyone's on, are we REALLY going to play chicken with so much at stake?" MQ

What if we do not need as much government as you think we do? This bloated government is like a 600 pound overweight man who abused his body with years of overeating. The Tea party is like doctor insisting he eat less, which is only radical and extreme COMPARED to the overeating. There is only "so much at stake" if you believe America will collapse by eating normally. We won't collapse, we will become healthier. America will only collapse if we don't change are bad habits.

Hey Caspian, the lifeboats have returned, we are not sunk yet..lol

----------

MG we were sinking more than 30 years ago without realizing it.

obama; He has tried to work with the republicans where revenues should be increased and cantor and boehmer like spoiled brats pick up their marbles and walk out of the room. The revenue they wamt to increase is to cancel the bush tax cuts which have cost over 6 trillion and have not produced any jobs. The only qualification is that you be a millionaire and you receive @200,000 from the government. Charle Sheen not a job creator would receive @200,000 to buy more cocaine. There are many more like him. Millionaires receive the lowest tax rate now thanks to favorable treatment in the tax code and now the gop wants to give more. Also subsidies which are large and outdated are given to oil co who do not need these subsidies. It would be better to give them to small co. The republicans were elected on creation of jobs and there has not been one billed passed out of the house for jobs. If the gop do not get their own way they walk and will not compromise. The debt ceiling is for the deficit in the past and should be held hostage by the gop.They will not compromise on anything and I hope obama veto andy of their stupid proposals. Like the balanced budget what a joke. Bush piled up a 11 trillion dollar debt and cantor and boenmer were in congress then and never wanted a balanced budget then. You remember cheney stating deficits do not matter. Its about time obama stands up to these clowns who would rather see the country go in default rather than solve problems and be on the side of the wealthy and large subsidies.

"Obama started his presidency spending at a much higher rate (than Bush)."-MG

The federal budget was already set, so he couldn't just bump up spending ad lib. And that budget was not strikingly bigger than previous ones. So what excessive spending did he do, and how did he do it?

"'Obama Added More to National Debt in First 19 Months Than All Presidents from Washington Through Reagan Combined.'"

No. Obama put Bush's debts (two wars, the unfunded Medicare Part D, and so on) in the debt column, which made the federal debt jump by trillions of dollars, practically none of which was Obama's doing.

"I am talking about living within our means. What's enough taxes, 60% 70%, 80%?"

Truman and Eisenhower paid for WWII by levying the previously mentioned tax rates of 90% and higher. Not only did commerce not crawl to a halt, it grew like never before, and across the economic spectrum we prospered. The poor became the middle class because of all the jobs created by manufacturing for the world, and the wealthy- even with 90% tax rates- became wealthier because they had manufacturing-generated revenue. High volume made up for high taxes The more investors invested, the more they cleared.

Sure, we're not producing for the world anymore, or even for ourselves. That's partly because Europe and Japan rebuilt, and partly because of neoloberal policies that INTENDED to send our industry overseas, for reasons I've never understood. We COULD have industry and jobs again. The hogwash that we're not competitive is not why we don't have factories anymore. Europe is highly industrialized, especially Germany, despite high wages and powerful labor unions and universal medical insurance and more social spending than we have. All the "happiness" indices and prosperity indices have European countries filling the top ten list. So much for Republican dogma.

Tell me what you think saving a few thousand in taxes could do if the government (local and state and federal) cut back to just a military (95% of the budget instead of 60%?), one or two departments (Commerce and Transportation, maybe), and little else. I truly don't believe you realize how much the government does that the individual cannot, that the private sector either cannot or will not. You might not see any difference in your life at first, with a tiny government. But over time you'll see that entropy is not cutting its budget, that vast and complex systems don't manage themselves, that research on a gazillion fronts WAS making your life better, and that now nothing ever gets better.

"Are we REALLY going to play chicken with so much at stake?... What if we do not need as much government as you think we do?"

That's not the point. The whole of American society cannot start a debate on this, mull it over, argue and spit, and come to a consensus before August 2. If the TP GOP has a good argument that the people and Congress will buy, it will still be a good argument when we're not on the brink of default. Boehner is pushing agenda virtually at gunpoint. Now THATs ramming!

Edit: "Tell me what you think YOUR saving a few thousand in taxes could do"

I wonder if Peter and MikeQ work for RNN

This whole debt limit debate is more fun than a barrel of monkeys.

What Obamas sticking point? That he wants to raise taxes on the rich?

Lets go back in time, a year or so ago, when Obama had majorities in both houses.
What did Obama do with the Bush Tax cuts? He went against his campaign pledges, he went against the Dem leadership, who controled both houses, and he went against the majority of the American people who wanted the Bush Tax eliminated.

Now, how is your hero holding up the debt ceiling talks.....?????????

And, when SS and Medicare are looking not to good, what does your hero do? Lowers witholding taxes......Looks like your hero just wants to crash SS and Medicare sooner than expected.

This is fun! Welcome back MikeQ and Peter! I was starting to get bored looking for new illogical ideological morons to troll. You guys are the last of the breed. Hopefully you'll take Caspian's-(a true progressive) advice and WAKE UP!!!!

"WAKE UP!!!!" of course means think as you do. Illogic is not thinking as you. Being moronic means not being you.

BTW, Obama's methods (he's not my hero. You assume that disliking Boehner's actions necessitates idolizing Obama. Talk about illogic!)are not conspicuous. He's said things that disappointed his base, and then later his saying these things turned out to be apparently calculated to gain an advantage in the argument. He doesn't have to ram anything; he just outsmarts those who have boxed themselves into an ideological corner. Well, sometimes.

“Tell me what you think YOUR saving a few thousand in taxes could do"
"I truly don't believe you realize how much the government does that the individual cannot, that the private sector either cannot or will not. You might not see any difference in your life at first, with a tiny government.” MQ

Mike Q, all this time and you still don’t understand my position or the Tea Party for that matter, when it comes to government. I don’t want to see the government go away but I don’t want to pay for a dysfunctional government. I want to pay taxes for a strong space program but we don’t have one. I want the strongest defense that my tax money can buy but we refuse to defend our borders and think we should be the policemen of the world. I want the social security money that I paid into but government thinks its okay to borrow from me, without assurance they can pay it back. I want to fix what is broken so that our money is spent wisely but we have untrustworthy, incompetent leaders in charge ruining this country and YOUR answer is to give them more of our money? They don’t need more of our money to waste! They need to be responsible with OUR money and we need to put and end to the corruption, by demanding they be more responsible.

Many years ago I donated to a non-profit charity that helped the poor but it was discovered that the organizers were taking in enormous salaries, so a good portion of my money that was intended for the poor, went instead to corrupt organizers. So I stopped giving to that charity and helped the poor by giving to a different charity. In comparison, if we invest in good government the poor gets more. Otherwise, we are hostages to corruption and there will never be enough money. “I truly don't believe you realize”… how much government waste there is.

just because he writes well dosent mean he is intelligent

"“I truly don't believe you realize”… how much government waste there is."

I'm sure there's waste. Where there are people, there's waste. In private businesses, in government. But when the TP GOP talks of TRILLIONS of dollars of spending cuts, that won't eliminate human inefficiencies or "it's not my money" attitudes that result in waste, it'll close departments, putting even more people out of work, reducing tax revenue even more than they are now. Can America run perfectly well without a Department of the Interior, or the National Institutes of Health? We'd survive, but we would not be better because we spent less and got less.

"Can America run perfectly well without a Department of the Interior, or the National Institutes of Health? We'd survive, but we would not be better because we spent less and got less." MQ

Well Mike Q, I will answer that by finishing my story from my previous post.

....So after I and others switched to this other charity, that is more honest, efficient and trustworthy. Guess what happened to the corrupt charity? They cleaned up shop and straightened out their act because they had no other choice. Since we were paying the bills, we had the power to effect real change by making the tough choices. If we had said, "oh well, that's just the way it is, human nature will always be wasteful and corrupt but we can't risk throwing out the baby with the bath water" Then they hold us hostage to do whatever they want to do and it will never get any better.

When will you realize it is "we the people" that employ government, not the other way around. We pay the bills and we have the power to effect change. Government serves us, it is not what a irresponsible government decides but what "we the people" decide and I say we can and will do better. Even if that means facing tougher times, in order to effect a long lasting positive change.

"it is not what a irresponsible government decides but what "we the people" decide"

If we had an irresponsible government, I'd be against it. You assume our government is irresponsible. You assume it's wasteful because of the big numbers of dollars it uses, without referencing what running this country realistically costs. You want independent accountants to go over the books? Fine, really. Until that happens, neither of us can make absolute claims about waste, whether it's wild and out of control or the inescapable inefficiencies in the use of paper clips we'd be foolish to flirt with default over. I don't BELIEVE that the federal government is particularly wasteful, while you declare as a given, as your rationale for anti-government expression, that the US government IS, without evidence needed, horrifically, scandalously wasteful.

IMO, the anti-government attitude comes first, then the conviction that government is wasteful,-not the other way around.

"You assume our government is irresponsible. You assume it's wasteful because of the big numbers of dollars it uses, without referencing what running this country realistically costs." MQ

Ahhh, I think understand much better now how you are thinking. I suppose if we added up all of what you might think of as waste,(such as #25 of the list below.."Congress recently gave Alaska Airlines $500,000 to paint a Chinook salmon on a Boeing 737") it would not put a significant dent in the deficit.

However, many might call the IRAQ war, the Bush prescription plan, the Obama stimulus, our open door illegal immigration costs and so on, as money that we should not have spent or in a sense, a waste of our money that if not for these wrong headed decisions or irresponsible leadership, we would have enough to run this country, without needing more.

So if we are to really be honest with ourselves, we have to recognize the cost of poor management. It can destroy a company as well as a country. We also have to decide on the size and role of government. You may feel you want a centralized government to handle as much as possible and therefore we would need to tax much more in order to support that ideal. I on the other hand, believe government should have a limited role and provide ways for people to be successful on their own. That's not anti government it's just putting common sense limitations on government and empowering individuals.

"50 Examples of Government Waste"
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2009/10/50-Examples-of-Government-Waste

The rats in the tea party would not vote for boehmer bill because they wanted more than 15 to 45 billion cut to pell grants. Students would not receive financial aid just to give more to the greedy wealthy or they are laughing called job creators. The tea party would rather see the country go into default and pay higher interest rate for mortgages and the stock market tank and will not compromise. Then ryan cantor and boehmer can pull their temper tantrums and lie on the floor kicking and screaming. They want a short term so in 6 mo they can come back to the same squabble. Meanwhile the stock market will not advance because of uncertainity and employers will not hire. The tea party is stupid and will wreck this country. If possible they should be recalled and thrown out of office because they do not represent their constituents only special interests and the wealthy.

JP Morgan biography
The most influential banker in history
John Pierpont (JP) Morgan was born on April 17, 1837 in Hartford, Connecticut to parents Juniet Spencer Morgan and Juliet (Pierpont) Morgan. His father was a partner of the firm George Peabody & Co. so by no means was JP Morgan born into a poor family. After he completed school at the English school in Boston, he went to the University of Gottingen in Germany.


When he returned to the US in 1857 he got a job working for the private banking house Duncan, Sherman and Company. In 1860 he was appointed as the American agent and attorney for George Peabody & Company in which his father was a partner. This later became J.S. Morgan & Co and when his father died in 1890 he left it to JP Morgan giving him important European connections and enabling him to run a large foreign reserve business.

By the time of his father's death, JP Morgan had already established himself as a financier through Dabney, Morgan & Co. and later Drexel, Morgan & Co. It was after the Civil War that he started buying distressed businesses and especially railroad companies. Some of these railroads include the West Shore, Philadelphia and Reading, Richmond Terminal, the Erie and the New England railroads. His process of buying and consolidation of railroads came to be known as Morganization.

*******On several occasions, JP Morgan also helped the government in its finances. In 1877, together with August Belmont and the Rothschilds, they floated $260 million in US government bonds. After the government ran into some gold problems, he bought $200 million worth of government bonds with gold thereby preserving the credit of the United States. Some of his detractors had, however, heavily criticised him for the harsh terms of the loan. This had also resulted in a Congressional hearing in 1912, but he walked away largely unscathed.

THIS WAS WHEN A MILLION WAS A MILLION!

*********Perhaps the biggest deal he was ever involved in was the forming of the US Steel Corporation, the first billion-dollar corporation. He had bought some mills from Andrew Carnegie and together with some other steel assets formed US Steel - worth approximately $1.2 billion. He was also involved with several other companies and sat on quite a few boards. A few of the better known ones include Western Union Telegraph Company and General Electric.

At the time of his death on March 31, 1913 he had an estate worth $80 million (today around $1.2 billion). Compared to his peers of the time, especially Rockefeller, it was not such a large estate. In fact, it was Rockefeller's comment at the time, "And to think he wasn't even a rich man." Yet, JP Morgan's power did not lie in the millions he had, it lay in the billions he controlled.

No new RNN topics? Here's one:

Do You Blame the Obama Administration for the Stock Market Plunge, the Poor Economy, the Spiraling Out of Control Debt and the Lack of Jobs?

Mike G:

Yes, yes I do.

Mike G:

Yes, yes I do.

=================

I do too.

Don't forget the Republicans also.

Gee, and I thought Obama saved the economy when it collapsed in 2008 under Bush/Cheney. ( wink wink ).

Are the American citizenry really this stupid?

The truth is both parties do not represent 99% of the population.

You have to pay to play in Washington DC to get a seat at the table.

"Don't forget the Republicans also." Casp

I agree! Next presidential election I will be looking for a new direction. Independent Candidate? Ron Paul? ANYBODY but the establishment. They are crooked I tell you!

They are constantly changing their tune. Promising one thing and delivering another. Nobody with half a brain is fooled. People just won't admit they invested and believe in a lousy team. Come-on partisans on the Left and the Right, it's time to admit your team sucks. Since the Democrats own both the Senate and the Presidency, I blame them the most.

Come-on partisans on the Left and the Right, it's time to admit your team sucks. MG.

------------

Your comment above is golden.

Obama turned TEN Bush Red States Blue because people were fed up.

All Ten will which back to Red next election because people are fed up.

Both parties are really one party, ( The Corporation Party ) and have to lie and promise change to the masses to get elected.

1. Nevada 2. New Mexico 3. Colorado 4. Iowa 5. Indiana 6. Ohio 7. Florida 8. Virginia 9. North Carolina 10. New Hampshire.

P.S. Dumbya Bush promised the bottom half of Americans will benefit the most from his tax cuts.

LOL

"P.S. Dumbya Bush promised the bottom half of Americans will benefit the most from his tax cuts." Caspian

Caspian, you raise some good points which is right in line with my debate with Mike Q of a responsible government and the idea of raising taxes.

The Bush tax cuts are a philosophy left over from the Reagan years which no longer appear to be effective in this global economy. So what is worse, not having enough money coming in OR spending when we can't afford it?

I believe an Obama stimulus package that does not stimulate or create jobs is much more destructive then cutting taxes because it spends money we don't have. The same is true with involvement in conflicts that cost lives and money and does not bear fruit. That money could have been spent to sure up our borders. How about poor immigration polices that drain our resources and is a burden on the economy? Should we have to pay more when government leaders refuse to lead and do what is in the best interest of the tax payers?

I think justice would demand the answer be no but how do we put the Genie back in the bottle? How do we get are money back which government lost with wrong headed policies? In some cases it's too late but in others it is not and yet this administration under Obama refuse to act responsible and prefer to continue spending without being able to afford it.

So let's take for example the Bush prescription drug program. I have heard many times it was irresponsible. So why don't those in charge repeal it? Even the Tea Party does not say repeal it. Then if that program is something we need, good and worth paying for then we should pay for it with higher taxes or do away with it and save the money. Our irresponsible leaders refuse to address these type of decisions and make the hard choices. That is not leadership and that explains our current economic crisis.

So let's take for example the Bush prescription drug program. I have heard many times it was irresponsible. So why don't those in charge repeal it? Even the Tea Party does not say repeal it.
MG
==================

How dare you speak ill of Bush and his policies in the presence of our friend Bill F. LOL

Bush and Cheney gave the largest tax cuts to the wealthiest in the history of America without paying for two wars and the aftermath of September 11, 2001.

Your post proves both parties do not represent "99%" of We The People.

The 8 years of Republican rule from 2000-2008 and now with Obama and his Dems putting band aids on cancer proves that in Spades. ( No pun intended ).

Clinton's NAFTA, 1996 telecommunications bill, and Reagan's war on Unions started this mess.

Congress are the Haves and Wall Street are the Have Mores.

Everyone else are the Have Nots.

-------------------

President NAFTA Backs President Shafta
December 11, 2010 / http://tinyurl.com/23murym
It was a stunning spectacle yesterday when former President Clinton took the podium from President Obama in the White House briefing room to help shove the Obama-GOP tax deal down the throats of Democratic activists and Congress members.
It was a fitting spectacle too (carried live on CNN) -- since Bill Clinton paved the way in teaching how a Democratic president can win battles through the votes NOT of his own party but the Republicans.
Remember NAFTA, the trade deal loved by big business and Republicans -- and opposed by Democratic constituencies like unions, environmentalists and consumer advocates? President Clinton passed NAFTA in 1993 with the votes of nearly 80 percent of GOP senators and almost 70 percent of House Republicans. Meanwhile, House Democrats opposed NAFTA by more than 3 to 2.
More than a year ago, I warned ("Get Ready for the Obama/GOP Alliance") that Obama would follow Clinton's lead in winning some of his biggest fights by allying with the GOP against his own base. / http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/12/11

------------------

Dorgan Amendment Slashed After Last Minute Pharma Deall Hasn’t Agreed To / December 16, 2009 / http://tinyurl.com/yhmpexf
Ryan Grim has a good tick-tock on the failure of the Dorgan amendment last night, delivering a huge victory for the pharmaceutical industry and a blow to consumers who could have saved over $100 billion in prescription drug costs. 30 Democrats and Joe Lieberman ended up voting against this amendment, preserving a backroom deal between PhRMa and the White House to limit their exposure to profit reductions in the overall health care bill.
Grim confirms that the linchpin to this treachery was a deal discussed by Senate leadership the night before, as I surmised previously
http://news.firedoglake.com/2009/12/16/dorgan-amendment-slashed-after-last-minute-phrma-deal-phrma-hasnt-agreed-to/

----------------------

Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999
Senate voted 90 yea 8 nay / http://banking.senate.gov/conf/
This proves beyond all doubt that both parties do not represent “We The People”!
http://banking.senate.gov/conf/

Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999-Part 2
http://tinyurl.com/ccs348

Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999-Part 1
http://tinyurl.com/dfnkuu

Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999
Bill Clinton and the Republicans did away with oversight.
President Bill Clinton signed this into law with 54 Republicans voting yes and 44 Democrats voting no./ http://tinyurl.com/5lwv6z
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=106&session=1&vote=00105

Caspian, What a shame! We were walking the same path here for a while, then you veered a little too far left. Come back and meet me in the middle, I'll wait for you at the crossroad up ahead..LOL.

One by one...'

"How dare you speak ill of Bush and his policies in the presence of our friend Bill F. LOL"..C

Because it's true. Most independents have a lot of trouble with IRAQ and thought he spent too much money, money we did not have and the economy was hurt by it.

"Bush and Cheney gave the largest tax cuts to the wealthiest in the history of America without paying for two wars and the aftermath of September 11, 2001."..C

I like to think if our country is going to go to War that we have no other choice. In that case, we may have to spend more then we have but in all other cases of spending, when we have a choice, then we need to be thinking about how we are going to pay for it. If we don't think about that, do it anyway and the economy suffers, then that is irresponsible.

"Your post proves both parties do not represent "99%" of We The People."..C

Yep, I agree! Mutual consenses is a wonderful thing!

"The 8 years of Republican rule from 2000-2008 and now with Obama and his Dems putting band aids on cancer proves that in Spades. ( No pun intended )."..C

Uh Oh.. Where you going? Come back onto the main path. I don't know how you could say Obama put a band aid on anything. That is being way too kind. IMO, he took a gaping wound and not only ripped it wide open but introduced an infection. As the patent is dying he brags about what a good physician he is. My only real question, "Is there a 'real' doctor in the House?" White house preferably.

"Clinton's NAFTA, 1996 telecommunications bill, and Reagan's war on Unions started this mess."..C

NAFTA absolutely but messin with Reagan.. well I can barely see you way out there on that far left path you wondered on.

"Congress are the Haves and Wall Street are the Have Mores. Everyone else are the Have Nots."..C

Sure what you state is true but an Independent like myself does not care so much who gets what, as long as they don't take it from me and give it to them or any other special interest or program that does not benefit "we the people"...which brings us full circle back to tax cuts. Less of my money going toward incompetence, is fine with me!

Now come on back to the Main (stream) path before I get lost and wander too far right.LOL

That is being way too kind. IMO, he took a gaping wound and not only ripped it wide open but introduced an infection. MG.

-------------

Obama inherited a cancer that metastasized and implemented band aid policies that will not work.

Dodd / Frank did not go far enough is one example.

Elizabeth Warren has all the answers and was rejected by Wall Street, The Chamber of Commerce, corporate Republicans and corporate Democrats like Obama.

---------------------------

Less of my money going toward incompetence, is fine with me!
MG.

I think every liberal in America would agree with you. Nobody likes higher taxes but in reality Americans have taxation without representation.

"We can have democracy in this country or we can have great concentrated wealth in the hands of a few, but we cannot have both."

--Louis Brandeis, Supreme Court Justice, 1941


"The two greatest obstacles to democracy in the United States are, first, the widespread delusion among the poor that we have a democracy, and second, the chronic terror among the rich, lest we get it."

--Edward Dowling

--------------------------

NAFTA absolutely but messin with Reagan.. well I can barely see you way out there on that far left path you wondered on. MG.

-------------------

12 years of Reagan/Bush created the highest deficits in American history until 8 years of Bush/Cheney.

"Obama inherited a cancer that metastasized and implemented band aid policies that will not work.Dodd / Frank did not go far enough is one example." Casp

Again you are giving him too much credit. You seem to be only looking at regulations. I agree, the cancer was there when Obama took office but it was because of Obama and the Dems that the cancer spread too other parts of the body. No bounce back in the economy, no jobs, Still in Afghanistan, Lybia, a divided nation, slow and poor decisions, open borders, attack on American values like in Arizona, Obamacare, loss of confidence in the markets and so on, is the spreading of disease because of his policies.

Yes Dodd / Frank was a band aid and getting Ben Ladin was a temporary boost but not enough to save the patient. We need someone better, he is not the answer. It is not only that he is not going far enough by punishing the crooks but his policies ARE the problem.

"12 years of Reagan/Bush created the highest deficits in American history until 8 years of Bush/Cheney." Casp

Whatever you want to say about Reagan and the deficit it does not matter because his policies worked, this country was united, we had employment and he knew how to work across party lines. In spite of NAFTA, Clinton also was good for this nation economically.

Unfortunately neither Bush nor Obama come close to Reagan or Clinton IMO.

Again you are giving him too much credit. You seem to be only looking at regulations. MG

I reject just about everything Obama did, and did not do. I did not agree with anything Bush did either.

Al Gore told the truth "ONCE IN HIS LIFE" when he said publicly that nothing was done about climate change for 8 years of Clinton/Gore because not only was almost all Republicans against it but many of his own Democrats were against it.

This proves too me that both parties do not represent the average Joe & Jane of America.

---------------------

Whatever you want to say about Reagan and the deficit it does not matter because his policies worked, this country was united, we had employment and he knew how to work across party lines. In spite of NAFTA, Clinton also was good for this nation economically. MG

Unfortunately neither Bush nor Obama come close to Reagan or Clinton IMO.
MG

I will stipulate in a generic way about the success of Reagan/Clinton.

Imagine if a Democrat was in the White House when Iraq bombed the USS Stark? LOL


Impeachment would be the least of the punishment. lol

-----------------

Republican Presidents Dereliction of Duty

Ronald Reagan, who did not retaliate for the murder of 278 United States Marines in Beirut and who violated his own terrorism policy by trading arms for hostages in what came to be called the Iran-Contra scandal;

http://tinyurl.com/9s52o

George H.W. Bush, who did not retaliate for the Libyan murder of 259 passengers on Pan Am 103; who did not have an official counter terrorism policy; who left Saddam Hussein in place, requiring the United States to leave a large military presence in Saudi Arabia.

George W. Bush who did not alert the airports having known the CIA warning memo August 6, 2001: Usama bin Laden and al Qaeda determined to strike inside the United States. FBI warned John Ashcroft July 26, 2001 not to fly on commercial airlines.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/07/26/national/main303601.shtml?CMP=ILC-SearchStories

Caspian, I am not saying everything Reagan did was perfect. Your mixing me up with someone else. Every president has made mistakes but I firmly believe as a whole, Reagan was good for the country.

I don't criticize Obama simply for mistakes. I criticize him because I believe his intentional policies have caused the country to go into a free fall. It seems like you are saying he has not done enough to fix the Bush debacle and I agree but I am saying if Obama was President in 2001 instead of Bush, this country would at best be in the same shape it is now or more likely even worse.

BTW, I don't believe in the Al Gore, man made global warming scam. I believe climate change is out of our control and a natural cycle the Earth goes through. However, we should do our best to protect our environment, without being forced into the stone age.

I agree that Obama and Bush43 are total failures.

Reagan did more harm than good for the average American for weakening Unions.

The Russian Bear still has the power to destroy this earth many times over.

Man made global warming scam?

Didn't the tobacco companies lie about the dangers of smoking?

The oil companies are doing the same with fossil fuels.

There is no such thing as clean coal.

"Didn't the tobacco companies lie about the dangers of smoking?" Caspian

Yes they did lie and I think they are lying to us now about cellphone safety. I also think some companies will try to cover-up the pollution they cause such as chemical spills, water pollution and air pollution. When we follow the money we expose the lies.

When it comes to man made global warming however, it is government that is lying. Al Gore a non scientist big investor of green energies warning the world of man made global warming. Government regulating pollution is a good thing but government wanting to be PAID for the natural carbon dioxide we breathe out and buildings emit. Well that is just a scam. One Volcano puts out more Carbon Dioxide then all the cars in the US. The Sun heating up the Ocean creates more Carbon Dioxide then we ever could. Follow the money Caspian and you will expose the lies.

I am a skeptic my nature so I do agree with you "Follow The Money" and you will find the truth.

The very concept of a scientific hoax or scam on the public is crazy.

There has never in the history of science been a single example of a scientific hoax perpetrated by the worldwide scientific community.

Scientists are professional skeptics who demand convincing evidence before they subscribe to scientific claims.

Caspian, I don't believe it is a scientific hoax. I believe there is real evidence of global warming. As to how much man is contributing to global warming, is not a proven fact. Studies change all the time as well as, all the contributing factors such as a hotter Sun overheating the ocean's trapping greenhouse gasses making it look like the industrial age is the main reason but it is unclear.

The hoax or the scam is by those who capitalize on the fears and lack of in depth study's by the average person. People tend to believe their leaders and when challenged to debate by scientists of alternate views, Al Gore say's, the debate is over. Sounds fishy doesn't it? It's kinda like when our leaders said we have to fight them there, so we don't fight them here. I know you did not fall for that one.

Sounds fishy doesn't it? It's kinda like when our leaders said we have to fight them there, so we don't fight them here. I know you did not fall for that one. MG

====================

You are logical MG and I cannot argue with that.

Yes, that lie was used in Vietnam and Ollie North used it for Central America.

And we all remember Bush using it for Iraq in 2002-2003.

Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice Tell The Truth About Iraq in Feb. July 2001 / Iraq was no threat to any country and contained
http://tinyurl.com/2fhgd8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0wbpKCdkkQ&feature=related

The Ice is melting at the Poles and it seems reasonable to reduce pollution.

http://www.postcarbon.org/blog-post/429117-who-killed-growth-an-animated-explanation

You have it exactly right MG. People do tend to believe their leaders and also the wealthy media talking air heads on TV and Radio.

Do you know the difference between the Russian and American citizenry?

The Russians know they are getting bamboozled with Pravda and the Americans believe the corporate mainstream / rightwing media "Hook Line and Sinker"!

"The Ice is melting at the Poles and it seems reasonable to reduce pollution." Casp

Caspian, here is some more logic to digest.

What country has more ice Greenland or Iceland? The answer is Greenland is covered with much more ice and snow then Iceland but the reason they are named that way is because at one time it was the opposite.

Caspian, the Earth has been here before man and has changed consistently from the beginning. Polar ice melting and changing is not something new, that evil man has caused.

Yet I agree, let's do what we can for our own survival and protect the environment, especially when it comes to clean air and clean water. However, when it comes to controlling the natural carbon dioxide we exhale by having to pay a fee. Well that just wreaks of a money making scam.

The only people who are spending "BILLIONS" against climate change are the oil conglomerates.

There must be a reason why they are spending "BILLIONS" in advertising.

===============================

America's newest security threat: Global Warming
Retired four-star General Zinni calls global warming a serious security threat / December 27th, 2007 Video
General Gordon R. Sullivan, USA (Ret.)
Admiral Frank “Skip” Bowman, USN (Ret.)

Lieutenant General Lawrence P. Farrell Jr., USAF (Ret.)

Vice Admiral Paul G. Gaffney II, USN (Ret.)

General Paul J. Kern, USA (Ret.)

Admiral T. Joseph Lopez, USN (Ret.)

Admiral Donald L. “Don” Pilling, USN (Ret.)

Admiral Joseph W. Prueher, USN (Ret.)

Vice Admiral Richard H. Truly, USN (Ret.)

General Charles F. “Chuck” Wald, USAF (Ret.)

General Anthony C. “Tony” Zinni, USMC (Ret
http://securityandclimate.cna.org/report/National%20Security%20and%20the%20Threat%20of%20Climate%20Change.pdf

============================

Surveyed scientists agree global warming is real

Human-induced global warming is real, according to a recent U.S. survey based on the opinions of 3,146 scientists. However there remains divisions between climatologists and scientists from other areas of earth sciences as to the extent of human responsibility.

"Human-induced global warming is real, according to a recent U.S. survey based on the opinions of 3,146 scientists. However there remains divisions between climatologists and scientists from other areas of earth sciences as to the extent of human responsibility." Casp

Bingo! It is real because just living on this Earth we have to contribute but there are so much bigger contributor's that we have little control over, like forest fires, volcano's the Sun and so on. In comparison, our contribution is like everybody in NYC peeing in the Hudson River and while environmentalist warn about that causing a flood.

Urination? LOL

Make no mistake MG. It was because of the efforts by BK Jr. that the Hudson became much cleaner.

Caspian, I agree we have less pollution today then years ago due to the efforts of people like rfk jr.

You see Caspian, I am a firm believer that if not for checks and balances we would destroy ourselves. Greed, gluttony, gambling, addictions, laziness, workaholics, etc. We are creatures of excess, so we need advocates that protect us from our own abuse.

Perhaps, where we differ is that these advocates are also part of the human race and sometime in an effort to do good they overplay their hand. Too much regulation, too much government involvement, over reacting to the point of oppression. Just look at the TSA. We all need checks an balances and common sense thinking.

You see Caspian, I am a firm believer that if not for checks and balances we would destroy ourselves.

Isaiah 64:6

All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags; we all shrivel up like a leaf, and like the wind our sins sweep us away.

It was the deregulation of Glass/Steagall which caused this mess.

"All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags; we all shrivel up like a leaf, and like the wind our sins sweep us away."

Amen Caspian and the key word in this Bible verse is ALL. Had it not been deregulation, it would have been an oppressive government. Those looking for a man-made utopia will never find it. Apart from God we ALL fail.

Yes All.

It was not that many years ago when only the Husband worked and supported the whole family.

Sounds Utopian too me.

I'll complain that you have copied material from another source

Hello! I've been reading your site for some time now and finally got the courage to go ahead and give you a shout out from Humble Texas! Just wanted to mention keep up the great work!

I like what I see so i am just following you. Look forward to exploring your web page yet again.

Im a huge fan already, man. Youve done a brilliant job making sure that people understand where youre coming from. And let me tell you, I get it. Great stuff and I cant wait to read more of your blogs. What youve got to say is important and needs to be read.

I adore that blog layout . Exactly how was this created? It is so great!

i need this website..bless you with regard to stating..

Being Jewish, I mentally substituted challah and cholent while reading this article. This blog is really cool!

Thank you for the auspicious writeup. It in fact was a amusement account it. Look advanced to more added agreeable from you! However, how could we communicate?