Well said Tom.

Hear hear

Hear, Hear. Well said Tom.

"America should be a counrty where people can come with nothing, work hard, and become RICH."---Tom

Should be the same for people already here too.

For an American returning home like a refugee to his own country.

Only to learn America is no longer a refuge for Americans.

Oh we will vote!!!!

We had a CEO. How did that work out? Fixing failing bridges and roads puts hundreds of unemployed engineers back to work. And yeah, that's govt. work ... so be it.

Nov 4th. Don't froget.

"We had a CEO. How did that work out? Fixing failing bridges and roads puts hundreds of unemployed engineers back to work. And yeah, that's govt. work ... so be it."

Isn't that what your guys did with the 850 BILLION DOLLARS?

"Shovel Ready" wasn't it?

You mean like the CEOs of Enron or the financial companies? Maybe the former CEO of Worldcom or the car industry moguls? Yes, corporate leaders are a great example of how to run ESSENTIAL services. NOT.

Druid Hills Liberals? Please. Tom, you are so behind with current events. Decatur Progs are the ones who are the world's foremost authority on everything. These are the ones that have coexist bumper stickers, yet they hate the most of the churches in their town. These are the ones who feel a strong since of entitlement to your tax dollars and call you undereducated for not voting for the TSPLOST.

These are the ones who continue to reduce the number of traffic lanes in and out of Decatur and wonder why their businesses downtown shrink. These are the ones who approach local businesses with requests to post all kinds of crazy flyers in their store front windows promoting their social agendas and will label you as a hate group if you refuse.

Yes, I live in Decatur. But I think in a couple of years I will be a resident of East Cobb. That is, if I can escape the socialist state down here.

I loved to be called a LIBERAL:

"What did liberals do that was so offensive
to the Republican Party? I’ll tell you what they did. Liberals got women the right to vote. Liberals got African-Americans the right to vote. Liberals created Social Security and lifted millions of elderly people out of poverty. Liberals ended segregation. Liberals passed the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act. Liberals created Medicare. Liberals passed the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act.

What did Conservatives do? They opposed them on every one of those things, every one. So when you try to hurl that label at my feet, ‘Liberal,’ as if it were something to be ashamed of, something dirty, something to run away from, it won’t work, because I will pick up that label and I will wear it as a badge of honor."

Yea. Whatever. Write you own history book.

Oh you're sooo funny...! Stereotypes! Paul Ryan has never held a real job in his life, unless you count driving the Oscar Mayer Wiernermobile.

Nice troll. The fake accounts agreeing with yourself was pro.

Pete has a great question:

"What did liberals do that was so offensive?"

My guess: Failed at basic economics.

Now tell me again how you are going to fix the debit by taxing the millionaires and billionaires? Shall we review those numbers again :)

Let's see,
If a CEO and a CFO were in a business selling a product and they were not making enough income for the price the sold the product to break even, then they would realize that they had to raise the product's price in order to make more revenue to meet expenses. They could also obviously reduce costs, lay off workers, use lower quality inputs. Normally the latter is more difficult than the former. A CEO worth his salt would figure that out. In fact when costs go up, we all see higher prices. Somehow this fundamental concept that all CEOs know, is an untenable idea to our Republican candidate CEO.

Republicans are loathe to increase revenue, because it affects them. All the uber-rich 1% would pay more tax so that there's more revenue. Mind you, it's quite alright to reduce costs by removing the help through programs that help the lower 20% of our society: including the elderly and the handicapped. Ryan's budget will reduce the 1%'ers taxes by 250,000 while keeping middle/lower income earners taxes essentially flat.

Yep. That's solid thinking. That's going to help America... or at least a privileged few of us.

Will someone please tell me what the Republican plan is to help those who could actually use it?

When will you democrats learn? Business owners aren't in business to keep people employed. They are in business to be successful and make money. Why do you think a business owner owes you a job? Wake up! And now the government is forcing business owners to insure everyone or pay a penalty? YEA... That's going to help a whole lot. DUH!!!

unfortunately, unless you have a lobbyist in your pocket, good luck with that!

Not only am I going to vote...I am bringing out as many of my liberal friends as possible...Do us a favor TOM...you stay at home!

Tom I consider myself fiscally Conservative, and happily voted no on T-SPLOST. But your stereotyping and anger displayed in your post, is why I would never vote R in a Presidential race. The party in its heart, proudly represented by people such as yourself, is nasty and venomous to the core.

Nasty to the core? That would be like a conservative calling ALL democrats dishonest. Well that may be a bad example.

Thank you for the clarification Paul. We all know Republicans are always honest and loyal people, who would never do anything but tell the truth in their personal and work life. Suggesting this isn't the case, is just a conspiracy from the lame-stream media.

Hey Ms. - Do Democrats realize America has increased the Ferdeal Deficit by almost $6 Billions dollars under Obama? We can not make up these shortfalls by taxing the rich. The math doesn't add up. If it means increasing taxes on the rich, I am all for it. America is headed for a HEAD ON COLLISION with the "over spending problem." (When times are tough, families cut back on their spending). AMERICA MUST CUT BACK ON THE SPENDING.
Do you have children or grandchildren? If so, they will be paying for this emormous disaster waiting to happen. Or, are you only concerned about yourself. TODAY. WHAT DO I GET. This mentality is for low life sac of .... losers

6 Billion since lunch. 6 TRILLION since 2009.

The good news is that taxes are going up, Because those with a brain know nothing is going to happen with the gridlock that is in place right now. The other piece of good news is that military spending is going down. See compromise is good, taxes up, spending down....

Hey Allen, DON'T LEAVE DECATUR!!! That would be like abondoning your post. Stand tall! We have to work this problem out with these left-wing crazies.

"Or, are you only concerned about yourself. TODAY. WHAT DO I GET. This mentality is for low life sac of .... losers"

Why would you even suggest that about me? I've never met you in my life, and can't understand your rage against a total stranger. It's clear you're not interested in any sort of civil discourse and I'm not engaging with you any further. This board is a sad testament to the reality of all discourse in the country. It started bad from the top, and turned into pure vulgarity at the end.

Dear Ms. I sincerely appologize to you if I have insulted you. I think an honest discussion between people is better for all.
I am upset about this "entitlement mentalitity" of America today. In realitity, entitlement means non-working women getting payments from the Federal Government, making babies from different fathers, and living a life style on the Federal Government dime,. There are worse obuses than that... the
American miliarary spending is totally out of control...these are the types of things I am concerned about. I do not in any way want to disrepect you or your opinion.

Tom- For the record, I'm for welfare reform. If you have a child while you are on welfare you shouldn't get an extra penny, and drug test the recipients. But I also don't like lumping everyone on benefits/food stamps as a deadbeat. I know a senior who worked all her life, and is now on food stamps. I feel disgusted to see everyone on benefits lumped under the same category. Lots of things happen in people's lives that change their circumstances. And for people who aren't part of a welfare culture, it's humiliating. Not everyone on benefits is a deadbeat or lifetime loser.

But I would also like to see something done to address the way pharmaceutical companies are allowed to rape and pillage our citizens. No other country tolerates this, and our system encourages it. People are filing bankruptcy over medical bills they'd realistically never be able to pay, hundreds of thousands of $, we need to take a SERIOUS look at the way we're doing medicine in general. People are paying higher rates to cover the uninsured, and that's creating a major imbalance in the system, and raising rates for everyone. And my mother's remission cancer treatment medicine is $500 a month, which she buys from Canada for $80 a month. Time to stop encouraging these drug companies to screw our citizens. But there's too many campaign contributions at stake for politicians to touch Big Pharma.

Our entire system needs a revamp, but the various factions can't talk sensibly about what that is.

Portrait of Radicalism:
Congressman Ryan has been at the forefront of attacking a woman's right to make her own health care decisions.
He co-sponsored a radical "personhood" bill that could have banned the birth control pill, in vitro fertilization, and all abortions -- even in cases of rape or incest. ? He wants to allow states to criminally prosecute women and doctors who perform them.
The middle class pays more so millionaires and big corporations can pay less. Under their plan 4.4 million middle-class Georgia families would face a tax increase. The average tax increase for families with children would be $2,000. While the middle class pays more, the richest Americans would get another $265,000 tax break each.
They would end Medicare as we know it , taking away seniors’ guaranteed benefits that they worked for and replace it with a voucher program. In Georgia, 1,391,252 people would be forced into a voucher system
Cut Federal spending in Georgia by 41.4 percent, the 5th largest cut in the nation
Cut funding for education, including millions in Head Start and special education for Georgia schools
Cut the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program by 10 percent, leading to $284 million less in SNAP payments for 1,591,078 Georgia residents who receive nutrition assistance (17.9 percent of Georgia residents earn an income below the poverty level)
Put at risk more than 275,000 college students who receive Pell grants, a needs-based program for higher education

Hey Tom, why don't you go back to Iran or wherever you learned about civics? This is a majority rule country... Please, go vote to create a welfare system for millionaires, and I'll go cancel out your vote.

The inscription on the Statue of Liberty says " Give us your tired your poor, your huddled masses yearning to be free, give you your homeless tempest tossed to sea"
"I left my lamp beside the Golden Door"
Problem is we got all of those, the homeless, the tired the poor. The people to the right were the ones we want here, that elevated themselves and worked with the Golden Door to Create the dream., the people to the left are still tired poor homeless, and looking to the government for handouts. That their "Golden Door"

don Gabacho you have bought into a bunch of crap. America is still the place where if you work hard and set your mind to it you can become anything you want. If you have failed maybe it is because YOU did something wrong . You sound like Obama "You did not build it someone else did". The same holds true if we re-elect Obama . We the people built him now we the people need to remove him from office at the next vote. I have done well in live made the right choices for the most part and will enjoy the fruits of my labor for a long time. That is if we can remove Obama from the White House this election. Vote NObama .

"don Gabacho you have bought into a bunch of crap."--- Jon Himot

"Bought into"? No one told me. I had to learn it the hard way by being that refugee.

"America is still the place where if you work hard and set your mind to it you can become anything you want.

No longer for everyone.

"If you have failed maybe it is because YOU did something wrong."

How quaint. See what happens to you when you attempt to have your own government bring the MxGov to task for having robbed you. See what happen to you when you file an election complaint of offcials and employees of the MxGov being provided and using still untold numbers of US voter registration forms.

Then you tell me what I somehow "bought into."

"You sound like Obama 'You did not build it someone else did.'

If I sound "like Obama" then its because you are not hearing the message.

Your thinking is limited by petty politics.

All Americans, be they Democrats, Repuiblicans or Independents need to do get this country on back on track is expel the MxGov (and its sub-governance) from the USA.

Until then---yes---America is no longer a refuge for even Americans.

John, that dream is harder to realize.
Taxes on wages and self employment are way more punitive than capital gains taxes.
The new American dream says if you're born with it, it'll be easier to hang on to it.
Neither party is gonna fix THAT, but I would like people making more Han me to at least pay a slightly higher percentage. Obama will fix that. Mitt will make it worse.

Go Obama/Biden!!!!

I agree OMme Go Bama / Biden go back to the end of the unemployment line where they belong. NObama 2012 a time of real change for America and Forward to a better America under a COO and a CFO running the nation. Mitt Romney/Paul Ryan new leaders for a better future for America.

What a democrat paying taxies? Get a pic when you see it , it might be worth some money.

DemoDame, I agree lets get the Fair Tax going but first lets start with 9-9-9 the Herman Cain Plan. Read it understand it push it. Why should you not have to pay taxes Fair is not a Free Ride . Lets see Obama gave 1% of his wealth in tax deductible gifts while Mitt and Wife gave over 18% of their wealth in tax deductible gifts. Obama is not poor by NO means and has been paid millions over the years . Vote for Change and for a better America Vote Romney/Ryan in Nov. Your future your children's future and your grand children's future all depend on how you vote this election. Obama gives them NO future Romney will give them the best chance for a better future.

Himot, 9-9-9 might be a great tax plan...if you live in Sim City. However, it has no basis in reality. I can assure you the Romney's didn't give 18% of their wealth to anyone, although they may have that much in Swiss bank accounts. Their 2010 tax returns show they did tithe approximately 10% of their income to the Mormon Church as all Mormons are required to do (they're sticklers about that kind of thing). That was about $4.5 million. They gave another $500k to their own charitable foundation which looks about as fishy as that $100 million IRA.

Brian Crawford 9-9-9 is a great plan , but like many you have not read up on it and the way it gets us to the fair tax. Records show that Mitt has given 18% of his earnings to charites. Go back to playing your Sims city game while the rest of us deal in reality. Obama reminds me of the credit card ad that asks "What is in your Wallet" .

Romney needed more support from conservatives. Ryan does that.

While the pick declares a show-down triggered by Obama-Care.

Watch Fast & Furious. Obama's & Holder's excuse, propagated by the media also, of a "botch job" and the guns even being sent to "drug lords" per se is a lie.

Issa's comittee will probably time a call for impeachment of Holder to coincide with the key-note speech at Obama's convention.

If Issa and Romney are smart, they'll ask Ted Cruz, who just won the AG of Texas, to prosecute (and be the next USAG).

The pick will certainly drive even more to the polls from both sides.

I wouldn't underestimate Ryan to persuade either.

The "lie" to cover for Mx's military and police being the gangs and Mx a failed state.

Obama said he would be comfortable with the now (still prospective) President of Mexico of PRI. Tens of thousands of Mexicans have been protesting since. The protests will worsen.

Then comes the biggest issue of all: the so-called "immigration."

Almost all Romney would then have to do is say he is not "comfortable" with PRI's new President for Mexico and promise to curtail the acitivities of the MxGov's stateside consulates (which, despite the interim of Fox and Calderon,have always been controlled by PRI) to virutally nothing.

I guess what you are trying to say Brain is that as our country gets more urbanized they also get stupid as well. Only way I can explain why anyone would vote for Obama and most other democrats.

I don't know, as true fiscal conservationist, I'd have to classify going from a $5 trillion surplus to a $6 trillion deficit as the worst president in history.

At least $2 trillion of spending were for programs already put into place by Bush but that didn't take effect until Obama was president.

Additionally, Bush put the war in place which accounts for a lot more of the spending (Obama's ending it) and cut tax revenues.

Finally, the rest of the spending was for stimulus to fix the economy Bush screwed up.

Blame everything on the republican neo-cons. Who controls the house, anyway, and is required to approve any bill to go through? Oh, I forgot - tea partiers.

So Brian, since its all George Bush's fault and those evil neo-con Republicans. Can you educate me on why the Democrats blocked the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005?

We've had 12 years of loose spending and i welcome a known fiscal conservative in the race. I agree all voters have the "gimme gimme's" so its a near vertical uphill battle, but hopefully but some crazy chance and a hanging chad or two Romney and Ryan get elected and start removing heavy levels of entitlement spending. And you Dekalb libs, keep doing what you're doing. I appreciate and smile at your kooky antics ;).

Steely Dan, Did you see Ryan's speech yesterday? He admitted that Obama inherited a mess and had managed to do a lot of the things he said he would do. He did go on to say that in two years he had not managed to fix anything. I'm sorry, but the big mess that he inherited is going to take more than 3 or 4 years to fix. You can call Obama the worst president in history, but I think he's running neck and neck with a couple of Republicans I can think of.

No argument that Bush stunk. But America is worse off 4 years later as a result of the Obamaniac and things are getting worse, not better.

I like this Ryan guy but too many Americans are on welfare or other loser, tax-stealing entitlement programs to vote for cuts to those programs.

America's Large obese population (no pun) won't be voting for entitlement cuts. How would they get around Wal Mart on those scooters without Obama's disability payments that us healthy, non-fat people are subsidizing?

And 100% of the losers who are in unions will vote for the Head Union Boss himself - Obama.

America - 1776-2008. RIP

Thanks Meagan. It's good to see the longer history. Dub-bull-ya Bush was the worst president in my opinion-a pea-brained puppet to Cheney et.al.. Not only the spending but the unilateral declaration of war on Iraq--perhaps the worst thing America has done

How many people do you have to insult to make yourself feel better? Walmart scooters? The majority of those on Welfare that are getting by and raising families on almost nothing? Where is your charity?

@Steely Dan, the title of "worst president in history" is a tie between four Presidents -- sadly all Republicans: U.S. Grant for corruption throughout his administration; Warren G. Harding also for corruption (he was personally involved in it -- unlike Grant); Herbert Hoover (nice guy but impotent during the early Depression); and then our good friend, Richard M. Nixon -- Mr. Watergate. These are the guys that HISTORIANS and political scientists say are the train wreck presidents. You can make up all the BS you want to but there is the truth — if you can handle it. Now, go make some crack about "academics"...

If Romney is smart, he'll have Ryan go after Obama and Biden on ObamaCare while, himself, carefully going after the MxGov's activities in the US even if Ryan upstages Romney in the process.

George Washington's greatest virtue was his willingness to surround himself with persons more brilliant than himself---particularly in Hamilton.

It's high-time the US acquires a Chief Executive who will do that much instead of dedicating himself to empowering himself via abuse of Executive Order and ability to enforce those orders through a DOJ gone wild and the consolidation of all police powers under the colossal and predictable error of DHS (an emulation, witting or not, of the 'corporatist' MxGov's notorious Ministry of the Interior.)

* Notwithstanding the validity or not of his birth certificate, as a public office holder, he had always been obligated to voluntarily produce his birth certificate for public scrutiny. That he refused, and even argued that he was not required to, was in itself a test for immunity from Contempt of the Public Trust.

In that he won; and with that victory, the confidence to amass, without hindrance, unprecedented and illegal powers to himself.

Jeffrey Ryan has more going for him in his little toe then Obama and Biden have between the two of them. A mind is a terrible thing to waste but so goes the Democratic left......Mindless.

Baloney. Both the Republicans and Democrats are engaged in that facecious argument to distract from the truth of the MxGov being provided and having untold numbers of US voter registration forms (since at least 2004).

When the long co-opted media claims how either the Republicans or Democrats are attempting to court the Hispanic vote, you should hear how both are courting the MxGov.

Drinking a little bit to much kool-aid Daniel. Nothing Obama does is Protecting our Freedom. The courts are ruling in favor of Voter ID laws. Got a problem with people proving who they are before they vote? Every Vote counts and should only count once for each person who votes and must be by a American Citizen.

When did living with ones means become a "far right " ideal? I'm sure you understand that our country is driving off a cliff with the accelerator pedal to the floor. Not a day goes by that I don't hear a commercial extolling the easiness to get SNAP or WIC. Really ? The Obama government is actively fostering a depend on government culture. Is this your new Amerika (sp) ? The problem with Socialism is that at some point you run out of other people's money. 5 TRILLION in NEW OBAMA debt in 3 1/2 years.
Wake up for the sake of the next generation of American's that will be paying your bills for the rest of their life.

@Truthseeker.
Quit already with the histrionics, please. You want us to pay the bills? Okay. Here's the way:
Institute a 1% Fed Sales Tax on non-food items for 10 years. The revenues must go *exclusively* to paying down the debt. It's non-partisan. it's inclusive. It would be effective.

Just like a democrat to recommend tax and to trust government to boot. DUH!!!

don Gabacho
"The debate is now going to be centered on cutting Medicare, which is a battle Republicans won't win.."

Actually they can on the whole of ObamaCare.

It would be simple. Laws have always been in place to get a handle on the soaring expenses of health care. They are Anti-Trust laws. And, in the case of soaring expenses, could have been (and must still be) used to go after especially, but not only, groups of medical specialists (orthopedists, etc.) as clinics who fix the prices they charge the insurance companies.

Obama had to have known this but elected to ignore it to impose odious socialism into the fabric of American life; while having to know also that, in effect, forcing everyone to pay the highway-robber sums can only add to the detriment it is to the whole of American society: not remedy it.

Ryan needs to don the suit of a Trust Buster.

On the day of ObamaCare being passed, essentially pro-Obama Atlanta media aired a sympathetic report of a fellow, who has cancer, being overwhelmed with the expenses of his health care (expenses outrageously charged by the clinics to the insurance companies which then, as they would have to to stay in business at all, to the needing consumer).

The report ended with the fellow saying, that if you can't understand my (his) predicament then: "You pay my bills."

Which, in effect, we now must do.

Instead of remedying the problem, via trust-busting, the clinics have, in effect, been given a green light to charge even more! And safely.

The remedial option of suing clinics is now at an end. Unless you want to believe that, with the government now also involved, any suit will somehow not be as futile as suing City Hall. Likewise, "choice of doctors" no matter how promised.

Instead of unchecked charges being a disaster to individuals, it will now be a disaster to all.

While, ironically, the people least capable of affording healh-insurance becoming the most liable for penalty under law!

One way or the other, ObamaCare = the unmitigated BS of an unconscionable opportunist.

Any recommendations?

You're a "centrist" voting for a Socialist? Speaking of finance, have you heard that Socialism has never worked anywhere it's been tried. Ask Greece,Spain,Portugal,Italy,Ireland. ALL bankrupt because they are spending money they don't have on an entitlement society. Capitalism when left alone (not corporate cronyism/political donor benefactor) has done more to elevate people from poverty than any other form of government.
Mr. Centrist, 3 1/2 years in to the Obama debacle, where is the recovery? 5 Trillion in new debt. Where are the jobs? Where are the new businesses openings? Where are the investors? Where are businesses expanding? 1.5%GDP is PATHETIC 3 years after the recession ended. Plugs Biden declared summer of recovery in 2010. Saying there would be 250K new jobs added monthly. 2 years later we're still waiting. So Mr. Centrist, Obama/Plugs is your choice because of all the success in the last 3 1/2 years? With that record of accomplishment you look forward to giving them another 4 years? Yeah, right you're a centrist independent.

Sorry, you lose all credibility when you refer to Obama as a socialist. He's very much a pragmatist and much more in the center than Romney 2012 is, which is why he's going to get re-elected.

Socialism? A republican term that is only reality in their commercials! And when has capitalism ever been left alone without "corporate cronyism.political donor benefactors", um, never!

Socialism is very alive in Obama's early life. Read his books. Look who his friends were before he came to RULE.

Do you even know anything about who the guy you voted for?

Fact : Barack Obama signed a contract with the socialist “New Party” in 1996.
“The ‘New Party’ was a political party established by the Democratic Socialists of America (the DSA) to push forth the socialist principles of the DSA by focusing on winnable elections at a local level and spreading the Socialist movement upwards. The admittedly Socialist Organization experienced a moderate rise in numbers between 1995 and 1999.

In October 1996, The New Party listed an update on their website of New Party candidates who had won their primaries and had good chances of winning their upcoming November elections. In Illinois, Barack Obama was listed as a New Party candidate for the State Senate.

The Progressive Populist also ran an article in November 1996 mentioning the successes of New Party candidates. One success: Barack Obama. The direct quote: “New Party member Barack Obama was uncontested for a State Senate seat from Chicago.” The article goes on to describe the class warfare politics that New Party members, such as Barack Obama, are actively engaged in.

In Obama's autobiography (Obama's opinion of himself obviously), he always went to Marxist and agreed ideologically with Marxist the most.

So actually Obama calls himself a believer in the Marxist form of socialism.

Ryan or Biden Ryan or Biden...........do you realy have to think about this one? Biden is one step away from being brain dead on all the issues. Ryan would give us hope for a better future. Romney/Ryan 2012 the future depends on it.

Obama 2008 - Hope and Change
Obama 2012 - You're Broke and Living on Change

Obama 2012 - Hate and Obfuscate

The same as last time. On the public dime. I think they call it "Forward" something like what Gen.Custard said at the Little Big Horn. His "Change did not work but he is still going "Forward" with it non the less.

That's what I thought. Nothing!

Time will tell

Is is that simple?

"Is is that simple?"---Dbc

Only each side's spiels are.

Too bad the Republicans, almost from the beginning, subordinated the Tea-Partyers. I found it humorous that all speakers at "Tea Party" events, on the steps of our State Capital itself, had to first be approved by the Capital's insiders while the media itself was directed, and allows itself to be directed since, to the (somehow official) Tea Party leader in, if I recall correctly, Dacula (or thereabouts), GA.

Welcome to 'corporatist' government.

Republican and democratic parties did a sort of flop in the last 30-40 years and switched places.

exactly: I said liberal (Ab Lincoln was a republican and liberal.)

now if you want a more current political sided point of view:

“To vote for a Republican means, now, to vote for a plutocracy that depends for its support on anti-government forces like the tea party, Southern racists, religious fanatics, and war investors in the military-industrial complex. It does no good to say that “Romney is a good man, not a racist.” That may be true, but he needs a racist South as part of his essential support. And the price they will demand of him comes down to things like Supreme Court appointments. (The Republicans have been more realistic than the Democrats in seeing that presidential elections are really for control of the courts.)

The independents, too ignorant or inexperienced to recognize these basic facts, are the people most susceptible to lying flattery. They are called the good folk too inner-directed to follow a party line or run with the herd. They are like the idealistic imperialists “with clean hands” in Graham Greene’s The Quiet American—they should wear leper bells to warn people of their vicinity.”

Gary Wills in a piece in the New York Review of Books titled, The Curse of Political Purity.

The above runs more on-line with my current party view.

You do know that the Civil War was fought in the 1860's and the Civil Rights acts, which were continually pushed by Republicans, were placed for passage in the 1950's and 60's. Dems opposed Civil Rights, with the exception of Kennedy/Johnson in the 1900's. If the Congress and President were solely run by Democrats, the Civil Rights act would never have passed the Congress to get to any president's desk for singing or veto.

The Republican Party still remains the only party to back equal rights for all, not ethnic or special or minority rights.

The southern Democrats created the KKK to oppose all the Republican laws enacted after the Civil War. The Democrats restricted the rights of others to benefit their party. Because more blacks existed in the south than whites, the Democrats had to get past the fair voting laws. It was the Democratic voter laws that needed overturned by the Civil Rights acts pushed by the Republicans. The biggest complaint was the Republicans didn't try hard enough, not that they didn't try to overturn the Democrat voting restrictions.

Much like our voter ID laws today, the Dems want to fraudulently elect officials through manipulating the voting box like they've historically done.

"Much like our voter ID laws today, the Dems want to fraudulently elect officials through manipulating the voting box like they've historically done.---Greg T.

True. While both the Republicans and Democrats---at best---refuse to id even voter registrars as officials and employees also of a foreign power: the MxGov.

don Gabacho, scary isn't it; that foreigners (those who don't have citizenship) can determine who are our (American) representatives. We're getting back to where we started, taxation without representation.

Greg T...It's scary that people like you would rather prevent 10, a 100 or more American citizens from voting to prevent the possibility of one foreigner from voting, especially when there hasn't been but a few foreigners busted from voting illegally. Heck, for a democratic nation, we trail the world in getting its own citizens to vote.

Instead of focusing on these supposed voting illegals, we should be focusing on getting 90%+ voter participation, but that would spell bad news for your party.

Frank, you don't know how they would vote. Nice straw man. I find it interesting that you don't care if there is voter fraud, in fact you seem rather comfortable with it. Most Hispanics typically voted Republican because our values are the same. Most Hispanics relate to the Catholic faith and values of family, faith and honesty. The Democratic Party no longer tolerates faith and the traditional family. It is interesting that Democrats have to buy votes instead of win them.

1) Medicare as we know it is bankrupt, it is out of money. Both parties admit that reform is mandatory, not optional. Our fearless leader and the Dems choose to do nothing. Ryan is the only one with the walnuts to actually propose a solution. That solution has been resoundingly distorted and demonized with lies on purpose. Hoping to snare air balls like you.
2) SNAP commercials have been running non stop in Atlanta for the last 3 years. You can own a million dollar home and still be eligible for food stamps. The food stamp program has increased 70 % since 2007. How dare Ryan propose applying income and asset limits to eligibility. It's interesting that they all have cell phones, cable, x boxes with $50 games but they can't pay for food.
3) Really? Why don't you just parrot some more mindless lib talking point.
4) See answer 3
5) Hey Sandra Fluck - You can afford to pay $10 bucks for an extra large box of condoms. Pay for you own contraceptives. I know you want to implement your govt is god belief system on others, but it is against the Constitution to force people to fund something that is against their moral conscience.
Obama has made more people loose their health care then any Republican. Further implementation of Obamacare will put the final nail in the coffin of the best health care system in the world.

Obamacare will end Medicare as we know it by cutting payments to doctors by 30percent in the first three years.......and will be governed by unelected individuals appointed without congressional approval, by the president. Ryan's plan will not affect anyone over 55. You can also choose to stay in or choose to use your own plan. What is wrong with open market?

Yea Yea Yea. Anything else?

And what has Obama done for you? Free phone?

Hmmm. Let me help you out here:

His budget proposal will add more than $5 TRILLION to the deficit because the Democrats believe that any extra capital in the private sector (which is doing just fine) will completely disappear and not promote GDP growth.

TRICKLE DOWN DOES NOT WORK in promoting a centralized economy and government dependency. After all, don't think at a certain point you've made enough money?

His budget will benefit those who have the most and hurt those who have the least because wealth envy promotes an emotional response rather than a logical one. After all, this has worked so well over the past 4 years.

Your right, Lissa. We had a huge surplus when Clinton was in office which was decimated after GWB's reign w/ tax cuts which added to the fortunes of those making the most and nothing for the rest except to add to the deficit. Now they don't want to give anything back & take away our Medicare and SSecurity (which of course, they don't need)

Cutting taxes works. Would you stay and pay 75% of your income in taxes like the French want? The top 20% pay almost all of the taxes. They pay their share and more. The botton 50% needs to pay something. They pay nothing.
Obama has taken money from Medicare to pay for ObammaCare. Which we can't afford and will never work.
When you cut Unemployment, people get a job. Extended unemployment is being paid for with SS money. SS is broke. Just gov IOUs.
Medicare, Unemployment, welfare, taxes all need to be reformed.
PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY!
Save for your retirement, buy unsurance, get trained for a good job.
The workers can't and won't take care of you. Put a time limit on welfare and a 2 kid limit. Enough already. Grow up.

JFK cut taxes...it worked......

IRS figures...top 20 percent earn 33 percent of the income and pay 67 percent of taxes. 47 percent of population pay NO taxes....so wheat is fair.

Conservatives don't like Teachers Unions. Obama loves all unions. Don't complain about the educational system unless you're willing to fight for better. Choice is better. Quit nagging and do for yourself. Geez!!!

Lissa - I don't believe in "trickle down". I believe in working for what you want and not letting excuses stand in your way. There are American success stories from every race, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, or combination. When it comes to money no one spends there money better in there own interest than the person that worked for it. When government spends your money they are not nearly as judicious as you or I would be. Look at DeKalb Schools as the closet example.

I'm a conservative - not a democrat or republican. I like pieces of the ACA (Healthcare Act), and accept that it is going to change our healthcare system for the better. I am concerned though it will put Medicare into insolvency by 2020 and that Congress will use Social Security to offset that gap.

You really should challenge your own prejudice against republicans. While many are conservative not all are against supporting programs that provide for the most of the needy.

Subsidies for oil companies and tax exemptions for religious institutions. Next.

Why not defense? It's long past the time where our spending can be justified with a straight face. It's time to bring the Reagan-era military spending spree to a quick halt. Right now our military consumes more than the military budgets of the next 23 largest countries combined, and six times that of China, the next biggest military spender. I'd personally like to see that capped at the sum total of the next five countries, which would result in a 25% reduction. I would also like to see a Constitutional amendment where in an emergency, Congress has the ability to lift that cap, with automatic across-the-board tax increases and a separate line item on your tax return to account for it, so as not to be able to hide the cost of our military from the taxpayers.

The DEA. Just legalize drugs across the board at the federal level, and zero out their budget. Retroactively pardon anyone convicted of simple possession, and you'll be able to cut the BOP budget by about 40%.

As others have mentioned, the multiple billion in oil subsidies can go as well. As can corn subsidies. (we'll have to remove price controls as well - there's a floor on prices, but there's also a ceiling - we need to fix that.)

So, there are five programs this lifelong Democrat would like to cut. What are yours?

One government program...tax cuts to the rich are ruining us...let's get rid of that program!

Dbc, the fact that half of this nation doesn't pay Fed-Income tax. That's what's ruining us. Those are the morons voting for democrats so they get more entitlements.

@Paul...maybe you should check your "facts". The IRS just released the stats on the top highest income 400 individuals and tax stats they paid. Six paid no taxes with over @200million in income and it goes on from there. Loopholes abound for the highest earners t(and their high priced accountants to get out of their tax liabilites. and stop with the name calling...again, not becoming!
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/06/us-column-dcjohnston-top-idUSBRE85500720120606

Dbc, I agree with that. It certainly isn't right for HUGE corporations like GE to be exempt from tax burdens. I was quick to respond here because it's become way too common for those making $250/yr to be considered rich. They may be rich to the average individual but they may also own a small business and Obama will now tax them as if they were millionaire rich.

Dbc, do you think that Dems would support a flat tax and simple tax code to eliminate the loopholes you so despise and detest?

Join those who support a flat tax or simple progressive tax. Let's see if you just want a talking point or a solution.

@Greg T...I absolutely support a flat simple progressive tax, but it won't happen. Too many with big money get out of paying taxes. Why would they want to change the tax code? This is not a Rep/Dem issue (just an issue with too much lobby $$ in DC) which, I am convinced, will not be resolved until the tea party runs its course. Not soon enough, we have to find our way back to center!

Dbc, blaming the Tea Party for our decades long problems with a complicated tax code is really an over the top fallacious straw man.

The "center" created the tax code that even the IRS doesn't understand. Only those outside the "center," like the Tea Party or the Occupy group could possibly challenge the status quo. You rail against so many other issues that "simply won't happen," why not make tax reform an issue for your cause as well?

Defense is already taking a hit. We are having to cut $50 billion, reduce troop strength and double our Tricare medical premiums. So that is the reason I exclude defense. Nobody else is subject to such actions.

I hope your corporate welfare subsidies to cut out include those targeted to Hollywood. Yeah that will make you a hero. Oil subsidies I'll buy if you allow us to drill our own resources. Trying to cut AG subsidies won't win you any friends in the Midwest, in light of the recent drought which is wreaking havoc. You are always stuck with defining 'big'. Measured by what metric? Acres owned? Number of tractors? Amount of livestock?

If we don't CUT, who is going to pay? We borrow 40% of what we spend now.

Gee, can you handle some real numbers or would you rather continue to hyperventilate over throwing grandma off a cliff. Actual federal government expenditures as compiled by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=1258 Defense - 20% Social Security - 20% Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP - 21% Safety net programs - 13%

The 2 biggest expenditures of the federal government is Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. Unless you address those two you are never going to even get on the path to fiscal sanity. I know, I know, quit scaring the senior citizens, but the numbers don't lie. You can change these programs without eliminating them but oh heaven forbid you should even talk about that. This is the 21st century folks. Programs that were thought up in the 40's and 60's simply are not viable anymore. If you are unwilling to change, then one of Darwins laws takes effect. Adapt or die.

Oh those programs you were talking about being eliminated, they are already under that 3.75% threshold you cite. No effect.

I don't think you understand. If the country adopted Paul Ryan's budget plan government spending would eventually be 3.75 percent (per CBO analysis) of GDP which is roughly the amount that is spent on defense right now. Even if military spending was lowered to say 3 percent, everything else would be gone for all intents and purposes.

We can print as much money as people are willing to lend us.Check out the low interest rates on treasury bills.We should be spending more not less money,especially on infrastructure projects.This would also solve the unemployment problem.

YES YES PRINT THAT MONEY!!! .... Spend it ALL....
UNTIL the day when we can get no more, ah but then how do you pay when the demand is made ... With an Oops we didn't think you'd want it back?

Budget deficits didn't start with GW Bush. Contrary to popular belief history is not divided into two eras known as "Bush" and "Not Bush". I am glad you brought up Clinton though. His budget success is due to a couple of factors. One, he limited the growth of federal expenditures to 3% and thanks to the dot-com bubble, million more was collected in taxes then expected. But don't take my word for it. Here is Factcheck.org http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-budget-and-deficit-under-clinton/
The Clinton years showed the effects of a large tax increase that Clinton pushed through in his first year. It fell almost exclusively on upper-income taxpayers. Clinton’s fiscal 1994 budget also contained some spending restraints. An equally if not more powerful influence was the booming economy and huge gains in the stock markets, the so-called dot-com bubble, which brought in hundreds of millions in unanticipated tax revenue from taxes on capital gains and rising salaries.

Those tax rates? http://www.forbes.com/sites/charleskadlec/2012/07/16/the-dangerous-myth-about-the-bill-clinton-tax-increase/

In 1997, Clinton signed a reduction in the (audible liberal gasp) capital gains tax rate to 20% from 28%.
The 1997 tax cuts also included a phased in increase in the death tax exemption to $1 million from $600,000, and established Roth IRAs and increased the limits for deductible IRAs.
Annual growth in federal spending was kept to below 3%, or $57 billion.

The 1993 Clinton tax increase raised the top two income tax rates to 36% and 39.6%, with the top rate hitting joint returns with incomes above $250,000 ($400,000 in 2012 dollars). In addition, it removed the cap on the 2.9% Medicare payroll tax, raised the corporate tax rate to 35% from 34%, increased the taxable portion of Social Security benefits, and imposed a 4.3 cent per gallon increase in transportation fuel taxes.

Current corporate tax rate is 39.2%. Yes let's cut that rate to the Clinton era rate of 35%.

Neither one of these things addresses my questions, so I'll ask you again to be academic. What happens if the Bush tax cuts expire for those making over 250K????
And as for the Forbes article; I will admit to not knowing the effect of the tax increases versus tax cuts had on the economy during Clinton's term, but the author sure seems convinced changes in the estate tax and establishment of Roth IRAs seemed to make all the difference. And of course he ignores the fact that the tax hike on the top earners, which he paints as the culprit for modest growth from 1992-1996, was maintained until 2001. How do you account for this? Don't try to slip Charles Kedlic's weak arguments by me.....

So, how many of these uborn children have you signed up to adopt since you're pro-life?

Aren't you afraid he wants in your uterus? Lissa K is.

Are you afraid Romney want to get in you uterus? Really? That's what this is all bout? Your uterus?

@Paul...what do you know about uterus'? About as much as most male politicians!

I'm a OBGYN in my spare time.

If the uterus is the standard, you MUST have hated Bill Clinton!

Government is a bloated, money sucking leach on productive society.

http://blog.heritage.org/2012/08/10/agriculture-department-pays-2-million-for-a-single-intern/

There's a million more just like this. But we can't ever cut anything in government, we can only spend more.

I have a website too. Did you do the design yourself? It's not very good.

Republicans today are freeloaders. (Yeah, I don’t know a single Republican who pays taxes.)

Who pays for the Eisenhower interstate system you drive in? (Depends, do you want more tax revenue or higher tax rates? I think the term is called growing your tax base rather than taxing it dry.)

They go to emergency rooms without health insurance and expect care. (So, are you claiming that the majority of people that go to emergency rooms and don’t have health insurance are Republican?)

Let's repeal Reagan's law that hospitals care for the uninsured. (Ah yes, the old scare tactic like Republicans will starve the children and throw grandma out into the street rather than address the issues. Maybe this is why some people have lost patience with this approach.)

They love war. (Again, purely an emotional response with no logic.)

Army housing and the v a hospitals are govt housing and healthcare. Let's get rid if those. (I think the bigger question is how are you going to pay for anything if you continue to reduce your tax base?)

Deficit solved.... (According to the Democrats in 2008 this would cut in half by 2012. I rest my case.)

I don't know anyone with a FREE cell phone voting Republican!

Heck I'd just be THRILLED if the Dem controlled Senate would simply allow the DEBATE on one, a budget BY ANYONE at this point...

He'll be here all week folks!!!

I love this part:

"America will be thrown back into the 1800's" LOL

Or this part:

"Deficits will run rampant." Like there aren't running rampant now?

That's why the republicans are going to lose the election.Good summary!

So Frank, which county do you live in? Dekalb or Clayton? The scary part is there are people in this country who actually believe that litany of gloom and doom. I think he forgot the earth will stop spinning, grizzlies will mate with penguins, and 32 oz Big Gulps will cause the oceans to rise wiping out life as we know it. Relax a little, if the Republicans win you still got that Mayan thing working for ya.

Obama's already thrown us back into the 1930s. Another 4 years of Obama and we'll be thrown back into the 1700s. Hopefully back to the year 1776.

Actually I want the republicans to all get voted in take it all. Let them pass the most extreme polices. Only then it will wake up these people who continue to vote against their own best interests. Because Ive seen a few right wingers turn left when it affect them not those lazy people.
Also alittle aside, when W was spending like a drunked sailor and Cheney was saying Deficits dont matter. Little Paulie was very very quiet.

Lets not forget that GUAM may tip over and capsize BEFORE we get to the 1800s..

If we had a $6 trillion dollar budget deficit we would indeed be in serious trouble. It's actually less than one-fifth of that. The annualized growth in government spending is the lowest it's been since before Reagan's huge expansion of government. http://articles.marketwatch.com/2012-05-22/commentary/31802270_1_spending-federal-budget-drunken-sailor

Frank LOVES deficit spending and hates fiscal conservatism. Frank loves anything that increases people's taxes and decreases gov't efficiency while demanding no accountability.

Frank's one of those types who believes that Only The Gov't Can Save You. He's left of Obama himself and likely a union-lover to boot.

Brian surely you mean the Democratic House and Senate PASSED huge expansion of government of the Eighties.

Got to keep the loonies on the path ...

Is that what you'll call it? Happy Days? Are you deaf, dumb and blind?

How do you know how they vote? Do you stand there with them?

Love it!

This quote comes to mind:

“In politics, few talents are as richly rewarded as the ability to convince parasites that they are victims. Welfare states on both sides of the Atlantic have discovered that largesse to losers does not reduce their hostility to society, but only increases it. Far from producing gratitude, generosity is seen as an admission of guilt, and the reparations as inadequate compensation for injustices – leading to worsening behavior by the recipients. - Thomas Sowell

To be specific, my Love It comment in ref: to DemoDame!

If you are jealous of the rich, why don't you become rich? Free country right? Of course it's a lot harder with dems in the senate and white house. Remember those shovel ready jobs? Obama found out that they weren't shovel ready because his Government Regulations were blocking progress. Do figure. Just blame the rich. How many employees do you have on payroll?

Hear, hear Greengirl!

@Paul....it's not about blaming the rich or wanting to be rich. It's about a fair playing field and equal opportunity for all. Since the 1980s we have been declining in economic mobility for all. We are turning into an oligarchy which is not healthy for a democratic republic. It is more in line instead with a monochary.

http://www.google.com/imgres?um=1&hl=en&sa=N&rlz=1T4GGLL_enUS311US311&biw=1440&bih=708&tbm=isch&tbnid=T5-wD_BPS2dFuM:&imgrefurl=http://moneyland.time.com/2012/01/05/the-loss-of-upward-mobility-in-the-u-s/&docid=L96vlKsVBV4vAM&imgurl=http://timecheapskate.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/chart.jpg%253Fw%253D580&w=580&h=386&ei=pzQoUO7XBoWc9QTNzoGABw&zoom=1

http://www.decisionsonevidence.com/2012/05/the-inverse-relationship-between-inequality-and-economic-mobility-threatens-the-american-dream/

Oh and Obama isn't a Dictator? Quit dreaming. Those days were gone long before the 80's.

Democrats putting unnecessary regulations on businesses like your "Go-Green initiatives are what is killing the American Dream.

What's amazing about this post is the anti-business sentiment. You do know that it’s the businesses that create the wealth in this nation, both in terms of individuals and in terms of the government tax base. Government can’t create wealth.

And further, you think that putting your foot down is going to hurt business. Got news for you, most US corporations are moving their operations overseas. Not only in terms of production but also in terms of selling their goods. International growth markets like Central and South America and Asia are where it’s at with business growth. I don’t know too many corporations that want anything to do with starting an operation here.
What Greengirl doesn’t understand is that wealth is created by productivity, not employment. And without productivity your tax base erodes and money problems start as the level of wealth in this nation falls.
The laws of economics are no respecter of nations and the wealth of the world will increase with or without America.

Most of that 50% figure are the working poor—people making minimum wage who make too much money for many social services but not enough to actually live on. These are the people who clean the toilets in hotel rooms we vacation in, who serve the food and bus the tables in restaurants we eat in and who do the much of the backbreaking manual labor most of us do not want to do.

Because the minimum wage is not a living wage and because the Fed has not raised it to match inflation, IRS allows those workers to use the Earned Income Credit to adjust their Federal tax liability.

My question is this---Why is it OK for Mitt Romney to use the US Tax Code to pay no taxes on millions (billions?) of dollars he has in offshore and Swiss bank accounts but it’s somehow an egregious thing for a dishwasher to do the same thing just to survive?

And if we're going to debate who paid what taxes, I'd like to see Romney's tax returns prior to 2010. Among other things I'd like to see if he participated in the 2009 Tax Amnesty Program.

What ever you say blabber mouth. You dems make up your facts as you go. What ever makes you miserable. Because we know that dems love to be miserable and they love to share the emotion.

@Paul, your comment is unbecoming

Democrats are unbecoming. Sue me.

Just putting construction workers to work will not fix the problem. The problem with this approach is that it just creates more debit for government. It takes the tax base of this nation to reach a level of productivity, that in turn generates a flow of tax revenues that allow this type construction.
Let me try another approach. Think of the tax base of this nation to be something similar to your garden. You and your garden have a deal. You take care of the garden and the garden feeds you. You go out and start picking all the fruit pretty soon there is no food.
Other counties take good care of their tax base, they invite these evil rich people to come and build factories while we here in the America threaten them with higher taxes to pay our debit. It’s a no brainer there, I would be off to that other country in a heartbeat.
So you might say at this point, we’ll tax them anyway. Try sending a tax bill to a Hong Kong billionaire and let me know how that works out.

Sorry Paul...but DemoDame is right about the Federal Money being sent back to Washington. Also, many states in the North and West that accepted the money have seen unemployment numbers go down.

As I recall, there was federal money for rail systems and transportation that was sent back. I remembered that when I voted no to TSPLOST...and then laughed as I drove home.

That wasn't the lie I was talking about. But since you bring it up, how much time do you spend checking on the voting habits of your freeloading, Republican voting homies?

That's typical "Rush 101", get upset and throw a tantrum. You will see much more when they realize Romney is still at the top of their ticket and the Sarah Palin effect kicks in. Obama '12 & Clinton '16.

So true...but when you speak to those with Blinders on and Ear Plugs in....you might as well talk to a brick wall...

I think I would first trust the editing rooms of the democrats at NBC news.

Paul you can now add CBS's democrats in the (selective) editing room. Paul Ryan's comment was "mysteriously" cut short while making a statement that the editing department didn't want Florida seniors to hear.
Can it get any more obvious that MSM objective journalism is dead?

After 4 years of Obama'nomics, I'm just Hoping I can find some Change.

Remember: You didn't find that ...

Attn, All Democrats. You heard it here first. Isley reminds all dems that voting day IS Nov. 4. Mark your calendars and don't miss it. Isley, If elected, I will do my best to fix all of America's problems and restore this nation to the Great Republic it once was. Thank you.

Sober up, Paul!

To take this further, I think allowing businesses that have money overseas to be reinvested back in the US without being taxed would generate a huge turnaround. John Chambers, CEO of Cisco Systems, has been saying this for years. Most US business are not bring that money back in the US due to the high taxes. So that money is invested in jobs in other countries. To me that is just a dumb tax policy this country has.

So these corporations shipped jobs over seas, made big profits, and now we should let them bring the money back into the country tax free?

Well Greengirl, as it stands now no one in the US is getting any of it. As they say in the south: "Its a gone pecan."

US Corporations have been sending jobs overseas for years...Apple for example. Of course they spend major $$ to lobbyist to make sure they don't have to pay taxes. They get around our employment laws (hello...child labor!) and then they want to come back and not pay taxes? They put nets around these US sweat shops in China so their workers (slaves) can't jump off. Then we buy their products?

Yes, another Republican saying we need less regulation. We need to go back to Glass Steagal that prevented commercial banks from intermixing with investment banks and taking safe prudent home loans and turning them into a commodity sold based on speculative practices. How has that worked out for us? Do you also want to weaken environmental regulations where industries are allowed to dump chemicals into our waterways unfettered resulting in instances such as the Cuyahooga River catching on fire multiple times and kepone laced fish in the James River? Businesses are sitting on the money because greed is their God, and they hope Mitt Romney will give them a huge tax break in re-patrioting the money off the backs of hard working Americans who have lost their jobs to that outsourcing to India. My husband is a small business owner, and he has never felt any pressure from federal or state government in hiring unless you are one of those who thinks you should not screen out illegal aliens for hiring?

DemoDame
Are you sure there is NOT a typo in the following text?

"My husband is a small business owner, and he has never felt any pressure from federal or state government in hiring unless you are one of those who thinks you should not screen out illegal aliens for hiring?"

I read the quote as it relates to modern times. George Soros comes to mind.

Well Paul, you can read it that way. But here's the problem, as long as you wage war on businesses you will continue to suppress job growth. As you suppress job growth along with a growing population there is going to come a breaking point.

You can’t keep put people on government dependency while at the same time killing job growth. The two trends can not continue indefinitely and I think most people see this reality.

I don't think Lincoln was reffering to war on business. I suppose it's self interpretation.

Now here's a bit of traction...

Democrats will spend this country into oblivion you dolt.

And liberals who spout MSNBC talking points are an equal or greater threat to our country. "We need independent thinkers who can reason for themselves!" "Doctor" Frank, heal thyself!!
Unearned income is taxed at lower rates so as not to stifle the kind of economic activity it is derived from. Everybody's income is subject to income tax and payroll taxes (up to certain limits, for example $110,000 for Social Security).
And NOBODY's income is subject to sales tax. Sales tax is paid when you buy something. Dont want to pay sales tax? Leave the money in your pocket. I'd tell you to put it the bank but I'm sure you'll recite some idiotic anti-bank rant from Kieth Olbermann...maybe you should just bury it in an old coffee can in your backyard.

@Jimmy...I have executive level managerial experience in a $2.5 billion holding company and performed many mergers, acquisitions, and start-ups and know that capital gains tax rates aren't considered when entrepreneurs look at investments. The argument for low long-term capital gain rates are a ploy, a lie, by those with money to accumulate even greater wealth. Raising the rates to 25% to 35% would not negatively impact investor decisions.

As to Payroll Taxes...the government created a funding mechanism for Social Security and Medicare. At the time, they applied the tax to Earned Income (W-2 & Self-Employment) and capped the the income subject to the tax. This funding mechanism worked due to the number of people drawing SS & Med , shorter life expectancies, and a growing population of workers. Times have changed and the funding mechanism must change.

For most people, 100% of their income is subject to Payroll Taxes. For the wealthy and ultra-wealthy, only a small fraction is subject to the tax. As such, the poor working-class people pay the same or higher effective tax rate that the wealthy class. That isn't right.

On sales taxes...There is a base level of expenses for simply living in America. For the working class, this base level of expenses consume virtually all of their income and as such, they pay sales tax on virtually all of their income. Once again, the wealthy only pay sales tax on a very small % of their income.

You need tax knowledge.

Frank Jones wrote:

"* Republicans call the 49% of Americans who don't pay Federal Income Tax deadbeats and freeloaders. And yet, half of these "freeloaders" are retirees who have already paid their fairshare. And most of the other half, simply make too little to pay income tax but yet pay payroll taxes, sales taxes, and other taxes. Republicans should lose these voters. "

Couldn't agree more....I am not a republican or a democrat. I've worked and paid taxes for 30 years. I cringe everytime I hear Ryan and Romney say...

"Our plan does not affect anyone 55 or older"... with regards to Medicare.

Well hell....30 yrs ago when I started paying into Medicare...I never thought that as I am 9 yrs from 55 that someone would say...we have changed to rules you deadbeat stop looking for a handout. Has this deadbeat already paid for 30yrs. Its not the governments money...its our money!!!

@GregRodgers - "never thought that as I am 9 yrs from 55 that someone would say...we have changed to rules you deadbeat stop looking for a handout."

Medicare or Social Security is not a handout. I don't even think of it as an entitlement. It's a CONTRACT--one that I had no choice but to participate in. And for the past three decades I've held up my part of the contract and I expect the government to hold up their part of it.

It's not a contract, it's a tax. Ryan will simply collected it in the past. Republicans don't raise taxes anymore, they can presently only had raised taxes.

Nonsense. Really ? Not for ourselves? When they lay off thousands and then take multimillion dollars bonuses. Please tell me how that's for a better country or walmart employees have to use gov programs to survive but the waltons are worth billions. Please let me know how that helps the country. Or cutting education so no taxes are raised tell me how that helps the country. Or college students having mortgage sized debts. How does that help?

Of course business owners are interested in saving their businesses. That's the point. Business owners don't start a company with the end goal being employment of people. The goal is profit. That's why we work long hours and sweat through the hardships.
No one forces college students to have debt at all. If someone chooses to go into debt instead of earning the money first, how can another be blamed? Again, it's called personal responsibility.

Big business destroys our country. It's the small businesses that help the country. Big businesses hurts the economy because it prevents the free-flow of money. Big businesses pinch off the supply. Demo or republican, we need to fight the influence of big business and fight to support small businesses.

Big businesses may be more "lean" and "efficient" but this is due to stifling competition and innovation, and at the expense of jobs. They wouldn't be so lean and efficient if the environment where small businesses could compete with large ones. Especially in the tech world, most innovation comes from small businesses. Big businesses just gobble them up before they can become disruptive.

By making Paul Ryan Vice-President you also make him the president of the Senate and able to cast the deciding vote in matters of legislation which result in a tied vote. In effect you have moved him from the House to the Senate.

I don't recall foreign policy being an issue when the guy currently holding the office was running and his only experience was being a community organizer in Chicago. In fact it was touted as some what of an advantage. If we don't get our economy back on firm footing we are going to have very little sway in foreign matters. When is the last time you heard of anybody listening to Greece?

I would say that the fact that Obama was a member of the New Socialist Party makes him pretty far left.

People, people, people...You may hate Obama but constantly belittling him as just a community organizer is ridiculous. Obama is a highly educated individual with work experience:

* Degree in political science from Columbia University.
* Law degree from Harvard Law School
* Editor of the Harvard Law Review
* Graduate Magna Cum Laude

He also practiced law.

I know you love GWB, but let's face it, he was an intellectual moron who rode his daddy's coattails his entire life. Instead of serving in Vietnam, he chickened out and got a cozy Air National Guard position in Texas. Instead of fulfilling his full commitment, he got a early release. This, while other non-politically connected young men were dying in Vietnam.

As to GWB's personal life, he was a drunk/party-boy, with mediocre grades.

So true Frank Jones....Obama was also a Law Professor in Chicago..

Barry "Choom gang" Obama was a D student who used his status as a foreign student to get preferential, affirmative action treatment at Occidental, Columbia and Harvard.

“I spent the last two years of high school in a daze…. attending classes sparingly, drank beer heavily, tried drugs enthusiastically…” - Barack Obama (Dreams of My Father)

He''s spent millions dollars making sure all records from every school he attended is sealed. Only President to ever do that. Hummmm. What is he hiding if he was so brilliant? The fact that he wasn't. As well as his foreign student status.

Do your own homework. I don't have to prove facts. They're out there for anyone looking.

He won't be able to show you any facts, that's not how they operate. Some people believe anything that's on the internet or Fox News.

Obviously you completely missed the socialized medicine law that passed. Um.. the Deplorable Care Act. The take over of GM (what you guys call saving the auto industry).
How about amnesty for Illegal Mexican Criminals?

Socialized medicine? 1. Not even close. 2. Designed by Mitt Romney.

Paul...Do you already have health insurance? If so, the ACA will only impact you by reducing your costs and adding benefits. So shut up, it doesn't affect you.

If you don't have insurance, I don't want to pay your bills when you declare bankruptcy after you have an unexpected illness or accident.

Even worse than Bush? Please explain? Let me help you, is it because he is Black?

I agree that Obama was a divider simply because the racist Republican party can't handle his color, his eloquent speaking (especially compared to GWB), his intellect, and the fact that he can dunk a ball.

I do not believe Obama was a divider. Most Americans do not feel this way. Most Americans like Obama and see Republicans as Obstructionists who have latched onto the Tea Party and Ideals which have made THEM the biggest dividers in the country.

These are facts found in the polls.

Many of the Cubans who left WERE the rich or at least the upper middle class so of course they didn't envy the rich here, they identified with them. But there's second and third generations of Cubans now in New York and Miami and not all of them are focussed on the events of the 1950s and 1960s.

Newt is not a good person... Cubans do not like liars like Newt. He embarrassed President Clinton which I was not a fan of anyway and he was doing the same thing... What's wrong with supporting Capitalism....

So we need he Fair Tax.

Paul...You need to read and understand the Fair Tax. I have and it is the furthest thing from fair! It will shift the lion's share of taxes to the poor and working class while cutting taxes for the wealthiest. The "Fair Tax" will turn the richest Americans into the dead-beats and moochers you detest.

CLEARLY you know absolutely nothing about the Fair Tax. How bout learning it and then comment?

The "fair" tax is scheme that some Limbaugh wanna be talk show host came up with isn't it? A thirty percent national sales tax if I'm not mistaken.

Under the Houston plan, basic necessities such as housing are reimbursed, thereby removing them from taxation. Otherwise, it's based on pure consumption. The more you spend, the more you pay. What scares the left is that it will remove power from the Washington politicians who can no longer dole out pork to their favorite projects and people. And BOTH sides have been proven guilty of this. The Fair Tax is the only way to tax Americans.

Brian, most of what BStein posts is trash, but I expected more from you. Even though I disagree w/you on just about everything, you normally at least take the time to be somewhat knowledgeable about a subject before commenting on it. You clearly know nothing about the FairTax's origins, research & percentage...unless you're deliberately trying to mislead people. If you don't like it, that's one thing, but if you really have an argument against it you should be able to do it on its merits w/o resorting to misinformation &/or demagoguery.

@Bill...yeah, under the "Fair Tax" the government will give "rebates" for sales taxes on basic necessities. Right! How long will that last? And they'll forget to adjust the rebate for inflation. Then, you'll cry foul that they shouldn't be giving any rebates to anyone...so POOF! It'll be gone.

Sorry Chris, I guess I was being a little flip. I've done my research and while I'm certainly no expert on the Fair Tax I know enough to see it for what it is; a national sales tax. They lost me when they insisted on voodoo math to come up with a figure of 23% when it is by any normal definition a 30% sales tax. I encourage anyone to read the book and the rebuttals and decide for themselves.

Brian, yes, the FairTax is a national sales tax…nobody's ever tried to position it as anything other than that. As for the rate, there's nothing "voodoo" about it. The rate is stated as a tax-inclusive rate of 23% so that it can be accurately compared to the taxes it proposes to replace. If you prefer quoting the tax-exclusive rate, that's fine, but quote the income/payroll taxes the same way to keep the apples-to-apples comparison.

I too encourage people to read up on both sides of the subject. That said, it's hard to find an honest critique that compares apples-to-apples & doesn't make demonstrably false/misleading arguments. Even GWB's tax panel used it's own criteria & assumptions to evaluate the FT instead of evaluating the law as it is written. The FT isn't perfect by any means, but if you can find an honest critique, you'll still find that it compares very favorably to all alternatives.

The topic is too nuanced to cover adequately here, but it's VASTLY superior to the system we have today. A flat tax could work, but its still a tax on production & keeps the current collection apparatus in place. Nevermind that the current monstrosity that is our tax code started out as a flat tax. Additionally, the FT offers many benefits that people of any political stripe can get behind. Heck, all its other pros/cons aside, if nothing else it eliminates all the loopholes/special interest favors that have made the current system the travesty it is today.

Bill - they'll just come up with an elaborate system to remove the tax from certain items in certain states. Then they'll spend money on pork projects just the same.

Plus, the fair tax is regressive. It hurts the poor disproportionately vs the people who are able to save and can offset the pounding they get from savings when they have to spend a lot (or when they buy that yacht).

The fair tax is a gimmick. Creating a multi-party system and eliminating the two-party system is the solution.

Again, you OBVIOUSLY know othing about THE Fair Tax. Not my tax.
Typical liberal answer though. At least I'm not surprised. Obviously, very FEW politicians will go for it as it takes a lot of power from government. Forget the TRILLIONS it could bring back to this country. You liberals are content with the over-spending which is running us in the ground.

Paul- You have reprimanded 2 of B Stein's comments- but offered no specifics of what particulars you believe he has misinterpreted. Is that you don't believe the tax is regressive? If so, why not simply state that, and if not, what is your beef other than you disagree (apparently vehemently) with his political ideology?

MS and BS, Once again you fail to do any homework of your own. Under the FairTax,families living at the poverty level will pay no federal sales tax at all and those under the poverty level will actually have negative tax rates. In fact, the FairTax is the only proposal, including current law, that completely "untaxes" the poor by (1) eliminating the payroll tax, a highly regressive tax that only targets wages
(2) eliminating hidden federal taxes, corporate income taxes and payroll taxes that businesses pass on to consumers in the form of higher prices.
(3)assuring that no American pays taxes on spending up to the poverty level. The rebate feature of the FairTax assures its progressivity and, in fact, makes it as progressive as current tax law.
To illustrate the plan's progressive nature we can examine the tax burden that a family of four will have at various annual income levels (or in this case, annual spending levels) if we assume they save nothing. A family of four that spends $20,000 per year will pay no federal sales tax at all. They will have a negative effective tax rate of -10.8% due to the rebate system. The rebate system assures that no American will pay taxes on the necessities of life. A family of four that spends $29,420 per year will have an effective tax rate of 0%; they will pay no federal sales tax at all. In summary, under the FairTax those who spend more pay more but the effective tax rate for everyone is less than 23%.

As for your assertion that it "costs between $600 & 700 billion dollars" FairTax is imposed at a rate that provide revenue equal to the amount currently generated by the income tax, including all payroll taxes and capital gains taxes, estate and gift taxes, corporate income and self-employment taxes.
But I guess you know more than the 10 years of research that went into the plan.

Amen.......should have picked Herman Cain or Allen West.....

Allen West? This guy is one step below Hank Johnson.

Hey Demo Dame, I am I life-long Republican. If our two parties do not work together for a solution to this problem, America will look a lot like Mexico in the next decade. It doesn't have to happen. There is nothing wrong with Rich people living in our society. I am not envious of them at all. I am totally middle class. Obama wants to make people like you and me envious of RICH people. I am totally secure in who I am. IT IS TIME TRUE AMERICANS BOTH DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS WORK TOGETHER AND FIND SOLUTIONS TO THE ECOMONIC DISASTER THAT IS COMING....

Tom...It's not about envying the rich nor is it about soaking the rich. It's about having the rich pay their fair share! If you look at the tax system over time, you'll see that the tax rates on the rich are the lowest in modern history. We are nowhere near high tax rates and yet, all the rich want are lower taxes.

If you look at Effective Tax Rates, the only tax rates that really matter, you'll see that the many of the rich pay lower tax rates than the working class. When you factor in payroll taxes, the difference is even more extreme (benefiting the rich, punishing the poor).

In addition, Effective Tax Rates only look at "taxable" income and there are many types off non-taxable income...$250,000 Home Gain Exclusion (most people don't even live in a $250K house but a rich person can exclude $250K of gain),
Section 1031 Like-Kind Exchange (rich people can choose to defer gains), Gov't bonds are non-taxed income, borrowing on appreciated assets provides cash on non-taxed income, and there are many more examples.

Yes, we have to work together. But in order to do that, the Republicans must stop their mis-information campaign that is dividing this nation.

Move to Russia or Cuba you stinkin sac of....

Congess names a bill "Jobs Bill". It sounds great. What idiot woundn't be for a job bill. Problem is that the jobs bill is just a big waste of government spending and nobbody gets a job except some jac-a in Washington DC. AMERICA NEEDS REFORM. not more spending.

You are a lost soul....

Dear Nod, Please loose the anger....We are Americans. You and me and Pablo who just cwawled under the fence....

You are so envious of other people that have wealth. It must be very hard to look at your disgusting face in the mornning....

next to nil?

Look, I too will credit Obama for making something of himself in life but the guy wasn't born into poverty. His success is due largely to his mother and expensive, private education. Oh, and the government, according to him.

Sorry Phil , Obama didnt pay off his student loans til he wrote those books. He didnt come from money. Of you question his grades because he is black there has to be a hitch on how he did so well. Maybe its just he was smart and worked really hard. To be born without a silver spoon its much harder. We arent all on a equal playing field,thats a myth.

Fourth Word - You're an idiot. Why must you people bring skin color into every conversation about Obama? Nobody gives a crap if he's half black. Skin color has nothing to do with one's intellect.

Paul...You're an idiot. Your Republican party has had an issue with his skin color and even Phil made a demeaning comment that "someone or some program helped him get into Columbia and Harvard" as though he didn't have the intellect to get in on his own merits. And yet, he was the editor of the Harvard Law Review which isn't given to some smuck.

Phil isn't the only person with that thought process...watch Fox "I claim to be" News channel.

Dumocrats are the only ones I've ever heard bring up Obama's skin color. It's ridiculous. I don't speak for anyone but myself. I could care less if the guy was green. I don't like him for a lot of reasons but the fact that he's got dark skin doesn't bother me at all. It apparently bugs the hell out of you guys though. I think you guys are pissed because you wanted the white woman to win. Believe me, we would rather have Hitlary too.

Greg, does your mommy know you're not at school today?

Atl Resident - John Adams and his son John Quincy Adams both served as President.

blah, blah, blah, AM. We now have heard four years of excuses of how it's Bush's fault and possibly another four to come. I wish I could blame my predecessor when things fall apart at work....how about you.........get over it.

Phil,
Would you like a OBAMA 2012 sticker?
That would show an interest into our future.
While the ro(MONEY)-Ryan sticker will be a low value piece of political history (except for the resounding defeat it will represent).

We should all thank the ro(MONEY) 'strategists' for the easy win.

That is exactly how the left felt when GWB was President (except maybe the part about it being easy to undo his follies).

Maybe you are new to conservatism, but based on this thread, I doubt. You seem very intrenched in your views and that likely means you voted for GWB..... and thus your opinion is rendered meaningless.

That's why he's making money hand over fist, you libtard.

DemoDame...S. Truett Cathy has gone after things such as adultry. You should read is books.

Floyd,

Maybe the Catheys should stick to what they know, cooking chicken, and stay out of social engineering.

Sure, ignore the truth. I am a Suwanee resident. And you are, well, not much. You wont run me off.

grow up, Bob!

Perry, I agree with you totally. Many folks on Patch seem to take it personally when someone disagrees with them.

Thank you, Patch! Don't agree w/ David Brown's comment that "folks on Patch seem to take it personally when someone disagrees with them," it's all of the namecalling etc. that people take personally...there's no place for it here.

the namecalling and the nasty tone!

David is a bit selective on who that applies to.

John, your claim is incorrect that everytime the tax rates are cut, revenues go up. For instance, during 2007, 2008 and 2009, certain rates and other tax cuts increased and yet revenues went going down. Further, using your philosophy cutting the rate to 0% would balance the budget. Your argument fails at all levels.

It's a historical fact that Bush cut taxes in 2001 and 2003-2010 and we went into a major recession. It's a fact that when Reagan overhauled the tax code in 1986 and some tax rates were increased while others decreased that tax revenues went up.

Revenues went up while the top rate was decreased to 33% from 50% because:

1. Capital Gains were taxed at ordinary income rates. There was no special preference for Long-Term Gains and as such was a tax increase.
2. Income averaging was eliminated which increased taxes.
3. There was a phaseout of rental incentives which increased taxes.
4. The IRA deduction was severely restricted which increased taxes.
5. The depreciation deduction was reduced which increased taxes.
6. AMT tax was expanded which increased taxes.
7. The law reduced the number of tax shelters, which increased taxes.
8. The bottom tax rate was increased from 11% to 15%, which increased taxes.
9. Interest and sales tax deductions were banned, which increased taxes.

Before you declare that cutting tax rates increases revenue, please do your research and get an understanding of the tax code.

Frank...you are an economic simpleton. The bush tax cuts of 2001 are widely known to have stimulated the economy and KEPT us out of a recession. Why? It put more of each american's money BACK in their pocket...increasing the funds available to 70% of the economy doesn't need explaination.

Furthermore, your claim that 2003-2010 cuts put us into a recession can't be made with a straight face without smoking something of questionable legality. I'm hoping you're just a stand up comic working on your routine. Check out the facts regarding the economy during the early part of that time. That's a recession?

Tip...The National Enquirer is not an economics source.

So Floyd, are you saying we need more government stimulus? The Bush tax cuts would have been fine as a temporary stimulus but making them semi-permanent piled up huge unneeded debts that are hindering our current recovery.

Frank,

Thanks!
Unfortunately the intentionally blinded will never see the truth.

Republicans over-exaggerate the effect of higher taxes. You could raise the rate to 70% on the top 1%, eliminate the capital gains loophole, and the economy would still grow.

The 5% increase plus spending reductions is a fair compromise, and I blame congress, not the President, for this failure.

I agree somewhat with your premise but there are literally dozens of political parties in the US, several of which will have Presidential candidates on the ballot in multiple states (Green, Libertarian, Constitution). There's nothing stopping us from forming our own political party today. How do you propose we bring some of these other parties into the main stream?

Totally agree, Brian. It creates a them-against-us mentally--"A house divided against itself cannot stand."

"How do you propose we bring some of these other parties into the main stream?"

When 3rd parties are out-spent by trillions, they have no voice and no chance. The first step is campaign finance reform.

As a card-carrying Libertarian I have a vested interest in this. Campaign finance reform is one thing, but the first 2 things that need to happen are ballot access & inclusion in debates.

Julie, I can't figure out if you're serious or being sarcastic. We do work for months and months before we're in the black and a huge portion of jobs have gone and are going overseas. But taxes have never been lower so that's obviously not putting the average working person in the black any sooner and it certainly isn't keep jobs inside the country.

An interesting article this morning... and this was an interesting distinction:

On the campaign trail this week, Romney said the Romney-Ryan plan to transform Medicare was "very similar" to Medicare Advantage.

But Marsha Gold, a health-care expert at Mathematica Policy Research, said the big difference between the two is this: Medicare Advantage, like Medicare, is a defined benefit -- where the government guarantees a level of coverage -- while the Romney-Ryan plan transforms Medicare into a defined contribution -- where the government decides what it will pay.

http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/08/18/13347755-romney-slams-obama-over-medicare-pledges-more-help-for-poor-and-sick#comments

Jobs go overseas partly by the US having an extreme corporate tax rate.

I'm sorry Paul but that is yet another Republican fantasy. The number one controllable expense for any business is the cost of labor. We lose jobs overseas primarily for one reason; the American worker isn't willing to work in sweatshop conditions for slave wages. They also like things like health insurance and retirement plans.

Couple that with unfavorable trade agreements and a tax code that incentivizes outsourcing and soon there will be no American manufacturing jobs left. Besides the wealthy elite, Romney and his friends, think outsourcing is a good thing. They want to ship as many jobs overseas as absolutely possible.