published Thursday, December 6th, 2012

The Cliff

about Clay Bennett...

The son of a career army officer, Bennett led a nomadic life, attending ten different schools before graduating in 1980 from the University of North Alabama with degrees in Art and History. After brief stints as a staff artist at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Fayetteville (NC) Times, he went on to serve as the editorial cartoonist for the St. Petersburg Times (1981-1994) and The Christian Science Monitor (1997-2007), before joining the staff of the ...

148
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
fairmon said...

The caption could just as well read when you are trying to get out of a hole the first thing to do is quit digging or in this case to stay out of a hole. The democrats want the perceived revenue from all temp rates expiring and the stupid republicans are playing right into their hands. The republicans should do just the opposite and agree to all of Obama's proposals and encourage him to make sure he has included everything. They should not include or agree to abdicate their responsibility regarding the debt ceiling which will need to be addressed later next year. The house should then pass legislation that would return to current levels but not as a temporary measure. The senate would vote it down thus officially transferring to Obama responsibility for the economy. Voters in future elections will grade the results of how well he performed.

December 6, 2012 at 12:30 a.m.
fairmon said...

mountainlaurel....

I am confident your heart is in the right place but it is not allowing adequate blood flow to the logical side of your brain. Would you agree with and support moving medicare and medicaid out of the general fund and adjust premiums and taxes enough each January to pay for the anticipated expenses for the coming year (claims and all other associated cost)?.

If not where would you suggest getting the money for the current and growing short fall in revenue to pay the claims? Feel free to tax the wealthy a percent of their income that is to be paid to the health fund, not the convoluted general fund. This is transparent, self sufficient and sustainable. People would know the real cost of medicare and medicaid and possibly even recognize abuse and unnecessary use need to be avolded. Hire more over paid, under worked government employees if necessary to guard against abuse and fraud and hope they don't participants in the abuse.

There has to be a better way than to keep digging a hole that will at some point cave in on us. The first rule when trying to get out of a hole is quit digging. Can you find one legitimate economist or politician not suffering from brain damage that will say the current state of medicare and medicaid is not a serious problem that must be addressed?

December 6, 2012 at 12:32 a.m.
fairmon said...

It is not hard to meet government expenses, they are everywhere.

December 6, 2012 at 12:43 a.m.

Don't worry, the Republican solution is clear.

A bigger shovel. Because clearly a bigger hole wouldn't have this problem, but would magically fill in through some fairy dust remedy.

harp3339, so let's see, the Republican plan should be to find a way to blame things on Obama and the Democrats in the Senate.

You're just one step away from the people who want the whole economy to crash so they can point the blame at Obama when it happens.

Which they'd do regardless. I swear, if Obama put out a house fire, Republicans would complain about the water used. (And no, don't try to argue the analogy with some technical argument about some fires you can't fight with water, that'd just be getting pedantic.)

December 6, 2012 at 12:55 a.m.
fairmon said...

The only difference between a rut and a grave is the depth.

December 6, 2012 at 2:05 a.m.
fairmon said...

another false conclusion is..... so let's see, the Republican plan should be to find a way to blame things on Obama and the Democrats in the Senate.

Voters in future elections will grade the results of how well he performed. Not republicans.

It may be credit for success is appropriate. Obama could be the first since Roosevelt to be a candidate for a third term as POTUS. I can see that happening if he wants it to and plays his card right. Energy is the key to giving the low income sector the largest tax reduction possible. Attract manufacturing in order to provide better paying jobs instead of bashing and taxing. Encourage profits instead of criticizing.

December 6, 2012 at 6:24 a.m.
potcat said...

Harp asked ML... Where would you suggest getting the money for the current and growing short fall in revenue to pay the claims?

Lets use some common sense! STOP giving away the store every year to other countries, which adds up to Trillions $$$ of American Tax payers money being sent to another country, come on really, is it that hard. Fully fund and be in the red every program Medicare-Medicaid ETC for our own American Citizens before one penny is even considered being given away, Damn.

Stop the flood of Refugees into this country untill every Veteran living under a bridge is no more.

December 6, 2012 at 6:25 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Altough I agree with the sentiments, potcat, most homeless people are homeless primarily because they are mentally ill. Veterans included. Not because refugees are taking all the housing. The key to solving most of the homeless situation is caring for and monitoring those with mental illness that includes psychosis and drug/alcohol dependency. Not an easy task, though.

December 6, 2012 at 6:34 a.m.
fairmon said...

Once again there are those insisting America police the world and jump in the middle east and north Africa quagmire while other countries observe, criticize and provide arms to the highest bidder. Continue the withdrawal and quit sacrificing the lives of our brave young generation for a lost cause that we cannot afford. Obama is handling the situation well with a hands off, wait and see approach and I hope he recognizes how futile expanding U.S. involvement would be.

December 6, 2012 at 6:37 a.m.
MTJohn said...

Harp - the fundamental problem with Medicare/Medicaid is that the first beneficiary of the program is not the people who need the service but the people who provide it.

December 6, 2012 at 6:47 a.m.
fairmon said...

MTJohn said... Harp - the fundamental problem with Medicare/Medicaid is that the first beneficiary of the program is not the people who need the service but the people who provide it.

That may be, I am not sure that is accurate but regardless the claims are much greater than revenue. The proposal I offered may result in people recognizing and challenging providers cost.

December 6, 2012 at 7:09 a.m.
fairmon said...

potcat said...

Lets use some common sense! STOP giving away the store every year to other countries, which adds up to Trillions $$$ of American Tax payers money being sent to another country, come on really, is it that hard. Fully fund and be in the red every program Medicare-Medicaid ETC for our own American Citizens before one penny is even considered being given away, Damn.

Discontinuing foreign aid may be a good move but that would only reduce the deficit spending and the amount borrowed. It would not be available for medicare and medicaid short fall. Why not tax those with incomes over around %520,000 per year at up to 10% of their gross income, which is before deductions, that goes into the medicare and medicaid fund then adjust other taxes and premiums to pay anticipated claims. Let the politicians haggle over the general fund but keep medicare and medicaid separate and funded.

Not to worry even if it makes sense politicians will never buy anything that transparent. They like the current convoluted system they can use to coerce, frighten and manipulate people with. They like the power and authority it gives them.

December 6, 2012 at 7:48 a.m.
fairmon said...

potcat said...

Stop the flood of Refugees into this country untill every Veteran living under a bridge is no more.

A lot of refugees work hard and pay taxes. Regardless of the cause veterans deserve much more than we provide. None should be homeless, hungry or unable to get prompt quality medical care. We send them for weeks of training and preparation for going into combat and a few hours transitioning back to civilian life regardless of their military experiences. The assistance provided in preparing for and obtaining a good job is terribly inadequate.

December 6, 2012 at 7:57 a.m.
potcat said...

Sorry i didn't make myself clear on Refugees, its not about housing, its about taking care of every American first.

Harp, hell i'm up for anything that will work. If my Country is starving and going over the cliff,i am going to feed American's first before i give it to another country, even when it doesn't fix the right things, it should.

December 6, 2012 at 8:10 a.m.
ibshame said...

Someone should ask Boehner and McConnell how that strategy of making President Obama a one-term President worked out for them? LOL

"Republicans wave the white flag

Speaker John Boehner emerged from his weekly huddle with House Republicans on Wednesday morning to take his place behind a mahogany lectern in front of a brown backdrop. The dark tones provided ideal camouflage for the deeply tanned speaker — as though he were trying to vanish into the background.

Who could blame him?

Right now, he is hoping to lead his fractious GOP to an orderly surrender. The question is no longer whether Republicans will give on taxes; they already have. All that remains to be negotiated is how they will increase taxes, and whether they will do it before or after the government reaches the “fiscal cliff.” ...

One of Boehner’s lieutenants, Pete Roskam of Illinois, stepped to the microphones, essentially pleading for the president to show mercy. “President Obama has an unbelievable opportunity to be a transformational president — that is, to bring the country together,” he said. “Or he can devolve into zero-sum-game politics, where he wins and other people lose.”

Those “other people” would be the House Republicans, because it is Obama who seems to be holding all the cards right now. A poll by the Pew Research Center found that 53 percent of Americans would blame Republicans for sending the nation off the cliff and only 27 percent would blame Obama. And Republicans didn’t help their cause by ending their workweek on Wednesday and going home.

Republicans are looking for face-saving ways to retreat, such as allowing a tax increase to pass the House by voting “present” instead of “no.” Jeb Hensarling (Tex.), the outgoing chairman of the House GOP conference, acknowledged Wednesday on CNN that “the president is going to get his revenue one way or the other...

As they prepare to accommodate Obama, Republican leaders have begun to crack down on hard-liners in their ranks who routinely defy compromise. On Monday, two dissidents were removed from the House Financial Services Committee and two from the Budget Committee....

But the bromides couldn’t conceal the fact that House GOP leaders, with little dissent from the rank and file, had already acquiesced on some form of a tax increase. “House Republicans are prepared to get to yes,” Roskam said. “House Republicans are not prepared to get to foolish, and it is foolish to reject President Obama’s own self-described architecture of $3 in spending cuts for every dollar in new revenue.”

Coming from a bunch that liked to say they wouldn’t allow a dollar of new revenue even if it came with $10 in spending cuts, this white flag is as big as a bedsheet."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dana-milbank-republicans-wave-the-white-flag/2012/12/05

December 6, 2012 at 8:40 a.m.
News_Junkie said...

Poll shows widespread support for raising taxes on the wealthy: http://www.businessweek.com/ap/2012-12-06/poll-shows-support-for-raising-taxes-on-the-rich

December 6, 2012 at 8:42 a.m.
conservative said...

Evidently this loontoonist believes that he can convince the frail of mind that our country's fiscal problems are due to tax cuts and not to spending.

December 6, 2012 at 9:03 a.m.
conservative said...
################ BELIEVE IT OR NOT! ***

Polls indicate that people who are not rich want to raise taxes on the rich!

December 6, 2012 at 9:25 a.m.
alprova said...

JonRoss wrote: "Raising the taxes on the "wealthy" will fund about 8 days of deficit spending. What about the other 357 days ?"

That is a very tired, old argument, and it only holds true if there were no spending cuts proposed as well, which there are.

"A tax increase on the upper 2% does nothing to resolve the crisis. It is a spending crisis."

It is a combination of both.

"You Communists may get some pleasure out of destroying the "rich" but all you are going to get now is a collapsed economy and a worthless dollar. Fools."

The rich are going to be just fine, the economy is still going to continue to recover, and the dollar will survive.

You wing-flapping, Chicken Littles are becoming ridiculous to an extreme.

December 6, 2012 at 9:30 a.m.
ibshame said...

"JonRoss said... A tax increase on the upper 2% does nothing to resolve the crisis. It is a spending crisis. You Communists may get some pleasure out of destroying the "rich" but all you are going to get now is a collapsed economy and a worthless dollar. Fools"

The rich aren't going to be destroyed. They weren't destroyed when Clinton raised their tax rate and they won't be destroyed now. The REAL DESTRUCTION started when cowboy Bush cut the tax rates then started two wars without paying for them. Of course none of the people who are crying about tax rates now had any problem with Bush's strategy.

The tax rates are going up. President Obama campaigned on it, won the election and he's not backing down. GET OVER IT!!

December 6, 2012 at 9:31 a.m.
Maximus said...

The back hoe or front end loader, whatever it is, should have HHS director Kathleen Sebelius face on it smiling gleefully as she is digging another grave for a Medicaid/Medicare patient sent to an early grave by the Obamacare death panels $$$. As for the current cartoon, Potcat and others must have a selective chip in their brains that produce Obama fairy dust every time he makes another third world banana republic leader like thuggish comment. Maybe its just the buy in to Chris Matthews and his quasi sexual relationship with Obama. It's Obama that is refusing to negotiate. Barry is pure socialist gangster with no real mandate. The lameist of lame ducks. And you are right, Barry wants to jump off the cliff so he can blame it on the Republicans. No one really wants to talk about Obamacare do they?

December 6, 2012 at 9:59 a.m.
ibshame said...

The Bush Vision on Tax Cuts. Gee that really worked out well for everyone. Whoops not so fast.

"Ruth Marcus: The shifting line on tax cuts

Memories are short, which is lucky for politicians. Consider the current debate over letting the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy expire, and the largely forgotten rationale for cutting taxes in the first place.

Hint: It wasn’t because rates were too high. It was because the surplus was too big.

Yes, too big.

President George W. Bush laid out this reasoning in his first address to Congress, in February 2001. “Many of you have talked about the need to pay down our national debt. I listened, and I agree,” he said, vowing to eliminate $2 trillion in debt over the next decade.

Likewise, he said, the nation, like “any prudent family,” should have a “contingency fund” for emergencies. And so, Bush assured the nation, he would set aside another sum, nearly $1 trillion over 10 years.

“That is 1 trillion additional reasons,” he said, “you can feel comfortable supporting this budget.”

Even with that rainy-day fund, and the budget growing at a comfortable 4 percent, Bush argued, “we still have money left over” for a tax cut.

“The people of America have been overcharged,” Bush proclaimed, “and on their behalf, I am here asking for a refund.”

Smart people in both parties understood, even then, that the projected surplus was uncertain; that the rosy estimates did not adequately account for the long-term needs of Medicare and Social Security; and that the true cost of the tax cut, obscured through budget gimmickry, was greater than advertised. They were right.

As it turned out, the people of America — in particular, the rich people of America — hadn’t been overcharged, they were undercharged. They received an unaffordable tax cut premised on the false notion of affordability.

Don’t take it from me, take it from Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain — that is, McCain circa 2001 and 2003.

“I cannot in good conscience support a tax cut in which so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate among us,” McCain said in 2001.

Two years later, when the surplus had evaporated and Bush was pressing to accelerate and expand tax cuts to help the faltering economy, McCain said more benefits for the wealthy would be “irresponsible” at a time of “rising national debt.”

The deficit that year was $378 billion. What once sounded scary now seems quaint.

cont.

December 6, 2012 at 10 a.m.
ibshame said...

cont

Today, the argument against raising top rates comes down to a tired and self-contradictory combination: First, rates can’t be allowed to rise now, with economic growth lagging. Second, rates can’t be allowed to rise ever, because of the supposed impact on — all together now — small-business job creators.

The first argument is not persuasive because the economic drag of higher rates on the wealthiest taxpayers is far less than the impact on the middle class. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that raising top tax brackets would lower growth next year by one-tenth of a percentage point, compared to a 1.3-percentage-point hit if middle-class taxes rose.

The second argument, about small business, is equally unconvincing. Despite the bipartisan idolizing of small business, it is not the engine of job creation. Start-up businesses are — at least the sliver of those that succeed.

Even if small businesses were the key to job growth, most — fewer than 3 percent — would be unaffected by an increase in top rates. Republicans respond that about half of income earned by small businesses goes to those in the top two brackets. But this is because the tax code’s strange notion of business income isn’t limited to your neighborhood dry cleaner.

Rather, it sweeps in all taxpayers with business income, no matter how small a share of earnings, along with lawyers or hedge fund managers whose firms are organized as partnerships.

Under this definition, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 237 of the wealthiest 400 taxpayers, with incomes averaging more than $200 million, would be considered small-business owners. So would President Obama, because he receives book royalties.

These upper-bracket “small businesses” are not making hiring decisions based on tax rates. Most don’t employ anyone. According to the Treasury Department, less than 6 percent of income to taxpayers in the top two brackets went to small businesses that employ people.

Nearly a dozen years and trillions of dollars in debt since the Bush tax cuts, no one invokes the now-vanished surplus. But proponents argue with equal vigor that rates cannot be allowed to rise.

The justification shifts, yet the bottom line remains the same.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ruth-marcus-the-shifting-line-on-tax-cuts/2012/12/04/

December 6, 2012 at 10:01 a.m.
ibshame said...

"tu_quoque said... IOughtToBeAshamed Humps The Same-O … Same-O: Read my 7:26 posts and educate your own self about the tax cuts."

Your posts couldn't educate my dog let alone anyone else.

Bottom Line: Rates are going up on the 2% who have been enjoying themselves for the last decade. Nothing Repubs can do about it unless they really do want to go over the cliff into oblivion which is what is going to happen to them in 2014. They are already 0 for two against Obama

December 6, 2012 at 10:07 a.m.
conservative said...
############ AMAZING BUT TRUE! **

People who don't pay income taxes want to increase income taxes on the rich!

December 6, 2012 at 10:17 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

so libshame How is raising taxes on the rich not a punitive thing? Revenue is almost meaningless in the grand scheme of things, no? And BTW, why aren't you out protesting Christmas Trees? Hmmm?

December 6, 2012 at 10:33 a.m.
Maximus said...

Ibshame, Ruth Marcus? Really? Didn't she date Castro and Bill Ayers. Speaking of Bill Ayers, the unrepentent felon bomber teaching at the Univ. of Chicago...you know the guy that wrote Obama's very revealing and revisionist bio. Bill's Daddy was the CEO of none other than Con Edison one of the largest utilities in the U.S. Yes, Bill Ayers, another generational wealth brat. A LOT OF DEMOCRATS HAVE THIS DISEASE!

December 6, 2012 at 10:50 a.m.

harp3339, false conclusion huh?

Let's look at your words again.

" The republicans should do just the opposite and agree to all of Obama's proposals and encourage him to make sure he has included everything. They should not include or agree to abdicate their responsibility regarding the debt ceiling which will need to be addressed later next year. The house should then pass legislation that would return to current levels but not as a temporary measure. The senate would vote it down thus officially transferring to Obama responsibility for the economy. Voters in future elections will grade the results of how well he performed"

Let's see, you want the Republicans to do something to make the responsibility go to Obama, that way they can go to the voters with that argument.

Pretending otherwise is yet another attempt of yours to deny what you clearly meant.

Like I said, you're just one step away from those who sincerely want the economy to crash, saved only because you didn't say "When the economy crashes" but left open the possibility it might not. Of course, those people deny desiring any such outcome, even while salivating over the chance to say "I was right" as they stand in the ruins they anticipate.

You're still looking for Republicans not to act to solve any problems, but wash their hands of the whole business.

Which would be futile for Obama since regardless of what happened, they'd still seek to rile up those voters against him.

But you continue to think your denials will be believed, that you didn't mean what you said. Why do you continue to think you'll be believed?

potcat, according to what I found, US Foreign Aid added up to somewhat less than 100 billion dollars, even including military support. It only adds up to trillions over many years.

And that money is not given away, but spent for express purposes that may even benefit America. Such as by stopping the spread of HIV/AIDs, or by stabilizing a country so it can be a good trade partner with the US. Often enough, the Foreign Aid is even invested directly in the US by purchasing goods and supplies here for use overseas.

I get that you want to help Americans, and I respect that, but we're not deficit in resources here at home to do so, nor are we spending so much on Foreign Aid as a total of our spending that it is really preventing us from helping anybody at home.

Yes, I'm sure there could be reform and improvement in Foreign Aid, but it's not the driving force that many people think it is in preventing us from doing what you want.

December 6, 2012 at 11:11 a.m.
ibshame said...

"Jack_Dennis said... so libshame How is raising taxes on the rich not a punitive thing? Revenue is almost meaningless in the grand scheme of things, no? And BTW, why aren't you out protesting Christmas Trees? Hmmm?"

Raising taxes on the rich is not punitive, it's about FAIRNESS plain and simple. As for the christmas trees, I don't have any reason to protest them - to each his own.

December 6, 2012 at 11:20 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

So Bulbs. Now you can devine what everyone else is thinking? Good. A few posters here try to look at all sides. You, Bulbs, are clearly not one of them. Commited leftist? Seems so.

December 6, 2012 at 11:21 a.m.
ibshame said...

"Maximus said... Ibshame, Ruth Marcus? Really? Didn't she date Castro and Bill Ayers. Speaking of Bill Ayers, the unrepentent felon bomber teaching at the Univ. of Chicago...you know the guy that wrote Obama's very revealing and revisionist bio."

Give it a rest why don't you? Don't you realize yet it hasn't worked? With all your Bill Ayers crap, Kenyan Birth, etc. it didn't work. Repubs are 0 for two against Obama and yet the ignorance just keeps pouring out from the nut jobs.

December 6, 2012 at 11:24 a.m.
potcat said...

Maxi mus have had some kind of dust storm raging in its brain this morning, i didn't understand a thing you wrote, huh.

I am not an Obama fan but i am a bleeding heart Liberal, always conservative with money but not like the political thieves who proclaim conservatism, liar's one and all.

Just got home from buying groceries, i asked hubby what he wanted me to fix for Sunday dinner, I always cook a nice meal on Sundays. He told me Pork chops, mashed potatoes-gravy,green bean casserole and Mrs. Smith Apple pie, vanilla ice cream, got it.

I have a grocery budget and i don't sway much on it. He owes me 20 bucks, i use to get this meal and a weeks worth of food etc and have some left over, not any more.

This is what concerns me!! How does a family with kids do it?

December 6, 2012 at 11:28 a.m.
MTJohn said...

harp3339 said..."That may be, I am not sure that is accurate but regardless the claims are much greater than revenue. The proposal I offered may result in people recognizing and challenging providers cost."

Harp - I note that all of the recent reports of fraud have involved providers, not patients. E.g.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-57556670/hospitals-the-cost-of-admission/

We operate in this country on the mis-conception that there is a good free-market solution to health care. As a result, we have an expensive but second-rate system of care and a system in which the public has funded much the R&D but the private sector has reaped the profits from that investment.

I agree that we need to fix Medicare. But, we can't really fix Medicare unless we first change some assumptions - beginning with the assumption that the first priority is for health care to function as a profit center.

December 6, 2012 at 11:39 a.m.
potcat said...

100 billion??? chump change...........

I am for helping the world and you are right it helps us too, but quit saying we are going over the damn cliff because we are SPENDING more than we can afford!!! If thats the case then we have to take care of America first,thats all. I don't belive a word any politician says about money.

December 6, 2012 at 11:39 a.m.
MTJohn said...

harp3339 said..."It is not hard to meet government expenses, they are everywhere."

That's because government services also are everywhere - and there really are many things that government can do better and for less cost than can be accomplished in the private sector.

December 6, 2012 at 11:42 a.m.
conservative said...

Did you hear?

Polls indicate that people who are not rich want to raise taxes on the rich!

December 6, 2012 at 11:44 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

potcat: Sounds like you're everything but knocked up.

December 6, 2012 at 11:50 a.m.
Ronald_Ragin said...

Get the narrative straight. There is no such thing as a “Tax Cut”!!!! They are tax rates. Which go up and down. A tax cut is what government gets. It gets a cut of all our earnings.

December 6, 2012 at 12:04 p.m.
fairmon said...

MTJohn said... harp3339 said..."It is not hard to meet government expenses, they are everywhere."

That's because government services also are everywhere - and there really are many things that government can do better and for less cost than can be accomplished in the private sector.

Many that can be better provided but not all. Regardless of who provides what like any responsible adult they should be paid for as you go. A loan only need be obtained for a one time purchase, like a home, with a specifc time frame for repayment. The current squabble over small tweak to taxes expecting a measureable impact on the total amount being addressed is a comedy and strictly political posturing.

December 6, 2012 at 12:22 p.m.
fairmon said...

Let's see, you want the Republicans to do something to make the responsibility go to Obama, that way they can go to the voters with that argument.

You got it exactly right this time. That is why I said the voters will grade the performance and decide if Obama's plan was a good one. I also also said he could by using smarts he may not possess be the first third term candidate since Roosevelt. He won't achieve that by expanding the dependent society but with decent paying productive work for all those desiring to work and provide for themselves.

December 6, 2012 at 12:33 p.m.
Easy123 said...

JonRoss,

Read up, Manorialist.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2012/12/06/reminder-obama-has-already-agreed-to-big-spending-cuts/

http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-cohn/110606/obama-deficit-reduction-offer-spending-cut-tax-increase-boehner

Doesn't it make you feel stupid to ask these questions, that you obviously don't expect an answer from, and get an evidence-based response?

You love getting off to "Communist". Don't forget to use the lotion.

December 6, 2012 at 12:55 p.m.
ibshame said...

One less Tea cup right wing nut job in the Senate for Now. LOL

Jim DeMint leaves for Heritage Foundation.

South Carolina U.S. Senator Jim DeMint will replace Ed Feulner as president of the Heritage Foundation. Mr. DeMint will leave his post as South Carolina's junior senator in early January to take control of the Washington think tank, which has an annual budget of about $80 million.

http://online.wsj.com/article/

Hmm he's the one who thought Obamacare was going to be President Obama's Waterloo. Well lookie who got beat. LMAO

December 6, 2012 at 12:55 p.m.
potcat said...

One sentence jack grouses... seems you're everything but knocked up.

Seems your conclusion of anyone proclaiming to be both Liberal-conservative makes a person an egomaniac..everything.

Sounds like you're a skimped shrew.

December 6, 2012 at 1:03 p.m.
potcat said...

My Forsythia bushes are blooming, what next my Peach trees................ its freaking December!!

December 6, 2012 at 1:31 p.m.
limric said...

Swell cartoon Clay. Ah laike it.

But once again I have a more apt metaphor for the phony baloney fiscal cliff crap:

A CAT D12 (driven by Mitch McConnell) pushing the middle class down the side of a landfill (any landfill) of waste and ruin Republicans created. Behind the dozer are the ‘Fix the Debt’ fraudsters, smiling widly – Champagne glasses raised as the Republican house leadership bow right in front of them - on their knees, heads bobbing like chickens. Go ahead, fill in the blanks.

Anyone wanna bet Republicans are going to hold us hostage again. It really shouldn’t surprise anyone that these whiny sore losing GOP babies, keep obstructing – hmm everything. HA! They act as if Romney won, and they got the mandate to move ‘Forward…into the past!’ If not that, then it’s (as Paul Krugman says) a foot stomping tantrum.

After 10 years of Bush tax cuts, how is it possible that ANYONE could possibly claim that they will create jobs or further ‘stimulate’ the economy? And yet, they WILL continue their way towards further bankrupting this country, just like Dubya did when he was ... Oh forget it. I just can't put the word president after that name.

‘Mother Mary & Joseph’, thank god Romney lost. Whew!!

December 6, 2012 at 1:35 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Potcat: Sorry. You left the door open. Wide.

December 6, 2012 at 2:15 p.m.
ibshame said...

"JonRoss said... just in from Gallup: U.S. Unadjusted Unemployment Shoots Back Up Unemployment situation best for college grads, whites, men, and older workers"

Now is this the same Gallup Polling Organization that told Repubs like yourself that Mitt Romney was leading President Obama by 7 points in the last week before the election? Maybe they should hire someone like Nate Silver (probably can't afford him now) if they ever intend to have any credibility again. LOL

December 6, 2012 at 3 p.m.
tderng said...

I agree with harp3339,the Republicans in both houses should simply vote present and let the democrats have their way on the debt problem.Who knows,it may even fix the economy,and if it does then great! If it does not then even greater,it will prove forever and anon that the ideas of one party or the other are best and this country can move on down the road.If it doesn't fix the economy the republicans,or even better the libertarians,can hopefully pick up the pieces and repair the damage. I can only hope that the cuts in defense that will come from the left doesn't leave us incapable of defending our country or responding to a threat from some of our enemies that already have the capability to cause serious damage to us. With a weakened military they will certainly begin thinking about it.

December 6, 2012 at 3:01 p.m.
potcat said...

Don't be sorry, i'm not.

December 6, 2012 at 3:04 p.m.
tderng said...

before someone jumps on me about the comment I made about if the economy fails using the democratic ideas would be even greater. I retract that statement as it was posted. I do NOT want the economy to fail. What I wanted to say was if it failed it would simply prove once and for all that tax and spend policies are not good for a free country.so I change that statement to: if it does not then fine...

December 6, 2012 at 3:53 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Potcat: fine

December 6, 2012 at 4:39 p.m.
potcat said...

fine...

December 6, 2012 at 5:04 p.m.

Jack_Dennis, yeah, turns out that reading what people write, tells you a lot about what they're thinking.

I know, it's hard to believe, but it's true.

potcat, when it comes to the problems of a whole country, yes it turns out less than 100 billion (you know, less than 1% of the total of government spending) isn't causing the problem. And sometimes taking care of America first does require overseas action, like it or not.

Still, the point I was making is that foreign aid isn't keeping us from doing anything here at home.

harp3339, so let's see, I say the same thing as I said the first time, and yet it's right the second.

Go figure. It's still about Republicans being able to blame Obama. It always was. And of course they're going to take it to the voters. That's a qualification without merit.

Not an attitude I care to support, and since it's not like they would give Obama credit for anything, it makes no difference. All indications are they'll still go with a "Obama sucks" platform.

I'd still much prefer people who want to implement solutions. And yes, Obama does want people to have jobs. That's why he wants to invest money here at home. So we build things for us.

ibshame, I'm not sure it's a defeat, so much as a lateral transfer so he can keep meddling, but with a more independent position. I'm sure's quite convinced that the problem is just not being conservative enough.

tderng, like I said, one step away from the people who genuinely said they want the economy to fail, so they can stand in the ruins and proclaim they were right.

But you know what I think is going to happen? That even if it works, Republicans won't change their tune, they'll still find a way to blame Obama.

I'd much prefer you try to persuade us with ideas and solutions than hope for failure. If we were going to judge on failure, then you'd think we'd be able to blame the failings in the Bush era, or the Hoover Administration, and avoid repeating them.

But I'm more worried that the defense spending that Republican Warhawks seem to want would drive this country even further into debt than it did under Reagan.

This was especially telling given Romney's criticism that the size of the Navy was smaller than after WW1. Such a shallow and superficial analysis relied on a deceptive appeal to numbers, not on an actual rigorous analysis. If he had wanted to make a genuine discussion of actual defense needs, he should have done so, not make an irrelevant comparison. It discredited him.

December 6, 2012 at 5:46 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

bulbs: no kidding

December 6, 2012 at 5:52 p.m.
jesse said...

NOW i know what George Will was talking about when he used the word "bloviating"!!

Bulbs has a black belt in it!

December 6, 2012 at 6:32 p.m.
potcat said...

Well if you say so happy then i suppose its got to be true.

Yeah it is very telling what people write about shows what they're thinking. WOW... light bulb moment!!!

You for instance are a fanatical delusional Obama nut job, it discredits you!!

Reagan, Bush, Romney??, Obama's first four years and what he said he would do, he did'nt. He's a liar just like the others and i can't wait to read how you are going to white wash that.

I am leaving for the night, can't wait.............

December 6, 2012 at 6:45 p.m.
tderng said...

^^^^^^^chuckle,chuckle^^^^^^^^^^

December 6, 2012 at 7:26 p.m.
MTJohn said...

harp3339 said..."Many that can be better provided but not all. Regardless of who provides what like any responsible adult they should be paid for as you go."

I agree, Harp. I also note that is a very compelling argument for a system of progressive taxation. Virtually everything that our government does supports or facilitates capitalism. Wealth accumulation, therefore, is a reasonable indicator of benefits received from public services. Pay as you go means that those folks ought to be paying for the services they received. The Bush tax cuts let those folks off the hook for responsible behavior.

December 6, 2012 at 7:47 p.m.
fairmon said...

Well said potcat...... Keep in mind bulbs is among those that like to take the 40,000 foot view of things to get a better insight. The problem is he is above the clouds with the sun reflecting off them and he is blind as a bat to reality, veterans under bridges, homeless and hungry after serving to protect his pompous ass so he can live off the government and wax philosophical to those working their ass off to make a living. He can talk at length on any subject and say nothing. He is like preachers that take one sentence from a paragraph and preach a hell of a sermon about something unrelated to the scripture. He took one sentence without the rest of the message and said I want Obama to fail. The hell I do, I can't afford for him to fail but he should have full reign and the opportunity. We will know if he right orwrong? If he is right bulbs says the republicans would still not give him credit....so what, whatever they say will mean nothing if he gets the promised results. I said and meant he Obama has an opportunity to be a third term candidate, the first since Roosevelt.

potcat....Would you hire bulbs to run a for profit business you owned? Would you invest in a business that hired him as their CEO? Would you let him mow your yard?

December 6, 2012 at 7:54 p.m.
fairmon said...

MTjohn... Pay as you go means that those folks ought to be paying for the services they received. The Bush tax cuts let those folks off the hook for responsible behavior.

We had this discussion and disagreed on what should be lebeled as a service received. However, I do think all deductions should be abolished and the progressive rates adjusted for the lower earners. The current plan will not generate the predicted revenue since those affected have other options to avoid taxes but doing away with the 60,000 pages of tax codes contining militple ways to deduct and avoid taxes would be a good start. Do that and there would be no problem will having capital gains and dividends treated as ordinary income which would affect the high income only.

December 6, 2012 at 8:04 p.m.
MTJohn said...

Harp - we agree that our tax codes ought to be simplified, loopholes eliminated, etc.

The simple fact remains that commerce, as we know it in this country, could not function without infrastructure, regulation, law enforcement, national defense, etc. All of those are government functions. Many of those could be provided by the private sector - at much greater cost and in a system that behaves more like an oligarchy than a democratic republic. Everyone who has accumulated (or inherited wealth) has benefited more or less proportionately to wealth accumulated from all of those functions that make commerce possible. I'd also note that functions like public education, welfare, etc. also facilitate commerce because they help to maintain a stable society and they help to maintain a base of consumers.

December 6, 2012 at 8:39 p.m.
alprova said...

Harp3339 wrote: "I said and meant he Obama has an opportunity to be a third term candidate, the first since Roosevelt."

OMG...you're losing it Harp. That's World Net Daily mentality you just expressed up there.

On January 20, 2017, President Obama will turn over the reigns of the White House to the new President elect that emerges from the November election in 2016, plain and simple, just as every President who has spent eight years in the White House has done since Roosevelt.

The 22nd Amendment to the Constitution, which was passed on March 21, 1947 and ultimately ratified by 41 states by May 4, 1951, expressly prohibits any President serving more than two terms in office as President, for life.

Will President Obama leave office a popular President? We'll know the answer to that in four more years. Some will have much praise to offer for the man by the end of his Presidency. Some will continue to despise the man, no matter what he does or accomplishes during his second term.

December 6, 2012 at 11:19 p.m.

potcat, if I say what, it must be true? If you have a specific question as to what I said, please be specific.

If you're questioning my figures on US Foreign AID, why didn't you ask?

But if you're talking about learning what people think from what they write...yes, it is possible. If it wasn't, why do we write?

That said, we can be wrong, willfully or not. And sometimes that is itself revealing. For example the dogmatic insistence by many right-wingers here that calling anybody a "fanatical delusional Obama nut job" reveals a lot about their thinking.

Namely they think that such empty accusations are anything but self-destructive, and revealing of an antagonism that actually demonstrates their blind fanatical devotion to hating Obama.

Speaking of what Obama did, it's funny, but many Republicans seem to expect him to have performed miracles, without even noticing their obstructionism or their misrepresentations of it. Take for example the conduct of many right-wingers here who have rampaged frenetically about Obama not closing Guantanomo Bay's prison unit.

Yet they themselves opposed that closure. Apparently they're upset that he accommodated them?

harp3339, ah you continue your wild fabrications against me. Yet how long ago was it you were feigning outrage at me specifically addressing your words? The contrast of your groundless yet far more encompassing characterizations of me is quite demonstrative.

As usual. You're upset that I reveal what's in your words, so you manufacture these empty and baseless attacks against me for things you know nothing about.

MTJohn, government being responsible for the framework that makes so much business possible? Why next you'll be speaking some heresy about IP laws. Hey wait, didn't a Republican staffer just get canned for that?

alprova, it does seem harp3339 is parroting a lot of sentiments commonly found on such sites.

December 6, 2012 at 11:52 p.m.
alprova said...

One final thought...

If President Obama is successful this next term in righting many of the wrongs in this nation, which I personally believe he will do, there are going to be a boat load of nervous Republicans running for office the next two election cycles and beyond.

We might be headed for another 40 year run of Democratic domination of all three branches of Government, and the last time we had that, this nation did quite well, economically.

People old enough to remember, do indeed remember how things were until Ronald Reagan was elected. Oh, there were bumps in the road, every now and then, but this vast shift in wealth and prosperity to a select few in this nation all began the day Ronnie was elected.

Remember the American Dream? I dream of a return of the Democrats to complete and total domination. A return to an economy in which the middle class did indeed do well. If this nation has half a chance, it must be so.

Can economic recovery be achieved in four years? As doubtful as that is, if this nation's economy does continue to improve and accelerates as predicted that it will, Republicans can claim to be the friend of any minority group it wants and flap their gums for all anyone will care.

December 6, 2012 at 11:55 p.m.
fairmon said...

alprova said...

The 22nd Amendment to the Constitution, which was passed on March 21, 1947 and ultimately ratified by 41 states by May 4, 1951, expressly prohibits any President serving more than two terms in office as President, for life.

Al, I appreciate the lecture,I am well aware of the amendment but there is a process for change you know. If you have a 2016 calendar note my statement and if this silly forum is still happening slap me around with it.....if some strange event occurs I will expect a fine dinner at your expense.

December 7, 2012 at midnight
fairmon said...

alprova said...

I dream of a return of the Democrats to complete and total domination. A return to an economy in which the middle class did indeed do well. If this nation has half a chance, it must be so.

The fact is it doesn't matter unless someone clamps down and interferes so markets can't function. The economy has always and always will cycle. There are approachng events and inventions that if successful will bring about the greatest economic growth in history.

Bush and Obama are blamed or credited, depends on who is talking, with the recent and current poor economy. The fact is if you think about it neither of them had twit to do about it nor can they. Did they prevent it being worse? Who knows, there is no way to prove the action taken helped although opinions galore. Did they actually lessen the negative impact with the cost being a long slow recovery instead of more rapid? Again...no way to know I am sure you like others have an opinion you are convinced is right.

December 7, 2012 at 12:14 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

ALPO has finally gone over the edge. You could see it coming for months. Now, God help him, he's bottomed out. 40 yr. run!! whoop de doo!

December 7, 2012 at 12:24 a.m.
fairmon said...

In a response to potcat..harp3339..The contrast of your groundless yet far more encompassing characterizations of me is quite demonstrative.

I was utlizing the you can tell what people are thinking by what they write skill with the far more encompassing characterization coming from far more wrting on more issues.

December 7, 2012 at 12:36 a.m.

Harp3339, you were doing so. Unfortunately, while a person can discern a lot about another's thinking from their writing, there are limits.

You jump passed the reasonable interpretation of sentiments, and into the wild speculation with no basis.

Their disparaging nature does say a lot about your choices though. You don't accuracy, you don't care about decency, you just wanted to say something hateful. Because bashing me? That's what you wanted to do. It's really an ugly sentiment.

And yet you will complain when I point out when your words reveal an attitude of less than salubrious nature.

Ah well, you just need an excuse to feel good about yourself. You don't need to tell the difference between our respective conduct.

That would take being responsible for your words, and that does not seem to be something you will ever do.

Yet another thing you have in common with the right-wingers here. You know, the ones who claim offense at some statement while launching into a hate-filled tirade of their own that far exceeds the one they're talking about.

December 7, 2012 at 1:22 a.m.
alprova said...

Harp3339 wrote: "Al, I appreciate the lecture,I am well aware of the amendment but there is a process for change you know."

In the mind of those who embrace conspiracy theories and who live in alternative universes, anything is possible, I suppose. Reality is far different and you know there is no way under the Sun that there are enough people who would stand still for a repeal of that particular Constitutional Amendment, and I am one of them.

"If you have a 2016 calendar note my statement and if this silly forum is still happening slap me around with it.....if some strange event occurs I will expect a fine dinner at your expense."

You used to be well grounded. I have no idea what has short-circuited upstairs.

I'm sorry, but the two of us meeting for any reason is rather remote.

December 7, 2012 at 2:56 a.m.
alprova said...

Jack_Dennis wrote: "ALPO has finally gone over the edge. You could see it coming for months. Now, God help him, he's bottomed out. 40 yr. run!! whoop de doo!"

Do the world a favor, you waste of space. Go to your cupboard, select a can out of your vast collection of Chef-Boyardee Spaghetti-o's in tomato sauce, pour it into a bowl, microwave it until it is real hot, set it on your one-chaired table, empty your lungs of all air, then bury your face in the middle of that bowl and inhale long and deep.

Don't worry...the authorities will find your carcass when the smell gets bad, in a week or two.

December 7, 2012 at 3:07 a.m.
fairmon said...

alppro said....

you know there is no way under the Sun that there are enough people who would stand still for a repeal of that particular Constitutional Amendment, and I am one of them.

Actually neither would I. In fact I would like to see similar limits in congress. I doubt any sane person would want the job a third time in todays world.

December 7, 2012 at 6:03 a.m.
fairmon said...

alpro said...

You used to be well grounded. I have no idea what has short-circuited upstairs.

This forum will not influence anyone or anything and I don't take it as seriously as some appear to. I do find it entertaining at times. My voting for Johnson is a pretty good indication I don't think much of either party. I really don't think Obama knows his ass from straight up about economic issues but is committed to a social agenda and will pursue it vigorously with some success. I think the economy will improve in spite of Obama and congress. I don't really care what the results are regarding the current rates negotiations although I may have to pay more taxes on capital gains just get it done. I am confident I can make $500 a day regardless of the market direction as long as enough stocks go either up or down. I am not a day trader but have an account for short term trades with gains taxed as regular income. A separate long term safe investments account is hedged against precipitous drops and grows about 5% per year which is why I react to your contention that all gains should be taxed as regular income.

December 7, 2012 at 6:39 a.m.
joneses said...

I do not understand why you hypocritical liberals are so against the obastard (President Bush) tax cuts expiring to the clinton tax increases? After all you were all for the Clinton tax increases. Another example of fine liberal hypocrisy.

December 7, 2012 at 7:26 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

ALPO and BULBous: You guys put way too much stock in your own bloviating. Do not strike a match.

December 7, 2012 at 7:32 a.m.
ibshame said...

"tu_quoque said... Why would anyone want to leave an organization where they are one of one hundred only to take the leadership of possibly the most important and influential Conservative think tank. Their income will be a paltry one million dollars a year, a six times increase, with the added exposure, opportunity to set conservative policy and greatly enhancing the prospects of a successful 2016 run for president."

Psst maybe someone should tell you this before you slither back under your rock until your next cut and paste job: Karl Rove and his organization spent over $300 million dollars trying to unseat President Obama along with several members of the U.S. Senate. The problem - the public didn't buy their bullsh*t anymore than they will buy nut job DeMint's no matter where he's working or how many millions he makes. Last count President Obama over 50% of the vote, Mitt Romney 47%. Now that's what is known as poetic justice. LOL

December 7, 2012 at 7:41 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

libshame: Not Rove's fault. The R's nominated a guy that couldn't connect...could not effectively convey the message of BHO's utter inability to govern.

December 7, 2012 at 8:24 a.m.
delmar said...

So,, Rove had nothing to do with Mitt getting nominated?

Interesting little read here for Jim DeMint followers.

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/12/senate-loses-jim-demint-and-his-crazy

December 7, 2012 at 8:53 a.m.
potcat said...

Harp asked,

Would you hire bulbs to run a for profit business you owned? This is not a dumb or corrupt person as far as i can tell by their Writtings, but no, probaly not.

Would you invest in a business that hired him as a CEO? Maybe, could'nt be any worse than the CEOs running things now.

Would you let him let him mow your yard? NO. I hope to never be disabled or to lazy to mow my own yard.

Harp, if you had $500,000 coming to you before the end of the year, what would you do with this money for it to be safe " no risk", but for it to work, grow for you?

December 7, 2012 at 9:11 a.m.
alprova said...

Jack_Dennis wrote: "The R's nominated a guy that couldn't connect...could not effectively convey the message of BHO's utter inability to govern."

Naw...it couldn't be that the message that a minority of people have been trying to shovel and that you consider to be the right one, is totally incorrect, and it always has been.

Most of this country considers President Obama a very effective President and they consider national Republicans nothing short of obstructionists and pitifully sore losers.

What does it say for those who elected someone to run for President who "couldn't connect?" Could it be that there are millions of people in this country who also have connection problems? I believe it does.

Goodness knows that you Republican cheerleaders have never been able to connect with people in this forum, and you never will.

Read the news. There are no dissension problems ongoing among the Democrats. They are rock solid and for the most part, are in agreement these days.

Republicans are bailing out like rats deserting a sinking ship. It's quite comical to witness the recent desertions, disputes, and the distancing going on at the moment.

It's going to get worse too.

December 7, 2012 at 9:39 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

ALPO: Might the reason I can't "connect" is that 90% of this forum are leftist apparatchik. Nothing wrong with Repubs message. Just did a piss poor job of making it. Course they had to fight their way thru the media. But I wouldn't expect a committed ideologue like you to understand it.

December 7, 2012 at 10:50 a.m.
fairmon said...

potcat asked....

Harp, if you had $500,000 coming to you before the end of the year, what would you do with this money for it to be safe " no risk", but for it to work, grow for you?

First let me say I didn't mean to imply that bulbs was corrupt or dishonest but I doubt he has ever been, at least successfully, accountable for a for profit business. I can't help it, the devil makes me do it, he is more impressed with his brilliance than anyone else.

What to do with a 500K windfall?

I am not aware of any "zero risk" insured investments that would provide good growth equaling or exceeding inflation. Some people think TIPS are good but I am not sure. The best thing for anyone with that lump sum amount to invest in a way that protects the principle is to find and use an honest and reliable financial adviser, talk to some of their long term clients. Don't listen to anyone like me for investment advice that is not a registered or qualified financial adviser. I know exactly what I would do but would never advise anyone else. I have been doing this for years, attended more seminars and school than you would believe while learning the hard way in many cases. The key is to diversify and limit the percent of principle in any one investment and accept that conservative investing requires accepting conservate gains but it is the smart thing to do.

I hope that is a real world situation for you and if it is the best of luck although hope and luck are not good investment strategies. You do know if you put it in a bank until you decide the maximum FDIC insurance is $250,000 so don't put it all in one bank.

December 7, 2012 at 11:30 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Harp3339 said: I am confident your heart is in the right place but it is not allowing adequate blood flow to the logical side of your brain.

May I ask what sort of premise you’re using to draw this conclusion, Harp3339?

Your premise that profit is the motivating factor behind all good things seems incredibly faulty to me, especially in the field of science and medicine. The reality is that people are motivated by a lot of things. It’s true in science and it’s also true in medicine. To suggest as you did in the "Makeover" cartoon thread that “the motivation to develop better and more effective methods” in the field of medicine would disappear if we reduced the profit motive, establish some consumer protection rules and some cost control standards seems incredibly silly to me.

Indeed, what’s logical about continuing to support an industry with a long history of charging excessive coverage rates for health insurance, denying health care coverage to consumers with pre-existing medical conditions, dropping insurance coverage of consumers when they get ill, intimidating/cheating patients, and exploiting the Medicare & Medicaid systems?

December 7, 2012 at 11:32 a.m.
fairmon said...

alprova said....

Republicans are bailing out like rats deserting a sinking ship. It's quite comical to witness the recent desertions, disputes, and the distancing going on at the moment. It's going to get worse too.

Be careful now that is the same attitude that took the republicans down. That may be the reason for the power shifts in recent years.

December 7, 2012 at 11:37 a.m.
ibshame said...

"Jack_Dennis said... libshame: Not Rove's fault. The R's nominated a guy that couldn't connect"

EXCUSES, EXCUSES. If Romney couldn't connect as you say then what does that say about the other nut jobs he ran against in the Repub primary? Is it your contention the Repubs didn't have a candidate who could connect with people?

If President Obama was such a failure, then there is no way he would have been re-elected. It's still amazing to me, how Repubs could sit back AND TRY TO SELL THE AMERICAN PUBLIC ON THE IDEA ALL THE PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH THE GREAT RECESSION BEGAN ON JAN. 21, 2009 THE DAY PRESIDENT OBAMA WAS SWORN IN.

George W. Bush and his neocon cronies took this country over the cliff when it comes to incompetance. They sat back and watched while Wall Street ran amok with people's pensions, the banks played with people's homes, Insurance companies dumped people who couldn't afford health care, either that or they refused to cover them, the Auto Industry was on the verge of bankruptcy, two wars were going on and thousands of young men and women were returning home in body bags or maimed for life and last but certainly not least the country was millions and billions of dollars in debt to China and other countries.

And here's the kicker, Repubs wanted the American people to throw President Obama out in 2012 because he didn't clean up THEIR mess fast enough. He was suppose to swope in and in 3 years clean up eight years of the trash and garbage they left behind. He was suppose to allow them to keep their tax cuts for the rich; close his eyes to the corruption on Wall Street; Let the banks keep playing the games they were playing and extend the wars because crusty war hawks like McCain said so. Well, guess what? Those things may have been what they wanted but it was not what the vast majority of the American voters wanted and they proved it by sending him back to finish the job he started of cleaning up somebody else's mess.

Turdblossom Rove, the Koch Brothers, Mitch McConnell, and the RNCC all thought if they threw enough money out there and told enough lies about how all the problems of the past 8 years could be laid at the feet of President Obama, they could bamboozle the voters into believing Mitt Romney would be their Savior. All the King's money and all the King's voter suppression efforts couldn't put Romney in the White House.

Mitch McConnell once made a snide remarks to Dems: "How's that hopey, changy thing working for you?" Now here's one for him:

McConnell in an interview with the National Journal on Oct. 23, 2010:

McConnell: We need to say to everyone on Election Day, “Those of you who helped make this a good day, you need to go out and help us finish the job.

NJ: What’s the job?

McConnell: The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.

How'd that work out for you and the rest of the Repubs Senator?

December 7, 2012 at 11:40 a.m.
Rickaroo said...

JD, I always love reading your enlightened posts. It's so refreshing to see the intelligent, unbiased commentary of someone like you who is not a "committed ideologue." I can always count on your reasoned, moderate stance to be one of wisdom and clarity.

But enough of the BS. Now for the truth: you're as much of an ideolologue as anybody. It always makes me chuckle to see you guys who somehow think you're not ideologically biased calling out others for being so. You have claimed to be a "moderate" but you are as wedded to the teabagging mindset as any self-proclaimed teabagger - you just don't fess up to being one. If you cannot see the disarray the Republican party is in now, you are either in willful denial or you're just plain dense. Most likely you're both. Many Republicans themselves are admitting to their party being disorganized and off-message, in need of rebranding itself. As for your comment that "90% of this forum are leftist apparatchik." Kind of mathematically challenged, are ya? I've seen a pretty even distribution of lefties and righties on here, with a fairly sizable number of independents, middle-of-the-roaders, and libertarians. It's not unusual for those who suffer from paranoia to see enemies on all sides, so maybe it's understandable how you're seeing 90% of this forum as "leftist apparatchik."

But carry on, JD. Now go ahead and wow us with your unbiased, non-ideological, moderate-positioned pearls of wisdom.

December 7, 2012 at 11:47 a.m.
fairmon said...

ml said...

Indeed, what’s logical about continuing to support an industry with a long history of charging excessive coverage rates for health insurance, denying health care coverage to consumers with pre-existing medical conditions, dropping insurance coverage of consumers when they get ill, intimidating/cheating patients, and exploiting the Medicare & Medicaid systems?

There is no justification for corrupt behavior and those engaged in it should be severely punished, including individuals who fraud a company therefore other participants. However, allowing reasonable profits and assuring competition yields good results in any field. Doctors charge too much, flood the market with doctors and quit limiting the number allowed to pursue a medical career. Prohibit price fixing in the medical profession while requiring and auditing quality care. The government needs to become output managers instead of input managers.

December 7, 2012 at 11:47 a.m.
EatsRainbows87 said...

Potcat you are the only one making sense on here.... Its common sense.. if one is having financial issues at home why would you be pumping money elsewhere.... 'charity starts at home' I don't know why the U.S. feels they should dominate the world... every other empire that tried this world dominance in History soon collapsed after. There is a reason we have the saying "too big for your own britches"

December 7, 2012 at 12:06 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Harp3339 said: "Doctors charge too much, flood the market with doctors and quit limiting the number allowed to pursue a medical career. Prohibit price fixing in the medical profession while requiring and auditing quality care. The government needs to become output managers instead of input managers."

Speaking of "doctors," I just about a study comparing the services of private practice doctors with some of these new community community health centers. It appears that these CHCs provide much better primary care than do private practice doctors:

“Federally-funded community health centers (CHCs) are a significant part of the safety net. They provide care to low-income Americans, most of whom either have no health insurance or rely on Medicaid.

The G.W. Bush Administration expanded CHCs dramatically, and the Affordable Care Act signed by President Obama does so even further, to the point they may serve as many as 30 million Americans a year in the near future. While seeing CHCs as laudable, many progressive health care policy analysts have fretted that the care provided in these centers is not at the same level of quality as that received by privately insured patients in other settings. A new study published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine shows that this is indeed the case.

The research team examined over 30,000 ambulatory care visits to assess quality measures such as providing adequate medications for chronic illnesses, screening for high blood pressure, counselling patients about the need for exercise and the like. The quality of care provided in CHCs was compared to that provided by primary care doctors in private practice.

The difference in health care quality across the two settings was profound: CHCs provide much better primary care than do private practice doctors. Of the 18 quality measures examined, CHCs were superior on 11, equal on 6 and inferior on 1. When the researchers adjusted the findings for difference in patient characteristics, private sector care was not superior in any respect, and was on most indexes significantly worse.”

http://www.samefacts.com/2012/12/health-and-medicine/community-health-centers-and-second-class-health-care/

December 7, 2012 at 12:14 p.m.
jesse said...
December 7, 2012 at 12:18 p.m.

Alprova, they're not bailing, they're clinging to the ship and wondering why the rest of us aren't interested in their cruise packages.

Rickaroo, certain right-wingers like to feel like persecuted martyrs. That feeds their own arrogance, as it makes them feel like they are surrounded by fools who just don't have the sense to listen.

EatsRainbow87, ah now that dominates the world is going from foreign aid to military spending. That's a far larger sum that dwarfs our foreign aid, and the rest of the world's spending combined.

I shame, Republicans still don't want to admit the down slide started under their watch and through their programs. They'd still rather just vent about the CRA rather than the GLB deregulation.

December 7, 2012 at 12:21 p.m.
delmar said...

EatsRainbows87 said... "I don't know why the U.S. feels they should dominate the world..."

Lot of speculation as to why, the how has been going on for a long time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mXZRRRU2VRI&feature=player_detailpage

December 7, 2012 at 12:28 p.m.
EatsRainbows87 said...

okay happy username... so are you making the comment that foreign aid is now being trumped my military spending? Military spending goes right along with foreign aid.. you cannot divide something that is so closely linked together. We could stop the budget crisis by PULLING OUT ALL TROOPS FROM FOREIGN AREAS AND STOPPING THIS RIDICULOUS SPENDING. I love how we go to areas of the world where there are "dictators" and "wipe them out" but we keep "dictators" that are close to home as in Cuba. I wonder why we never messed with Castro too much? Marinate on that in your mind for awhile... the reason should be easy to figure out for anyone with half a brain.. no 1/4 of a brain. :)

December 7, 2012 at 12:39 p.m.
miraweb said...

Gallup: Fiscal Cliff

Based on what you have heard or read, do you approve or disapprove of the way each of the following is handling the fiscal cliff budget negotiations?

Approve - Disapprove - Unsure

President Barack Obama 52 - 43 - 6

Democratic leaders in Congress 39 - 49 - 11

Republican leaders in Congress 27 - 63 - 10

http://www.pollingreport.com/budget.htm

December 7, 2012 at 12:46 p.m.
fairmon said...

http://youtu.be/ayad5mbSSrU

cut and paste and watch to see analysis of tax increase revenue affect.

December 7, 2012 at 12:54 p.m.
Maximus said...

Two quick thoughts....As the offspring of a WWII Vet that enlisted at age 18 shortly after Pearl Harbor and fought in the pacific so others could be free, a grim reminder...Dec. 7 "A Day That Will Live In Infamey". FDR President Obama will leave one primary legacy, he divided the American people better than any other U.S. president ever. His divisive, "you gonna be transformed or else", approach has pitted brother against brother only comparable to the Civil War where brother fought against brother. Obama's Nanny State that he is bound and determined to create will and has made us soft and ready for another fall. Just something during this holiday season for you children and grand children to look forward to. What will wake up this soft, transformed sleeping giant after Obama has had his way in trashing this once great country only God knows.

December 7, 2012 at 12:59 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

LittleRicky:

Ol' JD is a moderate. You lefties just bring out the worst in me. Not a tea party man...have never taken a stance on them. Have commented more than once on the disarray in R party. Actually, my math skills are not bad. Haven't done the math to quantify L posters here, but seems to be a majority. Lastly, little rick, I would say my ability to see another POV greatly exceeds yours.

December 7, 2012 at 1:06 p.m.
fairmon said...

mountainlaurel said... Harp3339 said: "Doctors charge too much, flood the market with doctors and quit limiting the number allowed to pursue a medical career. Prohibit price fixing in the medical profession while requiring and auditing quality care. The government needs to become output managers instead of input managers."

Speaking of "doctors," I just about a study comparing the services of private practice doctors with some of these new community community health centers. It appears that these CHCs provide much better primary care than do private practice doctors:

“Federally-funded community health centers (CHCs) are a significant part of the safety net. They provide care to low-income Americans, most of whom either have no health insurance or rely on Medicaid.

This is good competition for primary care but limiting by the AMA and government is in specialized fields which is not free market competition but akin to price fixing by intervention. Did the study mention the cost versus a primary care provider? I Still would like to know what you think of the growing interest in:

Moving medicare and medicaid out of the general fund and adjust premiums and taxes enough each January to pay for the anticipated expenses for the coming year (claims and all other associated cost)?. Tax the wealthy a percent of their income that is to be paid to the health fund, not the convoluted general fund. This is transparent, self sufficient and sustainable. If necessary hire more over paid, under worked government employees to guard against abuse and fraud by providers and participants and hope the auditors don't participants in the abuse.

December 7, 2012 at 1:08 p.m.
Maximus said...

Harp and Laurel do either of you currently go to the V.A. or other so called "free" federally funded healthcare facility for your own healthcare? I would wager not. One of the most dangerous places to be after dark along with the government "projects" in any major city or city mass transit is any government healthcare facility after 5 P.M. Why? No one, especially federally salaried doctors, is there. I have done business with V.A. hospitals for years and have made a lot of money doing so as an aggressive free market capitalist (remember to me government is just another customer) but I can tell you, do not visit a VA hospital around 4 PM....you will be trampled by a stampede of unmotivated employees leaving the facility. Without the free market profit motive in U.S. healthcare for doctors, nurses, and other support employees there is no reason to start early and stay late. Doctors will just minlessly punch in and punch out. Patients will suffer, innovation will decline and fewer students will pursue medicine as a calling. When was the last time Canada, Cuba, the UK, China, or any of the centrally planned middle eastern countries discovered a life saving or extending drug, med device, or diagnostic technology? Every lib can uncover the stupid world health stats or some such nonsense coming from some non-diverse, pristine scandanavian country or Haaarvard saying the American healthcare system is trash but....our system may be trash but the American free market healthcare system is better than any other system in the world. Libs save your typing fingers with all the UN, World Health Org, crap please.

December 7, 2012 at 1:34 p.m.
Maximus said...

Harp quote: "tax the wealthy a percent". I guess the "wealthy" signify an open check book for you. Loser. So good at spending other peoples money. I bet your Mama is still giving you lunch money. I know, i know, you are waiting for Obama to make everything fair so no one will ever, ever get their feelings hurt again. Now, now.

December 7, 2012 at 1:43 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Troll_Dennis,

"Ol' JD is a moderate."

And I'm the Pope.

"You lefties just bring out the worst in me."

The worst comes out because that's all you have.

"Have commented more than once on the disarray in R party."

By "more than once", you must mean twice.

"Actually, my math skills are not bad. Haven't done the math to quantify L posters here, but seems to be a majority."

And you would be wrong again, as usual.

"Lastly, little rick, I would say my ability to see another POV greatly exceeds yours."

LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!! Now try to sell us a bridge! Or some oceanfront property in Arizona!

You're delusional and markedly so.

December 7, 2012 at 1:52 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Easy: Is your name little ricky? (on second thought, maybe it is, oh man of many handles)

December 7, 2012 at 2:28 p.m.
fairmon said...

maximus said.... our system may be trash but the American free market healthcare system is better than any other system in the world. Libs save your typing fingers with all the UN, World Health Org, crap please.

I agree totally. You haven't read any of my comments prior to the testing of mountainlaurel who maintains that the profit motive in health care is bad. I maintain profits are the fertlizer that provides us with the new and better procedures and medicine. My comment about taxing the wealthy were for her benefit while I don't think it helps and may actually reduce revenue. I am thinking mountainlaurel thinks the government should be in charge of all health care and the insurance companies done away with. I get the impression she thinks the government should set the provider rates. I have a hard time understanding exactly how she thinks the short fall in medicare and medicaid should be covered. I know she doesn't think the wealthy are paying their fair share and she thinks the Clinton rates are fair for the wealthy but not everyone else.

Read the post again...I do not propose the government clinics and sure don't buy the conclusion they provide better care. I don't go to a veterans clinic, a doc in a box, or health care clinic and don't plan to. I do think veterans should have access to the same health care facilities and quality as I do. Some combat veterans can afford the premiums better than I can while others are not as fortunate.

December 7, 2012 at 2:35 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Troll_Dennis,

Are you having trouble reading, Mr. Conspiracy Theorist?

LMAO!

December 7, 2012 at 2:39 p.m.
fairmon said...

Maximus said... Harp quote: "tax the wealthy a percent". I guess the "wealthy" signify an open check book for you. Loser. So good at spending other peoples money. I bet your Mama is still giving you lunch money. I know, i know, you are waiting for Obama to make everything fair so no one will ever, ever get their feelings hurt again. Now, now.

du-mass that was provided for mountainlaurel not to represent my sentiments or opinion. I personally think tax on income whould be zero which is not as rediculous as it sounds.

December 7, 2012 at 2:40 p.m.
patriot1 said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=ayad5mbSSrU

harp, I took the liberty of posting your link....enjoyed it thanks

December 7, 2012 at 2:40 p.m.
fairmon said...

thanks patriot

December 7, 2012 at 2:43 p.m.
potcat said...

Well thanks EatsRainbows87, welcome to the Zoo Crew. I do disagree about America going after "Dictators"-"Presidents" part. We love to demonize other Presidents and murder them with lying Propaganda. US Goverment-Media riles the people of this Country and works them into a tizzy to believe that lie. Weapons Of Mass Destruction ring any bells??

Hold the damn phone ibeshame, from 2008-2011 the Democrats had the House, Senate and Presidency. Tax cuts for the rich was to expire in 2010. Democrats extended the tax cuts for the rich till Dec.2012.

Obama followed though to the letter Bushes Iraq exit plan. It is not what he campaigned on but by damn thats what he did. We are still there and Americans dying all the time. We didn't go there to leave, got the biggest Embassy in the world in Iraq, we did the Cults bidding and a lot of people got richer and still are off the ulitimate sacrifice of a few.

The Wall Street Bankers bought Obama the White House and he made a promise to them, read "Game Changers". What has Obama changed? A bill the Democrats wrote that you can drive a Mac truck through it has so many loop holes. Nothing has changed and it won't either. Obama brought the damn crooks to run America's Finacial institutions and NO one has went to JAIL, wonder why????

The other WAR, well its Insane!!!

Thanks Harp...

My GrandMother is 99yrs old today, she lived through Pearl Harbor, her Brother was gone 3 yrs. with only a couple letters exchanged and all the family worried.

She voted when she was 21 "that was the age then and never missed an Election to vote. She went through the Depression and was,is a Democrat. She influenced every woman in my family and we followed her lead but after what the Dems did to Hillary i broke all ties.

Happy Birthday Mother.......

December 7, 2012 at 2:43 p.m.
fairmon said...

maximux don't be lke bulbs, read one sentence assume you know what someone thinks and go on a tirade.

December 7, 2012 at 2:44 p.m.
degage said...

Happy, When you talk about republicans blaming Obama, seems that is a lot like the democrats blaming Bush when they had a lot to do with the problems since the dems were in control of the house and Senate and when they took over the unemployment was 4.6%. Between jan 2007 and n0v 2008 it went up to 7.5% with the help of the house and senate since they made the laws. The first 2 yrs Obama was in office he had a 100% chance to get their spending thru and they used it. He is not going to compromise as he made people believe he would. The GOP put a plan on the table and he dismissed it. He is saying My way or the highway. I say let the fiscal cliff happen and let him take the blame. He wants to go over the cliff because he thinks he can say its not his fault, but that may backfire.

December 7, 2012 at 2:49 p.m.
Easy123 said...

degage,

"He is not going to compromise as he made people believe he would."

Obama has compromised with Republicans on nearly every issue to date. Try again.

"The first 2 yrs Obama was in office he had a 100% chance to get their spending thru and they used it."

This is a myth.

http://www.thepragmaticpundit.com/2012/09/president-obama-had-filibuster-proof.html

"I say let the fiscal cliff happen and let him take the blame. He wants to go over the cliff because he thinks he can say its not his fault, but that may backfire."

You're exposing your agenda here. You want this to happen so YOU can blame Obama. You want to be able to place the fault on Obama. You discredit yourself with every word.

December 7, 2012 at 2:52 p.m.
ibshame said...

"potcat said...

Hold the damn phone ibeshame, from 2008-2011 the Democrats had the House, Senate and Presidency. Tax cuts for the rich was to expire in 2010. Democrats extended the tax cuts for the rich till Dec.2012.

(The Democrats won the House in 2006 but they only had a filibuster proof Senate for about a month right before Ted Kennedy died in 2009. Then Mass. elected Scott Brown, a Republican.

As for the extended Bush tax cuts that was done as everyone knows because the country was in the midst of the worst RECESSION since the 30's and it was considered a very, very bad move to raise taxes on those who were already hurting as the result of the recession.)

Obama followed though to the letter Bushes Iraq exit plan. It is not what he campaigned on but by damn thats what he did. We are still there and Americans dying all the time. We didn't go there to leave, got the biggest Embassy in the world in Iraq, we did the Cults bidding and a lot of people got richer and still are off the ulitimate sacrifice of a few.

(President Obama did not exit Iraq as soon as he had campaigned to do but chalk that up to McCain, Graham and the rest of the War Hawks including Petraeus who said leaving right then would be the worst thing that could be done for the stability of Iraq. Unfortunately, he relied on their judgment which was a mistake that only led to more of our soldiers being killed in a war started by Bush and his neocon cronies for which there was NEVER ANY JUSTIFICATION. As for the Embassy, that was one of Hussein's former palaces, you can chalk that one up to Bush as well).

The Wall Street Bankers bought Obama the White House and he made a promise to them, read "Game Changers". What has Obama changed? A bill the Democrats wrote that you can drive a Mac truck through it has so many loop holes. Nothing has changed and it won't either. Obama brought the damn crooks to run America's Finacial institutions and NO one has went to JAIL, wonder why????

(The Wall Street Bankers hedged their bets in 2008 but were all too willing to kick President Obama to the curb when they thought they could get one of their own installed in the White House in 2012. (There is no love between them and President Obama) Fortunately their plan to put Romney in the White HOuse didn't work and now they will have to deal with Elizabeth Warren on the Senate Banking Committee the person they hate the most when it comes to Wall Street Reform. As far as any one of them going to jail, I can't argue that point because some (if not all) of them should have been frogged march right to jail. Just as Bush, Rove, Cheney, Rice and Rumsfeld should have all been tried as War Criminals for the lies they told to start the Iraq War. But it didn't happen, that's just another one of those things like the Ford Pardon of Nixon we have to live with)

December 7, 2012 at 3:18 p.m.
ibshame said...

"tu_quoque said... Very odd how government employment skyrocketed just before the election so that the unemployment numbers would go down. It’s couldn’t have been more helpful to some people if it had been planned that way. Surely not !! … No way anyone would do something like that …. would they ??"

Still digging trying to find some scandal right? You are laughable. Guess what? Romney lost by 47% nothing you cut and paste is going to change that. 47% that's the number that will haunt him and nut jobs like you for the next four years. It's really, really funny how that worked out. You think someone fixed those numbers??? Now who would do something like that??? HAHAHAHAH

December 7, 2012 at 3:23 p.m.
ibshame said...

"JonRoss said... In a few hours Michigan will be Right to Work state. And the Filthy Bastard (who some of you refer to as President Obama) can do nothing about it."

And in a few weeks, on January 21, 2013 President Barack Hussein Obama will be sworn in for a second term and there's nothing right wing nut jobs can do about it, except foam at the mouth like mad dogs.

December 7, 2012 at 3:31 p.m.
EatsRainbows87 said...

Oh Maximus, me and you are gonna get along well. I would compare our views to being how close Catherine the Great's relationship to her Russian serfs were. You also Maximus go on saying that the wealthy are an "open check book" for the poor. God forbid the top percent of the wealthy pay anymore. I understand they have to use barns and warehouses now just to store their vast wealth because the banks have run out of room. I guess they just need more and more of goods. Whats gonna be scary for them is how are they going to take all these goods with them once they leave this world. I compare these money hungry crooks to the Egyptian pharaoh's who would store and collect great amounts of worldly goods and gold and jewels.. their wealth was so enormous that they could have never possibly used it on this earth. They of course hoarded it and were buried with it thinking they could use it in the afterlife. The amount of greed and wealth these people want is disgusting to me.. Of course i assume Maximus you think all the top 1% of the wealthy "earned" their wealth right? None of them used speculation or stealing from the 'regular' stockholders did they?

December 7, 2012 at 3:38 p.m.
potcat said...

Bla bla bla....excuses excuses excuses...........................................................................................................

December 7, 2012 at 4:22 p.m.
fairmon said...

potcat said....

My 99 yo grandmother voted when she was 21 "that was the age then and never missed an Election to vote. She went through the Depression and was,is a Democrat. She influenced every woman in my family and we followed her lead but after what the Dems did to Hillary i broke all ties.

Happy Birthday Mother.......

Potcat...you are a good woman proven by your love and respect for your grandmother, I hope it is a good day for her. A lot of people her age including an aunt of mine are died in the wool democrats. The democrat party is not recognizable compared to those days. I liked Hilary as a candidate and I still like her. I agree the DNC did not treat her well and her husband knows that. My aunt can't believe I like the libertarian liberal social views but accepts the fiscal conservative part. Was your ? about what to do with 500K hypothetical or something you or someone you know has to deal with. I tried to answer it seriously. I am usually not real serious about very many things. I give a lot of money away to causes I like, salvation army, community kitchen, Danny Thomas Hospital for children etc. I hate the inefficient way the government handles welfare and the way those deserving are treated. Most of those getting food stamps and other assistance would prefer an opportunity to work and would work. Make that happen then those remaining that are lazy and worthless drains that reduce the amount available for the disabled, the elderly and children could be dealt with.

December 7, 2012 at 5:06 p.m.

EatsRainbows87, yes less than 1% is dwarfed by over 20%. It's basic math, and we can certainly see how they're allocated separately in the budget. There are certainly some that are linked together, but yes, you are correct, actual withdrawal of forces would be more effective than chasing the foreign aid scapegoat.

Of course, there's plenty that would go into shock at such suggestions.

Degage, the trick is the specifics. Can you produce any? Do you think Obama walked into office and got everything he wanted implemented? Did you think that the Democratic Congress suddenly started passing liberal bills during Bush's term? Did you not notice that most of the stimulus spending was tax cuts?

Did you even pay attention to the mortgage crisis or the other bits of banking fraud? That had roots as far back as the eighties.

In any case, it's the Republicans (including some here) who have taken up the banner of taking us over the cliff. Unless they get what they want, because their idea of compromise is to get everything they want. It's just now that Obama is realizing he can't win with Republicans, so why concede anything?

Ibshame, don't you know their plan to demand a quorum? That's the ticket!

December 7, 2012 at 5:07 p.m.
Maximus said...

Easy 123, Abe Lincoln was a Republican, guess he was an idiot.

December 7, 2012 at 5:34 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Harp3339 asked: “Did the study mention the cost versus a primary care provider?”

To date, I’ve only read a summary of the study. If you’re interested in knowing more about the study, I believe the blogger provides a link that will take you directly to the study.

Harp3339 said: “I still would like to know what you think of the growing interest in: Moving medicare and medicaid out of the general fund and adjust premiums and taxes enough each January to pay for the anticipated expenses for the coming year (claims and all other associated cost)?.”

I’m not sure what you’re referencing here, Harp3339. While funding for Medicaid has come out of the general fund, the Medicare program has designated funding sources and is paid for through two trust fund accounts held by the U.S. Treasury – the Hospital Insurance Trust Fund, which funds Part A, and the Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Fund, which funds Part B & Part D. These trust funds can only be used for Medicare.

The funding source of the Hospital Insurance Trust Fund includes Payroll taxes paid by employees, employers, people who are self-employed, income taxes paid on Social Security benefits, interest earned on the trust fund investments, and Part A premiums from people who aren’t eligible for premium-free Part A. The funding source of the Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Fund includes funds authorized by Congress, premiums from people enrolled in Part B and Part D, and other sources such as interest earned on the trust fund investments.

December 7, 2012 at 5:38 p.m.
Easy123 said...

OfficerMaximus,

"Abe Lincoln was a Republican, guess he was an idiot."

Thank you for proving my point.

December 7, 2012 at 5:49 p.m.
Maximus said...

EatsRainbow....Obama is not going to implement a "Wealth Tax". Warren Buffet, who by the way has been making tons of money, using other peoples money via the low interest rates, (again a capitalist always finds a way to win)will not be paying increased taxes on the wealth he already has, just on his income. No, no, contrary to Obama's messaging, the middle class will be paying the bulk of the taxes not the 1%. Have you read the 1000 plus page Obamacare bill.....lots of taxes there pal. And yes there will always be crooks thats what jails are for. Obama is a two bit banana republic dictator with a desire to rule over the little people like you Rainbow. EatsRainbow enjoy your food stamp Christmas. I know you are just soooo excited that Dear Leader Obama is gonna make everything fair and no one will ever, ever, get their feelings hurt again. Also, maybe Obama can provide us with as many government programs as those great people in Red China so that we can spend more Qaaaaality time with family. EatsRainbow you will be floating on clouds and riding a unicorn...zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

December 7, 2012 at 5:52 p.m.

Maximus, he was a Republican in the mid 1800s.

The context of referring to today's Republicans should have been evident.

December 7, 2012 at 6:29 p.m.
fairmon said...

mountainlaurel said...

I’m not sure what you’re referencing here, Harp3339. While funding for Medicaid has come out of the general fund, the Medicare program has designated funding sources and is paid for through two trust fund accounts held by the U.S. Treasury – the Hospital Insurance Trust Fund, which funds Part A, and the Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Fund, which funds Part B & Part D. These trust funds can only be used for Medicare.

The funding source of the Hospital Insurance Trust Fund includes Payroll taxes paid by employees, employers, people who are self-employed, income taxes paid on Social Security benefits, interest earned on the trust fund investments, and Part A premiums from people who aren't eligible for premium-free Part A. The funding source of the Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Fund includes funds authorized by Congress, premiums from people enrolled in Part B and Part D, and other sources such as interest earned on the trust fund investments.

What I am getting at is an actual fund which is used to pay for medicare and medicaid. You seem convinced there is money there and that it is not just an accounting process? Why are funds authorized by congress if the revenue will cover claims? The accounting reflects that when medicare money is borrowed the current interest is paid on that amount. Do you know the only investment the trust can make? Are you agreeing medicaid is 100% welfare and comes from the general fund? If medicare is getting all the funding you list including congressional authorized funds who is paying or providing funding for medicaid? I am saying take medicaid out of the general fund and have it and medicare actually in a separate fund not in name only. Treat it like an insurance company and require reserves for future claims. Increase the premiums and taxes to reflect experience and anticipated claims to keep it solvent.

Mountainlaurel I am not saying quit providing benefits I am only saying people need to get their head from under their arm and realize if we want this we need to pay for it including medicaid which is primarily children, the elderly, disabled and unable. They have to be provided for even better than now done but it is stupid to keep borrowing more and more money and passing the bill on to the next generation.

The problem with the deficit and growing debt it misleads people regardless of the cause. Have you ever seen anyone that could keep borrowing money to support their life style change until they hit the wall and had to pay as they purchased?

It is as simple as we all have to pay more even if the increase for the wealthy is greater, which I don't think is fair, or we have to deny assistance to those that cannot pay......that just can't happen. Or just look at those kids still in school and know at some point in their life they will have to pay for our failure to accept responsibilty and pay for what we consumed.

December 7, 2012 at 7:01 p.m.
fairmon said...

nooga....no guvmint assistance received, requested or wanted. I no longer work but am able to barely achieve a 6 figure income by spending a lot of hours each week doing what some would not call work but it is. I put a lot at risk that I worked my tail off for and did without a lot to save. It does piss me off when someone like Obama tells me I need to spread what I have around according to the way he thinks it should be. Or alprova opines I need to pay more taxes on long term capital gains while he uses multiple loop holes to minimze business taxes. I don't think any business needs to pay any income tax since it is is a hidden tax that is passed on the consumers anyway.

Would you like to make a donation to my cause? If so just make it to the Salvation Army, a charity that in my opinion does it right.

December 7, 2012 at 7:18 p.m.
alprova said...

Harp3339 wrote: "I put a lot at risk that I worked my tail off for and did without a lot to save. It does piss me off when someone like Obama tells me I need to spread what I have around according to the way he thinks it should be. Or alprova opines I need to pay more taxes on long term capital gains while he uses multiple loop holes to minimze business taxes."

I'd sure like to know about all those alleged loopholes that I use to minimize my business taxes.

This week, I paid a bunch out for property taxes and to renew my business license. No deductions to those, I assure you.

Every business has expenses, which are legally deductible. I'm not rich enough to begin to be in any position to take advantage of any "loopholes" out there that are used to avoid paying taxes.

What I do is to keep track of every single penny that is spent for anything and everything I can legally deduct. You know that I take advantage of the tax credits offered small businesses -- Every single one of them. I offer no apologies for taking advantage of them either. How sad it is that so many people in business are not aware of them.

Income is income. And as I relayed to you previously, I'm all for all income being taxed at the same rates, according to whatever tax rate one falls into. At the same time, any and all losses from investments should be fully and wholly deductible, applicable to the quarter in which losses are realized.

Limiting loss deductions in increments and carrying them forward on future returns is just as unfair as taxing capital gains at a lower tax rate.

The way I see it, the capital gains rates are an incentive to keep people interested in investing in the financial markets. Removing the incentive will kill them, so I don't expect that the gains rates will be monkeyed with too much, if at all.

Not to belabor a point I made last week, but screw the stock markets. I've found a better way to realize a much better return on my investment capital than to limp along with mediocre profits, at best, and to live with disappointing losses like I suffered in the past.

I'm happy to pay higher tax rates on what I have earned over the past year. It's the easiest and the most money I have made in my life during any 12 month period. I truly wish I had started this business a couple of decades ago.

December 7, 2012 at 9:24 p.m.
EatsRainbows87 said...

Maximus I do not receive food stamps. My christmas will be small but a blessing... no food stamps will buy my christmas dinner and no government check will be buying my christmas presents... what a horrible assumption to make.. those programs were intended for people who need help and i understand that some people abuse the help our government has tried to bestow on individuals. I guess my comment must have offended you because you came back very defensive.. "truth hurts" is a common saying but real. The only thing you should be comparing your "red china" too is your attitude towards people.. you would fit right in with their government regime and their "dictator" like attitude to the less fortunate... Maximus you remind me of scrooge which will be replayed this week for Christmas. You should watch it.. maybe instead of bragging on what car your gonna buy your wife for christmas you could go feed some homeless people or do some holiday charity work... because as you conservative republican individuals routinely declare, "We want the best for all Americans through our Capitalistic Empire" I guess its just the best for a select few... BAH HUMBUG to you also Mr. Scrooge and a very Capitalistic Christmas to you also.... Don't trample too many Tiny Tims this month :)

December 7, 2012 at 9:25 p.m.
fairmon said...

alprova said..

I'm happy to pay higher tax rates on what I have earned over the past year. It's the easiest and the most money I have made in my life during any 12 month period. I truly wish I had started this business a couple of decades ago.

I totally understand that and I do hope it continues to grow as I hope other business owners have similar success. I hope you have the need to hire so many people you need a manager. I hope you have to pay people even better than they ever earned because people needing jobs are so scarce. That is what this country needs.

December 7, 2012 at 9:44 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Harp3339 says: “What I am getting at is an actual fund which is used to pay for medicare . . . You seem convinced there is money there and that it is not just an accounting process?”

I’m still not sure what you’re saying here, Harp3339. Medicare’s Hospital Insurance Trust Fund and the Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust are real trust funds

Harp3339 says: “Why are funds authorized by congress if the revenue will cover claims?”

As I recall, Medicare was expanded around 2003 to include prescription drug benefits called Part D, which was rather controversial for a variety of reasons. . . And one of the reasons was that it was “unfunded” so to speak. . . As such, one of the major sources of revenue for the Part D account is contributions of the Federal Government that are authorized to be appropriated and transferred from the general fund of the Treasury. The other sources are premiums paid by eligible persons who voluntarily enroll; and contributions from the States. . . Republicans pushed the Medicare Part D legislation. Even politicians like Paul Ryan supported and voted for the “unfunded” Part D - and even more interesting, Mr. Ryan along with a lot of other Republicans were opposed to the idea of negotiating the best prices possible for those drugs.

Harp3339 says: “who is paying or providing funding for medicaid? I am saying take medicaid out of the general fund and have it . . . actually in a separate fund not in name only. Treat it like an insurance company and require reserves for future claims.

Since the States and the Federal government share the responsibility for the funding of the Medicaid program, are you proposing that the States also establish a trust fund?

December 7, 2012 at 10:14 p.m.
fairmon said...

mountainlaurel...

I know you won't believe me so why not ask someone like a member of congress if there is a fund or if it is all accounting? The prescription coverage not being fully funded proves my point? It is not the only cause for a short fall in revenue but it is a major contributor. I am not suggesting the states do anything since they provide matching government funds and do not have the option of accumulating debt. The states do administrative work per federal regulations. What I am suggesting is that all federal health care be separated, not available to be borrowed by the government and treated as a non profit insurance company that meets all insurance regulatory requirements including a reserve fund and adequate revenue from all non government sources to remain viable with no deficit spending. Today the trust fund is an accounting wizardry with the claims actually paid from the general fund and accounted for or charged against the fund. The same is true for social security, there is no real money deposited anywhere other than the general fund but it is accounted for as though there was a fund with money in the safe.

Accounting wise medicare combined with medicaid is in debt to the general fund since spending exceeds revenue therefore the "loans" from the general fund will have to be paid at some point in time or if nothing else revenue to the general fund has to increase or more money has to be borrowed so congress can keep either keep loaning or gifting money to the under funded medicare and medicaid "trust fund".

You can't take the term "trust fund" literally in this case, it is not like the one aunt Suzy left you. You spend more than is added each year and you will soon have zero. Aunt Suzy didn't provide for the administrator to borrow money your kids will have to pay back at some future date so you can continue making withdrawals from it. We are making withdrawals and looking for congress to borrow more so we can continue doing that. When congress says we need to increase revenue our reaction is go ahead but get it from someone other than me.

December 7, 2012 at 11:55 p.m.

Salvation Army, does it right?

Harp3339, I think you might want to do some looking.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/01/31/133380561/salvation-army-comes-under-criticism-over-profits-derived-from-donations

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1010454

There are other concerns as well. But those are to its politics and religious doctrine.

Or do you find that to be commendable?

December 8, 2012 at 12:05 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Harp3339 says: “I know you won't believe me so why not ask someone like a member of congress if there is a fund or if it is all accounting?”

Hmmm. . . You’re recommendation is highly suspect, Harp3339. I say this because you’ve repeatedly told us in post after post that the U.S. congress is made up of a bunch of corrupt, self-serving, unethical, incompetent fools who can’t be trusted. And now you’re suggesting that I go to this unscrupulous group to validate your claim?

Harp3339 says: “Today the trust fund is an accounting wizardry with the claims actually paid from the general fund and accounted for or charged against the fund. The same is true for social security, there is no real money deposited anywhere other than the general fund but it is accounted for as though there was a fund with money in the safe.”

Sounds like you’re not familiar with the basics of fund accounting, Harp3339. I suppose it’s understandable to some degree since your life is mostly centered around the profit motive. Anyway, the system is used by governments and non-profit organizations because both need to emphasize accountability rather than profitability. In this system, a fund is a self-balancing set of accounts, segregated for specific purposes in accordance with laws and regulations or special restrictions and limitations. As to Social Security, the trust funds hold money not needed in the current year to pay benefits and administrative costs and, by law, invest it in special Treasury bonds that are guaranteed by the U.S. Government. A market rate of interest is paid to the trust funds on the bonds they hold, and when those bonds reach maturity or are needed to pay benefits, the Treasury redeems them.

Harp says: “What I am suggesting is that all federal health care be separated . . . as a non profit insurance company.”

Exactly what is a “non-profit insurance company,” Harp3339? I’m not familiar with them. Are they like some sort of cooperative or a credit union? Can you provide a few names or examples of a “non-profit insurance company?” And how do they differ from a designated trust fund?

Harp3339 said: “You can't take the term "trust fund" literally in this case, it is not like the one aunt Suzy left you.

Please, Harp3339. Social Security and Medicare trust funds are real trust funds. The only difference between these and the one that Aunt Suzy left you is that you can spend the trust fund from Aunt Suzy on anything you desire while the Social Security and Medicare trust funds are restricted and must spent as designated.

December 8, 2012 at 9:34 p.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.