published Wednesday, January 25th, 2012

Stupid

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 ...

96
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.
alprova said...

Hoo boy, I can hardly wait to see what kind of whining this will elicit from BRP. He'll be blowing spit bubbles.

I would like to take this opportunity to publicly congratulate the President in knocking a home run out of the park last night with his State of the Union speech. Take that all you Obama bashers.

Just out of curiosity, did anyone understand one word of Indiana Governor Mitch Daniel's rebuttal speech? I can't recall ever listening to someone offer so many obscure meaningless metaphors during such a short speech. I also almost fell asleep while he was talking. The man is boring.

I'll bet if the tape of his few moments on camera were fast forwarded, he would resemble a Caucasian Jesse Jackson. You know what I mean -- You would see his lips moving very fast, but his head would never move an inch.

How did that guy get elected as Governor?

January 25, 2012 at 12:18 a.m.

Of course you'd think that alprova, being Obully's bitch and all. Explain to the rest of us what made his speech great and what makes him great. I don't see it. You see and hear what you want to. Unfortunately for you and Obaby speeches don't put food on the table or make up for lost freedom. By the way, you really should go see a proctologist. I'd rather have a man in there who's boring and smart than a man who gives a good speech but is an empty suit.

January 25, 2012 at 12:59 a.m.
onetinsoldier said...

November won't even be close. The repugnant line up is like a skit from firesign theater. They are all bozos on that bus.

January 25, 2012 at 1 a.m.
blackwater48 said...

NICE BREAK

It was a great speech. It was welcome relief from the 24/7 right-wing propaganda and frenzied republican primary coverage.

One topic that really stood out was the President’s call to banish Congressional insider trading. He wants to prevent members of congress with oversight authority from owning stock in the companies they regulate. You mean now it’s LEGAL???

I'm astonished that anyone takes republicans seriously anymore. For three years they've been more interested in politics than policy and will oppose anything the President proposes. Even tax cuts.

GOP candidates are, once again, beating their trickle down economics mule. I heard Romney recently trying to channel the ‘Gipper’ by promising to increase military spending, cut taxes for the rich (some middle class families with children will have to pay more), shrink the size of government, and pay down the debt. (Mitt should deport himself back to the 80s so Reagan could set him straight.)

The last three republican presidents all campaigned of variations on that same theme, the promise of something too good to be true. That's because it is. Trickle down economics is nothing more than a scam perpetrated by very slick and well-funded crooks.

Oh, the rich got richer and the defense industry got big fat contracts, but the rest was ‘baloney.’ Under all three, Reagan, Bush I, and II, the federal government grew larger and the federal budget went catastrophically deeper in debt.

Why would any voter want to elect someone who promises to follow disastrously failed policies that drove America to the brink of a great depression?

Oh wait: Clay’s cartoon depicts one…

January 25, 2012 at 2:13 a.m.
sunnydelight said...

chattanoogatennesseeusa is absolutely right . Some hear only what they want to hear . Maybe somebody will record the speech in sign language or add footnnotes to it. Then chattanoogatennesseeusa can see what was said.

January 25, 2012 at 4:26 a.m.
hambone said...

There is a graph going around on the national debt that the GOP just can't run from!

Reagan raised it 189%

Bush 1 raised it 55%

Clinton raised it 37%

Bush 2 raised it 115%

Obama has raised it 16%

January 25, 2012 at 5:40 a.m.
AndrewLohr said...

Our president wants to serve all of us as president, the stupid included? He and Mr Bennett had better read I Corinthians 13 and reconsider his expression.

Hambone, thanks for the data. As vertical bars of numerical dollars term by term, president Obama's bar is tallest. Reagan inherited a mess from president Carter--terrible economy, weak military--but he didn't spend the next four years blaming his predecessor. He didn't need to; he fixed the mess, except for the deficit.

Our genius-in-chief gave Solyndra half a billion?

He's against mercury poisoning and chooses the new bulbs for us?

He fought a well-run but needless and undeclared war in Libya that replaced K'daffy with al-Quaeda? (Hannity: what flag flies over Benghazi now?)

He doesn't see that the murder of little babies is evil? He avoids adultery himself (good) but never hints that fornication is sin and folly?

He's a Christian but hasn't seen how libertarian Jesus is?

January 25, 2012 at 6:08 a.m.
fairmon said...

Neither party can run on their record. This speech and the campaigns keep talking about what they will do in the future but know they probably can't. Two more roar of the cannon but no hole in the target speeches. A lot of people appear to have selective listening. I got tired of seeing the jack in the box congress popping up in unison, applauding and interrupting on cue like they were at a prep rally. The debt meter was running through out both speeches and continues unchanged in the rapid rise.

January 25, 2012 at 6:12 a.m.
sage1 said...

Washington is corrupt from top to bottom. Both parties are too extreme. Neither side has a clue what to do, but the right way is probably in the middle somewhere.

I do feel that if Obama wants everyone to be on a level playing field, then he needs to put the entire Washington Elite bunch under the same retirement systems, Obamacare, and Social Security as everyone else is forced to participate in and take away all of the elite benifits and perks. If they had to live under the same system we are, they would'nt be so quick to pass legislation that hasn't even been read or reviewed.

When he accomplishes this task, he'll get my vote.

January 25, 2012 at 6:37 a.m.
limric said...

Good cartoon Clay. Great analogy onetinsoldier. The GOP debates are more like the Chinchilla show . To that I must add:

"Hiya, friends! Newt Spoilsport, Newt Spoilsport Motors - the worlds largest new used and used new automobile dealership - Newt Spoilsport motors - right here in the city of FIDELITY! Let's just look at the extras on this fabulous machine! Wire-wheel spoke fenders and two-way sneeze through wind vents, star-studded mud guard, sponge-coated edible steering column, chrome GOP fender dents - and factory air conditioned air from our slave-equipped fully air conditioned factory! It's a beautiful car my friends, with doors to match! Mitts blacklist says this automobile was stolen, but for you friends a complete price: only two-ninety-five hundred dollars in easy monthly payments of twenty thousand dollars a week, twice a week and never on Sunday!"

January 25, 2012 at 7:17 a.m.
hambone said...

LOL! LOL! LOL!

Newt "Boss Hog" Gingrich

Would you buy a used car from this guy?

January 25, 2012 at 7:27 a.m.
joneses said...

I did not listen to the pathetic fools speech last night because if I wanted to hear fiction I could go to a local kindergarten class and listensomeone read.

Here is one of many lies this propogandist stated last night.

"The Tax Man Is Hereth: Can Obama Tax the Rich to Save the Debt? President Obama suggested in his speech tonight that taxing the rich will "reduce our deficit." Unfortunately, tax experts disagree. Obama need look no further than the two men he chose to lead his deficit commission, Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles. They wrote in The Washington Post : "The president must be willing to support real savings in entitlements that deal with long-term costs. We can't simply cut or tax our way out of this problem. Bringing our debt under control will require tackling the growth of entitlements and reforming the tax code to promote economic growth and generate enough revenue to meet our commitments."

January 25, 2012 at 7:43 a.m.
dude_abides said...

Newt might also fit into the Deputy Dan mold. lol Only here can you be reminded of Firesign Theater and hear AndrewLohr ascribe a political movement to Jesus. Pope Ron Paul the first?

January 25, 2012 at 7:47 a.m.
EaTn said...

Obama will be re-elected president, the GOP will control Congress and we will have at least two more years of gridlock. What can be better than Washington with it's hands tied? Has anything other than disaster come out of there the past few decades with either party in complete control?

January 25, 2012 at 7:47 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

He avoids adultery himself (good) but never hints that fornication is sin and folly?

Since when is it Obama's job to tell us that cheating on your spouse is sin and folly? I elected a president, not a priest.

January 25, 2012 at 8:02 a.m.
whatsthefuss said...

limric, Have you ever lived in Nantucket?

Alpo, now that you have yourself cleaned up after your one handed typing fiasco this morning here is some objective news from our friends at the AP. Then grab your pom poms and start your repetitive cheers again.

I guess Clay forgot to mention he drew Biden on the other side of the cartoon but messed up his face so he erased him. He had to change the caption on the t shirt. It originally read "I'm With Studpier." He simply forgot to change the direction of the finger. Deadlines in this business are everything. Don't be to "Hard On" him. He is no more than flesh & blood.

http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/news-national/20120125/US.State.of.Union.Fact.Check/?cid=hero_media

January 25, 2012 at 8:06 a.m.
eeeeeek said...

eyeball hats!

January 25, 2012 at 8:08 a.m.
MTJohn said...

chattanoogatennesseeusa said...I don't see it. You see and hear what you want to.

Of course you do. You also do not see and hear what you don't want to. It's obvious that you didn't.

January 25, 2012 at 8:08 a.m.
sunnydelight said...

joneses said... I did not listen to the pathetic fools speech last night because if I wanted to hear fiction I could go to a local kindergarten class and listensomeone read. Here is one of many lies this propogandist stated last night.--- If the first statement made here is true , the second sentence would have to be hearsay. Either way nothing else said has one iota of merit . The bearer of the title pathetic fool just became clear.

January 25, 2012 at 8:11 a.m.
MTJohn said...

AndrewLohr said...He's a Christian but hasn't seen how libertarian Jesus is?

Perhaps that's because Jesus was NOT libertarian - at least not as libertarian is defined in the current vernacular.

January 25, 2012 at 8:13 a.m.
MTJohn said...

joneses - what did Simpson and Boles have to say about taxes?

January 25, 2012 at 8:17 a.m.
chet123 said...

Harp3339....did you say the debt meter????..where were you when your heros George Bush and Dick(debt is good)Cheney let the deficit explode... Hmmmm?...look like you are the one with selective listening.....YOU REPUBLICAN ARE REALLY AMAZING.....

You will do anything to take a bullet for the Rich and Greedy...really amazing

How do you keep your nose from growing???

January 25, 2012 at 8:21 a.m.
chet123 said...

What is this obsession the republicans have with sex.....sounds like a psychological disorder to me......

what hypocrites they are......gingrich was a sex detective doing the 90's running behind Bill Clinton....throwing stones in a glass house hahaha....and now we find out that gingrich was into swinging ha ha ha ha

January 25, 2012 at 8:31 a.m.
limric said...

Um- Andrew, your 6:08 a.m. post is one of the most fictitious I’ve ever heard. Stop parroting Hannity. Reagan blamed Jimmy Carter any number of (many) times.

Our genius-in-chief gave Solyndra half a billion?” The Gipper re-instituted the B-1 program. The Air Forces best crasher – at over 200 million (in 1990 dollars) each. And I won’t even mention SDI ?
I’ll let Alprova or Blackwater inject some truth into your nescient veins. I’m just not in the mood.

January 25, 2012 at 8:46 a.m.
chet123 said...

I love the way the republican(PEOPLE ARE CORPORATION..SUPER PACK) SUPREME COURT justices were too embarrassed to show face at the STATE OF THE UNION...and you republican say the system not rigged.... ha ha ha ha.....how juvenile....really....how juvenile!!!They have lost the respect (except the protectors of the rich and greedy)of the people of America...they are bought and paid for by the RICH AND GREEDY....

January 25, 2012 at 8:46 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Typical. The Wart is recycling the leftist idea that anyone that is not a leftist is stupid. Now he is just trying to label the supporters of GOP candidates stupid. No one can accuse Bennett of over working any of those brain cells rattling around in that noggin of his!

The bit that is missing was that Obama was standing to the voters left and just jumped over to his right trying to pretend he can be a responsible president. Of course this is all just words. His policies are just as leftist as ever.

This is a pretty good lesson for all voters on both sides. It is pointless to listen to what most of these politicians are saying. You have to judge them based on what they do. Obama's record is abominable but when you look at Romney, Santorum and Gingrich you only see differences of degree, not differences of principle and fundamental direction.

The only candidate that says what he does and does what he says is Ron Paul. He is the only candidate offering an alternative to the bloated big government nanny state that is dragging this country to its knees. Voters would be wise to stop looking for a flowery orator and start looking for real substance.

January 25, 2012 at 9:08 a.m.
lumpy said...

Stupid? Even I don't think all Democrats are stupid.

The teleprompter did a great a job, Obama did not. Same old stupid mumbo jumbo.

Check AP's fact check on Obama's speech. Even they think it's full of crap.

January 25, 2012 at 9:21 a.m.
lumpy said...

Obama's speeches won't help him this time around.

January 25, 2012 at 9:36 a.m.
acerigger said...

"Last night’s State of the Union speech received high marks from viewers across the country, a CBS poll shows. According to the poll, 91 percent of those who viewed the speech approved of the proposals put forth by President Obama, and 82 percent of viewers approved of Obama’s economic plans.(think progress)

Jes' sayin'

January 25, 2012 at 9:42 a.m.
chet123 said...

wITH ALL DUE RESPECT LUMPY.....MAYBE NOT ...BUT IT WONT BE WITH ROMNEY ,NEWT REPUBLICAN....MAYBE A BROKER CONVENTION

January 25, 2012 at 10:02 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

chet123 said... "MAYBE A BROKER CONVENTION"

We can only hope...

January 25, 2012 at 10:16 a.m.
EZ said...

I could only take the first 38 minutes of the Presidents speach last night. Then I turned it off. If I had closed my eyes and didn't know who was speaking I would have sworn it was a Republican. I think Obama will say anything to get re-elected. When he started talking about our energy independance just a few days after vetoing the Keystone pipeline I had heard enough. Does he think we're stupid? That we don't pay attention?

January 25, 2012 at 10:33 a.m.
alprova said...

chattanoogatennesseeusa wrote: "Of course you'd think that alprova, being Obully's bitch and all."

How quaint.

"Explain to the rest of us what made his speech great and what makes him great."

I said the speech was great. And given the tone of your first sentence, I owe you no further response whatsoever.

When you can conduct yourself as a gentleman, and respectfully offer your opinions, I'll be happy to converse with you.

January 25, 2012 at 10:37 a.m.
MTJohn said...

Borowitz got it right with his latest report (http://www.borowitzreport.com/)

After the speech, a furious Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell told reporters, “It’s been a longstanding tradition in our politics not to use facts in a State of the Union Address, a tradition the President chose to ignore in an outrageous way tonight. I won’t stand for it and the American people won’t stand for it.” “We want to work with the President for the good of the American people,” added House Speaker John Boehner. “But he’s going to have to take facts off the table. That’s a deal-breaker for us.”

January 25, 2012 at 10:42 a.m.
chet123 said...

What do you know about the keystone pipe line EZ......the last time we had a spill it was republican like you blaming Obama(you let Cheney off the hook)....with you republican its damn if he do damn if he dont....i think hes doing the wise thing.....beleive me???..the price of gas wont come down.....just more money for invester and rich and greedy like Romney(24 millions a year on interest)....

January 25, 2012 at 10:47 a.m.
chet123 said...

Obama know something you dont know EZ......HHHHmmmm...ever heard of the KOCH BROTHERS Hmmmmmmm...they use weak uninformed people as you EZ....

Kock Brother have been fined numerous times for pipe line violations.......just recently one of their pipe exploded killing a young man....this was because the kock brother fail to inspect the lines.....gredy,greedy,greedy.....they dont value human life only money,moneymoney......

Republican like you listen to the propaganda coming from networks like fox news and beleive it like the bible ....shame on you! shame on you! EZ

Think i know why they call you EZ.....you are EZ to fool!

January 25, 2012 at 10:54 a.m.
limric said...

Obama: "I'm sorry that my State of the Union milk joke sucked, but I was too busy directing SEAL TEAM 6 to drop into Somalia on a hostage rescue mission to write a better one."

January 25, 2012 at 10:55 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

chet123 said... "just recently one of their pipe exploded killing a young man....this was because the kock brother fail to inspect the lines.....gredy,greedy,greedy.....they dont value human life only money,moneymoney......"

Assuming this is true, what does this have to do with the approval, or not, of the pipeline? If there was criminal neglect the responsible parties should be put in jail in addition to the fines and the criminal behavior will be reduced or eliminated. If we shut down every type of activity that had an accident we soon would have no economy at all.

I wish leftists could see beyond the emotional cloud that blurs their outlook on issues. It does no good to be “informed” if you cannot draw a rational conclusion from the information.

January 25, 2012 at 11:20 a.m.
timbo said...

You libs are on drugs. There is no escape from the fact that we are in trouble and Bush and Obama are both equally responsible. There is also no escape from the fact that half the country doesn't agree with you libs. If half the country is "stupid" we probably don't have a chance to fix anything anyway.

As far as we conservatives are concerned, you liberal's emotional rantings are stupid. We think your half of the country and the political organizer in chief, are stupid. We have the teleprompter to prove it. So insulting us constantly does you no good. It only reveals your desperation because Obama can't win on his record. He is an average intelligence, no experience, socialist car salesman. People who vote for him are ignorant, socialist and uninformed.

By the way, those of you that couldn't understand Mitch Daniel's rebuttal are proving your stupidity.

Laugh it up and party on you left wing Titanic Passengers. The Idiocracy is alive and well.

January 25, 2012 at 11:26 a.m.
WendyLohr said...

Blockquote

hambone said: There is a graph going around on the national debt that the GOP just can't run from!

Reagan raised it 189%

Bush 1 raised it 55%

Clinton raised it 37%

Bush 2 raised it 115%

Obama has raised it 16%

Blockquote

Wow Hambone, you fell for that one? Even PolitiFact rates that as "Pants on Fire." Why wouldn't you fact check something from MoveOn (and Nancy Pelosi)?... http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/may/19/nancy-pelosi/nancy-pelosi-posts-questionable-chart-debt-accumul/

January 25, 2012 at 11:55 a.m.

acerigger:

"Last night’s State of the Union speech received high marks from viewers across the country, a CBS poll shows. According to the poll, 91 percent of those who viewed the speech approved of the proposals put forth by President Obama, and 82 percent of viewers approved of Obama’s economic plans."

Politico:

President Obama's 2012 State of the Union address again rated at an 8th grade comprehension level on the Flesch-Kincaid readability test — the third lowest score of any State of the Union address since 1934.

Just the messenger...

January 25, 2012 at 12:23 p.m.
alprova said...

AndrewLohr wrote: "Our president wants to serve all of us as president, the stupid included? He and Mr Bennett had better read I Corinthians 13 and reconsider his expression."

And you need to start paying particular attention to the ninth commandment.

"Hambone, thanks for the data. As vertical bars of numerical dollars term by term, president Obama's bar is tallest."

It's clear that the accurate and applicable percentages of debt increase went flying on a path straight over your head.

"Reagan inherited a mess from president Carter--terrible economy, weak military--but he didn't spend the next four years blaming his predecessor. He didn't need to; he fixed the mess, except for the deficit."

Reagan is responsible for financing his administration's spending which raised the national debt from $900 billion to $2.8 trillion.

Reagan absolutely used Keynesian economics to boost the economy, the same tried and true policy that Obama is being criticized for today.

"Our genius-in-chief gave Solyndra half a billion?"

Lobbying that Solyndra was involved in to obtain the low interest loan that was eventually awarded them, go all the way back to 2008, during the Bush Administration. During 2011, many notable Republicans were tapped to influence favors as well. Since 2008, 17 lobbyists who have worked on Solyndra's behalf and contacted at least 30 different offices or Members of Congress, on both sides of the aisle.

http://firststreetresearch.cqpress.com/2011/09/09/research-report-the-lobbying-activity-of-solyndra-inc/

"He's against mercury poisoning and chooses the new bulbs for us?"

The legislation passed that instituted the regulations pertaining to the phasing out of incandescent light bulbs and the conversion to CFL's came about in 2007.

"He doesn't see that the murder of little babies is evil?"

You're lying again Andrew.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/06/obama-explores-abortion-issue/

"He avoids adultery himself (good) but never hints that fornication is sin and folly?"

He's the President of the United States -- not a preacher.

"He's a Christian but hasn't seen how libertarian Jesus is?"

Since you continue to say this in just about every post you offer in here, I challenge you to support that contention that Jesus is a Libertarian by citing Biblical scripture to back it up.

January 25, 2012 at 12:30 p.m.
una61 said...

Appropriately, Obama followed and surpassed the NBC program, "The Biggest Loser".

January 25, 2012 at 12:37 p.m.
alprova said...

WendyLohr wrote: "Wow Hambone, you fell for that one? Even PolitiFact rates that as "Pants on Fire.""

True, but Obama still retains the lowest percentage in terms of the increase to the debt, so far, after fact-checking.

January 25, 2012 at 12:47 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

WendyLohr said... "Wow Hambone, you fell for that one? Even PolitiFact rates that as "Pants on Fire." Why wouldn't you fact check something from MoveOn (and Nancy Pelosi)?... "

Politifact also fails to mention that they are comparing 3 years of Obama to 8 years of most of the others.

January 25, 2012 at 12:48 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Alprova, You are again guilty of the selective use of statistics or believing any statistic you see at a leftist web site. You fell for the BIG OMISSION in the Politifact article.

January 25, 2012 at 12:52 p.m.
lumpy said...

I'll have to echo chattanoogatenesseeusa's question, what was great about Obama's speech? He spoke as if he hasn't been in charge for the last 3 years. Tell us why it's great?

January 25, 2012 at 12:54 p.m.
tipper said...

Read Lohr's letter today sorry to say. So, even if Obama is the "food stamp president," which he's not...so what? It's not any worse than Republican and conservative support of corparate welfare. Really, $2 billion for an oil industry that earns $32 billion-plus in profits in one quarter and gets life-support for an energy policy that should have died at least 20 years ago. And let's not mention taxpayer monies given to the petro-chemical industry, giant corporate farms, and the drug companies. Hey, I am all for class warfare, but at least I take on a class that can fight back. Ripping the poor in an tough economy is way too easy and beneath people who wish to have a serious discussion about this country--Gingrich, Paul, and Santorum included. I expect better than this from commentors and politicians.

January 25, 2012 at 1:11 p.m.

It is striking that all these Obama critics on this page cannot spell, write reasoned, logical arguments or recall historical facts. Are all the illiterates in this country in the Tea Party now? Does Chattanooga have a focused concentration of this genre? Now you can see the true impact of our underfunded education system ... our country is filled with legions of ignorant she it kickers who want to support a party that will further weaken our education system until eventually we attain intellectual parity with Afghanistan so there are more ignorant citizens in this country to fill the ranks of the Tea Party. Hmmm, so Tea Party = American Taliban. It is actually a brilliant strategy on their part, I will give them that. On after thought I think "she it-kickers" is hyphenated.

January 25, 2012 at 1:20 p.m.

Strong Political parties exist for the purpose of installing people to positions of power and influence in government. It is the same all over the world. To do this they compete with the opposition for support of the electorate by inciting passion over issues of the time. Whether the issues have to do with the economy, national security, individual liberties, the environment, Constitutional interpretations, or matters of moral and social conscience, parties stake claim to various convictions then pretend, as necessary, that they have always been philosophically faithful to their positions. However, this is done to gain support in terms of dollars and votes for their own candidates. People are attracted to particular parties over single wedge-issues like abortion or gun control and discount other party positions. The association of any party over time with a particular political philosophy is problematic at best. The distinction between liberal and conservative political philosophies and the Democratic and Republican parties in the United States, over time tends to blur. Philosophies and allegiances have switched back and forth over the years. For example, after the Civil War, most whites in the South became Southern Democrats. Then, following the signing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, many of these Democrats switched over to support Republican candidates. Political parties come and go. Sometimes the names stay the same, but the philosophies and respective positions on issues change according to the winds of war and fortune. It is impossible to separate politics from economics. It is all about power and influence. I remember a quote I read from Winston Churchill that has always stuck with me. Any man (ed. or woman) who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has not heart; and any man who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains. Winston Churchill, Sir (1874-1965). It can make you smile a bit regardless of what affiliation you have. The Republican Party has now become so conservative, so entrenched in principle that, in my judgment, it has lost broader appeal to many moderates and independents. It will either have to reinvent itself as a more inclusive party advocating something other than failed economic and diplomatic principles and appeasement of special interest groups like the NRA, big oil, big pharmacy, big finance, defense industries and fundamental Christian groups. My great hope is that Voters of all hues; liberals, moderates and “fiscal” conservatives, together with Independents , Republicans and Democrats will unite for the upcoming election bring needed change to Washington’s, business-as-usual, my-turn-move-over approach to doing the people’s business. This time around, we need someone in the White House who will be honest with us and who will be President for all Americans. I pray that candidate shows himself or herself soon.

January 25, 2012 at 1:21 p.m.

The delusional people that write on here is really scary. I do not understand how anyone with any common sense listen to that 64 minute speech and came away feeling good about it. That speech is the same as the last two he has given. The only difference things are worse now than before. Because he has not followed through on the promises made during other two. He has done nothing to make this country better since taking office. I know he walked into a horrible situation but he can not blame the fact he has made it worse on anyone but himself. He complains that republicans are blocking him. Well who blocked him the first two years in office when the Democrats had the majority of the numbers? His own party blocked him on several issues because it was easy to see he was in way over his head. I ask where is this plan he and everyone refers about? Is it raising the debt ceiling yet again? Something while in Senate said he would never vote for, because this country could not stand a raise in that area. Hmmmmmm he sure sounds different on that topic now. Is it a plan to chastise banks for making money on bad home mortgage loans? The very same banks he helped bail out. Is it to push tax payer guaranteed loans in the amount of 1/2 billion dollars to companies already on the verge of bankruptcy? Someone please tell me what he has done that would ever deserve him a second term in office. Some may say well unemployment numbers are down. No they are not. In fact they are much higher now than when he took office. The numbers that are continually being pushed are false. Yes while fewer people may be drawing unemployment benefits that does not mean there are less people unemployed. It simply means that those millions of people that got several extensions have finally exhausted all benefits and are no longer counted but yet are still unemployed. I made the mistake into buying into the "change" line but never again because the change I have see has been for the worse. The change I would like to see now is him out of office. I think that would be progress.

January 25, 2012 at 1:38 p.m.
jesse said...

just what we needed!another left wing elitist to tell every body on here how dumb we are!!

like we all ready got 8 or 10 o them,that's enough!!

sounds like "austrian from la la land"

January 25, 2012 at 1:42 p.m.
alprova said...

loveitorleave wrote: "The only difference things are worse now than before."

Specifically in what ways are things worse now than before? People say this all the time, but nobody has been able to offer a verifiable list of things that have worsened, or even more to the point, that can be laid at the feet of the President. Let's see if you can rise to the challenge.

Before you answer, peruse the following link for some rather astonishing facts in regard to the President;

http://3chicspolitico.com/president-obamas-accomplishments/

January 25, 2012 at 2:38 p.m.
alprova said...

loveitorleave wrote: "Some may say well unemployment numbers are down. No they are not. In fact they are much higher now than when he took office."

The unemployment rate does not tell the whole story. Peruse the following chart to get a better glimpse of the employment picture;

http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-12-07/politics/30485008_1_unemployment-rate-obama-election-day

"The numbers that are continually being pushed are false."

The heck they are. Net jobs added/lost peaked negatively just as President Obama took office. The net jobs figures have been improving ever since.

People praise or blame a President for the status of employment all the time, when the simple fact is that no matter what person holds the title, they have very little control over much of anything having to do with private sector employment.

The fact remains that the overall employment picture has definitely improved since the man has been in office.

January 25, 2012 at 2:47 p.m.
alprova said...

BRP wrote: "Alprova, You are again guilty of the selective use of statistics or believing any statistic you see at a leftist web site. You fell for the BIG OMISSION in the Politifact article."

No I didn't. The Obama administration still hasn't, so far, spent more than his predecessors have. Even at 34 percent, he still doesn't rise to the "King deficit spender" as he has been labeled by his critics.

January 25, 2012 at 2:59 p.m.

Al as someone that works for DHS I truly think I have a much better insight to the unemployment numbers than you. The "facts" I quoted are true and unbiased. You ask for proof of how the country is worse off now than before. This country is in 1001 day without a federal budget in place (longest in history) the largest debt of over 15 "Trillion" dollars (the largest in history) now I am not sure but those two facts alone are more than enough for concern and proof. But I am sure you will find some reason or way to dispute them.

President Obama said it best last night "Washington is broken". What is the old saying? If it's not broke don't fix it, well it came straight from the horses mouth last night. As I stated he came into a bad situation and we all knew it would be hard to turn it around but he had control of Washington for two years with no great accomplishments. That is as once was said "the rest of the story".

But you and others like you that will never admit to the fact he is just not the right person for the job because of the hatred for other parties. That in it's self is a reason for your opinion and yes that is exactly what it is an opinion to be dis guarded. For every site you pull up that states the facts as you want them to there are a hundred that do so in the other direction. It would be wonderful if the leaders of this country no matter what political affiliation they hold would work together for the betterment of this country.

January 25, 2012 at 3:34 p.m.
timbo said...

Richard_Crainium....Another pseudo-intellectual liberal...how original. This isn't English grammar class, it's a blog. I am going to give you a little advice that my Grandpa gave me. He said, "Do you know who the dumbest SOB in world is?" I said, "No." He said, "The SOB who thinks he is smarter than everyone else." You resemble that remark you arrogant ass.

January 25, 2012 at 3:53 p.m.
HighFastHard said...

Clay Bennett hit the nail right on the head with his cartoon. On some level, you have to feel sorry for Republicans this year ... they are faced with what has to be one of if not the most pathetic pack of presidential wanna be's even seen by the party. It's an ad hoc Confederacy of Dunces -- all of whom are fighting among themselves to be the nominee in an election that's already been lost before it's even happened.

If you're a Republican, you are going to have to choose between "one percenter" Mitt Romney who is a "quarter billionaire", wears Mormon "magic underwear" and believes in a book purportedly copied off of golden tablets inscribed by the hand of God that were found lying about in some woods in New England. Read John Kraukauer's book "Under the Banner of Heaven" for an incisive look into the beginnings of this (you can't call it anything else but a) cult. Next, read "The Mormon Murders."

Your other choice --- if you can even call it that -- is that giant baby sporting a huge man's head with an acid tongue ... Newt Gingrich. If Mitt is a one percenter then Newt is their lobbyist.

I am always amazed how, year after year, the middle American Republican base is hoodwinked by it's party elites into believing that if they elect them they will be watching out for their best interests. It's an incredible feat they accomplish. ANd they use the same old inflammatory wedge issues every time ... a flag burning amendment ... a marriage amendment ... bash the gays ... bash the minorities. Folks, the elites in the Republican party don't give a RAT'S ASS about any of those issues. They are a means of simply trying to manipulate you into voting for them ... so they can do the bidding of the hyper wealthy -- to further THEIR interests. Not yours!

How many more election cycles is it going to take the Republican base to figure out that they are at the bottom of the pyramid shouldering all the weight to hold the tippy top, most wealthiest at the top of the pyramid.

The path to redemption for mainstream Republicans is to first acknowledge that -- although you are not fools -- you HAVE been fooled. For far too long! WHEN are you going to wise up?!

January 25, 2012 at 4:05 p.m.
adolphochs said...

Chart this;

                              Inauguration          Today

Americans receiving foodstamps 32 million 45 million Americans in poverty 39.8 million 46.2 million Unemployment rate 7.8% 8.5% (underemployment rate off the chart)

January 25, 2012 at 4:21 p.m.
moonpie said...

chattanoogatennesseeusa, Exactly what freedoms have you lost?

lovetheusaorleave, You talk about things being worse? Obama at least got a tourniquet on the economy. Bush expanded the deficit by more than $5 trillion during an expanding economy. Under Obama, the deficit has increased by $1.9 trillion in a shrinking economy. What Obama has accomplished is better and harder to do than his predescesor. (Multiple sources available on this, how many do you need listed?)

I think the president did a very good job of defending his record.

When Obama took office the country was in a free fall. His bank bailout, auto-bailout and stimulus package were a success. Anyone who expected it to turn the country back to immediate prosperity would think it a failure. They would also have been naive at best, stupid at worst.

Which means, the Republicans who call it a failure are at best naive or stupid (at worst).

I think last night showed that Obama is also much more willing to work with Republicans than Republicans are willing to work with him.

What we saw last night was yet another example of a true statesman. A true leader, someone not afraid to challenge or be challenged and work together for a common good. He won't be right on every issue.

Anyone who says he's wrong on every issue, though, should understand how ludricous their own position is. This is the way of Republicans lately. It's sad to see how stupidly they are behaving. It's not that they are stupid. They're just playing politics and it makes them look that way.

(Well, some them are stupid.... but Democrats have their share of those, too.)

January 25, 2012 at 4:23 p.m.
hambone said...

Our broken government can be fixed by removing the obstructionists in Congress!!

January 25, 2012 at 4:24 p.m.
fairmon said...

chet123 said... Harp3339....did you say the debt meter????..where were you when your heros George Bush and Dick(debt is good)Cheney let the deficit explode... Hmmmm?...look like you are the one with selective listening.....YOU REPUBLICAN ARE REALLY AMAZING.....

look again dumb butt, you proved my point of selective listening, I didn't say it was a one party problem. Get your head out of Obama's arse and get some day light on the subject and you will see both parties share the blame and neither party is willing to face the truth nor does either know how to stop the slide. If hearing what makes you feel good is your thing then keep on cheering for that.

January 25, 2012 at 4:33 p.m.
alprova said...

loveorleavetheusa wrote: "Al as someone that works for DHS I truly think I have a much better insight to the unemployment numbers than you."

You have no more insight into any numbers than anyone else does.

"The "facts" I quoted are true and unbiased."

What facts have you offered? You offered a very generalized and widely expressed opinion offered routinely by the right.

"You ask for proof of how the country is worse off now than before. This country is in 1001 day without a federal budget in place (longest in history) the largest debt of over 15 "Trillion" dollars (the largest in history) now I am not sure but those two facts alone are more than enough for concern and proof. But I am sure you will find some reason or way to dispute them."

Congress passed the 2010 budget on July 22, 2009. Congress passed the 2011 budget on April 15, 2011. Congress passed the 2012 budget on November 18, 2011. Additional appropriations to the 2012 budget were passed on December 23, 2011.

The fact that there were delays to the passage of budgets for 2011 and 2012 were the fault of Congress. The President did his job and submitted proposed budgets each year, on time.

"President Obama said it best last night "Washington is broken". What is the old saying? If it's not broke don't fix it, well it came straight from the horses mouth last night."

You, like so many other people, are blaming the wrong person. President Obama hit the happy trail ready to work with both sides of the aisle and has been met with immense resistance to that goal repeatedly.

I spend a great deal of time defending the man against criticism that is totally misplaced, easily proven to be false, and most of the time, those whom I must defend the President to, seem willing to remain totally ignorant to facts and the truth.

"As I stated he came into a bad situation and we all knew it would be hard to turn it around but he had control of Washington for two years with no great accomplishments. That is as once was said "the rest of the story"."

I beg to differ. The man has indeed accomplished very much over the past three years. I posted a link to a very carefully assembled list of those accomplishments. He hasn't been able to whip out a magic wand and to wave it around and to reverse what took three decades in the making, but with a few exceptions, most Americans should be somewhat better off than they were three years ago.

Recovery from what tanked our economy has indeed been stubborn. It's going to take time to recover from all that ails this nation. I see signs every day of the week to improvements in our local area.

I opened a business the first day of December serving the public. It's off to a fantastic start. Another business is about to open across the street from mine. A third one opened down the street two weeks ago. Do you think that any of the three of us would agree with you that things are worse?

(to be continued)

January 25, 2012 at 4:37 p.m.
alprova said...

(continued)

"But you and others like you that will never admit to the fact he is just not the right person for the job because of the hatred for other parties."

You cannot for the life of you begin to back up that accusation with a word that has been spoken from his own lips. Hatred? Please.

"That in it's self is a reason for your opinion and yes that is exactly what it is an opinion to be dis guarded."

Opinions are like you know what.

"For every site you pull up that states the facts as you want them to there are a hundred that do so in the other direction."

I cite credible sources, with proven facts contained on them. I do not cite opinion based sites, devoid of proven facts.

"It would be wonderful if the leaders of this country no matter what political affiliation they hold would work together for the betterment of this country."

That, we can agree on wholeheartedly. However, no President who has ever served this nation has encountered the level of criticism or resistance from those on the other side of the aisle than our current President, and kick me all you want to, but I feel it has more to do with the color of his skin, than any other factor that can be cited.

January 25, 2012 at 4:37 p.m.
AndrewLohr said...

"great" speech? A great speech is one people memorize: the sermon on the mount, the Gettysburg address. I'd be surprised if anyone ever memorizes this speech. Maybe OK for what it was, but not great, not even very good.

The 3 chicks list first among Obama's accomplishments that he ordered a search for wasteful federal spending. But he hasn't found any, judging by the size of his budgets, so this "accomplishment" is a total flop. He keeps promising it and budgets keep bloating. Again, MT John, Jesus led a libertarian life as a free man in a not very free world, letting no one box him in; died a libertarian death, personally generous--he didn't crucify someone else as liberals do; and he rose up alive from the grave, personally relativizing the verdict of the only superpower of those days. (Read N. T. Wright on resurrection as something the powers that be don't like.) Note God's concern for freedom (especially of worship) in the Exodus and the jubilee, and Paul's instruction that slaves should prefer freedom if they can get it (but not worry about it), and his connection of Christ with freedom in Galatians, and God's preference for a limited government in I Samuel 8, and His very short lists of jobs for governments to do in Romans 13 and I Timothy 2. Not simply the same as today's Libertarian Party, of course--so I often use a small l and put that Jesus was rather libertarian, and occasionally mention the Constitution Party--but similar enough to be worth pointing out, and leaving readers, to whom I ascribe intelligence, to make such qualifications and detailed corrections as they think fit.

Pope Ron Paul--LOL.

January 25, 2012 at 5:27 p.m.

Al, you say he faces stronger opposition from those on the other side of the isle. How does that factor into when in the first "2" years he held the presidency he had a democratic control of "BOTH" the house and senate. It just proves my point, everyone wants to say he gets no support from republicans he did not even get from the democrats either.

January 25, 2012 at 5:36 p.m.

The color of his skin?????????????? Are you kidding me??????????? The man has been throwing gasoline on a fire for the last 3 years and you say it's about his color? Maybe some of us don't believe in HUGE OVERREACHING government. Maybe we don't think his health mandate is constitutional. Alprova you're pathetic and a liar. You say you're a businessman and you support a Marxist boob like Obama? Do you work? Most of us pop in and out because we're busy. You park your big rump in here and post long and painful posts all day, responding to everything. You clearly have an agenda. No one could post as much as you do on here and have a job.

January 25, 2012 at 5:39 p.m.
BobMKE said...

I was reading the posts and at the same time I was listening to the Mark Belling Talk Radio Show and I was laughing. People on here are saying what a great speech Oblamea gave. It was a great speech because he said the EXACT same things during his past State of the Union speeches. I was laughing when Mark played numerous parts of last night speech and then the same line(s) from past years. Jimmy Carter II is putting people into classes, pitting people against each other and that is despicable. He was telling people that they have someone to blame for their problems to let them off of the hook. That creates power to OB and his ilk. That is a terrible message to send to people and it does create classes. He sounded desparate. Using common sense, shouldn't the message to people be that you do have upward mobility and can have the American Dream if you if you work study hard at school, obey our laws, respect other people, work hard at your job, then get a better job, then another better job etc. Everyone in America has access to equal opportunity and that does not means make everyone equal. (Level the playing field. Were you listening Plumber Joe?) Remember the term Social Justice is no where in our Constitutional or Bill of Rights. OB stated, "Maybe our last chance." You think? Do we want our government to be our sugar daddy/nanny, or do we want freedom and free markets and government off of our backs?

January 25, 2012 at 5:52 p.m.
AndrewLohr said...

Cranium, learn about paragraphs. (Andrew, watch for typos.)

Mitch Daniels said the GOP aims to keep Social Security and Medicare the same for those who are already getting them or soon, will, but we have to change them into something affordable for the next generation. Nice that our President has cut Social Security taxes, but it doesn't help SS's viability.

The Presidency is a "bully pulpit," said Teddy Roosevelt. If our President said bluntly that fornication is sin (not, of course, the only or worst sin, but very popular) and that people who give their virginity to their spouse after the wedding are doing good, some people might listen. I applaud him for telling the guy in Iowa that he wants his daughters to think hard about sex, but he could speak more bluntly. His bottom line on abortion is that the murder of little babies for grownup convenience is OK.

We probably didn't need the B1.

Is Borowitz satire or just plain false witness?

If Reagan was Keynesian, it worked for him and it isn't for Obama.

GOP fingers may be in Solyndra's pie, but Bush's people turned it down and Obama's people approved it (and said, hold layoffs until after the '10 elections.)

Did Senator Obama vote for the mercurial bulbs? Has President Obama restored freedom as President Bachmann would've?

I agree with tipper about corporate welfare; so do most libertarians.

Education underfunded? D.C. has some of the most expensive and worst schools in the country (world). We need school choice as we have choice of cars and houses and colleges. The dollars are enough already.

GOP says Harry Reid's Senate hasn't passed a budget in a thousand days--just a string of pieces, not a whole budget, I gather. Sharon Engle (?) for Senate. Defund the cowboy poets.

January 25, 2012 at 6:06 p.m.
AndrewLohr said...

Link to an article I wrote about how Jesus frees people http://voices.yahoo.com/jesus-libertarian-7724306.html

The PoliticFact.com article Wendy at 11:55am mentioned said the numbers I let hambone feed me gave Obama's first year's debt to Bush. Quite a goof. (The numbers came from Nancy Pelosi; do we really want her in line for the Presidency?) Read on down, and it says project Obama for 8 years and his debt goes up 121%, which is worse than Bush; it says the figures confuse federal government debt with debt held by all Americans, and a different choice would say Bush 70% in 8 years, Obama 53% in 3 years; it says take debt as a percentage of GDP, and you get Bush 5.6%, Obama 21.9%.

January 25, 2012 at 6:13 p.m.
alprova said...

lovetheusaorleave wrote: "Al, you say he faces stronger opposition from those on the other side of the isle. How does that factor into when in the first "2" years he held the presidency he had a democratic control of "BOTH" the house and senate. It just proves my point, everyone wants to say he gets no support from republicans he did not even get from the democrats either."

On what? I did a search and found nothing of that Obama proposed that failed to pass Congress until 2011.

January 25, 2012 at 6:32 p.m.
alprova said...

chattanoogatennesseeusa wrote: "Alprova you're pathetic and a liar."

Prove it.

"You say you're a businessman and you support a Marxist boob like Obama? Do you work?"

If a Marxist walked up to you and punched you in the face, you'd never know it.

"Most of us pop in and out because we're busy. You park your big rump in here and post long and painful posts all day, responding to everything. You clearly have an agenda. No one could post as much as you do on here and have a job."

First of all, you do not know the size of my rump. Second, I have the luxury of popping in here as often as I so desire because I have internet access at my place of business, a nice shiny new P.C. on my desk, and third, I have the time to go online whenever I so desire. It's one of the perks of owning a business and being the boss.

January 25, 2012 at 6:42 p.m.
alprova said...

tu_quoque wrote: "Wow Dude !! Lame !!."

Oh I don't know. I thought it was one of his better works. It was quite hilarious in fact.

January 25, 2012 at 6:54 p.m.

alprova said, On what? I did a search and found nothing of that Obama proposed that failed to pass Congress until 2011.

Thank you! That is my point, if he wanted to get so much done for this country he had two years to do so and did nothing. Now all the sudden it is the fault of everyone but him. You can not have it both ways.

January 25, 2012 at 7:22 p.m.
MTJohn said...

AndrewLohr said...Again, MT John, Jesus led a libertarian life as a free man in a not very free world, letting no one box him in;...

Andrew - Jesus led the life of a suffering servant. To the extent that life equates with the "libertarian life", as you just described, it does not equate with "libertarian", as defined by Frederic Bastiat, Ayn Rand or the Tea Party movement. Jesus was and is self-giving - the latter libertarians are all self-serving.

AndrewLohr said...Is Borowitz satire or just plain false witness?

Satire. And, just like a good political cartoon, satire only works because it develops around kernels of truth.

January 25, 2012 at 8:16 p.m.
alprova said...

lovetheusaorleave worte: "Thank you! That is my point, if he wanted to get so much done for this country he had two years to do so and did nothing. Now all the sudden it is the fault of everyone but him. You can not have it both ways."

Oh brother. Why don't you stick to a point you're trying to make? You claimed he got no support from his fellow Democrats, and now you change your tune to be that of nothing being done when he had the chance? Lots of legislation came down the pike, not that right-wingers think so.

The fact is that the 111th Congress passed quite a bit of legislation during those two years. 383 bills in fact. President Obama vetoed only two bills during those two years.

Would you care to amend your assertions now to reflect the truth, or are you going to waffle some more?

http://www.congress-summary.com/A-111th-Congress/Laws_Passed_111th_Congress_Seq.html

January 25, 2012 at 8:35 p.m.
moonpie said...

Al,

Obama did not get a public option when he had a majority and pushed for one. This is what lovetheusaoeleave would be referring to if he weren't just quoting others and not knowing what they meant.

On the other hand..... Now deadbeats who don't or won't pay for their own health insurance will be more accountable for just showing up at the ED when they were I'll. What Republicans have failed to understand (thus be stupid) is that we already have a socialist medical system which is just more expensive than those countries which require universal participation

January 25, 2012 at 9:23 p.m.
moonpie said...

Forgive my typos. I'm out of the country and Internet speeds are verrrrrrrrrrrrrry slow!,

January 25, 2012 at 9:26 p.m.
DarkSky said...

AndrewLohr,here's a verse for you...Romans 13: 1-7

“Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which god has established. The authorities that exist have been established by god. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what god has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he shall commend you. For he is god’s servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is god’s servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. There fore it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience. This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are god’s servants, who give their full time to governing. Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes, if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.”

January 25, 2012 at 9:29 p.m.

Al, that is why there is no talking with you. Everything I said was in my first post. You try as you always do to turn everything around to where it fits your world. When you are called out on your own words then you can't even handle that. Point is if he is such a great president as you and others on here are so fooled into believing. Then why is this country is such shambles? It has nothing to do with since the Republicans got voted into control of the house and Senate as you want to blame. He had carte blanche his first two years as president and could and should have got everything going in the direction he wanted then. I remind you yet again 1001 days with out a budget. It started when he and his party had complete control. He wants to complain now that he can't get support from the other party and there are those that believe it. I am not one that buys it any longer, because he fooled me once but will not again. Everything I have stated is fact! Try as you might and as always do you it can't be disputed.

January 25, 2012 at 9:30 p.m.
DarkSky said...

Hey AndrewLohr here's some more for you...

Jesus says, "Don’t imagine that I came to bring peace on earth! No, rather a sword if you love your father, mother, sister, brother, more than me, you are not worthy of being mine." Matthew 10:34

January 25, 2012 at 9:44 p.m.
alprova said...

Moonpie, as I recall, it was the "Blue Dog" Democrats that killed the public option. They opposed Obama's and other Democrat's proposals as often as the Republicans did.

To the very end, he had widespread Democratic support for the public option. Insurance companies were for it. Doctors were for it.

I had the very same thought in the back of my mind while I was refuting what he stated, and while that piece of legislation was indeed notable, it's about the only sticking point that anyone can point to, to make claim that the President had any conflict between himself and his fellow Democrats.

Now, since the 112th Congress has convened, the only other piece of legislation where he met with resistance with other Democrats, is his $447 billion jobs bill proposal of late last year, and I think the opposition from some Democrats had more to do with the President's negative job approval polling numbers than anything else.

January 25, 2012 at 9:52 p.m.
chet123 said...

BIGRIDGEPAT...

IN RESPONSE TO YOU POSTING ON JAN 25 11:20...THIS IS MY PROBLEM WITH REPUBLICAN AS YOURSELF....IF YOU ARE NOT FAMILAR WITH THE KOCH BROTHER PIPE LINE EXPLOSION WHY THE RAT BUTT ARE YOU ELABRORATING ABOUT AN ISSUE YOU ARE IN TOTAL DANKNESS ABOUT....I'M TRYING MY BEST NOT TO CALL YOU STUPID....BUT IT REALLY GET UNDER MY SKIN TO COMMUNICATE WITH A PSEUDO INTELLIGENT POSTER AS YOU....

WHEN YOU DO YOUR HOME WORK ABOUT THE KOCH BROTHER PIPE LINE THAT EXPLODED AND COST A YOUNG MAN HIS LIFE..MAYBE WE CAN POST EACH OTHER...BUT I'M NOT GOING TO WASTS MY TIME POSTING AN IDIOT..THE KOCH BROTHER WAS FINED BY THE GOVERNMENT(THIS IS WHY THEY HAVE A DISDAIN FOR THE GOVERNMENT)....THE SAD THING ABOUT THIS IS THAT THE KOCH BROTHER USES STOOGES TO HIDE BEHIND...REALLTY AMAZING

January 25, 2012 at 10:18 p.m.
alprova said...

lovetheusaorleave wrote: "Al, that is why there is no talking with you. Everything I said was in my first post. You try as you always do to turn everything around to where it fits your world."

I turned nothing around. I quoted it word for word.

"When you are called out on your own words then you can't even handle that."

Hogwash. You're just another in a long line of people whose points are effectively refuted and found to be totally lacking in credibility and you can't admit it.

"Point is if he is such a great president as you and others on here are so fooled into believing. Then why is this country is such shambles?"

Because a President, no matter who, can only do so much, given the time that it took to get here, and with only so much to work with.

Nobody, and I do mean nobody, could have done any better than President Obama has done to right the wrongs that led this country to the state we faced in 2008.

"It has nothing to do with since the Republicans got voted into control of the house and Senate as you want to blame. He had carte blanche his first two years as president and could and should have got everything going in the direction he wanted then."

Are you of some opinion that the President and Congress can pass a magical bill that will right this country overnight? Even the worshiped Ronald Reagan took eight long, arduous years to bring down unemployment to a decent level.

You are of the opinion that Obama should have done everything needed in two years? You're dreaming.

"I remind you yet again 1001 days with out a budget."

I'm sorry to remind you that I posted the dates that the applicable budgets were passed by both Houses of Congress and signed by the President. Your statement comes from Representative Paul Ryan, and it is patently false.

"It started when he and his party had complete control. He wants to complain now that he can't get support from the other party and there are those that believe it."

I'm an American who has witnessed it time after time. I stay on top of most things in the political arena. With very few exceptions, the Republicans have stonewalled every key Democrat sponsored bill introduced since they assumed control of the House of Representatives.

"I am not one that buys it any longer, because he fooled me once but will not again. Everything I have stated is fact! Try as you might and as always do you it can't be disputed."

Look...what you think is fact is fine and dandy, and I'm not interested in changing your mind at all, and that aside, I've quite effectively refuted your alleged "facts" with the truth.

January 25, 2012 at 10:32 p.m.
chet123 said...

Andrewlohr...get over it buddy....Obama is the President.....you lost!....cant you realize that......stop whining..you lossed

January 25, 2012 at 10:45 p.m.
chet123 said...

HA HA HA...THE RIGHT-WINGS NUT ARE OUT OF THE BOX.....OBAMA SMOKED YOU AND EXPOSED YOU LAST NITE....EVERYBODY LAUGHING AT THE REPUBLICAN PARTY HA HA HA HA

January 25, 2012 at 10:47 p.m.

Al, if you think anything in wiki-stupedia is truth, well then it sure explains where you continue to get your wrong information. But by all means please continue to do so, watching you make a complete fool out of yourself on a daily basis is rather a fun source of entertainment.

January 25, 2012 at 10:52 p.m.
moonpie said...

Love,

Al smokes you at every turn and you keep coming back. You are proof of the cartoon. Correction. You are the cartoon.

And by the way, I know you.

January 25, 2012 at 10:52 p.m.
alprova said...

tu_quoque wrote: "Surely you not being dishonest and suggesting that the Bush administration has any responsibility for that fiasco."

Not at all. I'm merely suggesting that the process of Solyndra lobbying for that loan began years before Obama assumed office and that more than 30 Congress people were lobbied as well. GWB had no hand any more in the decision to grant the loan than Obama did.

Surely you're not suggesting that the President has any personal responsibility for that fiasco either.

The investigation has not closed on Solyndra yet. There is one man who appears to be the most likely responsible person for that fiasco and it is Energy Department stimulus adviser, Steve Spinner, who pushed for a quicker decision on that loan.

January 25, 2012 at 10:52 p.m.
alprova said...

tu_quoque wrote: ""How interesting that you are choosing to base the evaluation on percentages. Now that the debt is 100% of GDP any future president is going to get a break as it will be near impossible to double the debt with a couple of trillion dollars."

I have no problem at all in talking dollars as well. The subject raised was a percentage graph. In terms of percentage, or in terms of dollars, the result is the same.

The Obama budgets are accountable for an increase of $3.66 trillion dollars or about 24% of the total debt, as of this date. But his presidency inherited a great deal of baggage that has required inordinate amount of spending that his predecessors did not have to deal with. He inherited two expensive wars. He inherited a damn near collapsed economy. He inherited a severe unemployment problem.

"Why are you so reluctant to list the actual dollar amount of increase over a defined period of time?"

I'm not.

"I wonder how much Obozo has added each month during his term versus Bush per month?"

Probably much more, but then Bush left office before the bottom of the tanking economy was reached. Obama increased the war effort in Afghanistan, to finish what Bush had all but abandoned to go into Iraq. Obama picked up where Bush left off to save the automakers and the financial sector as well.

Most of the expense in salvaging what could be salvaged hit rock bottom after Obama assumed office and he has received all the criticism for that fact.

It's amazing how some people refuse to look at the progression of events to discover the truth, and who would rather blame an incoming President for every bit of it.

January 25, 2012 at 11:14 p.m.
alprova said...

Lovetheusaorleave wrote: Al, if you think anything in wiki-stupedia is truth, well then it sure explains where you continue to get your wrong information."

The dates and the explained delays pertaining to each of the last three budget years are thoroughly explained. The information cited in each of those three year pages came straight from the Government.

Representative Paul Ryan is the person who made that 1001 day claim, and it's nothing short of an outright lie. The only truth to that statement is that the Senate has not rubber stamped a budget proposal for 1001 days that the House sent to them for approval. The Senate amended, changed, or rejected provisions in each of the last three budget proposals before passing them.

"But by all means please continue to do so, watching you make a complete fool out of yourself on a daily basis is rather a fun source of entertainment."

That's your story and by golly you're going to stick to it.

January 25, 2012 at 11:31 p.m.

Moon, I am confused by your remarks. I do not see where as a person stating facts is trumped by those who state non factual opinions. It is these type of dialogues that have caused the paper in our area to no longer allow the option of posting comments. I understand the TFP has also restricted where people are allowed to post remarks. The Tennessean began by restricting it's readers from responding to reporters then within a couple of months even the opinion section was off limits and people had to respond by using only face book. It looks like it will only be a matter of time before the TFP does this as well.

When you get back into the country since you stated yesterday you were out of it. Please stop by my office if you are in the Franklin area if you do know me. But seeing as you referred to me as "he" or "him" just shows that you are confused. I find it hard to believe that there is still a male chauvinistic attitude in this world that feels women are not allowed to participate in political conversations.

January 26, 2012 at 7:18 a.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.