Dodd Says “Me, Too”

I just read this from the AP:

“Anti-incumbent sentiment is rippling through the electorate, a majority of the country says it’s on the wrong track, and the party in power typically gets blamed for the nation’s troubles.”

Now, someone explain this to me. Jesus Girl, anyone!? Last year at this time voters wanted change, I mean they was high on some serious change-smackdown, and boo-yeah they got it. They threw the proverbial f’ing bums out. Now they’re going to throw out the new bums, who replaced the old, with (now here it gets funny) with the old f’ing bums who were screwing ‘em over as recently as last year!? I mean, you’re laughing right, to the pt. of tears aren’t you?

Thanks, Amy. Do you ever get to sleep or only at work? Hopefully you’re a night owl. Or is this a “robo-post” as James Poniewozik calls ‘em? I asked Jay in her last post about tea-leaf-reading many retirements in both parties. Even with bitter D vs. R fighting, I’d guess the obvious that the crappy economy + unemployment are now taking a political toll, esp. in your home state. But are there other factors YOU are seeing that we need to look for, Amy? Thx for your thoughts.

The fact that all of these Dems are dropping their bids at the same time obviously reflects poorly upon the party and the president, but the bottom line is that these defections are hardly surprising. They all had their problems and faced difficult fights in the upcoming election that had little to do with the unpopularity of the Obama agenda.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Something that I never understood is exactly why politicians are so afraid to lose a political race. I get why the party — particularly in Dodd’s case — would want a poorly polling incumbent to step aside in favor of a more competitive candidate. But I don’t get why the incumbent politician wouldn’t take the rare opportunity to throw caution to the wind, stop significantly fundraising, and just do whatever they feel like in office.

In Dorgan’s case it is particularly distressing. The Dems are almost certainly going to lose that seat. The best chance the Dems have is to hope the economy rebounds along with Dorgan’s support. Why Doesn’t Dorgan, who actually seems principled for a Senator, just say “WTF do I have to lose? I’ll tell Obama that I want drug importation language or I’m filibustering the bill. What are they going to do? Not support me for re-election?”

I like to think that Dorgan isn’t just planning to pull a Daschle and become a corporate whore. But who knows?

BTW, once again, to paraphrase the immortal words of Judy Miller, the DFHs have been “proved f—ing right”

What did we say early last year? The WH stimulus package was too small and too heavily weighted towards non-job creating tax cuts. The Democratic leaders had to have known that 2010 and 2012 would, in large part, be a referendum on how they had handled the economy. They should have bent over backwards to (a) create the most stimulating package possible, (b) explain the magnitude of the economic mess that the GOP had left, and (c) lay the foundation on any double-dip recession on the GOP blocking a larger stimulus package.

Instead the WH and Congressional leadership pandered to Republicans, got nothing out of it, and will now cede power back to the people that created the mess in the first place. Brilliant.

No kidding. And its only going to get worse because the only lesson the democrats ever seem to learn when they lose is to move further to the right.

“Why Doesn’t Dorgan, who actually seems principled for a Senator, just say “WTF do I have to lose? I’ll tell Obama that I want drug importation language or I’m filibustering the bill. What are they going to do? Not support me for re-election?”"

er, perhaps because not getting precisely what he wants is not a reason to stop a bill that will insure 31 million more people and will ultimately end up passing just under $200 billion a year to lower income families (more than the federal government spends on the earned-income tax credit, Head Start, assistance to single mothers and their children, nutrition programs like food stamps, and the National Institutes of Health combined.)

Square, you talk about “ceding” power back to the republicans, as if you and others don’t have a say! you have a vote, don’t you? or are you one of those that is going to stay at home because you think Democrats deserve it and there is no difference between democrats and republicans, between obama and Palin/Romney?

“I like to think that Dorgan isn’t just planning to pull a Daschle and become a corporate whore. But who knows?”
.
Unfortunately thats the way our system works. We might think we are voting the bums out, but in reality Dorgan is only losing his title as a sitting senator. He is not losing his influence and power. The talking head shows will have him on speed dial now.
.
Even Sarah Palin, who should have been a footnote in history has reporters checking her facebook and twitter pages for updates. Newt Gringich was one of the most booked guests on Meet the Press last year. Politico is the official press office for the Cheney camp. Daschle was using the front door of the White House during the healthcare debate.
.
The joke is on us if we think we are hurting these people by voting them out of office.

homerhk is upset that Americans would like to have the same kind of health care that he takes for granted.

Well this is even worse news.
.
Encouraged by a group of influential New York Democrats, Harold Ford Jr., the former congressman from Tennessee, is weighing a bid to unseat Senator Kirsten E. Gillibrand in this fall’s Democratic primary, according to three people who have spoken with him.
.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/06/nyregion/06ford.html?hp

Anyone else?
.
Sure. Senators Kit Bond, George Lemieux, George Voinovich, Kay Bailey Hutchison, Sam Brownback, and Jim Bunning are all retiring too.
.
Oh, you meant only Democrats. Right. I forgot how for the media it’s a dire crisis that two Democrats are retiring, but six Republicans retiring merits only a big yawn.

I wasn’t trying to hijack the thread with discussions of the HCR bill. My point was just to point out that Dorgan theoretically has been freed up to actually fight for what he really believes in if he feels like it. Instead he is quitting. Interesting.
.
Although I do not agree with your assessment of the merits of the HCR legislation, it has been sold to the Democratic base on the premise that Democrats will immediately begin work to fix and improve the system.
.
Your comment implies that, unlike with Landrieu, Nelson, and Lieberman, the Democrats would never have conceded to Dorgan’s demand had he made it. That sort of undermines the argument that this bill will ever get fixed. As does the retirement of Dorgan, a leading proponent of lowering prices through competition.
.
I hope you are satisfied with the bill as is, because it will never be marginally improved (in 10-15 years when the entire system collapses, we may be forced to revisit comprehensive HCR).

“Now, someone explain this to me. Jesus Girl, anyone!? Last year at this time voters wanted change, I mean they was high on some serious change-smackdown, and boo-yeah they got it.”

.
I’m not “Jesus or Jeasus Girl”, but to explain it in elementary language that you might understand, people are simply fed up to their eyeballs with “business as usual” in Washington.
.
Despite Obama’s pledge during the campaign we are not seeing “change we can believe in”. Instead we are seeing typpical Washington politics as usual.
.
Transparency? NOT
.
Bipartisianship? NOT
.
Lobbyist Reform? NOT
.
Do you get the picture yet?
.
The only change we see is an expansion of Government, and more taxes. Expansion of Government and more spending.
.
And, the real scary thing going on right now is the Sal Alinsky approach Obama and his minions are doing to bring about the Father of Community Organizing, “How to Take Down the Government, and Replace It with Socialism”.
.
Does that help?

Are you guys serious? Demos lose when they run to the right? The plan as articulated by Carville for the 2008 election was to run as Republicans. Obama did it. Everytime he went off message (Wealth re-distribution) we saw dancing that would do Michael Jackson proud. Clinton lost Congress because he thought he had a mandate to drive hard left. Voters put up “This road is closed”. Obama and the Demos continue to lose public support because of spending, HC, Crap and trade,industry takeovers and loss of freedoms.

If you truly think that Demos need to run to the left. Please, please please do. Not only will the 60 votes of the Senate be gone so will the simple majaority. Find all the Van Jones out there and have them run.

To offer a snarky answer as to why Demos are afraid to lose ? There isn’t any war a demo will fight.

To be more accurate, I am upset that there are some Americans who are willing to prevent a significant step towards Americans having healthcare that I take for granted just because they think that step isn’t significant enough.

This is where I think your liberal v centrist meme does you in. I am all for government healthcare and think that every country has an obligation to provide basic healthcare to all its citizens. Having had experience of the US healthcare system when my dad spent his last few months in an ICU there to the tune of $1 million (as opposed to two years free cancer care in the UK immediately prior to that) I strongly believe that the healthcare system in the US should be reformed. So, as I’ve said, I don’t think you and I are much different in terms of policies – I am an unabashed liberal.

However, I am also a realist and take the view that something is better than nothing. So, when I said that I think that the reason that Dorgan would vote for the bill even though importation of drugs is not in the bill because he would not want to scupper all the great things in the bill for this I meant it.

you view centrists as a movement or a philosophy – and to some it might be. But there are also many many liberals who understand however that not every liberal idea is going to get through the legislative process. I don’t think that’s centrist – I think that’s a liberal who is realistic.

Can you please explain to me why you think that the status quo is better than the imperfect bill that is going to be passed?

Square, a few points.

First, it’s not that I think that democrats wouldn’t have accepted the amendment but I do think that particular senators (ie the ones you mention) would have had a hard time accepting this and given their track record would resurrect their filibuster threats – I don’t know of course but I presume that’s the dynamic here.

Second, the way the bill will get fixed is not that suddenly magically the dynamic of the senate is changed overnight. It is a long process and one that will take place when the kinks and loopholes and gaps that are inevitable in any legislation become apparent in the course of implementation (much in the same way as social security and medicare – as has been set out numerous numerous times).

Third you say you disagree with my reading of the merits of the legislation – what precisely do you disagree with? that it will insure 31 million more people? or the money flow I mentioned?

Calm down, homer. I am merely making an observation straight out of Politics 101: When you fail to deliver for your constituents, you lose elections. Or as Bill Clinton said, “It’s the economy, stupid.” If unemployment remains around 10% and the Democrats can’t explain why it isn’t their fault, what they have done to address the problem, and what the GOP has done to stop them…THEY WILL LOSE.
.
you have a vote, don’t you?
.
Just as I am generally incapable of protecting Democrats from their own political stupidity, I cannot specifically help them in 2010 because, no, I cannot vote for any federally-elected Democrat who is seriously at risk of losing to a Republican. And, even if I could, my lone vote would hardly stem the rising tide of voter discontent with these self-destructive yahoos in D.C.

I’m convinced that the media will create an issue if there isn’t one. Everyone wants change in the form that THEY want and they want it NOW. In reality it doesn’t work that way. Heck, I want a million bucks but I don’t think it’s coming anytime soon so I work with what I have. That’s not good enough for politicians and ideologues. There’s no patience anymore.

There isn’t any war the Republicans won’t support, if you indeed declare a war.

Yes they will always take a principled fight. Words not in the left lexicon.

Homer, all bills have pros and cons. There is no bill that is entirely good or entirely bad. You have to weigh the costs against the benefits.
.
IMHO, the costs of this bill far outstrip the benefits. Mandating that people buy health insurance, particularly without any significant cost savings, is terrible policy and terrible politics, and I can’t support it. People are uninsured in most cases because they can’t afford it or don’t think it is worth it given their risk profiles. Simply shoveling money at the problem is a terrible solution in my opinion.
.
And, frankly, I’m tired of fatalistic Democrats who are so quick to surrender before the fight has even begun.

homerhk the problems the Left has with the Nelson/Lieberman bill are well documented if you are interested. I think it is completely unfair of you to paint liberals as extremists. The public-option was a pathetic compromise on what liberals really wanted, the same thing you already have. They were realistic, unlike your hateful characterization of them.

Repub “principles”: More wars, more tax cuts for the wealthiest among us and more corporate “donations” in our coffers……..

Derek — I think you are completely misrepresenting what homerhk is saying. Nowhere did he “paint liberals as extremists” and nowhere did he express any “hateful characterization” of them. He simply believes that at this point, the HC bill is not going to be improved further and he would take some improvement over the status quo. I believe you have taken things out of context.

I am curious homer, why did your father come to the US for health care?
.

“Having had experience of the US healthcare system when my dad spent his last few months in an ICU there to the tune of $1 million…”

.
Just curious.

diecash1 he has been lobbing personal attacks on me for a few days now, basically accusing me of being an extremist.

By corporate donations you mean bonuses to Fannie and Freddie execs who have wrecked the housing market or stimulus checks to zip codes that don’t exist.

Demos definition of wealthiest- anyone with a paycheck.

It’s possible that I’ve missed the personal attacks but there were certainly none in this thread.
..
I do think your position — vote this bill down and live with the status quo — could certainly be categorized as extreme as there is zero chance of a new bill being negotiated at this point.
..
As homerhk said, he (and I) likely agree with your policy preferences. We would all prefer single-payer or, at the very least, a real public option but it’s not in the cards at this point.

So Rusty, all the Republicans retiring — and there are more Republicans retiring in the House than there are Democrats, more Republicans retiring in the Senate than there are Democrats, and more Republican governors retiring than there are Democrats — that’s all a sign of dissatisfaction with Obama?

By donations I mean the corporate whoredom that is the republican party.
..
When will you actually get something right? Fannie and Freddie were ENABLERS. They did not force financial institutions to continue to securitize loans and sell them off while continuing to make poor underwriting decisions so they could continue to rake in BILLIONS in profits. If you want to compare bonus checks, why don’t you look at the bonuses that financial executives collected as they destroyed our economy?
..
Even the quintessential dumba$$, W knew that his bogus taxcut (2001) went to the wealthiest (top 1%) among us, not “anyone with a paycheck.”

Just based on memory

Retiring Senators

Republicans

Gregg- NH
Voinovich-OH
Martinez(already gone)-FL

Speaking of Florida, I live there, Rubio v Crist=bloodbath=possible Dem Win

Democrats

Dodd- CT
Dorgan-ND

No kevin, I am hopeful that the incumbents in office who are older, and know the political scene better than any of us would ever hope to know, see a political wind on the horizon that is full of voter dissatisfaction.
.
That the big lobbyist buy-outs will no longer be tolerated.
.
That people are sick and tired of the pay-offs back to those same lobbyists with our tax dollars will not be tolerated anymore.
.
In my own area about 6 years ago, an incumbent 46 year term State Senator was booted out of office when he ran for re-election in the primary. It sent shock waves throught the political system where I live. People here simply said “enough is enough” of the corruption and wasteful spending of tax dollars that the average person saw no benefit from.
.
I truly believe we are now seeing the same thing on a National level. I believe what you are seeing are those in power like Dodd, who see the anger out here in voter land, but do not want to be a part of it anymore.
.
Obama for the past year for his part simply proved that we cannot trust any of them to do the people’s work in our best interest. They make big promises, but never deliver.

‘DROPPING LIKE FLIES’?…. Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.) is retiring. So is Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.). And before anyone could catch their breath, Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter (D) announced he’s not seeking re-election, either.
.
It led ABC News to report that “Democrats are dropping like flies.”
.
It is not shaping up to be a pretty week for the Democrats. [...]
.
You will certainly hear a lot of talk from Republicans that Democrats are beginning to face the reality of just how tough the current political landscape looks for them and they are running for the hills.

.

This is, to be sure, exactly the meme Republicans want the media to embrace, and if the coverage this morning is any indication, political journalists seem anxious to comply.
.
But let’s add a little perspective here. Quick quiz: which party has more Senate retirements so far this campaign cycle, Democrats or Republicans? Follow-up question: which party has more House retirements so far this campaign cycle, Democrats or Republicans?
.
If Dems are “dropping like flies,” the answer should be obvious. But it’s not — in both chambers, Republican retirements, at least for now, outnumber Democratic retirements.
.
In the House, 14 GOP incumbents have decided not to seek re-election, while 10 Democratic incumbents have made the same announcement. Does this mean Republicans are “dropping like flies”?
.
In the Senate, six Republican incumbents have decided not to seek re-election, while two Democratic incumbents have made the same announcement. Is this evidence of a mass Democratic exodus?
.
Among governors, several incumbents in both parties are term-limited and prevented from running again, but only three Democrats who can seek re-election — Parkinson in Kansas, Doyle in Wisconsin, and Ritter in Colorado — have chosen not to. For Republicans, the number is four — Douglas in Vermont, Rell in Connecticut, Crist in Florida, and Pawlenty in Minnesota. (Update: the GOP number is five if we include Palin in Alaska.)
.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/

“When will you actually get something right?”

Decades before you will. THe ENABLERS coerced by ACORN and the CRA act forced (read:extorted) finanical institutions to give loans to unqualified people. Barney Frank yammered how these Fannie & Freddie were solid and no oversight was needed.

And yes let’s compare the bonuses of Franklin Raines and Jamie Gorelick of hundreds of millions of dollars while cooking the books of Fannie Mae. Gee are they democratic corporate whores? And isn’t Gorelick the same genius that wrote the policy to keep a wall between gov.agencies so terror information isn’t shared?

Or how about Algore using global warming hoax to persoanlly profit. Demos have no problem being a whore just before they condemn others.The hypocrisy is no surprise. The difference demos use government. to steal money. It is easier than working for a living

I see that Lady diecash is still living in the past. So much so that I am hopeful that the insurgence of folks who are simply fed up with the politics as usual theme brought to us by the current Democrat controlled Congress and Presidency will be soundly defeated in 2010.
.
That people like Pelosi who want to term the anger out here in the heartland is nothing more than “astro-turf”. Well the only way you prove someone like dear Nancy wrong is to show her that it is not “astro-turf”, and that the people of this country that are it’s base, have awakened and found they do not like what they see and hear.
.
The programs and policies of the Democrats in power are not what this country needs. All polls show a complete disfavor of the current health care bill as it is proposed. That has not changed since early this summer during the townhall’s that were conducted across this country.
.
People in general do not like change. They like it less when there is a major risk to lose their healthcare because this is simply a terrible bill. Add in all the other things which have gone wrong in the past few weeks, a recession that deepens, and jobs not recovering as promised, and you have a situation ripe for full on voter rebellion. Saw the same thing in 1980 occur. When Jimmy Carter was swept into office, people were going on how this was such a great thing. 3 short years later he was basically run out of Washington as a joke back to Georgia.

The only thing you are likely to reach “decades before me” is death.
..
Acorn and the CRA NEVER forced any financial institution into making a bad load. Bad loans were made because the financial institutions saw nothing but large profits.
..
The difference is Republicans use government to steal money as evidenced by the years 2001-2009. It is easier than working for a living. Fixed that one for you.

Well Rusty, it’s good to see you are still an abject moron. Some things never change.

They make big promises, but never deliver.
.
Right. Obama campaigned on health care reform, and we’ve seen no motion on that. At all.

…it will insure 31 million more people…
.
This is a sales-pitch talking point, not a factual statement.
.
Unless one means to say that health insurance will be provided at no or little cost to 31 million people who could not otherwise qualify for nor afford coverage, the 31 million number is an exaggeration.
.
It is more accurate to say that the bill will require many more of the 31 million uninsured to purchase insurance from private insurers, some of whom will obtain tax credits at the end of the year to offset some of that high cost.
.
It’s highly misleading to imply that 31 million people will get some kind of benefit out of this legislation.

Derek, I don’t think I’ve been lobbing personal attack at you but if that’s the way it’s come across I apologise. Certainly the comment you made at the start of this thread could also be characterised as a personal attack at me, but I’ll not comment further on that.

I do object to the characterisation of centrists that runs through a lot of your posts – precisely because of the reasons I set out above – I consider myself a liberal but a realist one. You may have different views as to what is realistic and we may just have to disagree on that but that is not a question of POLICY in the way that you appear to think it is.

Whatever might or might not have been done better – frankly we’ll never know for sure – my point remains – this is a significant step forward. And yes, I think that having regard to the well documented problems that people have with the bill. As Sq. says above, all laws will have pros and cons – I happen to believe that the good things I refer to (which no-one has yet disputed) are worth the bad things in the bill. Because, when it comes down to it, the main thing that people object to is that it provides more customers to insurance companies. I can see why that’s distasteful but it seems to be price one has to pay in the US to get expanded coverage – which in my view is paramount. If there was another way of doing it that would pass the senate i’d be all for it, believe me.

Rusty, the reason why my dad came to US is that the NHS, having exhausted all treatments for my dad, including a stem cell transplant, basically said there was nothing more they could do. The doctors in the US said they would try another stem cell transplant (after a pretty raucus board meeting, as I understand since many on the board thought it was pointless) but that there was only a 5% chance of it working. It didn’t work and the NHS were correct and the last month of my father’s life was pretty awful instead of being at home with his family. Before you jump on that as an example of NHS rationing care, I am fairly confident that no insurance company in the US would have paid for this additional treatment given the circumstances – the only way we could afford it was to use my father’s life insurance…

rusty:

lady di is not living in the past, its a delusional present.

“Well Rusty, it’s good to see you are still an abject moron.”

But falls right back to name calling, of course I will be accused of being the bile spewer and taking Lady di words out of context. How the above statement can be taken out of context can only be viewed through a disturbed mind.

====
“The difference is Republicans use government to steal money as evidenced by the years 2001-2009. It is easier than working for a living. Fixed that one for you.”

Lady di is stull under the delusion that money earned is the government’s money an dnot the taxpayer. So tax cuts are stealing while handing money out to unions and other special interest groups as payoffs is work.

So more republican house, senate and governors are not seeking re-election than democrats? That means nothing. The democrats are still dropping like flies while the republicans are soaring like American Eagles while the Star Spangled Banner plays and real Americans eat apple pie and wait until they get married to get their wicks dipped in wax.

No dimwit, I have given up the “niceties” when dealing with you and Rusty as I have received nothing but insults, condescension and derision. I might as well respond in kind.
..
Fools like you that forget the past damn us to repeat it. Learning lessons from the myriad of failures of W is probably the only benefit of this “lost” decade. I have never said anything about money that individuals earned belonging to the Government. That is yet another one of your delusions.

[Democrats are] dropping like flies…

More Villager bullsh!t, and lazy reporting to boot:

…in both chambers, Republican retirements, at least for now, outnumber Democratic retirements.

In the House, 14 GOP incumbents have decided not to seek re-election, while 10 Democratic incumbents have made the same announcement. Does this mean Republicans are “dropping like flies”?

In the Senate, six Republican incumbents have decided not to seek re-election, while two Democratic incumbents have made the same announcement. Is this evidence of a mass Democratic exodus?

Among governors, several incumbents in both parties are term-limited and prevented from running again, but only three Democrats who can seek re-election — Parkinson in Kansas, Doyle in Wisconsin, and Ritter in Colorado — have chosen not to. For Republicans, the number is four — Douglas in Vermont, Rell in Connecticut, Crist in Florida, and Pawlenty in Minnesota. (Update: the GOP number is five if we include Palin in Alaska.)

Your Chicken Little media at work.

Ya beat me…but I guess it’s worth reiterating, right?

Lady di

If that rational makes you feel better– great.

The insults, condescension and derision is how most lefties here respond to anyone who disagrees with them, especially conservatives so spare me your disgust.

Yes don’t forget the past. Every country and government that has gone down the road you want and that the Obama administration is taking us HAS FAILED.

While countries world wide are embracing capitalism and tax cuts you deride both.

I know freeinpa, people like Di are merely “trolls” as stuart was so nice to explain in a previous thread to me by hijacking a thread with third grade name calling. I know, I am guilty too by calling “it” Lady Di first, but knowing full well that he/she will not discuss anything without attacks is his/her tactics, always.
.
But, I am confident that the Lady Di’s on the left will keep up living in the past of GW Bush, when in fact people have moved forward and are now focused on the fact that Obama has outspent not only George Bush in less than one year with tax dollars, our tax dollars on frivilous programs, but Obama is spending future dollars on programs like Health Care “Reform” that will do nothing at all to stop the costs from rising.
.
Right after 9/11, Bush did restimulate the economy with tax cuts. It did cost billions of dollars. It did actually stimulate versus what we see with the Obama stimulus which has done absolutely nothing to date.
.
Which is worse, a stimulus of tax rebates that did stimulate the economy and kept it from folding right after 9/11? Or, an Obama stimulus that we see doing nothing? No jobs, no growth, no nothing.
.
And they wonder why someone like Dodd is getting out of Dodge?

homerhk there are other ways of passing the bill, ones that Bush had the balls to use.
.
I don’t think you appreciate how far the gap is between the third way people and the more traditional Left, especially when it comes to Lieberman. The thought of him dictating the terms of this bill is stomach turning. Your argument reminds me of all the other arguments the centrists have used the last decade, for things like the war in Iraq, for example. “Oh well, that’s the best we can do, even though we do have options.”
.
The Left was very clear, months in advance, about what would happen if the watered down public option was cut. If the Democrats think they can do better without the aid of the Left this year, good luck to them. If not, they better find some other way to get it done.

sacreh

Politicians never go out on top (or in power). You tend to have higher retirements from the minority party than you do the majority.

I think when the majority retires it is the ego to be remembered as a retiring member than a loser.

“the reason why my dad came to US is that the NHS, having exhausted all treatments for my dad, including a stem cell transplant, basically said there was nothing more they could do.”

.
So in other words, if someone in the UK has “exhausted” all other possible treatments, and a “board” decides that they cannot get any further government dollars to pay. They can’t even use their own “Life Insurance” money to keep on trying? The “board” simply says, “you die”?
.
Is that what we want in this country? Even if you have the money to spend you still cannot get medical treatment no matter how futile it may seem?
.
Death panels indeed!

“No jobs, no growth, no nothing.”
..
As accurate a description of what W produced during his years in office. His administration had the worst job growth numbers ever. So how is it you still can’t see that?

Crist is running for the Senate. Media apparently don’t make a distinction between natural turnover and the sky falling. (Grape beat me to it, darnit!)

freeinpa: I agree that more retirements usually come from the party that isn’t in power. When the prospects look good that they will become the majority in the next election they do tend to run again however. I’ll be the first to concede that the democrats are going to lose seats in the house and senate because they have such large majorities in both and history doesn’t favor them in the midterms. I also believe that the republican party will still be in the minority in both houses after November.
.
While the chances are very good that the republicans will pick up significant numbers, I believe that even they don’t really believe they’ll be in control after the election. There’s a good chance that more republicans aren’t seeking re-election and will join the private sector until the chances for control appear more feasible.

Okay, here’s the reason for the story. If you didn’t catch this last night I will reiterate — the media is only interested in writing from the perspective of one of two archetypal narratives:
.
1) the guy/or gal for that matter, who is too big for his britches and gets their come up ins
.
2) And the other is the phoenix rising from the ashes.
.
And this is so important to them that when these themes don’t occur naturally they create them — hence despite reality the story becomes “Democrats are dropping like flies.”
.
Can anyone guess how many stories in the next revolution will focus on how Obama’s agenda may have been too overreaching and put the Democratic majority in jeopardy?
.
More importantly, since we all know the story is crap, How many people want to take a bet on how quickly after the Democrats don’t implode next November how many stories will start with a reference like a phoenix rising?
.
And folks it doesn’t much matter who they are — it’s what they do.

You mean as opposed to this, Di?
.

“It turns out they were optimistic. Even with the $787 billion stimulus package that Obama signed in February, more than 4 million jobs have been lost in 2009, the worst year for job losses since World War II. The jobless rate that advisers projected would peak at 8% has topped 10%.”

.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2009-12-03-obama-jobs_N.htm
.
And the sad truth is, it is not over yet.
.
I know I know, it’s not Obama’s fault, it is George W Bush’s fault.

Dee: I agree in large part with what you said, but I think the chances are equally good that the MSM will spin it as the democrats had a shot fired acrooss their bow or else the voters were warning democrats that they were going to far. Retaining control won’t be the story, losing seats will be.

Stuart, could you provide some evidence for your own talking-points? I hear you talking at large about how others are wrong, but I see little attempt to support your claims.

sacredh

I am reserving judgment as to whether the Repubs will pick up a majority in either House yet. Whether you agree or disagree there is a growing number of folks (right and left) that do not like the results they are seeing from the current party.

Forcing through legislation, although a favorite of folks here, is not playing well. Neither is huge spending to special interests while employment is in double digits. The Democrats tone deafness if continued can enhance a possibility of a control shift in Congress.

The difference between Democrats and Republicans, The GOP retirements stem from facing the reality that their failed ideology is still being rejected by their own constituents at a time when historical precedent ought to run in their favor and supposedly the base is so energized. Conversely, Democrats are looking at their political realities and while they failed to convince Corzine to step aside in time to run a m ore viable Democrat, they will be able to do so in Connecticut — It’s not the Democratic agenda that the problem, its individual personalities they have to worry about. Clearly they are seeking to overcome the personal or perhaps better thought of local issues. Moreover, Republicans are in for double whammy because they have raised far fewer dollars and must come up with resources not only for the generals but they have far more primaries to resource. But you know I don’t see any stories about that, because they don’t easily fall within the two archetypal narratives.

rusty:

yes the default position is its Bush’s fault. This crowd will never man-up.

In Obama speech yesterday it was the first one that did not include I, I ,I,I in it. When asked if its a failure of the adminstration the response was a collapse of intelligence.

It’s always somebody else’s fault.

Wrong again, Freepie and Rusty. Bush II did not stimulate the economy, precisely because he chose the wrong way of doing so. Tax cuts are notoriously ineffective as a way of stimulating the economy, and even more so when misdirected towards the rich. We should also remember that the last three GOP presidents all hiked the deficit, that none were good for the middle class, and that the economic record of the GOP is one of ignorance, dishonesty and failure. In sum: voodoo economics.

That bunch is incapable of “manning up” and accepting that conclusion. Honesty violates all of their sworn beliefs.

Perhaps the question will be asked early in 2010;
.

“Are you better off now under the Obama Presidency? Or, were you better off under the George Bush II Presidency?”

.
Do you feel that You and Your family are more safe? Nope.
.
Is your financial well-beling better now under Obama?
Nope.
.
Did you loose your job under Obama?
Yep!
.
Did you get your job back under Obama?
Nope.
.
Did the 787 BILLION dollar Obama Stimulus help you and your family at all?
Nope.

So now we know that Rustyreturns is Scott Rasmussen. Interesting. The batshit convergence continues.

Just for you “maverick”.
.

“Were you lucky enough last Christmas to have the tax payers spend millions of dollars flying you and your family to Hawaii? Did you get to go golfing over Christmas past, and eat your weight in flavored shaved ice, while the rest of the tax payers were trying to make their last dollar go further in the worst economy since the Great Depression?”

.
Nope!!

Well I think they will say something about voters warning Democrats that they are going to far because falls into the Obama is arrogant and hes getting his come up ins with his transformation presidency nonsense. But the warning shots might force them to explore GOP weakness and they don’t seem to want to do that. And I think I just won the debate since Nora O’Donnell just asked the question does the Dodd retirement mean that Democrats are more excited about heir chances or does this mean that it’s a signal that Obama is weak.

Yup, batshit.

Breathless in the Village. Charlie Cook, Divine Astrologer to the Village has spoken. When Republicans retire yawns all round. When Democrats do: were into crisis mode.

What’s new?

Dems have had their scumbags: Dodd, Murtha, Rangel and on: they have problems with cash, fancy mortgages, free office space and pork for their projects.

Repubs have the same plus an additional one: a Bible in one hand and in to someone’s pants with the other.

Stuart, could you provide some evidence for your own talking-points?

What talking point?
.
That the bill requires individuals to purchase insurance?
.
Sure, here’s the evidence, it’s in the Senate bill in:
.
Subtitle F—Shared Responsibility for Health Care
.
PART I—INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY
.
SEC. 1501. REQUIREMENT TO MAINTAIN MINIMUM ESSENTIAL COVERAGE ( link to PDF WARNING HUGE PDF of Senate bill )

(G) Under sections 2704 and 2705 of the Public Health Service Act (as added by section 1201 of this Act), if there were no requirement, many individuals would wait to purchase health insurance until they needed care.
.
By significantly increasing health insurance coverage, the requirement, together with the other provisions of this Act, will minimize this adverse selection and broaden the health insurance risk pool to include healthy individuals, which will lower health insurance premiums. The requirement is essential to creating effective health insurance markets in which improved health insurance products that are guaranteed issue and do not exclude coverage of pre-existing conditions can be sold.

That’s not a talking point, that’s a fact. It’s in the bill, right there in black and white. Nobody even debates this.

I hear you talking at large about how others are wrong, but I see little attempt to support your claims.

Well, I’m sorry you read it that way. I thought it was up to the people making the original claim to provide evidence for their assertions. I was pointing out that the claim is highly debatable.
.
In theory, somebody who claimed that the bill would “insure 31 million people” would need to provide evidence that this is the case. As it is, the bill requires that many individuals (presumably in that 31 million number) must now insure themselves through private insurers, although some of those people will eventually receive some of that money back in the form of tax credits at the end of the tax year.
.
Don’t you think that it’s incumbent upon those who toss out the claim “insure 31 million people” to describe exactly what that means using supporting evidence?

That the big lobbyist buy-outs will no longer be tolerated.
.
That people are sick and tired of the pay-offs back to those same lobbyists with our tax dollars will not be tolerated anymore.

Welcome to the reality-based community.

Personally, I’m pretty satisfied with Obama’s presidency so far. I had hoped for him to be more liberal but I realize that heading toward the center may be the only way he can get re-elected. I can live with that. I’d much rather see some of the agenda I wanted realized than none at all. As for the people who are disappointed that he isn’t “left” enough saying they won’t vote for him again, I can understand their frustration, but when 2012 comes around are they really going to set it out and risk someone they are diametrically opposed to get voted in? My guess is no.
.
I’d love to stay and continue but I have 8″ of snow in my driveway that looks like it’s getting too comfortable. Have fun folks.

“I think the chances are equally good that the MSM will spin it as the democrats had a shot fired acrooss their bow or else the voters were warning democrats that they were going to far.”
.
The MSM will spin it the way their corporatist owners and editors tell them to present the latest “conservative” propaganda and lies (usually a straight pass-through, with attribution).

That people are sick and tired of the pay-offs back to those same lobbyists with our tax dollars will not be tolerated anymore.

The “people” being distinct from the big industry and big finance recipients of state largess, and the Third Way folks in the Democratic leadership who believe in the sanctity of that relationship.
.
Yes, people are sick and tired of being exploited to remedy the failures of elites. We’re sick and tired of double standards in the moral hazards, we’re sick and tired of nothing working for us, and we’re sick and tired of unrepresentative government.

Dee:
.
The overlooked third (actually first) narrative, designed to generate clicks/ratings/circulation numbers without investing any effort in accuracy, is this:
.
FOOD FIGHT!!!

Rusty, that’s the same question you used to ask about Bush’s many vacations in Texas, right? Or every other president’s vacations in his home state since George Washington?
You couldn’t possibly be making that lousy of an argument just to try and score political points, right?

“As for the people who are disappointed that he isn’t “left” enough saying they won’t vote for him again, I can understand their frustration, but when 2012 comes around are they really going to set it out and risk someone they are diametrically opposed to get voted in?”
.
As even Markos said at the peak of his pique over the PO, engaged liberals will still vote Democrat (they’re rational and understand that politics is always the choice of the lesser of evils). The problem comes with: 1) young, new Democratic voters who were swayed by Obama’s promise of change but otherwise don’t know much about politics, 2) finger-in-the-wing independents who’s default vote is Republican (the 10% or so of the public who used to call themselves Republican until BushCo ran the country off the rails) and 3) lack of energy and money from a dispirited Democratic base. Against the right-wing, teabagging lunatics and great ignorant masses, ginned up by traitorous right-wing lies and left ignorant or misinformed by a corrupt media, in a disastrous economic/political environment, it may not matter much what choice rational and well-informed liberals make.

GDP 2000 9951.5 billions
GDP 2009 14,441 billions

Employment (non-farm + Gov)
Dec 2000 132,485,000 Jan 2009 156,873,000
Nov 2009 153,497,000

I suggest Lady di you stick to name calling. The numbers as reported by the BEA tell a different story from your delusion. GDP & jobs up despite 9/11, a 2 recessions. The Messiah however no so much

For the left, no runs, no hits only errors

To paraphrase Chevy Chase: “Freeper you ignorant slut!” You’ve once again missed the forest for all of the trees.
..
This from that ultra-liberal rag, Business week:
..
“Between May 1999 and May 2009, employment in the private sector sector only rose by 1.1%, by far the lowest 10-year increase in the post-depression period”
..
Feel free to have someone read (and explain) it to you here:
..
http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/economicsunbound/archives/2009/06/a_lost_decade_f.html

“The MSM will spin it the way their corporatist owners and editors tell them to present the latest “conservative” propaganda and lies”

Yes anytime I want to hear the conservative view I get the NYT LAT Boston Globe or turn on ABC, NBC, CNN.If you believe that these are “conservative your view is further outside the mainstream than any conservative group.

If the dissatisfaction with the media is so great why hasn’t the left launched their own. That’s right they have Air America and MSNBC. All o fthe listeners can meet in a phone booth. Nobody cares or is intersted in what they have to say/

It seems incumbent on both parties to prove their claims, to my way of thinking. So far, you haven’t really established your claims in terms of independent analysis, rather than pointing to the bill and suggesting a possible consequence. Not to be unkind, but that isn’t really proof either. I might feel slightly less strongly, if you did not have a rather long track record of demanding proof from others. Don’t you agree that you should be held to the same standard?

“No jobs, no growth, no nothing.”

So your prior post was a lie and now you try to justify it by a lame article that cherry picks the data points. I provided you the numbers for Bush’s entire term. And try as you might you are the ignorant slut with my apologies to sluts.

Still no runs no hits and you keep piling up errors. See mommy about nap time.

My prior post was entirely correct. Those were your boyfriend Rusty’s words and I used them in a subtle attempt to point to job growth (or lack thereof) under W, the worst record of job growth since the Great Depression. Subtlety, like facts, are wasted on idiots such as yourself.
..
I note that you don’t dispute the analysis of his pathetic job growth record either. Apparently you’re “mentally exhausted.” The “morally bankrupt” part goes without saying.

I like the way you write.
.
OT, but Bless my next door neighbor and his new snowblower. 175 feet of my driveway and 225 feet of his in less than an hour. I did them both and I looked like a snowman when I was done but…DAMN…that was easy. The thing practically dragged my ass up the slope.

“I note that you don’t dispute the analysis of his pathetic job growth record either.”

It was not an analysis of his record moron. It started 8 month before he got into office and ended 5 months after he left. Cherry picking data to make our case is pathetic even for the brain dead. Of course I am making an assumption you had a brain to begin the process. My mistake

How completely ignorant can you be?
..
“It started 8 month before he got into office and ended 5 months after he left”
..
So that didn’t cover the years he was in office? You have a complete lack of objectivity and analytical ability. Did you even go to school? I’m sure it was a diploma mill if so given the quality of your posts.

So far, you haven’t really established your claims in terms of independent analysis, rather than pointing to the bill and suggesting a possible consequence

You mean I can’t just read the bill myself, quote from it, and then everyone will know what it says? I have to get, like, some other party involved, so that analysis is “independent”? I’m not independent enough? I’m not “suggesting a possible consequence,” the bill explicitly states:

“INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY, REQUIREMENT TO MAINTAIN MINIMUM ESSENTIAL COVERAGE, ”
.
The requirement is essential to creating effective health insurance markets in which improved health insurance products that are guaranteed issue and do not exclude coverage of pre-existing conditions can be sold.

The consequence of the bill is a requirement that non-exempted uninsured individuals purchase private insurance. That’s not a suggestion or a possibility, those are the facts. What other “independent analysis” is required to state with authority that the bill mandates insurance purchases?
.
Actually, I think that you just don’t like what I’m saying, and are being argumentative.
.
If quoting the bill in question doesn’t serve as evidence for you, then nothing probably will.
.
Fortunately my credibility will probably survive your doubt.
.
But go ahead: feel free to use whatever evidence you can find yourself to support the claim that the bill “insures 31 million people”, or to refute the claim that the bill requires some of those uninsured people to purchase private insurance with reimbursement in the form of tax credits.
.
Help us all out here, and provide some support yourself for some argument, whatever that is…

More analysis of W’s dismal record on job growth here:
..
http://www.ppionline.org/ppi_ci.cfm?knlgAreaID=107&subsecID=295&contentID=252964
..
Highlights:
..
“The number of jobs in the economy increased 2.38 percent per year under Clinton, but it has decreased 0.17 percent per year under Bush.
..
There have been 1.7 million jobs created since September 2003, which may sound like a lot, but that number falls short of the 1.8 million jobs that must be created per year just to match population growth, and it falls far below the 3.7 million jobs that the administration predicted would be created when the president signed his 2003 tax cut into law.
..
Median household income is the best measure of American families’ well-being because it shows the true economic mid-point of the population. Median household income has fallen an average of 1.15 percent per year under Bush

Sounds wonderful. When my back heals from the last shoveling, I might have to go look at one.

“If the dissatisfaction with the media is so great why hasn’t the left launched their own.”
.
Too late, we (well, Al Gore) invented the intertubes. We were looking for a media where information could be shared far and wide without the filter of either Beltway corporatist media gasbags or right-wing “conservative” liars. How’s that one-way FOX/IEB brainwashing program working out for you? Oh, right…

In a word, Stuart, no, you are not independent enough, nor, as far as I can see, qualified to make future predictions on the strength of your beliefs alone. You may waffle, as you have done in your latest post, at length, but the fact remains that you are no closer to offering proof of your side of the argument than is the person you are debating. It is also rather tedious for you to try and draw me into the debate on one side or the other, when in fact I seek real arguments and real proofs from both sides before deciding with whom I agree. You have written many posts demanding links, evidence, proof from others – and yet are curiously reluctant, even outraged, when the same demand is made of you. Perhaps a session of self-reflection on your part would be beneficial.

In a word, Stuart, no, you are not independent enough, nor, as far as I can see, qualified to make future predictions on the strength of your beliefs alone. You may waffle, as you have done in your latest post, at length, but the fact remains that you are no closer to offering proof of your side of the argument than is the person you are debating. It is also rather tedious for you to try and draw me into the debate on one side or the other, when in fact I seek real arguments and real proofs from both sides before deciding with whom I agree. You have written many posts demanding links, evidence, proof from others – and yet are curiously reluctant, even outraged, when the same demand is made of you. Perhaps a session of self-reflection on your part would be beneficial.

Read more: http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/01/06/dodd-says-me-too/#comment-121416#ixzz0brfKjWJJ

Lady di:

Progressive policy Institute? What DNC website down>

Again here are the numbers from ther Bureau of Economic Analysis:
Dec 2000 132,485,000 Jan 2009 156,873,000

It must be that unionized public education but that look like positive growth. 18.4% growth overall or 2.1%/year.

Maybe Ed Schultz can give you some more numbers to twist to your liking or maybe you can get the Climate Research Unit to help they are great at fudging numbers to the lefts religious liking.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/01/graph_of_the_day_for_january_5.html

Temperature do go up if you adjust prior numbers. As always the Dumos make there case by coming to the conclusion then twisting to fit their needs. Then yell its been decided or liar.

Stick to name calling you suck at everything else.

Again you ignore the data and analysis that doesn’t fit your warped paradigm and then you proceed to conflate your BS with arguments that I didn’t make. Idiot.

“Too late, we (well, Al Gore) invented the intertubes. We were looking for a media where information could be shared far and wide without the filter”

Yes Algore ,the beginning of your delusions and he did start a media source for liberal nonsense but it failed- just like liberalism.(Actually I think Agore ate it) Nobody cared and even the CRU declared Algore the biggest source of global warming

Please please please explain to me how measuring employment by an organization that is charged with doing it for the period of time Bush was actually in office is a warped paradigm but your cherry picked data from selected time frames is strong analysis.

Please please tell me. I want it in writing so I can post elsewhere. The entire world will then know you are a deranged laughingstock and it will not be just here with the rest of the left wing nuts jobs.

Not to take on Stuart’s argument (he can do that just fine for himself) but, for the sake of my own curiosity, what “proof” is needed for this rather simple statement of fact?

[the statement that the current legislation "...will insure 31 million more people..."] is a sales-pitch talking point, not a factual statement…
.
…It is more accurate to say that the bill will require many more of the 31 million uninsured to purchase insurance from private insurers, some of whom will obtain tax credits at the end of the year to offset some of that high cost.

I mean, other than the “sales-pitch” characterization, what about that needs to be proved? Predictive claims are the things we should be skeptical about, not challenges to same.

So more republican house, senate and governors are not seeking re-election than democrats? That means nothing.

Not nothing. It is very good news… for John McCain.

Goods-producing(in thousands)
Year…….Total………..Total private jobs
2000…… 131,785 …….110,995
2008…… 137,066……..114,566
..
Service-providing(in thousands)
Year…….Total service jobs
2000……. 107,136
2008……. 115,646
..
Source:
ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/suppl/empsit.ceseeb1.txt
..
Wow, you’re totally right……..NOT. That is a pathetic record of job creation as I stated and as both sources I provided showed. These figures are in the private sector. I know you wouldn’t want to count jobs created by government expansion now would you?
..
Face facts, you suck and you lose. You are only good at hate filled rants, nothing more. Now piss off.

basilbrush:

you are not independent enough, nor, as far as I can see, qualified to make future predictions on the strength of your beliefs alone.

I’m not making a future prediction, I’m citing a fact. The fact cited is “Uninsured individuals will be required to purchase health insurance under the new law as passed by the Senate.” It is not through the strength of my beliefs by which I came to this knowledge, but through the reading of the bill, in particular the part named “PART I—INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY” and the section “SEC. 1501. REQUIREMENT TO MAINTAIN MINIMUM ESSENTIAL COVERAGE.”

You may waffle, as you have done in your latest post, at length, but the fact remains that you are no closer to offering proof of your side of the argument than is the person you are debating.

If you will not accept the very language of the bill in question as proof of an assertion about what that language states, then no, I suppose I can be no closer to proving or disproving anything, but then I suppose we should probably do away with reliance on empiricism altogether. In case you did still wish to retain the use of evidence in the consideration of conclusions, here is that language again:

By significantly increasing health insurance coverage, the requirement, together with the other provisions of this Act, will minimize this adverse selection and broaden the health insurance risk pool to include healthy individuals, which will lower health insurance premiums.
.
The requirement is essential to creating effective health insurance markets in which improved health insurance products that are guaranteed issue and do not exclude coverage of pre-existing conditions can be sold.

There’s a whole section of the bill devoted to the individual mandate, so there’s plenty more where that came from…

It is also rather tedious for you to try and draw me into the debate on one side or the other, when in fact I seek real arguments and real proofs from both sides before deciding with whom I agree.

It is rather tedious to have an assertion supported by direct evidence challenged repeatedly on the basis that the print before one’s eyes does not constitute proof. Absent epiphanies from God, “real proof” regarding questions of the substance of a bill is contained in…the language of the bill. Do you really not see this?

You have written many posts demanding links, evidence, proof from others – and yet are curiously reluctant, even outraged, when the same demand is made of you.

“Curiously reluctant”? “outraged”?
.
It seems you have mistaken providing this link to the bill here (warning! pdf) for reticence, and considered response for outrage.
.
The only thing curiously reluctant here is the reluctance with which you will acknowledge that which is before your very eyes. I’m not outraged by this, I’m amused. It’s amusing to witness someone clown around like this. It’s silly.

Perhaps a session of self-reflection on your part would be beneficial.

Perhaps so. Self-reflection is usually a useful activity.
.
Perhaps you, yourself, might benefit from a review of this ( link to the Argument Clinic Sketch ), and then some reflection on the act of being pointlessly contrary might be beneficial, as well.
.
Cheers, basilbrush.

basilbrush

I hear you talking at large about how others are wrong, but I see little attempt to support your claims.

“little attempt to support” my claims?
.
You can’t be serious, basilbrush.

Sad little girl. Selective data management again. It seems you would not want to count government jobs in this case. Of course you would for Obama because check the disaster he has wrought. The government does other things besides collect taxes, a function the left is fond of but only for other people. That was link to the private sector but you also need to add the public sector jobs as well. All impact GDP

Here have a fifth grader explain this to you:

C+I+G+X=GDP
C=personal consumption expenditures
I= gross private investment
G= government expenditures on goods & services
X= net exports

See if you can find another source to bail out your sorry ass since facing facts see to not be your strong suit. Maybe you can find a site in one of your left wing blogs that counted jobs under Bush that were created on Tuesdays with sunny days for left handed people.

It matters not what data or website that I site as you ignore it (BusinessWeek), cry about it because it’s not a winger website (PPI) and completely meltdown when I post data from the BLS.
..
The fact is that only you and the remaining 15% of Americans that STILL support W would even try to defend his abysmal record of jobs and the economy. Why don’t you explain to all of us here how Business Week and the PPI are wrong in their assessments? I’m quite sure that you’re not up to the task.

Lady di:

I know its late in the day and your medication is runnin gout and mom isn’t home yet but..

I have a simple requirement. You as a simpleton should relate to that. I want to use complete and accurate data. I gave that to you and because it didn’t conform to your conclusion you frantically searched ofr others.

The Business Week data included parts of terms from other Presidents. I would love to know how Bush is responsible for months before he was even elected let alone in office.

If I showed you something from the Heritage Foundation you would reject it out of hand as a right wing conspiracy. Doing the same with PPI is unconscionable in your opinion. The assessments they make may be correct for what they try to measure. Using the complete BLS data not your partial for the actual time Bush was president contradicts whatever conclusion they, you want to reach. I don;t need to defend BUsh’s record however I will piss all over your lies and distortions.

Sorry still nothing but errors.Hope mom gets home soon for your meds.

Two Dems Senators out: drop like flies. 6 Republican Senate seats are open: what does Ms Sullivan say about that? Perhaps there are six invisible Republican Senators-elect only Ms Sullivan and her Village colleagues are aware of. The whole Village is pushing the “flies” stuff. Do these people also think in packs while they run in packs?

The whole Village is pushing the “flies” stuff. Do these people also think in packs while they run in packs?
.
Yes.
.
This has been yet another fun-filled edition of Simple Answers to Simple Questions.

I make a comment about W’s pathetic record on job growth, which is well documented and only the most obtuse among us refuse to admit, and somehow I am labeled a liar. Ridiculous. I would tell you to seek help but you are obviously waaaaaay beyond that. The least you could do is have Rusty change your depends and up your meds as it appears you’ve suffered a psychotic break and have become totally detached from reality. You two have really set the bar for stupidity lately but I’m sure you get that a lot.

Tuoche mon ami. I trust you are well. Best for the New Year

Touche Stuart Touche. Sorry mon ami!

Ladydi

Don’t worry Mommy will be home soon. I produced offical employment figures for periods certain. You produced numbers for twisted time periods to better suit your argument.

You are a simpleton of the highest order. Don’t bring a water pistol to a gun fight and then cry because you couldn’t convince your own mother that you were right.

Stick to the name calling. Its something you excel at and I don’t give 2 hoots about. Cry yourself to sleep now

You wouldn’t recognize a fact if you were slapped with it. Check your meds old timer, I produced actual data covering exactly the time W was in office. I also produced analysis about said data but you’re too stupid to assess it. As I stated and demonstrated, W’s record of job creation was the worst since the Great Depression, your deluded opinion aside.
..
Go Cheney yourself.