Obama time: Prez gives Perriello re-election push
President Barack Obama appears in shirtsleeves on a chilly October evening in Charlottesville to rally support for Tom Perriello. –->SLIDESHOW PHOTO BY LISA PROVENCE
They waited for hours. By 4pm–- an hour before the gates to the Pavilion opened–- the line of people waiting to see President Barack Obama stretched to the Omni on the other end of the Downtown Mall, soon to wrap around to Water Street.
More than two hours after the gates to the Pavilion opened, at 7:40pm, a roar went up from the crowd as Congressman Tom Perriello came on the stage to introduce the man he hoped would inspire voters to say "yes we can" in the hotly contested 5th District Congressional race.
"I was in the neighborhood and thought I'd stop by to make sure you go vote Tuesday for the best representative Charlottesville has ever had," said Obama to the enthusiastic crowd.
The President acknowledged that he and Perriello, who is seen as one of the most vulnerable congressman in this year's midterm elections and has trailed his Republican opponent, state Senator Robert Hurt, didn't always see eye to eye.
"There are times when I know his first allegiance isn't to the party," said Obama. "It's to his district and to the people of Virginia."
Unlike some Democratic candidates who've tried to distance themselves from Obama's policies, Perriello has not backed off from controversial measures he's supported, such as healthcare reform, and he embraced a visit from the man whose own approval ratings have dipped.
"Let's face it, in this day and age, political courage is hard to come by," said the President.
"Tom Perriello went to Washington to do what's hard, to do what's right," said Obama. "When somebody like that has your back, do you have his back?"
Apparently this crowd did, and responded to Obama with, "Yes we can, yes we can."
No one speaks to an audience in Charlottesville without invoking Thomas Jefferson, and Obama was no exception. He reminded the crowd of the "son of Virginia" who declared that all men are created equal in the Declaration of Independence, and compared the situation of the founding fathers under actual attack with this country's current economic woes.
"What if they'd said, 'Oh, this is too hard'"? Obama asked.
Obama closed his speech at 8:20pm by picking up on a theme from his 2008 campaign. "I need you guys to keep on fighting," he said. "Tom needs you to keep on believing."
Just like Obama's first visit here, only with more Secret Service and an even bigger crowd. PHOTO BY CHARLES WERNER
Before the event, Fire Chief Charles Werner estimated that 6,000 people could squeeze into the Pavilion, an even larger crowd than when then-Senator Barack Obama was here on the exact day–- October 29–- three years ago. But after the event, Werner said in an email that the Secret Service put the crowd at 9,000, with another 3,000 in an overflow area.
Among those in the primo standing room at the front were Pavilion boss Coran Capshaw, elected Dem officials like Mayor Dave Norris and state Senator Creigh Deeds, and Perriello donors, including former congressional spouse Susan Payne and Hook co-owner Ted Weschler, who shook Obama's hand, as did Weschler's daughter, Lizzie.
On Market Street as the crowd exited into the evening where temperatures dipped into the 40s, one woman seemed still warmed by the presidential proximity and exclaimed, "I shook his hand!"
Updated October 30 with Weschler's correct relationship with the Hook.
108 comments
"Caseonia is and has been a sanctimoniuos loudmouth for months on this board and is uncivil with anyone that disagrees with her. She invites rebuking and deserves it. "
Oh. I see. So someone hits back to you as hard as you hit, and you don't like it do you? I have read some of these diatribes that have gone on here, involving you and some of the characters you are so upset about,and I happen to see things quite a bit differently.
I read a bunch of bullying, ugly, petty, nasty, and downright threatening comments, and I read someone pushing back. Hard. Real hard.
If you can't take it, don't dish it out.
Your pathetic defense of the wealthy and the claims about stealing pretty much put you into the same category. TARP was the biggest heist yet by the wealthy, taking tax money from the middle class and working poor, and handing it to those who by all the rules of capitalism, should have been left to fail.
If you want to have 90% of the GDP, you should expect to bear 90% of the tax burden.
It's just that simple.
TARP was a heist and I was never for it. I have no problems with letting businesses fail big or small so long as it is their own doing. I stand by what I said. The rich don't owe you. They have an obligation to contribute to the general welfare. They do not have an obligation to pay your cable bill or provide lazy people with health care beyond ER treatment. My statments make sense. If you took all of the money from the rich and gave it to the government they would have to sell their holdings to pay it. Despite your beliefs, they do not keep their cash in a room like Scrooge McDuck, they have it in the economy in stocks bonds banks and real estate. So when they liquidate the economy collapses and there is less money to borrow and finance investments. When you hear the media say there is a "trillion dollars" sitting on the sidelines you need to look a little closer and you will find that the bulk of this money is simply money that has been credit lines drawn out so they don't disappear. So how much IS enough for you?
I also don't complain about anybodys attacks on me. I am quite capable of defending myself. I don't come on here and try and point out how much better I am than other people the way caldonia has. I merely pointed out to her that somebody somewhere is done with her so she can't be "all that".
Hey Quicksilver. You seem like a smart guy. You don't have a problem with your teammate HarryD's racism? What is this "Dope and Chains" crap? Is this you?
Democracy...I read it in all the newspapers.
With any luck, India will offer Obama a job...and he'll resign.
I understand that he does service station and Wal-Mart openings too. Perhaps he will now go to India and spend $2BB, YES $2 BILLION on a friggin' visit to INDIA where I am sure they need his help to get rolling...........
"O.K., you poor little Democrats. Stop sobbing. Lift up your little liberal heads and shout. There’s gonna be. ... "
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/04/opinion/04collins.html?ref=todayspaper
Obama is taking off tomorrow for Mumbai. The trip will cost tax payers $200 million per day. He has blocked off the entire Hotel Taj and has 3000 people accompanying him. What a disgrace.....
2010 HOPE
2012 CHANGE
Actually, the real nuts ââ?¬â?? Christine O'Donnell, Ken Buck, Joe Miller ââ?¬â?? lost (okay Rand Paul did win).
I'm quite curious as to HOW the Repubs will put "the country back together." They have no plan and they will not compromise and they have little if any care for the common citizen (i.e. most working people). The policies they promote now (supply-side, laissez-faire economics) have proved to be a failure....they are in fact the direct cause of the nation's huge debt, its job losses, its mortgage crisis, its financial debacle, and its broken economy.
Conservative ideology ââ?¬â?? like the real Quick Silver, mercury ââ?¬â?? is toxic.
(potter1...where do you get this goofy information you keep posting?....can you not think? Oops sorry....already know that answer).
I think you are the real and true nut democracy. BTW, under Clinton we had a Republican Congress. Last 2 years of the Bush presidency and first 2 years of the Obama presidency when the country went sour, the Democrats had control of Congress. Hmmmm...what could that mean? Can you not think? Sorry...already know that answer.
Fat Lady already sang, man! You folks talk amongst yourselves: we'll be busy putting' the country back together.
Have a Blessed Day
It was a good night for America!
"He derives other income from investment stategies that are open to everyone."
Wow, you really ARE a tool, aren't you Bill? Investment strategies everyone is open to? You obviously know very little about how the market really works these days, and access to it do you? I guess we can all buy the upstream servers that process transactions milliseconds ahead of the general horde, to actually take advantage of marginal inefficiencies in the market, and work the commodities markets by bulk.
The way the Wall Street works has changed substantially since Buffet was out there making his first million. He still has lots of good advice for smaller investors, but spare us your own sanctimonious ignorance about what the small person can actually do what Buffet did 50+ years ago.
Good luck on lower CEO pay heading back towards the shareholder too in either capital investment or dividends.
BBSOE: I've been away. I don't know anything about HarryD or Dope and Chains. Definitely not me...
just another good reason not to vote for perriello, thanks obuma
Thank you to President Obama for coming to Charlottesville! I went with my family, and we will be proudly supporting Congressman Perriello. Hurt's policy of supporting tax breaks to the very companies that are exporting American jobs is something that we, as Virginians, cannot afford. We need good jobs now!
Thousands of us have already voted and we're coming to eat your brains. You will know us by the little blue stickers.
@?: Authority figures are: Parents, Teachers, Officials of all sorts who make me feel bad. Liberal elites are fashionably thin. Mkay?
Serious question, why are so many of the Tea Party folks morbidly obese? I know America is fat, but the Tea Party folks look like they have been in 40 straight days of a hot dog eating contest...?
Thank-you to all of the bicyclists who participated in the BIKE TO OBAMA event.
Several hundred of you (which means by National Park Service count, "thousands") enjoyed the autumn air to ride your bikes into town to see our President (and those other guys, too).
Hence the brain consumption.
@? - Tea Party = ticked off republicans. They are stress eating....
@Col. Forbin - dig deeper into politics itself...you don't really believe that either party passes laws for "the people" do you? I usually find a "deeper" meaning to any law that is passed and someone with really deep pockets behind it to make their pockets deeper.
@J. Tyler - what a great way to show support for less energy consumption! Bike away!!
Colfer.... you're comments are nothing less than what we would expect from your ill-mannered group . Bringing civility back into the political process is one of the hallmarks of the Progressive Movement. Hopefully, you will learn that hateful comments only further marginalize you, and we hope you will do some growing up very soon, and join in sensible, thoughtful debate to find common ground towards solving the problems that face America today.
Coran Capshaw and Dave Norris must have been the first few in line to snag those front row seats. That's great!
To those kvetching and whining, I think that the enormous turnout indicates that many people were very excited about the rally and Obama's visit to our town. Also, don't forget the many many others who turned up in places along the entire motorcade route to cheer on the President.
Re Colfer's comment above-- yeah, he's REALLY rude, isn't he? He should tone it down a little by borrowing a sign from a right-winger that says "Die, F*gg*ts!" Oops, my bad-- for the sake of authenticity, I should have misspelled one of those two words.
What a joke! Every great a powerful line he spoke about our country
got the crowd excited. But, Not one of those great lines had anything to do with him or Tommy boy. "Fridays after Jive"
Sure Tommy knows what it's like to struggle $%^&*()_ What?
I'll bring some boxes over to your office on Monday so you can start packing. On Tuesday we will "HURT" Tom PerriHELLno. See ya.
Has anyone seen the President work yet?
This is the second time I have heard Obama speak in Charlottesville. I am in awe of the genuineness of this man, our President, and find him to be a truly inspirational person, and someone whose values I admire.
The Republicans are just using you tea partiers like Hindenburg tried to use Hitler. "Oh, we can control them." But in this case they will. Your ignorant revolution was born in a grave. The R. Party is using your dissatisfaction to further enrich the wealthy and destroy our country. Wake up, zombies.
Excuse me NancyDrew,
The dude is a punk. Hopefully you be able to get the stars out of your eyes by Tuesday.
You don't have to tear down our guy to make a point. Build your guy up! Maybe that person is Sarah "Gravitas" Palin. Maybe it's John "No Plan" Boehner!
Tell us why your Republican plan of action is superior to investing in education and infrastructure. Tell us how eliminating the Department of Education will position America for the global marketplace of the 21st century. Tell us how responsible it is to cut taxes on millionaires and billionaires while conducting two de facto wars. No Child Left Behind was a GOP plan. Tell us how you have achieved educational gains with it. How about tax breaks for American companies to ship their manufacturing jobs overseas?
Mmm, that's good policy, right?
Funny how they were saying all these wonderful things about Obama Care, yet NONE of Tommy Boy's political commercials even mention it. Gee, I wonder why? That's all right. The majority of voters in Virginia's 5th remember Tommy Boy's vote all too well, as well as all his other votes supporting the Obama socialist agenda. On Tuesday we'll translate those memories into action in the voting booth. Adios, Tommy Boy. Don't let the door smack you in the butt on the way out.
I voted for Obama and Perriello last time, but never again.
Too many promises broken and TP and BO don't deserve my support but I would NEVER VOTE FOR HURT.
My vote, stay home and enjoy the day with my kids.
I won't get fooled again.
What hateful comments? Without disclosing my absentee vote already cast, I can tell you that a "liberal elite" scrawny zombie would of course prefer the corpulent flesh & especially the flabby brains of a pudgy tea partier. On the other hand, a tea party zombie would have but one target when approaching with unrelenting hunger his scrawny liberal elite victim: the only luscious part, the liberal brain. It's really quite simple.
Reality Check, the enormous turnout had little to do with Tom Perriello, IMHO. It had to do with people being near and seeing the President of the Untied States up close and in person.
Notice that I said 'Untied States", because the entire country is still on the verge of a total collapse.
Party hardy Tommy Boy. By 8 PM on Tuesday, you'll realize the danger of voting against the wishes of the vast majority of your constituents. You were elected to represent them, not San Francisco. For your sake, I hope the Dems have a job lined up for you as payback for carrying their water. Now go back on Nancy's lap and suck your thumb.
Nancy Drew needs to get the stars out of her eyes and do a little investigating. You don't have to do a lot... just a little to find out the truth about who and what kind of person Obama really is. He is not the President you think he is. The scariest thing is how people just swoon over him because of his rhetoric and don't really check on the substance of what he says and does and what he said and did in the past. I checked on him when he was running. A lot has been hidden and sealed so we can't see it but there is still much to read and he is not who you think he is. Hey,don't listen to me read for yourselves and open your eyes...please!
Nancy Drew, you are aware that the President has a very large staff that writes and prepares his speeches for him? After two years in office, the Prez knows what to say now whether there's a teleprompter in front of him or not. :)
Hey KRN - "Bringing civility back into the political process is one of the hallmarks of the Progressive Movement".
Get out of here. Don't you remember all that crap your side spewed about Bush and Cheney? Do you recall the disgusting comments you'all made about Palin and now O'Donnell? Progressives are hypocrites.
Look it was all very nice for your side that the former senator from Illinois chose to dress up as a president for Halloween and come to Tom's party on the mall, but it really is kind of a death watch, don't you know. Tom is toast, and the Obama era is on a steep decline as most voters have awakened from the stupor of 2008.
Oh, and by the way HOOK, really Crackerkjack reporting, letting us know that the publisher's daughter shook Obama's hand...
Mmm, mmm, mmmmmm... Have a blessed day
Have a blessed day.
Quick Silver, your observations about people meeting the Prez reinforce my statement that the majority of the crowd turned out to be near and see the President of the Untied States up close and in person. The "large crowd" had nothing to do with supporting Tom Perriello. Perriello has to run on his past record, not some Presidential endorsement.
Roger has it right. Stay home and dont vote. Those politicians sure know how to play us.
Potter1- I would be glad to read something that would dissuade me from my view that President Obama is a truly genuine person, interested in seeking the greatest good for the greatest number of citizens, and for making public education one of his top priorities.
We will never lead the world without a first class educational system for all citizens.
But that educational system, the health care and everything else is not free. Reality is clearly not meeting expectations while continued unemployment leads most of the country to disappointment, not the confidence needed to push out of a recession.
His spending the stimulus on consumption rather than investments puts the USA in the same place as it would you and me if we did not invest for the future...
Currently, projections for our debt to China indicates 50% of all tax revenues simply paying interest by 2018.
How are you going to pay for education and health care then?
Wishful thinking is not a good life plan.
I am convinced of the wisdom of this statement: " The tragedy here is that if voters do turn on Democrats, they will in effect be voting to make things even worse.
The resurgent Republicans have learned nothing from the economic crisis, except that doing everything they can to undermine Mr. Obama is a winning political strategy. Tax cuts and deregulation are still the alpha and omega of their economic vision.
And if they take one or both houses of Congress, complete policy paralysis ââ?¬â? which will mean, among other things, a cutoff of desperately needed aid to the unemployed and a freeze on further help for state and local governments ââ?¬â? is a given. The only question is whether we’ll have political chaos as well, with Republicans’ shutting down the government at some point over the next two years. And the odds are that we will.
Is there any hope for a better outcome? Maybe, just maybe, voters will have second thoughts about handing power back to the people who got us into this mess, and a weaker-than-expected Republican showing at the polls will give Mr. Obama a second chance to turn the economy around.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/25/opinion/25krugman.html?_r=1
Liberals of the world, don't let yourself be confused by the facts. November is Coming!
@Jimi, we could end the pointless war in Afghanistan? You remember that one, right? Apparently it costs a lot of money to police the world.
Nancy Drew..PLEASE study history and the background of the policies of Mr. Obama. The Democratic majority before him is what caused this mess. Mr. Bush made some bad mistake also but Congress holds the purse strings and Dodd, Hoyer, Pelosi, Reid, Frank and the other crooks that had and still have the majority are the ones who took our economy down. He took it and used it to further our ruination along with the gang in Congress. What they did is a disgrace to our great country and they must go..and Nancy they will go because we want our elected leaders to represent us not the thugs in Congress that shoved and continue to try to shove laws and policies down our throats when we have told them we don't want it. It is that simple.
We need the system to correct itself and get the government out of our business and stop their control tactics. Research Wilson, FDR and the others that tried the Government takeover. Socialism is a failure around the world. Now they want us to implement it?!!!
Why was the invocation given by a pastor that does not even like Obama? His churches website has several anti-Obama links?
Great speech. If you like smart (Obama), why in the world would you like dumb (i.e.Palin and the rest).
After bump from Obama, NY Times goes from 89.9% to 89.6% chance Perriello loses.
http://elections.nytimes.com/2010/forecasts/house/virginia/5
At this point I would vote for Mickey Mouse, literally, if he promised to vote against the Obama agenda. Jefferson must be rolling around up on the hill at the growth of the federal government under the current administration. Its been going on for years under both parties, but the current administration is doing it on steroids. I believe that fundamentally Obama does not like the principles upon which this country was founded.
@quicksilver: "Get out of here. Don’t you remember all that crap your side spewed about Bush and Cheney? Do you recall the disgusting comments you’all made about Palin and now O’Donnell?"
Yeah, but, those things are true.
Angry "conservatives": Incorporate or get off the pot. Your anger is misdirected.
Win or lose, I'll be glad when the election's over. The commercials have grown tiresome.
Have to direct this to sanityPlease. You really need to read what Quick Silver wrote again. And, I really think you should read anything and get a few facts. Let's see, not 2 years under Obama and his deficits are about the same as 8 years of Bush. I am in no way going to defend Bush, but maybe you should stop praising someone who promised change and moving our country forward, only to be the most divisive President in the last 40 years and seeing the unemployment rate double during his 22 months in office. How's that Hope and Change working out?
Whateva!--term limits are a great idea. However, if we expect them to have only public servant salaries, we need to (1) make sure they are not on the take from special interests and (2) make sure that we get more than self-funding millionaires running for office. That means publicly funding elections (it would keep them working in DC instead of fundraising all the time) and allowing donations only from individual citizens.
I went to see President Obama on friday but im still voting for Robert Hurt.With the mood around here im not sure what Perriello was thinking.For everyone on here that has called me a liar i say to you watch how much of the African American vote Robert Hurt gets then you will see who was telling a lie.
@beepbeep. Those things were true? Those things only appeared to be true if you're Cindy Sheehan, a third grader or moveon.org supporter. What is true is that this POS affirmative action President is pushing a socialist agenda that voters don't want. The UK Telegraph summed it all up nicely:
"More than three centuries ago, the residents of America staged a rebellion against an oppressive ruler who taxed them unjustly, ignored their discontents and treated their longing for freedom with contempt. They are about to revisit that tradition this week, when their anger and exasperation sweep through Congress like avenging angels."
Our anger is spot on
Beep!
We're back to where we started.
"Don’t you remember all that crap your side spewed about Bush and Cheney? Do you recall the disgusting comments you’all made about Palin and now O’Donnell? Progressives are hypocrites."
Look, let's stop bickering. Point is, the electorate rejects the Obama agenda, and Perriello will be just one of the well deserved casualties. Once the lame duck nonsense is out of the way, we can get to work fixing what's broken.
Amen Quicksilver!
Hey quicky: are you for accepting foreign $$$ too, or just their ideas?
I am helping vote tommy boy out because I want things to return to how they was. I can see Jim Demint saddling up his dinosaur and riding roughshod through the streets of washington. The smell of napalm in the morning... Just a few women in their man pants in the government and the rest at home cookin stuff. Yeehaw!
The left and right agree on more than they realize. If you follow the money, you will see where any candidate's true loyalty is. It's true for Dems and Republicans.
It is patently ridiculous to label Obama and Pelosi as socialists or whatnot. They are not.
What I think is sad is that the tea party movement is bankrolled by extremely wealthy private interests who are doing a great job of getting people to vote against not only their own but their country's best interests. A return to GOP control and Bush policies will NOT help this country.
Frankly, a little more wealth redistribution in the form of higher taxes for the 5% who own most of the wealth in this country would be a good thing. News flash: most people are not and will NEVER be wealthy. Why support policies that just protect something you will never be?
Yo, Beep Beep. Accept Foreign Money? You mean like John Huang, the guy who pled guilty to funneling illegal money from Indonesia to the 96' Clinton Campaign? Or do you mean when smarmy Al Gore took illegal foreign money at the Buddhist Temple? Surely you don't mean the fantasy accusations about foreign money coming from the Chamber of Commerce - you know the accusation Axelrod made that caused liberal New Host Bob Schieffer to laugh at him out loud?
Pathetic.
And while we're talking... Dawg, keep your day job, cause as a political analyst you're not all that. The Tea Party is unprecedented because it organic - there is no organized leadership, and is hardly the creation of "wealthy private interests".
As far as wealth distribution - why don't you, Beep Beep and Nancy Drew just redistribute amongst yourselves, because if you come after mine, it would be Grand Theft - and we have remedies for that. Create opportunities in the private sector, Dawg, and people do better. Confiscate through taxation and you get big unemployment, mass bankruptcies and all the other aspects we're living through now.
Don't worry though - it will be over soon.
Have a blessed day.
@quacksilver: I was commenting on your curious choice of a non-American overview of Our political state.
As for your comments:
"As far as wealth distribution - why don’t you, Beep Beep and Nancy Drew just redistribute amongst yourselves, because if you come after mine, it would be Grand Theft - and we have remedies for that."
Talk about "pathetic". I don't want your money or the tacky junk you have filled your McMansion with, get real!
Beep - Curious choice? Is it somehow less valid because it originated in the UK? Since you didn't rebut the argument, I'll assume you agree.
@Quick... Do I agree with the opening paragraph of the Janet Daley piece from the Telegraph?
No.
I did read the whole piece. Did you?
I see that the paragraph is today's favorite cut 'n paste with your crowd. I have to admit that her distance from the process (as a non-voter) makes her writing less unpleasant than the local stuff.
She does not resort to the threats and insults that you folks always seem to.
OK, cool: no bickering! The Dems are going to have some losses, but not the # that is being yelled about. What I'm wondering is: why you think the folks the tea party has "elevated" are going to be in any way effective if elected?
Please: VOTE
Agreed.
Here's the thing: the Dems will lose many more than the 55 that Larry Sabato anticipates. I will not be surprised if the total is well North of 70. They will also lose at least 8 in the Senate, and perhaps as many as 11. What's worse for your side (I assume that it's your side), is that the Governor's split will go from 26-24 in favor of the Dems to close to 35-15 in favor of the Republicans. This is a huge loss because of redistricting, and sets the Republicans up very nicely for 2012.
Many, many Democrats will be very angry at Obama by this time next week. He had a legitimate mandate in 2008 and he squandered it. Within three days of taking office, he blew the Republicans off, arrogantly reminded them that "elections have consequences. I won", and never let them sit at the table.
Well, this election will have consequences too. The voters are understandably enraged at the way the Dems have rammed this very radical left wing agenda down their throats and they reject it. Obama has pushed a slightly center right electorate way to the right. Think about it - if there had not been a Jimmy Carter, there would never have been a President Reagan. Obama and the Dems were really amateurs at governing, and so even though I don't see a Reagan out there, you will now see a generation of conservativism. It will be a dark age for liberals.
As far as how capable the Tea Party candidates will be remains to be seen. I think a guy like Rand Paul will be very competent. Sharon Angle, maybe not. But time will tell, and it doesn't matter. The voters would rather have the devil they don't know (Sharon Angle) rather than the devil they do (Harry Reid).
It's really not that tough: Americans are fair and generous people for the most part. They want secure borders and respect for our citizenship laws, but they are not racist. They want to see their countrymen get health care - they just don't want a statist solution for that. They want to pay their fair share, but they don't want redistribution and they want the spending stopped. We could work all this out, but only when the dems meet us in the middle and quit pushing their extreme agenda.
Beep, all I can tell you is that if you think the projected losses are overstated, you better strap yourself in on Tuesday. It's going to be a rough night for your side.
I am going to endorse Perriello. I am a member of the John S. Birch Society, and I hate Obama. With that said, Perriello, is a decent man and seems to be honest. I would rather have a guy who graduated from Yale representing me, than some Hampden-Sydney grad (13th and 14th grade) as my congressman. I disagree with most of Perriellos votes, but he seems decent and he doesn't want to take my guns. See you at the polls. I believe in my heart this endorsement will give Perriello the election.
I just checked-in to see what's doin' here. And wow! Crazy comments from Quick Silver--does that guy ever take his head out for some fresh air? Man, you need serious help. Stale remarks. Completely unremarkable. Please Mr.(?) Quick Silver, get some help. Or at least a book.
Politics always make this forum so much fun to read!
I like Dawg.
sanityPlease - catchy name - hope you get some.
Unremarkable? Since you disagree with my analysis, when it all comes true as a bad dream for you Wednesday, will you think they're stale and unremarkable then?
OK, check back with me then - quite sure it will fall in line close to the way I've outlined it here. Meanwhile, time for you to get some cocoa and read another chapter of Old Yeller...
nite nite
Thank you for your service Morris.
Quciksilver,
"Within three days of taking office, he blew the Republicans off, arrogantly reminded them that ââ?¬Å?elections have consequences. I won”, and never let them sit at the table."
That is a lie. That's right, I am just calling it for what it is. A lie. Obama did let Republcians sit at the table. However, what he said was not only very clear, but absolutely right;
Elections do have consequences. When you run the country into the ditch, you can't expect for your polciies to continue after you have been voted out of office. You have to either change some of your policies, or face getting nothing.
What the GOP and folks like you do is close the door to other ideas when your party is in control, and then complain bitterly if when out of control, you don't get every thing you want.
The GOP and right's idea of bipartisanship is everything they want their way.
The US is built up of more people than overweight angry white males, and they have interests too. I think it's time you got that message. You might win some seats this time, more because people are angry at Obama for not bringing enough change, rather than liking the GOP. Once the Democrats clean house - and this election will help themdo that - they and a lot of independents will come together and start making some rational decisions.
You either adapt, or you will get left out in the cold.
I like Lisa! :)
I really don't know why people think Obama has a "radical agenda." His goals simply are not by any measure--if anything, he is too much in bed with Wall Street. In general, his actions are very much toward the center and in accordance with what most polls say people want--like health care of some kind. Honestly, most polls showed support for a public option, but the insurance companies and wall street wouldn't go for it, so it came off the table early. People who are calling him radical really need to think about what the word means before they use it. I think this election will have a lot of losses for the Dems, but that is typical for a midterm. It is by no means a mandate for a return to Bush-era policies.
Lets see Clinton, Bush, and yes Obama are recovering junkies and people we should admire. As for Perriello he is a decent guy but clueless.Hurt is a career policitician that cant be trusted. Why cant we get politicians that understand that the gig is public service and not street hustling. As for Obama visit Perriello went from 46% to 42-44% as Obama is seen as hopeless. Never held a tenured job and is basically community college level having landed at Occidental in Los Angeles before he was promoted to Manhattan and Cambridge where he majored in rhetoric and communications on the streets of those cities.
@brian - "Why cant we get politicians that understand that the gig is public service and not street hustling."
Simple...stop making it so profitable for them during and AFTER their tenure. Don't let them vote for their own raises. Limit them to the eight year tenure for ANY position..no job hopping after the eight...only eight period! And most of all - pay them for what they are, civil servants...let them live off a teacher's or police officer's pay. Security for them ONLY during their term...it's on them after they "retire". Maybe harsh but it may be the only way that we can acutally make them understand.
Wow. potter1 and JohnnyAmerica are unglued....and far off-base in what they perceive to be accurate. There are, I think, several reasons for that:
First, many voters are not well informed. For example, only about 12 percent are aware that the Obama stimulus gave them a tax cut, and many are unaware that it reduced unemployment by half, and led to job creation (15,000 transportation projects).
Second, conservative media have been relentless in trashing Obama and his policies. Whether it be Limbaugh, Beck, Levin, or Fox News, conservatives have distorted and twisted the truth, and they've flat-out lied in their quest to regain power and lavish more tax cuts on the wealthy. They've claimed that health care reform was a "government takeover," but we still a system based on private, for-profit insurance. They falsely claim ââ?¬â?? still ââ?¬â?? that financial reform is unnecessary. At every opportunity, conservatives have chosen the interests of big business, the wealthy and corporate elites over the well-being of the American public.
Third, the Supreme Court decision in the Citizens United case opened the floodgates to undisclosed campaign spending. Republicans in Congress blocked every attempt to legislate disclosure because they don't want citizens to know who funds their ads, ads that in most cases fit into the distorted, twisted and lie molds.
The simple fact is that Obama has achieved MORE in 20 months than virtually every other American president since Lyndon Johnson. And he's done it under extremely difficult circumstances and despite conservative obstructionism at every turn.
Conservative supply-side policies and conservative political leadership have been unmitigated disasters. That's the truth. And it's something that honest columnists will tell their readers.
For more on Obama's accomplishments, see:
http://www.rollingstone.com...
Hi Kids,
Sorry I haven't been able to join the fray - had to work all day. You know how it is.
Let's see: The Old Timer says that the statement that Obama blew off the Republicans three days after he took office is a lei. Well, let's see. In the Washingtonm Post on 10/25 Mark Thiessen recounted the details: "The decline of the Obama presidency can be traced to a meeting at the White House just three days after the inauguration, when the new president gathered congressional leaders of both parties to discuss his proposed economic stimulus. House Republican Whip Eric Cantor gave President Obama a list of modest proposals for the bill. Obama said he would consider the GOP ideas, but told the assembled Republicans that "elections have consequences" and "I won." Backed by the largest congressional majorities in decades, the president was not terribly interested in giving ground to his vanquished adversaries."
There are many other contemporary reports of that meeting, but perhaps you'll take the word of the liberal Post?
You say "You either adapt, or you will get left out in the cold."
You're in for a damn frosty decade, brother.
I think it will be so bad tomorrow that women and children will be sobbing openly on the streets of Liberalville.
QuickSilver, let me remind you of your claim:
You said "Within three days of taking office, he blew the Republicans off, arrogantly reminded them that ââ?¬Å?elections have consequences. I won”, and never let them sit at the table."
That statement is very different from what you are citing as 'proof':
"Obama said he would consider the GOP ideas, but told the assembled Republicans that ââ?¬Å?elections have consequences” and ââ?¬Å?I won.”"
That statement in no way indicates or proves that Obama did not let the GOP have a seat at the table, which is what you assert. What you assert is wrong. Obama did let them talk, and many of their policies made it into things like the healthcare reform bill.
But denial and victimization is where the right likes to sit. They run around and stomp on people's heads, and then cry victim when someone pushes back.
"You’re in for a damn frosty decade, brother."
Really? Two things you had best remember.
1) Polls show that independents ( not Republicans playing independent) dislike Republicans more than Democrats. They are voting this time to punish the Democrats for NOT bringing enough change. things still feel too much like the Bush years. I wouldn't count on those people.
2) Demographics. Younger voters are Democrats. They have watched the Republicans squander their future. They still like Obama. Only so much gerrymandering will get you around that one as well.
The GOP isn't dead yet, and might get a few more sessions like this, but it's dying. It's dying because the young are tired of Joe the Plumbers thinking they should make the same amount of money as someone with a modern day highly literate and global skill set.
I'm a liberal Quciksilver? How would you or anyone on the right know that? You never even try and find out what the people in Charlottesville are like.
You know why i won't vote for Hurt? he never came to my doorstep once to even begin to talk about what he would do.
I am a marksman, drive a one ton pickup, go hunting, am a net taxpayer....woops. I forgot. I'm not an overweight white male ranting about the fact that I can't hold a job because I never bothered to get qualified in the trades, or got to college.
Hey Caesonia - chill. Who was talking to you?
And how do I not know what the people in Charlottesville are like? I LIVE in Charlottesville.
I can tell you that Hurt wanted to come by your house, he really did. It was the junkyard dog chained to the washing machine that gave him pause...
Dawg-thanks! those are great additions! Should have thought of those!!
Crikey! It's really getting hot this kitchen with the political atmosphere as volatile as it's becoming. I can imagine that the heat is going to turn up even further the closer we get to the results of the election tommorrow...as much as I enjoy reading all the posts and hoping to see someone antagonize someone else to see the verbal joust, I hope the results of this election definitely move our country FORWARD....it's been spinning it's wheels far too long.
Whateva! Something we can all agree on...
So who do you resent more? The people who are richer than you and who pay more taxes than you or the people who are poorer than you but get all kinds of government assistance including (but not limited too) section 8 housing, free school breakfast and lunch for their kids...and food stamps /wic, free health care, cash assistance, free educational/job training and placement assistance, free legal aid, childcare tax credits, earned income tax credits and I am others I cannot recall at the moment.
If you make 30k a year you get nothing. If you make 20k a year and have a kid you get it all. So when it is all said and done they get more than you. That sounds fair doesn't it?
But the rich guy who pays a minimum of 100k a year in taxes is your enemy.
Regardless of what you hear the rich do pay taxes. Lots of taxes.
Warren Buffet likes to say that his Secrateery pays a higher tax rate then him. This is true. However his secretary pays 30% of 100k or 30K in taxes. Warren buffet pays 16% of 25 million dollars or 4 MILLION DOLLARS a year in taxes. That is 11 THOUSAND dollars a day or 450 dollars AN HOUR. 7.50 cents a minute. Even when he is sleeping. But he is your ENEMY because he obviously doesn't pay enough.
Congress is the enemy of the people. They have spent the treasury and then some and we have nothing to show for it. Obama wants to spend more. At least the republicans SAY they want to spend less.
Perriellos vote will go to obama on the big items, Don't give Obama that vote.
Typical Perriello supporter?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPIP-i3sdVk
So I guess you think that on a public forum owned by someone else you have the right to dictate who has a right to answer what post, huh QuickSilver? Leave it to a righty to think he is 'the decider'. It's only when someone says something to him that he feels that somehow 'no one's' listening.
Junkyard dog? You must be confused by all those unemployed neighbors of yours, now that construction has collapsed. I tend to think it's all the Perriello signs down Locust and Park that kept Hurt away and cowering. Our dogs have bigger dog houses than your neighbors.
Bill.
Typical Hurt Supporter?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbnEy_U9pYk
And the guy thinks she should apologize to him.
That incident didn't take place in Downtown C-ville...
and you should be careful when bragging about the size of your doghouse and comparing it to quicksilvers neighbors houses...
you may not be an overweight fat guy but I am quite sure someone in your past is happy to be done with you.
Wow Caesonia, are you sure you're up to all this?
No one cares what you post... free country, free forum... I was just pointing out that no one had addressed their comments to you, so why take offense?
Earlier you supposed that I was a McMansion kind of guy (wrong), but now you seem to be looking down at construction tradesmen suffering in the housing depression, as if I was one of those. (wrong again). I would think as an Ed Schultz viewer (the "righty" remark gives you away), you'd be all for the workin' man.
Anyway, tell you what. Starting Wednesday Perriello can be your Block Captain over at Locust and Park, cause he sure won't be Congressman no more. You can be Assistant Block Captain if you want.
BTW, since you like watchin' videos, you might want to see the whole story. You girl at the Rand Paul debate first attacked the candidate, and was brought down as she should have been. Your video shows half the story, which is typical of the "corrupt" media. Now, no one condones the stomp, but she isn't the sweet widdle innocent she pretends to be, so do yourself a favor - watch the whole thing. You just need to see the first 20 seconds. Let me know if you think the incident was misrepresented just a bit.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiLeud-sxrM&feature=player_embedded
Meanwhile, have a Blessed day, Caesonia
oooohhhh, democracy - - - cwever comment about mercury, you wascal you. Just love witty repartee like that when there is no substance.
On the road for work now... ttyl
Nancy Drew- tell me again what you are in awe of......the way a person speaks? You have to be kidding or really into the DOPE and CHAINS.
actually- 2009 DOPE, 2010 Chains
I'm missing something....
Quick Silver posts a link to a youtube video claiming that it was Rand Paul who was attacked, rather than a MoveOn.org protester. But the video doesn't show that. It does show a woman who pokes a sign at the passenger side of Paul's car, but that can hardly be construed as an attack.
And Quick Silver sites a Marc Thiessen piece to try and claim that Obama dismissed out-of-hand some "modest proposals." In fact, one-third of Obama's stimulus bill consisted of tax cuts, the kind of policy Republicans claim to support. And every study on the stimulus bill shows that it worked, preserving at least three million jobs and funding 15,000 transportation projects.
And citing conservative flack Marc Thiessen ââ?¬â?? of all people ââ?¬â?? as some kind of accurate authority is wrought with error. A former Bush speechwriter (did the Bushies tell the truth about anything?) and advisor to racist Jesse Helms, Thiessen said torture was endorsed by the teachings of the Catholic Church (it isn't) and added that his own "common-sense" definition of torture is, ââ?¬Ë?If you’re willing to try it, it’s not torture.’ ”
For Thiessen, anything goes. Lie, lie, lie.
Poor Bill Marshall doesn't get it. The only relevant statistic in how much Warren Buffet pays in is the effective tax rate. The rate paid by billionaire Buffet is less than the rate paid by his secretary. In fact the rate paid by the very richest Americans is less than the rate paid by most working families.
The MIT economist Simon Johnson reports in his new book, 13 Bankers, that there was a period in U.S. history, roughly the period from the end of the Great Depression to about 1980, when government regulation of banks and the financial industry (Wall Street) worked quite well.
Pulitzer-prize wining reporter David Cay Johnston writes that "during the years from 1950 to 1980, the share of total income going to those at the top declined, and the real incomes of the vast majority grew much more quickly than did nearly all incomes at the very top." The U.S. economy grew, jobs were created, and the nation was becoming - in the words of the Constitution's Preamble - "a more perfect Union."
(See: http://tax.com/taxcom/taxblog.nsf/Permalink/UBEN-8AGMUZ)
Then came the supply-side policies of Ronald Reagan (and the Bushes). Reagan and his cronies lavished tax cuts and loopholes on the wealthy, policies specifically designed for "the proliferation of the rich." Budget deficits piled up (See: http://zfacts.com/p/318.html). The U.S., once the world's biggest creditor nation, became its biggest debtor. The "more perfect union" was badly weakened.
As Johnston reports, supply-side ..."economic policies in Washington are undermining the nation as a whole." The tax system is manipulated to favor corporations and the wealthy through "tax-subsidized mechanisms that encourage American manufacturers to close their domestic factories, fire workers, and then use cheap labor" abroad. The net effect of these policies "has been disastrous for the vast majority of American workers."
Kevin Philips and others have written about the supply-side evisceration of the middle class (see The Politics of Rich and Poor). Johnston confirms the "stagnant to falling incomes for the vast majority." Yet the rich have become fabulously richer. The Great Recession - brought on by supply-side policies - wreaked havoc on American workers, but the average income of the rich ..."increased from $91.2 million in 2008 to an astonishing $518.8 million in 2009." The plutocrats ..."made as much as the 19 million lowest-paid people in America, who constitute one in every eight workers." But nothing has trickled down.
Three decades of plutocratic policy have directed national wealth to a select few. While 90 percent of Americans "have seen their incomes go nowhere," the top 10 percent have seen huge gains. In effect, supply-siders reduced "the base of the income ladder while placing a much heavier weight on the top," creating an unstable economy that's been constructed on "income inequality, budget deficits and malign neglect of our commonwealth."
So I'm missing something......Bill Marshall and Quick Silver and other conservatives want more of this?
Yea, democracy - you are missing a lot.
Think. If someone tried to poke that sign into Obama's face, it would have been the secret service who stomped them, not some overzealous campaign worker. Funny though how the actual series of events is left off by 90% of the media reporting.
Think. "saving" jobs, though laudable if true (unlikely), is an entirely new standard of judging the success of job creation policy. Saving the jobs of union thugs and SEIU workers is not a standard the rest of us can get behind.
Think. It doesn't matter if Thiessen is conservative - those oval office events were well chronicled at the time. Obama presented a take it or leave it proposal, just as he did with his mock bi-partisan health care summit last spring.
I know this is hard, but stay with me.
Think. The supply side policies of Reagan cut taxes from 70% to 28% for the top rate payers. That cash flowed into the markets, into R&D, into the economy in myriad ways. Among other things, the R&D led to the PC explosion the rise of the internet and unprecedented productivity gains, which led to the terrific economy Clinton enjoyed in the 90's. Then of course since Reagan was right to hardline the Soviet Union, they crumbled and Clinton also got the benefit of the peace dividend.
As far as jobs that go away? Once upon a time in New England they made a lot of shoes. Fade in, Fade out, no "for profit business" (the only kind) can afford to pay workers $10 to $20 an hour to produce a shoe that must sell for $30 to compete with shoes made for $1 an hour in the far east. So things have to change. It's wrenching, it's ugly, but it's what happens. New enterprises have to evolve to salve that pain of dislocation. There is no other way.
Raising taxes to prop things up that are unsustainable is a never ending downward spiral.
Is that what you want more of?
"Poor Bill Marshall doesn’t get it. The only relevant statistic in how much Warren Buffet pays in is the effective tax rate"
Why is that the "only" relevant statistic?
Warren Buffets "effective" tax rate would be higher than his Secretarys if it were all salary. He derives other income from investment stategies that are open to everyone.
He paid 4 million dollars. Why do you want more? Why is 4 million dollars not enough? How much should one man have to pay? Why are you entitled to more than 4 million dollars from one man?
He earned it. Warren buffet was blessed with a great financial mind and put it to good use. He has made tens of thousands of people millionaires by investing with him. He saved Geico from going under and they employ tens of thousands of people. Warren Buffet has set up foundations and is giving his money away where it belongs .. to charities who will do a better job than the government ever could.
To say nothing has trickled is an outright LIE. Go to C-ville high school and count the cell phones, survey the kids and ask them how many have cable and internet and cars with Air conditioning. Ask them what brand of clothes they wear. Ask them how often they eat out.
The standard of living has increased dramatically in America and will only go backwards if Obama has his way. Look at Greece and Spain. That is your future if you listen to people at MIT who have never had a job or a callous on their hands other than from a golf club.
Citing an effective tax rate is like citing an "average" river depth and saying that he only drowned in an average depth of "two feet" when it was 20 feet deepin the center. 4 million is enough for one man to pay regardless of how much he makes.
billmarshall - well said!
QuickSilver,
I would imagine that Caesonia, Democracy, myself, and others are very much up to dealing with 'this' if 'this' is you making a lot of preposterous claims, and in some cases, just telling blatant lies.
You claimed that Obama blew of the GOP within three days and NEVER LET THEM SIT AT THE TABLE.
That was a lie. It was big. It was blatant. And your using a quote from a Bush speechwriter doesn't change that one bit, because it does nothing to prove your point about saying Obama never let them sit at the table.Several modifications in the healthcare bill were Republican ideas, and they got credit for them. If they weren't at the table how would that be?
But how like the GOP attacker to cry victim, when someone pushes them back. Time and time again, we have plenty of clear statements from the GOP that it is THEM, who never wanted to sit at the table, unless they got their way all the time. As Bush said, you are either with us, or against us. From the beginning, the GOP's ONLY goal was not to solve problems, but to 'stop' the Obama Presidency.
It was Mitch McConnel who said that if they win, things will go back to the way they were. In otherwords, their way or no way. It was Boehner who recently said his only oal was to limit Obama to a one term presidency.
The people not willing to play and solve problems, except through violence, and hate, are the Republicans. Well, I am a white male who doesn't want to hear it anymore. Enjoy your next two years, because they will be your last, if you do as Boehner says.
Bill,
What you seem to not get is that those who pay the lion's share of taxes are those who benefit from the lion's share of income and assets in this country. Why shouldn't they contribute to the very society that enabled them to be rich to begin with. Anyone who makes that kind of money is welcome to not make it, and let someone else make it. The middle class should not have to pay 50% of their income in taxes, when they receive very little in return for their tax dollars, while the very wealthy get handed out tax breaks.
I'm sorry, but relativity does matter.
Warren gets it, why don't you? Because you are a typical right wing free rider? You want to pretend that somehow you made your money on your own, and not as the result of lots of tax payer contributions to infrastructure?
I do agree with you that it is unfair that people in the lowest income brackets can do better than those of lower income because of social payouts. The way to to solve that though is to have better wages and educate people isn't it? Instead of cutting funding and rewarding slave wage employers like most contractors and restaurants are.
an interesting article on two economies.. one of wich is recovering nicely...
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/germany-said-no_513319.html
Great posts Old Timer, thanks.
Bill,
"you may not be an overweight fat guy but I am quite sure someone in your past is happy to be done with you."
I am sure someone can say the same for you and QuickSilver.
Maybe QuickSilver and you shouldn't have turned it personal from long before Caesonia started posting, and then decided to make even more personal comments such as having a dog tied to a washing machine.
By doing so, you only demonstrate you really don't have much in the way of defensible points. Why don't you guys spend a little time coming up with better evidence, and a little less time making ad hominem attacks, and you won't get one back.
1) The Republicans do want to stop Obamas agenda. That is something that they admit and should be proud of. Obamas numbers do not crunch and he has no grasp of Economics. This does not mean that Republicans don't want Health Care reform. They just don't want to bankrupt the Economy in the process. Republicans are smart enough to know that Obama is WRONG for the country and his ideas are bad for America.
2) Last week Obama said for republicans to "ride in the back" and that they were "the enemy" His words.. not mine. The guy is an egomaniac with a brain the size of a pea. He is bad for America.
3)The rich pay plenty of taxes and it is in their best interest to have the poor get wealthier because the poor are their customers moreso than their employees. The manufacturing jobs are gone (because of Unions, Government regulations and Tax policy) so keeping wages down is not as important as it once was.
4)Regardless of how "rich" someone gets you make a great leap of faith that his money will leave go to a middle class person if he does not get it. That makes no sense. If Bank of America pays its CEO less do you think they will give their employees a raise with the money? No they will (and should) give it to the shareholders as dividends. Employees are paid what they will work for. No more No less. If someone will do your job for less thanhe deserves your job. If you don't like it then make sure you are a damn good employee and worth your salt. No one trades in 4 Aces.
5) Caseonia is and has been a sanctimoniuos loudmouth for months on this board and is uncivil with anyone that disagrees with her. She invites rebuking and deserves it.
6) "Contributions" to society cosist of more than tax dollars to be redistributed. Some of those "rich" you despise (or envy?) so much work harder than you ever have. Some of them provide jobs to hundreds of people and risk their entire fortune trying to take care of future generations of their offspring. If they were single with no children they could sell out and thrive in Palm springs but they choose to keep going because they are ambitious people with gumption. To say that they don't pay their fair share is a crock. Its one thing to pay the check for everyone in your party because you are doing well, it it quite another to have to buy everyone in the restuarant dinner.
7) If you took all of the accumulated wealth from the rich and got us back to even what would you do next year when the rich didn't have anything for you to steal? We would be in the same boat in a year because of government spending. It is easy to hate the rich because they didn't give you "enough" of their Halloween candy, but you don't seem to resent the guy next to you who gets candy every day from the government that came out of your bag.
As I predicted...it's getting hotter...results should be in within the next couple of days..guess we'll see then. Again I can only Hope/wish/pray that the country can MOVE FORWARD...there's not much rubber left on the tires to spin.
Quick Siolver:
You say "think" but your ramblings show now characteristics of that term. To think is to gather and utilize information; it's to analyze and synthesize, and to evaluate. The term "to think" implies an impartial judgment of facts.
What you present as "thinking" is fantasy world. You just make it up as you go (so too does Bill Marshall....Bill, when grade school kids learn how to add and subtract fractions they must use a common denominator....in comparing tax burdens, one must use the effective tax rate paid). Marc Thiessen has proved again and again that he has only a passing acquaintance (if that) with the truth. You cite his as gospel (do you also attend Beck University?).
You claim that Bill Clinton's successes trace to Reagan (bizarro!). But the truth is that Clinton raised taxes on the wealthy without a single Republican vote (they whined it would ruin the economy), he cut spending, he reduced the size of government, and he balanced the budget (three times), and he produced budget surpluses. Those are all facts easily verifiable.
On the other hand ââ?¬â?? and you refuse to "think" about this ââ?¬â?? at the end of 12 years of Reagan-Bush policies, the national debt had more than quadrupled (http://www.lafn.org/gvdc/Natl_Debt_Chart.html). It more than doubled under Bush2, who squandered the Clinton-era surpluses, broke the economy and left behind two unfunded wars.
Reagan, Bush1 and Bush2 all followed supply-side economic policies, which have proven to be an utter failure.
Indeed, if supply-side theory worked (and it only works for the wealthy), then there would o be plenty of jobs. Supply-siders claim that if you "proliferate the rich" and shower them with tax cuts and tax breaks, then they will "invest" and create jobs. Well, the rich richer than ever(http://www.tax.com/taxcom/features.nsf/Articles/0DEC0EAA7E4D7A2B852576CD...), banks and corporations are sitting on record amounts of cash, interest rates are at historic lows, and there's a huge, readily available pool of labor.
So why aren't they hiring? (This is not a hard question to answer for anyone who actually thinks.)
In March of 2009, 6 weeks after Obama took office the national debt surpassed $11 trillion. And Obama still had to work under the last Bush budget (the fed fiscal year runs from Oct. 1 to Sept. 30), which contained another $1+ trillion deficit. Then, there were two unfunded wars. And a broken economy. Conservatives, unwilling to think, and admit the truth that their ideas failed badly, choose to blame Obama. Fox and friends perpetuate the lies.
I've been encouraging you (and Bill Marshall and others) to THINK. But you are proving to be a very, very difficult (hopeless?) case.
potter1 says that Republicans regaining control of the House is "good" for America. If the past is prologue, then regular, ordinary citizens have much to worry about.
Think about that.