Pretty much this. The Republicans will stop at nothing to make sure Obama is a 1-term president, even going so far as to tank the world's economy just so they can say "see, it got worse under Obama, vote for us!"

We live in a plutocracy, where the richest and the least needy rule.

Kat - all the money that would have been spent for the AJA would have been pissed into the head winds of the Greece and Spain sovereign debt crisis which may lead to the unwinding of the euro, the slowdown in China and India. The world is deleveraging and the global pain that we are experiencing is a result of this. Just as Americans can't keep borrowing against our home equity lines to keep our spending above our means, the rest of the world is doing the same. Global spending above our means can not be sustained through borrowing.

Hank,

Do you REALLY THINK the euro can be saved? The only reason the banks are propping it up is that they think there is more money to be squeezed out of Greece and Spain, and yes, Italy. Why in the world do you think they are all in favor of "eurobonds"? Anybody who has been watching what has happened in Europe KNOWS that Germany is trying to save the euro but what they are actually doing is allowing the euro to die a SLOW PAINFUL death.

Greece will default and BIG! Wouldn't it have been better if they did that before the "bailouts" or do you think these bailouts were "grants" instead of loans? They will still default but NOW on a WHOLE LOT MORE MONEY!!

Do you actually KNOW what is going on in China right now or are you listening to those companies who just want to strip China? China HAS to slow down and all that lovely "trash talk" of floating the yuan is just that - it won't happen, it can't happen! China's "slowdown" would become a depression and you don't think they wouldn't remember who did it to them?

The AJA as a matter of fact WOULDN'T have affected either - what it WOULD have affected are the big banks whose only interest is to squeeze money from people so that they can have their big profits and big salaries. Frankly what the big banks want has HURT this country, and one of the BIG FAILINGS of the Obama era is that he did NOTHING to reign them in!

There are times when you HAVE to incur debts - there would have been MUCH less debt if Bush hadn't left this country in such BAD economic shape- and no matter what, you CANNOT blame Obama for that (unless you are so blinded by ideology that you can't see what is in front of you)!

Hank It is only through spending that growth can be sustained. What business facing such an economic crisis would not "borrow" and invest to generate more income in order to sustain itself while correcting the mistakes of the greedy few who brought down this economy?

Look how easily we paid down all the borrowing after WWII when we were much further in the debt hole. We can get there if we just get all these republicans out of government before they turn this nation inot an oligarchy or plutocracy.

Zora, it's always easy to spot the liberal. They are the ones who never read a bill before proclaiming it a miracle worker. The AJA was a disaster from the beginning and to say only republicans were against it is a lie. The bill was ridiculous. It would increase taxes by eliminating charitable contributions and by eliminating the federal tax exemption on Municipal Bonds. Charities would be hurt badly, but not as bad as cities. By selling triple tax free bonds cities can lower the interest considerably and by doing away with that, most cities could see a 2% hike in the interest rates they pay.

And secondly, it produces no jobs. The tax credit is something Obama tried before twice and it failed twice and this one is smaller than the last two. The infrastructure bank that Obambi claims would create hundreds of thousands of jobs is a lie. First, in order to set up such a bank, it would take 1 1/2 to 2 years and another 6 months to a year to approve the first project. Meanwhile, Harry Reid is sitting on 27 bills passed by the republican house with bipartisan support because he doesn't want the republicans to ruin the democratic plan to make 100% of the population dependent on government.

It failed the first time, why not just throw it against the wall and try it again, we really need the extra debt with nothing accomplished. It was a jobs act in name only

Great leaders will work, compromise and reach agreements with both parties.

"Dictator" will present a "take-it-or-leave-it" package to Congress--my way or no way!

If it fails to pass, he becomes "blamer"--Congress did not pass my jobs act so I can't create jobs with your tax money

David Axelrod told ABC News that the White House is not negotiating changes to the President’s jobs bill.

Said Axelrod: “We want them to act now on this package. We are not in negotiation to break up the package. And it’s not an a la carte menu.”

Hypothetical speech given by Pres. Obama in trying to sell his newest $1.2 TRILLION 'stimulus bill' to the American people.

"I need $1.2 TRILLION more, people. I know, the last two stimulus bills didn't do jack, other than to pay back some of my campaign contributors in the public employee unions and green energy business. And forget all those old sayings about throwing good money after bad. And how insanity is defined as doing the same thing over and over again but expecting a different outcome. This time it'll work. You'll see. Trust me'.

Brother - Greece will default and BIG! Agreed.

All this hand wringing by the europeans is just prolonging the misery. The rates for both Greek and Spanish debt is already predicting defaults. Germany just issued this week a zero coupon 2 year Mark note and traders are buying this as a play on the eventual breakup of the Euro and a return to the Mark.

As for China, yes I do know a little about the country. I spent 2 weeks last year visiting family in Shanghai, Beijing and my mother's country childhood village. The Chi-Coms have a very difficult job to manage enough growth to maintain social order while trying to keep inflation in check. Until you visit there, you can not imagine the amount of people that are everywhere including the countryside. The living conditions in rural China have not changed in the past 100 years. As young men leave the farms and migrate to the cities to find work, there will be riots if they can't find jobs let alone women. Real estate speculation is rampant in the cities and there are a number of empty and unsold condo projects because no one can afford them, but they keep building to keep their workers employed and occupied. Reminds me of our real estate boom in the in 2006. Due to the first world slowdown, there is no market for their exports. Because of this drop in demand, Chinese companies are not accepting materials and abandoning shipping containers at the ports. This will not end well. So yes, I do know a little bit about whats going in China and my views are mine own and not a recitation of MSM.

So I feel like our current quarter given the stock market decline will show growth slower than Q1 2012's 1.9% - either flat or negative given all the global negative headlines. Yesterday's market decline erased all the Dow's gain for 2012 when we all thought the economy was recovering at the beginning of the year. So any "analysis" that the AJA would add 1.3 million jobs is complete BS.

The world has major structural issues to reset - overly generous pension benefits and work rules in Greece, Spain, Italy, Portugal, California, New Jersey, Ohio which all need to be cut because there is no political will to continue their unsustainable payment and growth. We at best are going to limp along at 1% GDP growth for this quarter assuming no european contagion or heading back into recession in Q3 if the Euro does unwind.

Bjobott the only reason we paid down the debt after WWII so easily is the rest of the world was blown to smithereens and everyone owed us money for the armaments we sold them. While hiring teachers, firemen, and police officers are valued and necessary they are not drivers of economic success. They are paid by taxes that have to be collected from the people. There is no government job that helps grow the economy. The only jobs that create economic growth are public sector jobs. All government jobs are created as the result of taxes taken from the people.

Why can't democrats just admit they hate the middle class and want to setup a class system where the elitist leaders of the democratic party tell you what you will get and be happy with? Democrats want dependent classes. Republicans want to create individuals that are responsible. It's just that simple.

Why do you liberal fools continue to think that Obama has any idea how to get us out of this mess? Everything he has done so far has failed and all the cry baby in chief can do is golf and blame Repubs? Seems like he had total control of congress for two years and could do anything he wanted...how did that work out? Reagan inherited a much worse situation than Obama, yet his policies worked. It's not Bush, the Republicans, or Congress, it's the policies stupid. Get rid of Obama and we can begin to turn this economy around, more of the same failed Obamanomics will only push us deeper into economic disaster.

Every notice how it's always about what someone else should have done for the members of the Liberal Mob? Never about the destruction the Liberal Mob has created?

LOL thanks for the morning laugh, just got up had some coffee getting ready to go out and i knew i get a good laugh.

and i was not disappointed. LOL four in a row.

You nailed it. It is treason!

Please find another term. Just because Republicans label disagreeing with them as "treason" doesn't make it a good idea.

Definition of Treason -(http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/treason)

1: the betrayal of a trust

2: the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign's family

When an elected official repeatedly votes against policies that they have outspokenly (YouTube!) supported in the past, that would benefit the country as a whole, with a publicly stated goal to adversely affect the efforts of the President to address a national crisis, I don't know what other word you would use.

Definition #2 is too strong.

Actually maphi, definition #2 hits what the GOP is doing right on the head. They are committing treason against WE THE PEOPLE, but this President will be the fall guy.

Zora - It is the phrase "... to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign's family" that I think (hope ... oh please GOD...) is too strong. Besides we don't have a sovereign.

The 1st 20 words of the definition describe exactly what the GOP has been doing since 1/21/09.

#3 rikyrah EXACTLY! Economic treason is what I'd call it.

Right, and the "stimulus" package was supposed to keep unemployment below eight percent. Obama himself said he would own the economy by year three. You cannot throw money at the economy and expect growth , something liberals will never understand.

For all of the posters saying that the Republicans are committing treason by refusing to go along with the Obama administration plans to spend ever increasing amounts of money, this ignores the fact that government spending always results in money being taken from the private sector, either through taxation or inflation. There is no net gain, and ultimately there are no net gains in jobs.

However, the effects are much worse than being merely a wash. Although spending by the government is necessary (we do need cops, teachers, and a military to defend our nation) government spending is almost always inefficient and shouldn't be done to "stimulate" the economy.

My first thought was that Obama and the Dems should throw this back in the faces of the Republicans who voted against the AJA and other jobs programs. If Repubs are going to work against the interests of the country, they shouldn't be allowed to walk away politically unscathed. Obama needs to talk about the "do nothing (positive anyway) Republicans in Congress.

Because they believe in the "American Dream" that they too can be a billionaire one day.

Because they hate taxes going to "lazy welfare Queens."

Because the immigrants are "takin thurr jerbs!"

Because Obama is black.

That last one, Katherine, especially that last one.

#5.2 Yep, it's the last one, Pretzelogic in Philly, Pa

I like pistachio ice cream. India Le Carre, Pgh., PA

"I have to wonder too, if employers are holding off on hiring until the Supreme Court hands down its decision on the Affordable Care Act "....

You didn't intend to but you just highlighted one of Obama's HUGE blunders that illustrates just how unfit this man was for the presidency. Attempting to restructure 1/6 of the economy during an economic crisis is beyond asinine. Rahm and almost all of his advisors begged him to hold off until the economy rebounded. All of which begs the question. Is Obama completely incompetent or is he purposely trying to destroy the economy...Nothing this man does makes a lick of sense.

Phillip...The man is either unfit or purposely pushing a totally socialist agenda. The comments by the leftist's in the above posts are comical.

For them to talk about the republicans being obstructionists is assinine. Remember all they did to obstruct Bush? Only a moron could forget the continually assine things they said about him and our troops. If you want to talk about treason, look at that.

Remember the Obama budget that was voted down 99 - 0? So the Dems are obstructionists too? I forgot. Those mean republicans forced the dems to vote against the bill.

The above posts from the left are a clear sign that liberalism is a mental disorder. The sad thing is that it only gets worse as they get older. They all act like little spoiled kids who do not get their way. November can not get here fast enough!

Yes, and now the latest DNC approved talking point is that the GOP obstruction of the last asinine jobs bill is responsable for today's economic numbers...of course they fail to mention that BOZO's proposed bill was so ridiculous that even the Democrats sternly rejected it....November can't get here fast enough.

What flavor is it?

Rocky Road (not taken)? And that has made all the difference...

Now I know why your name is pretzelogic - because you take a different approach on every website you comment on. At least here you are the 'logic' side of your name. Wish that part would show up on Think Progress.

r1 - I don't comment at Think Progress very often - and don't actually recall the last comment(s) I must have posted. Maybe you could remind me about whatever apparently twisted thing I said?

Also, I've noticed over time that I'm not the only one who's ever used a handle with that word in it (why I usually try to be able to post as Pretzelogic in Philly, PA). Are you sure it was me?

Uber-spending liberals prefer kool aid:) Two years of unabridged Democrat policy implementation!! What a fail.

Mego, give yourslef a break - Cantor, Boehner, and Romney are just power-hungry goofballs and liars, but Krauthammer is an unhinged lunatic. I stopped reading him long ago, because I could. We get enough of the other three; why punch yourself in the face with the rube?

If your newspaper is like mine, they publish Leonard Pitts across from Krauthammer. I only read Pitts; it's like taking an antidote to poison, and good for you even when you don't take the poison. I suggest you do the same if you can.

Thanks...I needed that. I'm off to train volunteers for OBAMA today. It'll get me out of this mood.

Mego, #8 It's NEVER enough for those T-party freaks. They're a bunch of vultures; standing around waiting to feast on the President of the United States. They're despicable.

Obama 2012, The sane choice.

What a waste of time. Maybe you can train them all to change their own diapers after the government provides them for you!

A point generally well taken.

However, over the last several years, Democrats have made several attempts to correct the tax statutes which actively encourage, and essentially subsidize with our tax dollars, the "off-shoring" of American jobs. Those attempts were killed through filibusters by Rape-Public-Con-Men.

Democrats over the years have made their share of mistakes, to be sure (let's just say that "triangulation" makes me see "red"!) but I think this may be a case of "false equivalence". At least in recent years, when it comes to this issue, both sides don't do it.

It is so ironic the way Republicans in Congress act. Oppose good bills that would put millions to work, then bitch about all the people getting unemployment. I swear a group of 5th graders could do better than this Congress.

"Whether one likes President Obama or not, the facts are, if Congress had been allowed to put into place its "austerity remedies,"

exactly what austerity remedies are you referring to?..or maybe the talking points memo left that out. And there is no austerity going on in Europe...save for Greece who was forced to cut in order to get their next rounds of bailout billions. If you aren't up to researching the validity of your DNC talking points...please stop voting.

newsblog....Another blind leftist. What about the close to 30 bills the house have passed and the senate will not take up? Even if the senate does not like them they should vote on them and then send revisions back to the house.

The insane ones are Pelosi....Reid...Oboma....and the rest of you who believe their socialist agenda. Remember Pelosi saying we had to pass the health care bill to know what is in it? Now that is insane!

Anything else insane one?

Jan - "elections matter and we won" to paraphrase BO after his election. If he and Pelosi were not so arrogant and had done a better job of reaching over the aisle and working with the minority party in those first 2 years there wouldn't have been a landslide election win for house Republicans. wasn't that what 'Hope and Change' was supposed to be about - Governing a different way?

The problem was that BO let Pelosi lead and she drove the country from the ditch on the right side of the road into the ditch on the left side of the road. Dow is down 225 in reaction to the jobs report as I write this. I am hoping for a change because the last 3.5 years have not worked.

Hank - so you want to go back to what we had before the last 3.5 years? Have you really forgotten where we were then? I would rather gain a measly 69,000 jobs a month than lose 800,000 jobs.

Hank, with all due respect, frankly your argument about Pelosi and Obama being arrogant doesn't hold water. Working across the aisle? Obama went out of his way to do so. He held his hand out and it was repeatedly slapped down. Repeatedly.

The problem with the last election was not that Pelosi and Obama didn't reach across the aisle, it was because Obama didn't go progressive enough, and tried to hard to deal with Boehner and friends. Obama got into trouble for being too friendly (or at least attempting to) with the other side. His problem was that he tried to play the middle, to be pragmatic, and he got beat up by both sides as a result. And I direct you to a very active and productive House during Pelosi's run. What happened when Boehner et al rolled in? Nothing. Nothing at all. Not one damn thing. Oh they played around with abortion legislation and gee whiz attempting to defund NPR and planned parenthood, but did that get us any jobs? Working across the aisle is a two way street. Negotiation and compromise. It's hard to compromise with a house like we have now. And the Senate? One man or woman can stand in the way of anything. One man. One woman. All they have to say is no and the wheels fall off. This is not squarely on Obama. Or Pelosi for that matter. At least she TRIED to do something.

You said that Pelosi took us out of the ditch on the right side of the road and put us in the ditch on the left side? Well, Mr. Boehner has managed to shove us deeper into that ditch and collapse the road on top of us, with an extra load of manure piled on top for good measure. This is entirely political. And it can be fixed immediately if both sides would come together. BOTH sides. It is hard for one side to say Hope and Change when the other side is shouting "HELL NO!!".

Let's face it. If Obama discovered a cure for cancer, all cancers, and all it would cost would be one thin dime for each and every American, the right would come out and shout "Look at him! He's putting the cancer drug makers out of work!! He's placing a burden on the American tax payers!! How dare he be so arrogant?" You know this is true.

Hope and Change does not come from one man or woman alone. We all, ALL have to work toward it. And right now, we aren't.

Hank - President Obama and Nancy Pelosi did actually reach across the aisle.

The Affordable Care Act took the path that had previously been advocated by the Republicans - (keep healthcare with the private insurers and an individual mandate to insure that that the increase in numbers of relatively health people offset increase in number of sick people).

I was repeatedly dismayed by the concessions the administration was willing to make, only to be repeatedly rebuffed.

Speaking as someone who leans left - but not extremely so - there was no driving into "the ditch on the left side of the road."

You could argue that the public option solution for healthcare reform would have been "on the left side of the road".

Our country is still a center-right country between the coasts. The past 2 elections shows what happens when the pendulum swings too far to left (SF Liberalism) and over-reaches and then swings to the right (mid-west Tea Party) and over-reaches.

This next election will be interesting, much more so then I would have thought 6 months ago. I prefer DC grid-lock. The markets love grid-lock because it allows the private sector to go along with their business including hiring because it ends the future uncertainty of new sets of policies, regulations and laws which will need to complied with and paid for. This uncertainty may make one business owner not hire an additional employee for his shop until after the election. However when each employer feels the same way and does not hire on the margin, the cummalative effect results in decreased overall confidence which further dampens hiring. Its an endless downward spiral until we know 6 months from now who is in power and whether or not we are currently in a recession.

A center right country would imply that the center is a constant. There is no such constant, the range seems to be loosely based on neurosis. Also, can a city really represent "liberalism" (what is that these days? Humanity? Civility?)? Does a corporate underwritten and "controlled" organization called tea-party really represent Constitutional law or it's participating member's interests? These labels (and pendulum fables) are half of the problem, the rest appears to be psychological.

Dc gridlock sounds an awful lot like "Status Quo" to me. Sure let's keep everything gridlocked, sounds great, for those getting tax breaks and such. Does nothing for anyone else.

Frankly, for the last two years, work on jobs should have been job one. Get something, anything done to get people working again. The focus should never have been on defunding NPR or Planned Parenthood. Get teachers back in the classroom, get firefighters and police back to work in our communities, fix the roads and bridges and infrastructure. Invest in the COUNTRY and not the pockets of those "job creators" who even if given all the tax breaks and handouts still will not hire because there is no demand. All of this hand wringing over regulations and health care is just that, hand wringing. It's just an empty excuse, nothing more.

I look to all those other countries who are doing so much better than we are. Smaller countries who took the effort to actually invest in infrastructure and education and the PEOPLE, not the pockets of those big businesses. These countries have health care, and their people can get an education, and they are working and buying and they have trains and buses and new roads and bridges that aren't on the verge of collapse. How can they do it and we can't? Yup I can hear it now, "that's socialism". That tired old cry. Know what? It works. Is it perfect? Nope. Is it better than what we have here, right now? Hell yes. There, I said it. The evil mean bloated government can and should invest is us. Yes, it should put construction workers back to work. Yes, it should put teachers back to work. Invest in education.

We are supposedly a representative democracy, but I can foresee a future when the wealthy get wealthier, and the rest of us slide down the ladder we will reach a place where only the wealthiest among us will be able to get an education and be able to in effect buy the government. If Romney is elected, very soon our list of presidents will have only five or six surnames on it. The presidency will be handed down from wealthy father to wealthy son, on and on because they will have bought the country. In twenty or thirty years do we really want a President TAGG Romney?

I've gone and made myself sick....

Frankly, for the last two years, work on jobs should have been job one

Jan - this should have been Job One since BO's first day in office. Instead he passed the $700B Stimulus, figured that was enough, and spent all his political capital in his first 2 years trying to pass healthcare regulations. It is B.S. to say that he tried to reach across the aisle on Pelosi's agenda. (Yeah, Pelosi's district is in San Francisco, go visit it. Its a beautiful city, but one of the most, it not most liberal city in the country) BO had a super-majority in the House and majority in the Senate and let Pelosi lead.

Well the electorate spoke in the mid-terms and shellacked the Dems. Why would the House Repubs want to cooperate with BO's agenda if they disagree with his policies?

The stimulus should have been bigger, and should have been used for what it was intended for.

What I am saying about the last two years is this...Boehner shouted and banged his fist and stomped his feet "Mr. President, where are the jobs?" Well, he was then selected to be speaker of the house, and what have they done since? Not one damn thing. They haven't even tried to do anything about jobs. Nothing. Look it up. Abortion, obsessing about NPR and Planned Parenthood and taking away funding for food stamps and Medicare and trying their damnedest to repeal the Health care bill, or trying to find a way to screw it up so badly that it is all but torn to shreds (repeal and replace...ok replace with WHAT? *crickets*) And once again, OBAMA DID REACH ACROSS THE AISLE. Or at least he tried to. And all he got for it was snark, obstructionism, and a slap in the face.

And in response to your last question, if the house republicans do not agree with Obama's policies, why don't they at least try to meet him half way? Hmm? That's what cooperation is, that is what compromise is, meeting someone half way. One needs to give something to get something in return. Remember, republicans are only the majority in the House, not the senate, and not the presidency, but they are acting as if they are. With the House saying no to everything, and just that one Senator saying no to something, nothing happens. Those more moderate voices in the republican party who are willing to work as a unit to figure out solutions are thrown out of office, so only those obstinate, selfish, my-way-or-the-highway folks remain, unwilling to meet anyone half way, unwilling to see reason, unwilling to take responsibility for anything at all, always blaming and pointing fingers at the other guy.

I am old enough to have seen many congresses and many political disagreements. Heck, the Thanksgiving table at my house growing up was loaded up with partisan arguing. But it was never personal, and somehow, some way, solutions to problems were hammered out.

Let's face facts here. The day Obama was sworn into office, as the words "...so help me God" left his lips, the republicans plotted how they were going to bring him down. It wasn't a matter of any of them disagreeing with the man's policies, it was "get Obama out by any means necessary". So they vote on bills as a whole, speak the same talking points, walk in lock step every step of the way, and if one of them veers off the path, they are punished, silenced and banished. I always thought the Democrats were a mess, all over the map on issues, some more liberal, others more conservative, but at least they can work things out. Republicans can't, or won't, unless told how to do so.

I will finish here by saying I have voted all over the map in the past, for people who I felt could and would do the job for me, while representing me. Republican, Democrat, conservative or liberal. As it stands right now, sure the Democrats are a mess, but I will vote for them over the regressive right side of the aisle. And I have never been so frightened about the future as I am right now. Not because of Obama, or Pelosi's progressive agenda; it is the specter of Mitt Romney being sworn in, and the republicans taking the house and senate. I see my daughters' futures being buried, their dreams of college shattered, our health care taken away, our jobs gone. And this for the sake of lining the pockets of the wealthy.

30 plus jobs bills sitting in dim Hairy Reids desk, real budgets passed, senate doesnt think we need budgets, get over the dim slogans. Dims will be purged from Washington in 12, poor Hairy will be very lonely in his new committee slot as gurardian of the congressiona urinal

Jan - I don't agree that the stimulus should have been bigger. With the benefit of hindsight, the headwinds that we are currently facing - a real estate market either continuing to fall or bumping along the bottom, household and global deleveraging, Europe debt crisis, BRIC nations slowdown, that $700B was pissed away. The stimulus wasn't for "shovel ready" infrastructure projects, it shored up state government budget shortfalls. Any more money sent to the states would also have been pissed away and our debt would be that much higher.

Our CA governor Brown is proposing a "temporary" 4 year 1/2 cent sales tax increase which will go on the ballot in November along with a 7 year income tax increase on those making over $250K. We already have the country's highest taxes with 8.75% sales tax and a 9% income tax rate. Most of the revenue generated by this tax increase is going to backfill the $65 billion unfunded Teachers Union pension liability. It is not going for text books or new teachers salaries.

I am sure as heck looking forward to the day when I will move out of this state to one with no income tax. The current exodus from CA and erosion of our tax base to NV, AZ and WA will accelerate if the tax hikes are approved in November.

Fact check....

1) The repubs were in control for only 6 years.

2) The dems won the houe and senate in Nov of 2006. The last 2 years of the Bush era were controlled by dems.

3) Every budget that was ever passed during the 6 years of repub control had less spending than the dems wanted. Had the dems had their way it would have been worse!

4) When the dems took control in Jan of 07 is when the problems intensified. The stats are easily found to back what I am saying if you are brave enough to look! Libs do not look at facts. They "feel" what they want to believe and if they "feel" it is right, it becomes fact in their liberal minds.

None of those phony "jobs" bills were/are jobs bills. They called jobs bills but they're simply deregulation bills that are called jobs bills. None of them, when analyzed by independent analysts -- if they can even be analyzed -- produce jobs.

Fact checks without sources are not fact checks. But that's not even the important thing here. The important thing is what the W Administration requested in its budget. What Democrats proposed, and Lets needs to produce that to have a case, is not important.

Just asking, but do you think it's deliberate? I've noticed major REPUBLICAN companies slashing their work force. Could they be sabatoging the job market to make Obama look bad? They can always hire non-American contractors until the election. LORD I don't want to sink into conspiracy theories but I wouldn't put it past them...

Corporations don't slash jobs to make the president, or anyone else, look bad. They do it because it makes business sense. You need to get over the conspiracy theories and put away the tin-foil hat.

Ageed , the gop have figured out how to GAME the entire democratic system , they have made it NON FUNCTIONAL because distortions and lies rule over logic , and it would be futile to try and rebuild a system with the ayn rand hate filled zombies

This happened with the health care act so called Obamacare as well.

That's a double-edged sword. One reason the Republicans are so set on a last-ditch stand against the PPACA is that they expect people to like it once it's in place.<P>

Imagine if Medicare had been known as JohnsonCare? Remind every geezer who to give the credit to when the check arrives?

The Republicans have recently come out with some statements in support for some of the most popular pieces of the ACA, such as keeping young people on their parents plans longer, not being denied coverage due to pre-existing conditions, no life-times limits etc.

So they support the parts that are popular that also happen to cost money.

If the private insurance companies are required to take on these costs several things can happen:

1. increased payouts due to more and sicker policy holders resulting in increase in rates (increase cost of health care insurance)

2. absorb the cost and decrease profit (can't expect a business to go along with this - and not going to happen)

3. Guarantee more - theoretically well people - buying policies to offset the increased risk. This is the individual mandate.

The piece of the ACA that the Republicans are so bitterly opposed to is the piece that was their idea first and is the piece that makes the notion of keeping health insurance with the private companies and out of the hands of the government possible. I think it is as simple as that.

Also, see "Hank's" comments above. As it is, he and his fellow supporters of the Rape-Public-Con-Men (the Rape-Public-Conned?) are convinced that Obama and his "team" didn't make enough of an effort to "reach across the aisle". Can you just imagine how loud the whinging would have been if Obama and the Democrats had tried more forcefully to advance their agenda?

That said, while I understand why the Administration pursued the course it did, I too would have liked to have seen more "partisanship" from them. I eagerly anticipate that, if rewarded with a second term, they will have learned the sad but useful lesson that Rape-Public-Con-Men are not interested in compromise or in fashioning any productive and useful public policies. To the extent that we make any progress, it will have to be despite and without them.

Do bear in mind that we're about to hear the word on the PPACA this month.

Given how partisan the Court has been, I don't really expect a complete green light for it. On the other hand, the Court (and notably Kennedy) have generally been deferential to Congress in working out the details of tradeoffs, so I would not be all that surprised to see the Court hand Congress exactly what the Republicans are saying they want: all of the "good parts" minus the individual mandate.

And that's going to be a spectacular Charlie Foxtrot. The insurance industry will be noisier than a gelded calf, and they will be demanding that Congress do something about it. Since there's no question that the mandate could have been done in a slightly different way with the same effect (across-the-board tax with a refundable credit for those with insurance) that would be a quick fix.

It would also put the Republicans on the spot horribly with the election coming up, because it would mean actually taking some responsibility for Obamacare and raising taxes!

"The Obama administration has a lousy communications team. "

NO..The administration is a lousy team period!! starting with coach Obama.

I cant't believe the pass this imbecile gets from liberals. The Dems not challenging this failed president in a primary for the good of the nation during such perilous times is borderline treasonous.

Pretzel - BO ran a campaign of Changing the way government governs. What we all saw was that as soon he was sworn in, it was partisan politics / business as usual. Because he had control of all three houses, he didn't need to reach across the aisle. He made a token reach across with the healthcare summit. Remember that with BO, Pelosi and Reid sitting at the end of t he conference table and Republicans expressing their views and dissatisfaction with the bill. There was no discussion or debate. It was all for the cameras and staged as BO's effort of being bipartisan.

Here's an article from the beginning of BO's administration which describes Pelosi's boorish behavior.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=aaX0MEqeCGjA

First, civility begins at the beginning. In the next month, Obama will set a tone for Washington that will likely endure as long as he does. If he fails to live up to his rhetoric now, he will fail just as Bush did.

Second, civility begins at home. It is one thing to demand civility of one's opponents, another thing altogether to demand it of one's own party.

Obama faced an early test last week, when, in the midst of the debate over economic stimulus, Democrats worked to shut Republicans out of the policy process, then behaved boorishly when Republicans complained.

Democratic leaders responded with the political equivalent of a sack dance in football. "If it's passed with 63 votes or 73 votes, history won't remember it," said Senator Richard Durbin, Democrat of Illinois.

Yes We Did

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi added to the mood by saying, "Yes, we wrote the bill. Yes, we won the election."

There is still time for Obama to object to such behavior. If he wants to fulfill the promise of his rhetoric, he should take Pelosi to the woodshed and insist that she include Republicans, collegially, in the process. He should stand up to his party and threaten to veto a bill if it fails to make reasonable concessions to his friends across the aisle. He should advise his own staff to begin returning the phone calls of senior Republican aides.

If he fails to do that, there can be little doubt that government will fail to change and will continue to fail us. When times are good, one might be able to survive with a pitiful government. Today, we might not be so lucky. We are living in a fleeting moment where real change is possible. Aristotle is watching.

Both your posts are spot on Leslie thank you , the dem leadership has dismissed that part of our economy and its workers for too long , but by god they sure mention it come election time ...Obama came here to iowa a few months and a college student made your point and asked him specifically what what he and the dem leadership are going to do to keep jobs in america? It was the 1st time I have ever seen him fumble an answer , so , as your posts point out , it is not encouraging going forward , unless the issue is addressed aggressively

I will vote for obama , and I have a dem house member and senator , but the fact of the matter is that dems roll over for wall st , and throw workers under the bus when push comes to shove , workers need to stand up and demand dems stop treating their causes like they are toxic to their political careers , jobs and living wages makes a strong nation , paying your fair share in taxes is patriotic , so why is the dem leadership afraid to fight for all that?

Wall st presents the exact opposite of that , so stop looking to them for any solutions dems

Patango. You mentioned VP Bidens line about being patriotic and paying your fair share of taxes. What about the 49% of Americans that pay no income tax? I'd venture to say that most are dems and are receiving gov't entitlements. Are these people patriotic? It has been entertaining reading all the liberal post. Most are very angry people that either play the race card or the blame game. I understand that the last election 90% of blacks voted for Obama. I have often wondered if he was 100% white instead of 50% would he have gotten the same black turnout. Hardly. Where is the racism? Obama had both Houses for 2 years, he could have passed any bill. He was preoccupied with cramming the largest tax increase in history (per Supreme Court) down the throats of Americans. Liberals need to take a chill pill and try getting their anger in check. And oh, please layoff the koolaid.

so exaclty how did the republicans bring on the recession/depression?

Weren't two copies enough?

You don't have to imagine it. If you have the stomach, just watch Fox Propaganda.

Pretzelogic, #23.1 Count me out. I don't have have the stomach for it. Not to mention, I have a brain, and it goes into spasms at the mere mention of Shawn Hannity or that tall Irish guy.......what's his name... O'Neil? Tall, kind of pinhead looking fellow, around 55 yrs. old? No chin... always yelling...

O'Reilley!........oops, there goes lunch...

You see, I could hardly actually WATCH F0X noise!

You must have missed it when the Democrats started telling us we had the worst economy in 50 years, at a time when we had 5% unemployment and 4% growth in 2006 (Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi). All prior to the meltdown they helped make and protect. Obama had 2 years with a filibuster-proof majority and could have done anything he wanted without a single Republican vote, so he got his $800 billion stimulus that went 85% to public and private union employee pay and pension support, and did nothing for the private sector, then he ignored the jobs issue and went after healthcare. Even now the House (Republican led) has passed some of Obama's jobs initiatives, and have passed many more that have gone to die in the 'intransigent' Senate (Democrat led).

It's not obstructionism when I don't vote for your bill if I fundamentally oppose your bill. BO's biggest failure was not pivoting to the center after the Dems shellacking in the mid- terms which Clinton successfully did when Clintonn famously proclaimed the era of big government is over. Clinton worked with Newt and the Republicans to pass balanced budgets with small tax cuts and welfare reform by getting millions off the dole. Unfortunately Clinton's successors did not share Clinton's fiscal conservatism.