stevenash

You make fun of/belittle Fox and then post something  from MSNBC.  Ha Ha Ha

Give her some time.  Thinkprogress.org may not have an answer to your question thus forcing her to seek alternative "research".

Newtobie- who was it that said all blacks are on section 8 and running around with free phones? What is criticized by Republicans is not the people who receive all the handouts but rather the idea behind the handouts and the costs associated with continually expanding the handouts and the number of people receiving them  We are being indoctrinated ( well, many of us are) to believe that government can solve all issues and it simply cannot.  It's far too easy these days to become a recipient of government assistance and, in many cases, those who receive it teach their children ( by example) that it is an acceptable alternative to becoming self sufficient.

Just saw where this company pays it full time workers an average of $14 per hour.  Shouldn't the left be praising Hobby Lobby instead of fighting them in court? ( Especially since they are dedicated to the "plight " of the "little guy", that the hourly wage is more important than saving 4 out of 20 methods of birth control)

You mean you wish I was getting upset ( only because you think you are doing some meaningful chain yanking)    You seemed to be so proud of saying that Obama created more jobs than Bush.  Let me give you another version of that.  Next year, the Cleveland Cavaliers and Milwaukee Bucks are both going to win a greater percentage of their games compared to last year than the Miami Heat.  But the Heat will still be in the playoffs and the Bucks and Cavs will still be trying to make a respectable showing.  There are no "grasped straws" in any of the points I made to you.  If your only retort is" grasping at straws", that is an excellent example of grasping at straws.  You really ought to give up on the feigned condescension and try another approach.

Then you mean to say that since school prayer was banned in the sixties, there really hasn't been anything going on in recent years regarding separation of church and state? 

If I steal money from my employer and there is a list of the wire transfers made ( such as the one that recently was shown on this board) and it never becomes public knowledge ( until a much later date) then somebody else is likely aware of what I am doing.  I feel safe, though, because I am giving him/them some of the spoils and they don't want to see the end of the gravy train nor have themselves discovered as participants.  I would further suggest to you that, in my business, when it comes to money schemes, I have been exposed to more than most and am required to be updated on, and conversant with, various methods every six months in order to maintain my license.

Nobody is an expert on Obamacare.  Heck, the people who passed it didn't even know what was in it.  But, help me on your opinion that my assertion is incorrect.  Am I incorrect in suggesting that there hasn't been a substantial effort in recent years to maintain separation of church and state in our schools and court rooms?( eg:  no prayers at football games, etc etc etc)   If I am not incorrect in that respect, I must conclude that you mean I am incorrect about what is required of corporate health care plans.  I don't believe I have said anything in that respect that is untrue but will certainly admit my inaccuracy if you can show it to me.

If you perceive my feelings as hurt, you certainly have confirmed you are no psychiatrist.  Frame it any way you wish.  The broadest indicator of the health of the economy is GDP.  The rebound in the health of the economy and the improvement of jobs from the depths of the recession can be attributed to the cyclicality of the economy. (aka- there has never been a recession from which we did not recover)  Since you and I both like to deal in facts, I am going to restate several.  GDP in this recovery is the weakest in over 75 years.  GDP in this recovery has been running at about half of just the average recovery GDP.  The 2.9% GDP  CONTRACTION that we experienced in the first quarter is the largest contraction within a recovery since World War 2.  By the way, I didn't praise Bush about an economic boom.  I merely pointed out that the median income average was higher during his presidency than anyone else( by your chart) and your only response was the job losses occurring when he left office which had ZERO relevance to average median income that YOU brought to the discussion.  Tell yourself about "boom, roasted" and maybe you will eventually believe that because nobody else does.  And the bottom line is this: the economy has recovered in spite of Obama, not because of him, although we can give him most of the credit for the sub par recovery that could/should have occurred more rapidly and more vibrantly. ( His projection of 5.5% unemployment and halving the debt by the end of his first term are very good indicators of his economic "acumen")

Obama created more jobs than Bush.  Thats because he started at a virtual zero.  Unemployment rates are what they are and you (nor your charts) can't change that.  Why would I tell you who I work for?  You are the one who claims to be enlightened/chosen, intellectually superior and at the top of a competitive industry.  Why not tell us what you do and who you work for? So we were in an economic bubble during the Bush years?   Go ahead and explain that one and also tell me why the same doesnt apply to his predecessor.  The only bubble that burst was the sub prime mortgage bubble and try as hard as you want ( consult all of the charts you want) it cannot be credited to Bush.  You can give most of the credit for the bursting of that bubble to Barney Frank and Chris Dodd who wanted our society to be "more inclusive"( ahh, yes the compassion of which the left is so proud) and provide mortgages for anyone who wanted one regardless of work history or ability to pay.  But, then again, you already know all of that if you are anywhere as "enlightened" as you would have us believe.  And, by the way, there are still fewer  people working today than when the recession began.  So much for the Obama economic methods ( which, if you recall your recent statement, you totally disagree with)

I am going to bet you that more people participated in the use of that stolen money than just the ones who did the stealing.

If you want to credit a President for circumstances only when he walked off the job and not during his entire tenure, then I suggest you change your title because it certainly is not enlightened.  But if we are going to do that, I want to judge Obama by the employment rate only at the end of his first year in office.  Fair enough?   If not, lets go with averages.  The average unemployment rate from 2002 through 2008 was 5.25%                                                The average unemployment rate from 2009 through 2013 was 8.52%   TAke your choice- and consult your charts-  facts cant be altered.   Let me know if the road going forward is serious ( as you first portrayed in your concern about the middle class- or smart ass as in when you cant make the point you would like to make regarding Mr. Bush)  If you want to keep posting charts, I dont mind that because rest assured my inventory is larger than yours.

I would disagree with your definition of the Tea Party.  Your definition is:  People who hate our great country My definition is:  People who hate what is happening to our great country.

Your response about Mr. Bush is a great smartass answer but thats about it.  The figures during his years ( yes, years - therefore judging him by the entire presidency rather than just making hay out of the beginning of a recession when he was leaving office) averaged higher than that of anybody else.  You cant alter that FACT either.  If you want to keep your "serious" face on, lose the smartass response.

America has pushed out prayer and the ten commandments in our public schools, court rooms, etc- claiming the separation of church and state but, in the next breath, declares that religious institutions and even businesses( Hobby Lobby) must buy a health care plan whose coverage must include the cost of abortions- a clear infringement of the separation that they insisted on when it is to their advantage.  Why is this?

One more question for Enlightened; Please provide me with YOUR definition of the Tea Party.

Enlightened- In looking at your bottom chart,(regarding real median income) what does it say about George Bush?

Enlightened/chosen- If you think there should be lower taxes, less regulations, and no obamacare, you ought to be one of Mr. Obamas biggest critics because his entire agenda runs totally counter to those items.

Dove, are you still holding on to your theory that only a couple of bad apples were involved in all the problems of BISD?

If excess labor supply keeps wages down, then more jobs is absolutely the answer.  Sorry, but higher taxes, more regulations, and Obamacare encourage businesses NOT to hire, NOT to expand, but rather to lay off workers, and consider relocating the company overseas.  You simply can't spin it any other way.  If you are so enchanted with "the shrinking middle class" theory, show me a country that has confiscated wealth via the tax code, has a growing middle class, and a vibrant economy.  Is it Italy?  Is it Greece?  Is it Argentina?

So he sounds insane?  What did he say that is insane?  Is any of what he said more "insane" than denying the existence of the Federal debt?

Governor Chris CHristie said this morning that there was a 700 million dollar revenue shortfall in New Jersey.  He also said the the top 1% of tax payers in the state pay 41% of all taxes in the state.  When the Fed raised tax rates, the wealthy quit realizing capital gains and dividend income by either not selling what they owned or by selling the dividend producing holdings and replacing them with investments that paid a tax free income stream or no income stream at all, hoping to have a long term capital gain instead.  He stated that when your tax policy is basically aimed at that 1%, it has a real impact on the states revenues.  Same thing applies to the Federal level whether one wishes to acknowledge that or not.  I also distinctly remember then candidate Obama being interviewed on television about raising tax rates.  He was asked this question:  If it could be proven to you that keeping rates where they are or lowering them would actually increase revenues as compared to where they are now, would you consider that approach.  His response was "no, because its a matter of "fairness" .  Translation- My ideology of taking from the rich is more important than the solvency of the country for which I am responsible.

Hmmm- Maybe one solution is to have more jobs available to the middle class.  Lets see, if we raise taxes some  more, how will that impact job availability?  If we approve the Keystone pipeline, how will that impact job availability?  If we have to have an 18 month environmental impact study on most businesses before they can start up, how will that impact job availability?

PamFAm- are you saying that this country does not do enough for the less fortunate?  If so, what should be done?

Come on Smitty.  She absolutely, unequivocally believes someone else should pay.  The libs know who ought to pay and it is everyone but themselves.  They claim to know more about managing (disposing of) other peoples money better than anyone.  They are very big on freedom to except when it comes to freedom to do what you want with the money you earned.  She will tell you that we need to take care of the poor and, in this country, the poor are completely disregarded ( which is similar to the non existent 17 trillion dollar debt)